malmo wrote: > Doesn't give you an advantage? Think again. > > Remember Dr Smulovitz, the Eugene endocrinologist who supplied many of > Eugene's runners steroids in the 70s and 80s? In the 90s I know of many > athletes who where being treated by him for asthma. A sudden breakout of > inhalers for a small cabal of atheletes, and you're suggesting it doesn't > give an advantage? I don't think so. I have also heard that the Eugene area is terrible for people with allergies (like the Tennessee Valley area where I live), so that might account for much of this.
However, there were also the stories about the East Germans (i.e. Krabbe) taking Clenbuteral, which was approved for asthma in Europe, but also had anabolic properties. It never received FDA approval in the US for humans. We know that many athletes will try anything if they think that it would give them an edge, but I think like I said, there are disadvantages for many of these drugs. I suppose that most of the controlled studies on the effect of the drugs (at least, outside of East Germany) have been on "unhealthy" subjects. A small degree of bronchospasm occurs in even healthy individuals, especially with exercise. So theoretically, relatively healthy people might benefit. The question would be what would constitute an unhealthy, asthmatic condition vs. cheating. I still don't believe that a truly asthmatic athlete on medication will gain an advantage over a non-asthmatic athlete. bob
