There really should be regular testing. It should be made more efficient and part and parcel of matchday.
Pep - Doping (?) | Are PEDs being used by footballers
- Thread starter JoaquinJoaquin
- Start date
There really should be regular testing. It should be made more efficient and part and parcel of matchday.
I'm sure there are some players who use PED's. I personally don't see how any club could use it in any structured manner given the scale that would be required, the number of people who would know about it and the damage to the club's reputation it would do if and when it came out, especially given that samples are often tested retrospectively. The simple logistics of any sort of doping program with a top level football team seem impossible.
In cycling it was an open secret for years but even then, with a small team and limited staff etc., riders had to sort out their own doping programs with doctors and obtain the products themselves, or at the most were being administered blood bags or whatever in cheap hotels or camper vans during whatever tour they happened to be riding in.
In cycling it was an open secret for years but even then, with a small team and limited staff etc., riders had to sort out their own doping programs with doctors and obtain the products themselves, or at the most were being administered blood bags or whatever in cheap hotels or camper vans during whatever tour they happened to be riding in.
I think what they are trying to do is control narrative here. Mahrez came up dirty on an internal test so they are promoting a story in case he gets tested externally before his system clears.
I mean why on earth would you publicly admit that a player didn't play because he might fail a drugs test? They can perform internal tests so they'd easily find out if he thought he might be dirty.
I mean why on earth would you publicly admit that a player didn't play because he might fail a drugs test? They can perform internal tests so they'd easily find out if he thought he might be dirty.
Walker is definitely juicy with that ridiculous hair loss, in less than half a year.
Wonder what will happen to Mahrez then.
Wonder what will happen to Mahrez then.
He just shaved his head. I don't know why people are calling it "hair loss", although technically true, it wasn't drugs, it was clippers that caused it.
Could be. If a disproportionate amount of City players end up getting cancer later on in their lives then that could be a good indication (if the rat studies prove to correlate in humans anyway).
The first (or maybe second stage) clinical trial results for cardarine were so concerning in relation to cancer risk that the drug was abandoned, despite it potentially being a huge money spinner given its highly impressive effect on cardiovascular fitness.
I actually tried cardarine for a couple of weeks before losing my nerve due to the aforementioned studies.
No more than a handful need to know. Most players don't ask questions about what their team doctors give them. See juve in the 90s etc.
When you are an elite athlete you have to detail everything you take. If you are away and buy from a different manufacturer you have to get all the specific ingredients checked out. Day to day drugs bought in the UK can be different to those abroad.
It makes perfect sense to me.
Mahrez must have been given a medicine that he had taken before but the details need to be checked as the manufacturer must have been a different one to the one they normally use. It is probably perfectly fine but better to be certain than risk a failed test.
It makes perfect sense to me.
Mahrez must have been given a medicine that he had taken before but the details need to be checked as the manufacturer must have been a different one to the one they normally use. It is probably perfectly fine but better to be certain than risk a failed test.
People are calling it hair loss because he didn't just shave his head. He had a full head of hair last season and if you looked at his hair especially the crown area hes actually lost alot of hair there in a very short time. He has bald patches all over now so something has happened.
I've also tried it and honestly had no issues. The trials showed massive dosages over a two year period is what caused it in rats which is why they stopped.
To be honest, eating processed meat every day, 1kg of sugar or smoking a 100 fags a day would also give you cancer so there's a good chance 10mg of Cardarine for 8 to 10 weeks won't do you any harm at all.
It was common knowledge that Italian football teams hired more chemists than actual pharmacies back then. One of the big boys had about 17 on the books.
Woah I didn't know one could bald that fast. Literally seemed fine at the end of last season a few weeks ago.Steroids will do that if you have male pattern baldness in your family. He could have done a minor course in the off season to bulk up slightly which would have accelerated the hair loss. By the time pre-season comes round it would have been out of his system. I'd presume that if footballers are doping though, they'd be taking SARMS and not old school steroids, less risk and harder to detect.
He's been losing his hair for years, certainly since he signed for City.
I think they would mainly use HGH and steroids for muscle development, as there is far more research on it. SARMS doesn't have anywhere near the same body of research on it.
Could he not just take finasteride to balance whatever is causing his baldness if it was accelerating so quickly ?
I suspect in this day and age, given the coverage this type of thing gets and the education they've had regarding supplements etc. players are more savvy than they once were and certainly better advised. Especially given the potential penalties for them personally, i.e. a ban and instant dismissal which above all else hits them in the pocket. At top clubs these players could arguably go anywhere so why would they take that risk? The power lies with the players these days and the vast majority will very much know it - there is far less loyalty or ability for a club to put pressure on its players these days. It would take only one disaffected player (or ex-player, or doctor or some other random member of staff) to speak out.
If a manager wanted his side to engage in systematic doping "in house" (which it would have to be, since 25 players visiting the same doctor or clinic regularly would be discovered in no time), it is inconceivable that he could do so without the club's approval to employ that particular doctor and would need the top people in the club involved since logistically there is no other way. The club would need to be aware of him being there, the medical teams would all have to know. The club would (as a corporate entity) need to be involved and therefore, those senior executives would stand not only to lose financially if the club was caught out but would also potentially face criminal sanctions. Would they take that risk for marginal gains in a sport in which physical intensity is important but rarely decisive? Also, any such doctor prepared to do that is likely to have a history of it (or be suspected of it) and any association with a club would be instantly toxic for it.
I just can't see how it could be done, or more importantly why. I've no doubt some players have, or do engage in it to try and give themselves an advantage or make it to the next level but that'll be the case in any sport.
You can clearly big patches of absolute nothingness in his dome.
HGH is only good for faster recovery from injury and to increase your appetite while bulking so they'd definitely pair that with a steroid. Steroids cause major damage to your body in general though and SARMS don't have the same amount of research but they're milder and show to actually be of benefit.
Of the two teams Liverpool looked more likely to be on something yesterday. Salah looked bionic and quite frankly a bit freakish with some of the stuff he played.
If there were some sort of cutting edge, doping going on in football which is within the current rules, then would it be so typical of United to be behind the curve and not have even heard about it
Would explain our lethargy too when City and Pool play 50 games a season at the same intensity.
The doctors didn't give him any drugs so why would they know what he took? It sounds like Mahrez self-medicated while he was away on holiday/after the AFCoN and City decided not to risk playing him in case he had taken something that was prohibited. There are enough ordinary medicines out there that contained banned PEDs for it not be worth the risk. That's not to deny doping takes place, but obviously if there was anything to this then Pep would have kept his mouth shut. The obvious excuse would have been it was too soon for him to play or make up a small injury.
Since doping is rife in pretty much every major sport there is no reason what so ever to believe it doesn't happen in football. Didn't that Ex barcalona doctor say that if he told the truth Spain would lose their WC? I wonder if Man Utd ever doped. I don't know if Fergie is the type who would allow it.
'Hair dryer' was merely a codename.
heh, Fergie was a massive cnut(for oppo's at least) but i'd like to believe he had certain principles which maybe is a myth. Guardiola has already been convicted for doping several times and his Barcelona team had extreme energy levels. It's hard to believe they were not with Fuentes and all that.
You are all assuming that the players know they are taking stuff. They may believe it’s the Guardiola magic training that makes them run faster for longer. He probably still has some Nandrolone left from his days at Brescia
Google Kyle walker hair loss and you'll see he's been losing hair for a while
Ridiculous thread
If Pep had something to hide, then he could have easily just said that Mahrez wasn't involved because of him being late back from the African cup of nations and nobody could have questioned that.?
Hard to disagree with this.
You mean the ones where he was cleared of all charges ? But if you want to believe then carry on.
Yes, and the Spanish court said they didn't want to hear it and he must destroy all evidence
It's fairly obvious Pep has been at it for years, both as a player and a coach, but i would be astounded if he was the only one. Leicester's PL winning campaign is another that stands out, but it's probably more like which clubs don't do it than which ones do.
Why is it ridiculous? Doping has been uncovered in virtually every sport there is at some point. I understand not believing this particular rumour because of lack of evidence. But it would not be the first time doping has happened in football if it were true.
Its focus on City/Pep is the ridiculous bit. All the big clubs are at it to some degree, or much more dirt would be thrown at each other.
It follows Pep round like no other coach though.
Yeah right. And I've got a pink elephant for sale if you want to buy that too?
David Silva says hi.
It simply has to be happening, too much money is at stake. Testing methods currently are urine samples only not blood. By the law of averages, the fact so few have been caught is actually implausible.
Your paranoia is amazing, should be a pool supporter! Youd fit right in.
I agree that it is much more prevalent than we think it is. But I don’t think the focus on Pep is particularly ridiculous either. Pep has been implicated in doping scandals in the past. He was banned from playing for several months after testing positive for a banned substance.
I don’t see the harm in discussing the issue given how prevalent it probably is. Direct accusations would be over the line without hard evidence. But so far most of what I have seen has been general discussion of the topic without focusing on any particular individual