daddy-o
Joined: 12 Apr 2004
Posts: 3307
Location: Springfield6/24/17 7:01 AM |
Thanks, Lance, Festina
It's an interesting article, and the subject is a talented rider, but the the negative association of cycling and the attention grabbing headline irks me.
But the headline got our attention, well Sparky's, and here we are.
The gist of the headline within the article:
“In my sampling, only half of cyclists have Prevotella,
but top racers always
have it,”
The gist of the article is much greater.
The same old takeaway:
The headline says "cyclists"
specifies
cyclists, reaffirms the public perception of cycling being the main sport with a doping problem.
My non-sequitur:
Look at all the advertising for testosterone boosting, non-FDA, outside of FDA. Does this "poop organism" Prevotella raise the risk of stroke and cardiovascular disease?
Would testosterone craving gym rats benefit from "Prevotella is thought to play a role in enhancing muscle recovery" like the article states?
What about opioids to keep players on the field? End of non-sequitur.
Then the article takes a really interesting, generalized turn.
But the rolling doping experiment tag persists. As much as I despise the everybody-does-it argument:
everySPORT does it
and does it systematically. But "tennis doping, soccer doping" doesn't provide the same recognizable handle. Damn newspaper editors up to it again.
|
CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
