Testing Times for Athletes

[Mark Thompson]

Testing times for athletes

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/more_or_less/default.stm>
(Listen again available, usually a few hours after it has been broadcast)

In More or Less this week, presenter Andrew Dilnot and the team investigate
statistical weaknesses in the testing regime for drugs in sport.

One athlete initially suspected of taking testosterone was finally cleared
last week.

The cyclist Floyd Landis is also contesting the allegation that he too took
testosterone to enhance his apparently winning performance in the Tour de
France.

While we have no idea of Landis' guilt or innocence and would not
speculate, is there anything in the argument that testosterone can reach
suspicious levels for natural reasons?

What we found in our investigations was reason to concern us both about the
plight of the innocent and our chances of catching the guilty.

[Mark McNeill]

Response to Mark Thompson:

I wrote to "More Or Less" recently: they've been asking for examples of
unintended consequences, so I cited Ian Walker's recent helmet research.

Got back a very nice email from the producer, basically saying thanks
and they have hopes, but not immediate plans, of doing a piece on cycle
helmets some day. O well.

--
Mark, UK
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."

[Adrian Godwin]

Mark McNeill <markonne...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Response to Mark Thompson:
>
> I wrote to "More Or Less" recently: they've been asking for examples of
> unintended consequences, so I cited Ian Walker's recent helmet research.
>
> Got back a very nice email from the producer, basically saying thanks
> and they have hopes, but not immediate plans, of doing a piece on cycle
> helmets some day. O well.
>
>

I wonder if the Guardian's 'Bad Science' column would like to do a piece ?

-adrian

[Mike Sales]

"Adrian Godwin" wrote in message

>
> I wonder if the Guardian's 'Bad Science' column would like to do a piece ?
>
> -adrian

I suggested this to Ben Goldacre a while ago (by email). He replied to
the effect that helmet advocacy assumes that it is the responsibility for
the risk of cycling lies with the cyclist. I said yes but that was not the
point I was making. I repeated that pro helmet studies are Bad Science.
I think that would be worthwhile someone else trying.

Mike Sales