Why I Think Clarence0 is Wrong
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 06. 2024
- There are two sides to every coin. Clarence did a great job explaining his views on drug testing, and I hope to have accurately shown the 'opposing' view points.
I appreciate Clarence taking the time to put together a great piece of content, from which I could then create this.
Original video - • Why I'm Against Anti-D...
MPMD reaction - • Clarence0 Dismantles A...
More Videos & Podcasts & Programming
/ weightliftinghouse
Shop W|H
USA - www.weightliftinghouse.com/sh...
Europe - www.weightliftinghouse.com/sh...
All Weightlifting News
www.weightliftinghouse.com
Podcasts | Interviews & News
podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast...
00:00 - Intro
03:16 - Why I Disagree With Clarence
06:12 - 1. It Creates an Unfair Playing Field
08:38 - 2. It Facilitates Corruption
12:33 - 3. It Demonises PED's
15:37 - 4. It Forces Athletes to Use Dangerous Compounds
18:33 - Conclusion
19:53 - Outro
Clarence Kennedy's video on PEDs and Anti-doping sparked More Plates More Dates to film a reaction. I hope to adequately explain the other side. - Sport
![Eminem - Houdini [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/22tVWwmTie8/mqdefault.jpg)
Hey Seb, thanks for the video. You certainly made some great points. I've also read some other good counterpoints from other people, so I'll eventually make a follow-up video.
I'm actually really happy there's an intelligent discussion about this topic now. 5 years ago the debate was like: "Doping is bad" or "Everyone uses PEDs so we should just allow it". This is a huge discussion with many great arguments.
you're welcome clarence
Have you seen More Plates More Dates reaction video?
Clarence 》seb
Clarence wasnt supporting doping he just showed a better way
Thank you for starting the discussion, hopefully it will lead to a major change in professional sports.
Watched Clarence's video, watched More Plates More Dates video, and now I'm here.
Beautiful time to be alive
@@tjb8158 watch Zack Telander drops a video about it tomorrow, or Coach Greg lol
Doping or anti doping? Your thoughts?
@@cuongbui9708 I'd like to see an untested federation, sort of "how heavy can they really lift?" Obviously, I'm a big fan of Clarence, and I love Strongman where everyone is sauced the gills. However, for the Olympics, I'd rather stricter testing and trying to remove corruption, rathet than getting rid of efforts altogether.
@@josephaugustinerhodenhiser1353 Yep. Isotopic-ratio tests on every sample, and every archived sample, and then go from there. You've seen the MPMD vlog where a top IOC official laughed at the very idea of testing that strictly though. Sigh.
I feel like Clarence's opinion comes from someone who lived through the process of competing and getting to see and feel how bad the situations is, while your opinions seems to be more from the point of view of big fan/follower of the sport.
And this comes through when you compare how both feel about young weightlifters. Clarence's wishes he knew how bad things were before entering competition while you are more concerned about what it would do to the longevity of the sport if young weighlifters got discouraged.
Both have certain degree of truth but to me clarence's view of it is more oriented towards preventing frustration that he wished was prevented on his case, and for that I believe he comes from a better place
Clarences view is also more pragmatic. This video is done with an idealist mindset.
This video response is like "Believing in Santa makes me happy, so why can't we all pretend that Santa is real?"
@@nicholaswessels3000 that’s exactly what this is. This guy is respectable but Clarence’s arguments are just more sound.
@@raensaeck Clarence's view is not pragmatic. His views are short-sighted and fails to understand the impact of anti-doping on long term future of the sport. Without anti-doping rules, countries would dope their kids with impunity. This may not affect kids from western countries whose parents can simply refuse to allow their kids to partake in the sport due to availability of alternate careers while in poor countries athletes wouldn't have that luxury.
@@nicholaswessels3000 what? He says several times that he's aware anti-doping has it's holes. But, it at least puts a sort of cap on things. Clarence's view is- "There's a tear in my umbrella, I'm gonna throw the umbrella away". I'd rather get wet than completely soaked
Lasha is a walking pharmacy. Can’t wait to see him 500 total though 😬😬
Imagine if he took even more lol
@@supernoodles908 PEDs have diminishing returns, its not certain more drugs would give a better result. It might just end up hurting him.
Name-dropping Sally from down the road geez haha
I think clarence’s points are more valid on this one personally
How?
no wada would exclude pretty much everyone outside the elite level…
Simp
So basically it shouldn't be called anti doping, it should be called controlled doping
But the state of elite sports is already about who has the best genetics for drugs.
Why does everybody assumes american lifters are all clean? just because the are not winning medals doesn't mean they are clean!
american propaganda works. china, being one of the most heavily tested nations and winning medals must be dirty, while the usa must be clean. its so dumb.
@@mxn1948 exactly!!!!
@@osvaldit0 Very good point and this holds true for all athletes from supposedly 'clean' countries. German lifters for example still have an insane training load (six days a week, multiple trainings a day) and lift weights which are very close or beyond what heavier athletes lifted in the 50s for example.
Are we led to believe that these major improvements in training frequence and intensity are only due to better technique, nutrition and equipment?
Also, American lifters are often very strong, they just have lackluster technique.
@@mxn1948 Trusting China with absolutely anything requires midwit levels of intelligence
He is right, this sport can't exist without steroids, This sport is made from steroids, period
It could. Theoretically.
@@user-gw1ki2jw8f Maoist defender or ironic?
@@user-gw1ki2jw8f lol
To the level of what people want to see sport? No sports and anabolics have to coexist. There are for more people closer to normal non sporting than there are sporting. Like most of these people on anabolics are hard workers and good as well and this is why we watch
@@user-gw1ki2jw8f What do you mean? I say facts. They are all on steroids
Thumbs up for any video on YT with time stamps.
My thoughts (rebuttals) on your rebuttals to Clarence's points:
1. Unlevel Playing Field - I think the argument that countries with the resources developing a super steroid or something like that don't really make sense to me. If anything I think the desire to create an undetectable super steroid is the same if not more when anti-doping exists compared to anti-doping. For example, let's say a country with the scientists and resources i.e. Russia pours money into making some undetectable analog of Trenbolone with 0 side effects. In a world with anti-doping, Russia now has this Super Trenbologna while other countries are supposed to be "clean" giving them a hugeeeeeeeee advantage. In a world with no anti-doping, Russia still has a huge advantage, but not as large because other countries are all using normal tren and Winstrol and whatnot. You mention what teenagers and their parents would want to enter a sport knowing that the end result would be steroids, but is that any more ethical than it is now? The way it works now is teens and parents go into the sport thinking it's this clean fair sport, when in reality the kids eventually all get on huge amounts of gear anyway, and the parents might not even know sometimes. Lastly, you mention that sport might turn into a competition of the most talented hardworking people with the best response to drugs instead of a competition of the most talented hardworking people. I dont understand this point??? Response to drugs is already a hugeeeee part of top-level weightlifting! The scenario you are referring to if anti-doping is gone is already the reality.
2. Corruption - Yes there are other outlets for corruption to happen, but does that mean that we should just ignore the blatant amount of corruption in the aspect? I think it's fair to argue if anti-doping is eliminated, then there can't be corruption in anti-doping. I think it's much easier to prevent corruption in something like bribing officials at weigh-ins over anti-doping which is much harder to regulate.
3. Demonises PEDs - You talk about why don't we just create two federations, an untested and tested one. This opens the can of worms into making lots of little federations like in powerlifting and is in my opinion one of the big reasons powerlifting won't be an Olympic sport for a long time. Also, natural bodybuilding and powerlifting (like the USAPL) are already filled with people who use drugs anyway, so it doesn't really solve the problem in my opinion. By creating an untested federation, you will still have plenty of cheaters in the tested federations. Lastly, I think your shoplifter analogy is a bit incorrect. I think it's more like this. Almost everybody (at the highest level) shoplifts, but only a very, very, very few amount of them get caught. Since everyone is already shoplifting anyway, it's not fair to those who get caught, so let's just let everyone do it. Additionally, I think PED's are bad overall, but unlike shoplifting, they don't harm other people.
4. Dangerous Compounds - I don't think Clarence is arguing at all the PED's are safe. But he is saying that steroids with little research pulled from the trash can decades ago and substances like Oral trenbolone are more dangerous than the PED's people would use if anti-doping didn't exist. Sure drugs can be hard to get and tainted, but it's not the biggest problem? Getting your whole team cycled on test and Winstrol or ten or halo or whatever you want is not some huge difficult expenditure that even poorer countries can't afford. I live here in the US and the average joe can get his hands on these substances if he wants to, I'd doubt a whole country couldn't figure it out for their athletes. Lastly, I'm not saying all the American athletes are on gear, but to immediately assume they are clean is a mistake in my opinion. I think it's much more likely for these American athletes to be clean, but it's still definitely a possibility that people like CJ Cummings or Katherine Nye are not clean. But really who cares if they are clean or not? I don't think it should matter.
I don't mean any hate, big fan of the channel and keep it up!
Also it should be noted that there are diminished returns for weightlifting if you just blast gear like bodybuilding, so it woudn´t really just be a race for who can take most drugs
Spot on
This is the way that disagreements and different opinions should be done. Thank you for the discussion.
Both these video's a soo good and informative! How hard would it be to see a interview/debate between both of you in the future?
Beautiful video Seb! Loved the counter arguments. This video is a prime example of how to disagree professionally. Do Jerks, Do not be a jerk, ;)
Don't do jerks do strict presses and power cleans
I agree with some of your points, but I think war on doping in sports will be as successful as war on drugs was. You can talk about it, try to crack down on it (no pun intended) and regulate the crap out of it, but when there's need there will ample supply.
yeah, you can draw many parallels to the war on drugs.
I think powerlifting (untested federations) is actually a good real life example of how it actually does cause a leveled playing field when put into practice. Granted, powerlifting doesn’t have state sponsored programs which could likely have compounds developed, but I think the drugs that already exist are probably as good as it will get tbh. Halo and tren in competition is more than sufficient, and other compounds during training blocks that work more than sufficiently as well
Yeah I see what you are saying. But it is certainly the state funded element that will change the game completely. And certainly the risks will become even worse when more money is on the line athletes will take even more extreme measures than they already do to win. In some sense state funded doping could be safer because they have professionals but if that's true it means your safety depends on your countries doping scheme which is still unfair. And I certainly think there would be a lot of athletes who die at a young age because they disregard their safety. If there are no tested federations or the apex of the sport is untested then it would encourage new comers to abuse PEDs especially young kids who have no idea what they're doing. Which is why I think powerlifting can never make it to the Olympics. It would be even worse than weightlifting in terms of doping, health risks, long term effects.
This is not even a major disagreement. The comments are artificially inflating the issue. Both stances agree on the same problem of the uneven playing field, which would exist regardless. The only question is whether it's worthwhile to even it out a little bit with regulations than without, even though it will never be truly even. The inherent talent or genetic factor is a nonargument on fairness, as the definition of fair in sports never extended to genetics, it was a matter of rules and removal of special treatment, the context was never about making sure the person that wins is the one who put in the most number of hours of work, this is a very rudimentary outlook, there are always external uncontrollable factors: different training techniques and body builds and the factor of luck, all of this contributes to the uneven playing field but also the excitement and fun in a sport.
"The inherent talent or genetic factor is a nonargument on fairness, as the definition of fair in sports never extended to genetics,"
I may be misunderstanding you but there are many cis-female athletes that have been forced to take hormones in order to compete because they have the genetic advantage of having a natural higher level of testosterone.
@@erestorhalfelvan7676 They had to because they are competing with female women, while they themself are male women. There was a reason, why sports got split into 2 gender groups, so there was/is a fair playing field, because men are just stronger/faster. But nobody really expected the emergence lgbtq+ and gender transformation and the effects they can have on sports.
Maybe the smarter thing would be to divide the brackets with the physical sex, instead of gender.
@@Eiferius No, they were cis women who were accused of being trans because they looked masculine. Caster Semenay, a hermaphrodite women, is one of the athletes I am talking about. There were also three Chinese track stars, who are cis-gendered, that also had to go under hormone therapy in order to compete.
@@erestorhalfelvan7676 ok sorry, i thought you were talking about trans-women. My bad.
@@erestorhalfelvan7676 caster has nuts inside her producing testosterone she isn't a cis woman....
How do you really know if an athlete is clean? Not getting caught is not clean. How do we know that the US is just not better at doping? If Lance Armstrong retired earlier we may have never known about his massive doping. In the end, there is nothing more more unfair than genetics.
Also doping affects are determined be genetics
Are you familiar with the testing done by USADA?
@@redspeye7823 yeah, they're trash
Clarence has more insight into this than almost everyone else. He could've easily become a competitive world class weightlifter (in competition) if he had the resources of a more weightlifting focused country behind him.
@Me you and the animal If you truly believe after everything that we have seen that weightlifting is ”dope controlled” you need your head checked mate
@Me you and the animal you should see a therapist.
@Me you and the animal The only difference is Clarence doesn't have an Irish government program providing him with the drugs lol
@Me you and the animal how stupid are you? If anything, he would lift More if he was born In china and competed, because hed get His hand on better drugs and coaches.
He used to compete. And he admits to not being natty.
I think Clarence's biggest point imo is that PED's should be researched into more to make them safer, which in turn makes it much more reasonable to be against anti-doping. As much as it would be great for top level sports to be completely drug-free and promote a drug-free culture, I think it would produce a much more realistic and more promising net positive in the future if PED's were researched into becoming much safer, more accessible, and less scrutinized throughout the sport's world. I guess the biggest question to answer is *how safe* can these drugs be to where they're not a grand disservice to one's health. The progression of anabolics research could also maybe result in even stronger and more harmful drugs, but to be fair, athletes are already doing that anyways without said research, so I suppose it can be a coin toss in that regard. It's tricky to say. In terms of USA athletes becoming world champions, just because the USA has stricter testing, doesn't mean there can't be any outliers or any sort of corruption to have that specific athlete excluded or snuck through the system. I think you propose some decent points here and there, but I also think some of these are proposed under the assumption that Clarence is assessing a solution, rather than criticisms against anti-doping.
Solid points man
You seem to think that there is still a lot to discover about what makes PEDs safe and unsafe, that's not really the case. We already know what drugs are safest, they're simply the ones that are closer to the ones you produce naturally (the safest by far being injectable testosterone) and we also know exactly why: it's because it aromatizes into estrogen, which counterbalances the effects of testosterone and prevents brain damage, bone density loss, etc. So no, there's really no reason to believe that we're gonna discover some unknown PED that is safer than testosterone. Testosterone is also extremely effective in strength building and has a relatively low ceiling from which it's pointless to take more, so I share Clarence's optimism that if anti-doping was banned, athletes would simply take a relatively healthy dose of injectable testosterone and maybe some Primobolan, which is way, way safer than oral or designer drugs.
@@fluiddynamics3591 I'm not saying we're going to discover a new, safer drug, rather putting money into researching drugs that already exist to make those safer for athletes. Even if they're still not safe in the end, it'd be at least some kind of positive to mitigate the negative effects as much as possible. In Clarence's video, he mentions how anabolics haven't been thoroughly researched in decades now, and with the technology we have today, I'd argue safer alternatives to already existing anabolics and even perhaps new anabolics could take the stage if the money was put into the right hands.
Totally agree with you and with both of them. It is far from easy to find a solution. On the one hand, an enhance weightlifting sport without anti-doping would cause even more serious health damage. Why? Elite-weightlifters can't allow themselves to do the same cycles as other non tested sports like Strongman do. So, without any control, like Seb said, many athletes would sacrifice even their lives to win. Why Eddie Hall or Thor retired? Apart from personal stuff, I'd say drug abuse (because they abused a lot from PED's) impacted their health. I prefer someone to reach their 70s with a 200kg C&J at 90 bw than a 225kg C&J at 81kg bw. Also, one problem that arises is the spectacle, the fame and the absolute demanding numbers. This happens in other sports such as football or basketball. The fans want more and more and more. So, without control, things can get out of hands.
On the other hand, anti-doping is not perfect and CAN be unfair. Shi Zhi Yong, Lu or Tian Tao smashing World records and not getting popped (how? No idea) in spite of getting tested (China) 600 times a year; or Iran and North Korea not getting tested at all is ridiculous. Meanwhile other athletes who, yes, are not natural as well, are getting popped. In my opinion, is better to have a strong good anti-doping system with wholes in it than a free buffet of PED's. Even if the use of PED's was regulated, countries would find ways to give more to their athletes as their are already doing it. I'm 100% sure that the IWF and IOC know that records and competitions happen with enhanced athletes that will never be caught for whatever reasons. And I think that's better than having all the roids in the world. It is naive to think that someone would cast out tren, for example, if it allows more chances to win the gold medal. Athletes would take it even in larger quantities than when it is used to pass anti-doping protocols (like Clarence said).
Again, this is very complicated topic but discussing it is already an achievement. Stay safe people!
@@EtienneYT I disagree with Clarence on that, there's been plenty of research on PEDs, both from an anti-doping perspective, from drug manufacturers themselves (look how SARMS were invented recently for example), and from endocrinology. It may be possible that there's some way we don't know yet about how to make PED use safer, other than simply taking lower doses, but honestly, I'm not very optimistic about that, we already know a lot more about how PEDs work that what you seem to think, with all due respect.
17:09 look at the countries who medal most its inversely proportional to how much they test
Didn’t Seb say the Chinese got tested 600 times last year?
Genetics still matters, the Chinese never had any heavy weight champions. Tian is their heaviest world champ.
Seen the script on Instagram, so excited for this vid
Great video! New sub from Clarence’s channel. I do think Goldman’s dilemma is worth revisiting as it doesn’t seem to hold up anymore.
Very refreshing to see a well articulated exchange of ideas. If you and clarence did a video where you discussed it together, I would tune in.
I found your counter argument very valuable? However, it sort of lost a bit of value when you said that American athletes are clean. Are we still believing this?
I’m not sure exactly where in the video he says that so I can’t check it, but he probably means “cleaner”. As in, better tested. I think it’s fair to say that athletes from countries with large scale testing are cleaner than for example North Koreans where WADA has absolutely no power to do anything.
@@bastiaanbogers4114 you are right. Perhaps, my comment is more aimed at the general idea sold by the US that their athletes have no flaws and should be the standard. Have a listen to joe rogan’s and Matthew Fraser talking about doping and the olympics and you will see the same trend. I think it is a disservice for the spot because nobody actually believe the American athletes are clean, and it also diminishes the accomplishment of all other athletes from places other than the US
Alejandro Faini Yeah, totally agree on that.
@@bastiaanbogers4114 Yes, this being presumably a large part of the reason why the USA used to be one of the very best weightlifting nations with the likes of John Davis, Jim Bradford, Norbert Schemansky etc. and now is a non-presence outside of women's weightlifting, which I assume in that case is because of the newness of the division and other countries not having caught up.
seanseanston Also don’t forget the popularity of powerlifting.
Its nice to see an articulate and respectful response. Both of you have well thought out arguments. Though I side with Clarence on this one. To summarize in a short comment, I believe competition is the best form of regulation in most things in life. Absolute centralized power tends to breed more corruption than it prevents. As a wise man once said "Placing the state in charge of moral principles is equivalent to putting the proverbial fox in charge of the chicken coop" - Murray Rothbard
Diplomatic, respectful and well put together arguments. Great video, Seb.
Great video! Its great to see that the main public personnas of this sport are so respectful, thoughtful and thorough in their arguments. Looking forward to more contributions to the discussion.
If removing anti doping would make sports become a chemistry war, why is Russia doping his athletes with old compounds like trembolone, instead of researching new, better compounds that would also very likely be undetectable with current methods?
It's just because that's not how science works, just wanting get something and being willing to put work on something won't make you be able to get it.
Other than peptides, PED research seems pretty stagnated (even if it's currently not really being researched)
A lot of pretty great points. At the end there's one that sticks out though: You said that people like Kate Nye prove you can still win as a "clean" athlete. This assumes she is actually clean though. Passing a lot of drug tests doesn't mean you aren't using drugs.
If we assume she is clean, then that leads to some other follow-up assumptions:
- either, drugs don't work to a level that can't be overcome
- or, drugs aren't prevalent in that weight class.
Both of which I find highly questionable.
Exactly, just because she can pass drug tests doesn't mean she's actually clean. Lance Armstrong never failed a drug test in his life afaik and was doping. Although testing has improved vastly in recent years I feel like it is still possible for top level athletes with coaching and guidance to chest tests.
Yup. Doping will always be ahead of anti-doping.
Yeah that stood out for me as well. But there is a possibility that she just has way superior genetics and doesn’t need to use drugs or can use way less than less genetically gifted ones.
@@MrOpticBlade this kind of discredits her achievement though, as this just means the weight class is super un-competitive.
Female weightlifting isn't that new anymore, so I don't think that would be true. But yes, technically this could always be the case.
@@icemanstrange6185 they can't.
Of course you'd assume people are clean unless there's reason to suspect they're not. But winning world championships is a big eyebrow raiser for me, especially in a sport so dominated by PEDs like this.
Does Sally down the road have big numbers?
Bruh...MASSIVE glutes.
@@rustyshackleford8473 cringe
Best you can do is have tested and untested comps.
Ya than ppl will still try to cheat in the tested comps n than we'll be in the same pickle we are in now
That's not how this works. Then people will just cheat to win the tested and it'll be the same thing haha
@@1ForeverClan it’s not perfect but the prestige will be in the untested comps because that’s the heaviest weight and that’s what people want to see. Would you rather have bronze in the Olympics or gold in the special Olympics? The athletes on gear will mostly gravitate to the former
@@AdasHere Seems like we are in agreement. Nobody cares about tested bodybuilding. We all want to see freaks
It will be like having 2 popes.. make that 3 popes
Thank you for this discussion. It is very important for prominent voices in this sport to be more candid and honest about the topic of PEDs, and you've approached it in a very robust way. Antidoping is currently imperfect, but the argument to abolosh it really has not provided much evidence that it would create beneficial outcomes for the sport, the athletes, or the audience.
I’m a massive Clarence fan but you make some good points. It’s a hard problem with no easy, obvious solutions.
Clarence also stated he wasn’t putting forward a solution in his video.
They could just have two classes for athletes, one tested and one untested. There might still be a few people using stuff in the tested side, but if competing untested was just as profitable if not more, most people using gear would just compete there because trying to dodge drug tests is a pain in the ass that I'm sure most guys would gladly be done with.
Sérgio Alves that’s what happens on powerlifting
I want to see natty lifters so I have something to compare myself to. I also want to see the Lashas lifting ridiculous weights. I think the best solution is a Natural federation and a Enhanced federation.
Could you please do a spotlight on Sally down the road! What're her best lifts?
Not very knowledgeable when it comes to this topic but I did watch both of your videos with great interest, you laid out your opinion in a structured and respectable way. I don't have an opinion that's well thought out enough, as i'm not that well informed. Cheers.
I say just take weightlifting from the olympics, and like powerlifting, make an untested division so they can blast gear and test human limits.
Clarence mentioned in his video for weightlifters more drugs isn't better. For instance, Clarence said when his bodyweight went up "cycling" is what I'm going to assume his overall strength increased however he became worse at the Olympic lifts because of mobility and he probably felt less healthy as well when on cycle your risk of injury is significantly increased. So i don't think you will see the same extreme abuse you see in powerlifting and bodybuilding.
Increasing body weight in weightlifting also will put you in a higher weight class.
@@raensaeck does in any sport though
I respect the opinions of both of you, but I fall into the category of stopping the anti-doping.
Saying that parents won't get their children to train weightlifting because in order to become a world champion or win the Olympics is in my opinion a fundamentally flawed way of looking at it. 99% of all parents who let their children do sports or encourage them to do sports aren't doing so in hopes of them becoming world champions. That happens later. Children who play football, basketball, go skiing or do running don't enter with the intent of becoming the best in the world. Of course there are some who do. But most people enter their sport because they think it looks fun or their friends are doing that sport.
Even if some countries do develop better drugs, in my opinion the difference between no drug and designer drugs is MUCH bigger than the couple of small % you might get from taking a new drug that isn't designed yet. I don't think there will ever exist a gap in the effectiveness of drugs that'll make one country win over another, if doping is allowed that is.
I think that antidoping culture has created this overstimated power image of drugs
@@ripaisabel Yes and no in my opinion. You'll never win vs a genetic hyper elite who takes drugs and works hard if you don't take drugs yourself.
I do however agree that there isn't some magical drug that is several times better and will make a genetic hyper elite win vs another genetic hyper elite who takes "lesser drugs". If drugs become allowed then I don't see a way of one drug making athlete A win over athlete B.
"I don't think there will ever exist a gap in the effectiveness of drugs that'll make one country win over another, if doping is allowed"
I agree with this 100% !!!!
I would make one counter-argument for your second to last point about a substance being relatively safe, readily available, and performance enhancing. Your claim is that if a substance meets all three criteria, then it wouldn't be a banned substance and that's why you used Creatine as an example.
My counter-argument is that testosterone meets all three criteria. It is a naturally occurring hormone that at TRT doses is relatively safe, enhances performance, and is readily available around the world. Why is this banned by WADA?
Yeah I dont think Seb knows much about medicine, medical research or basic pharmacology. I think if someone doesn't have this knowledge they shouldn't even be engaging in this debate TBH.
@@user-jw6yh4ev4n toxic comment
With the first argument, one issue is that it actually describes the current situation instead of the situation it was intended to describe, which is one that would exist if PED's were permitted. It overlooks how the countries that invest more into PED's already have an advantage. Clearly, the legal framework, as it is now, allows that advantage to persist because it is in fact easier for certain countries to covertly invest in PED's. This is something Clarence discussed in detail in his previous video. A response to that might be something like, "those countries just need better regulatory authorities", but again, Clarence's previous video details why this is extremely difficult to do, and that in any event, it's very unlikely to be effective or even happen. In order to mitigate (or even eliminate) the advantage that those countries have, the better option is to give other countries the same *opportunity* for that advantage. Permitting and regulating PED usage would allow this to happen. The concern that this would create and foster an advantage in favour of countries that invest in PED's isn't validated. First, this is because the advantage already exists. Second, it exists despite the laws and institutions designed to prevent this. The only conclusion is that there is clearly a link between the current legal framework and these advantages.
Can you imagine how much Lasha would lift if he was on gear!
He’s tested positive before. What makes you think he’s clean now?
@@22448824 you’d hope so 🤔
@@stephenjlewis1976 and that was when his total was 80 kg lower
Roid monster
Wow, I really didn't think there could be a rebuttal to Clarence's video because it was incredibly convincing, but your points are equally valid if not more so, especially about the escalation theory. If contestants could take more drugs, the country with the better backing would create more powerful drugs for their competitors, making the sport a competition of chemistry and biology. And you also run the risk of harming more people and furthering the drug industry, which is already grossly corrupt and damaging.
I don't think there is a solution that man can come up with. Greed is so pervasive that no human establishment can fix this issue. History shows that no human ruler has ever been able to squash out greed.
When you have drug testing, it happens this: some athletes are being popped for dug used, other who also take drugs are not popped and let to compete. Not on purpose not popped (although sometimes yes), they just find ways to pass. And this can't be surpassed, no matter what you do with the testing. And so the athletes who got popped, have their lives destroyed, but others who take drugs win medals. Let's look at it from another point of view. Imagine you're one teenager, who enjoy strength sports and wants to train hard, get stronger and compete against other guys/girls. After few years of training you find out about PEDs and want to try them, to boost your strength even further (assuming you're over 18). I'm saying if you want to use PEDs to get stronger, that should be purely your choice to make, of course you need to be aware of the dangers. And after you get very strong, naturally you'd want to compete with other strong people. How do you do that, if PEDs are not allowed in competitions? I think that untested federation is a good idea. However, it is not good if you want to get as strong as possible and compete, there not to be a way for you to do it. Also another point: it isn't true, that if PEDs are legal, richer countries will produce better PEDs. Actually, most often even nowadays athletes are being popped for PEDs, which exist for many decades, nothing modern. We actually do not have any new PEDs that are more effective than the ones discovered in the 60s and 70s of 20 century. And they are not expensive at all. Methandienone is one of the most effective steroids ever used and 15 years ago you could buy it in a regular pharmacy in Bulgaria under the name Bionabol for about £2 for 40 tablets of 5 mg. The other strongest steroid id Nandrolone, which is also not expensive. So if PEDs are legal in competition, any country could afford these drugs. With all this, I'm not saying there are no bad effects of non-testing. Countries will use it on kids and so on, but actually that's going on now too.
I was so sad to see Clarence video, which really shows the dedication a young athete can put into an endeavour which he/she later might come to regret because of lies and deceit from adults, coaches and people that should know better. Sport today might be unfair and filthy, but what would we want for our kids? Taking medals in championships of the table, what goals can't you achieve clean? The bar is always there for us making it possible for us to test and surpass our limits, regardless of how high or low that limit might be. I thank you and applaud you Seb for havíng the peoples lift in the news show, a lift can be beautiful or impressive regardless that it's not done on an international competition or big enough to place if done in competition. I strongly feel that our community benefits from more arenas where great achievements can be saluted.
Isn’t it kinda poetic how the fitness community of youtube who most likely spends the least amount of time on the website also happen to be the most polite and truly mature people here who are capable of taking and giving criticism just like mentally healthy human beings.
I believe that your assumption that some countries would have access to some drugs that other countries wouldn't is faulty. Even in currently heavily drug tested countries with heavy penalties for drug usage, it is relatively easy for anyone to acquire these substances and use them, whether they're created in that country or not. If we take the example of Mr Olympia, it takes place in the US, and the US has usage and possession of these peds as a felony. This has not discouraged their usage or limited their availability within that country.
In addition, the sport would eventually self regulate the level of PED usage. It is one thing to ask someone if they are willing to die in 5 years to get a gold medal, but another thing entirely when said athlete sees a former competitor die of excessive drug usage. This obviously does not stop some outliers from doing excessive things to win but I don't think that will ever be stopped. You can't stop some people from over-using peds if they think that's what they need to win, drug tested or not.
Is there any actual upper limit of what current lifters are using when they get popped? If they are taking a specific ped and they know that if they get tested they will get caught, what's stopping them from over-using said ped. One thing that we don't generally see is what their reference ranges were when they did pop. Was it just over the limit or way beyond it?
Love your content, really appreciate your views on this.
How does being genetically gifted differ from being genetically more gifted to respond to steroid use? If you wanted to level out the playing field every athlete should have the same hormones, testosterone levels etc. Sports will never be fair no matter if steroids are used or not. Sorry kids hard work does not beat talent.
pretty much, "fairness" is a bad angle to approach this topic from.
Yes, also some people are better at the first day of training while others are better after the 100th of training, so there are better responders to training as well.
@@deliciousdishes4531 Equality of opportunity is what we should strive for. But no matter what we do the playing field will never be level or ”fair”.
If PED’s are allowed some countries/athletes will have better access to better PED’s. If they are banned the same situation still occurs. If PED’s are banned like now then genetic/DNA manipulation will become a thing (if it isn’t already.)
Taking out the PED factor some athletes will get more funding and better training possibilities etc.
Sports will never be fair.
@@Loporrr I would put this under the genetics factor.
@@MrOpticBlade That is my point, we agree
What do you think? Not what Clarence nor I think.
I think we need Grizzly's opinion
I honestly don't know enough to make a factual opinion on either side. I agree with some of Clarence's points and they seem pretty like minded, but I don't know enough to say what is incorrect or not
I think that if we want change we need to first let everyone know how corrupt sports are in general and how unrealistic it is to be competitive at the highest level without peds. The vast majority of people think sports are clean and thats a big problem.
There should be a certain dosage which should be distributed per qualified athlete. You can use that amount of gear and if you use more than that you're disqualified. Far too optimistic and will probably never happen but this would be the only fair option. This way you can still test athletes but it would be the most fair you can get.
Unless you remove money from the olympics entirely, it's going to be corrupt.
My biggest issue with your argument is when you said the public perception of bodybuilding and strongman is worse because of the drug use.
Strongmen athletes are by far more popular than Olympic weightlifters, some have millions of followers on social media while even the most popular Olympic lifters barely reach 6 digit followers. Same with bodybuilders, many people know the big names from the IFBB and Olympia Competitors... but who honestly can name 5 bodybuilders from drug tested federations.
Any strength sport will struggle to compete with the more staple sports, in terms of popularity. But the most popular competitions and strength athletes are the ones with unregulated drug use.
Humans bodies are built for running, not lifting crazy weights and getting huge and jacked. Many of the most popular and commonly played sports have running as a key component of the game. (Basketball, football, American football, baseball, tennis) Coming from a former track/cross country runner who now solely trains Olympic lifting as a “hobby” I can say running form and progressing in running speed is much more natural. Most people struggle with running only because of being overweight (whole other conversation). Point being, the limit for muscle growth and strength gains is a lot smaller than most people realize. Besides the occasional genetic outlier, most people are just never going to clean and jerk 400+ lbs, deadlift 4-5 times bodyweight or have 20+ inch arms without taking some sort of performance enhancer. We’re just not built for it. If anti-doping worked 100% of the time strength sports would honestly be a lot more boring and probably would be even less popular.
Btw, I totally see where you’re coming from most of the video. This is just a really complicated topic and there is no real right or wrong answer it’s just opinions and point of view. At least for the moment. I love your channel Seb and I rarely miss a video. I just wanted to put in my 2 cents, not that anyone cares.😂
Good response, Mr. Weightlifting House. Much like the other viewers, I really appreciate the nuance from you and Clarence when discussing this topic of anti-doping; it shows that the weightlifting community (at least those with the most influence) aren't just a bunch of meatheads who can only look through a binary lens.
I think a constructive intelligent conversation about this is extremely promising for the future. I really like that this is the direction we are going
its not
I appreciate the counterpoints from Seb, and I suspect some of the early dislikes I'm seeing may have less to do with disagreement with the arguments presented and more to do with hardcore fans reflexively defending Clarence. Personally I'm a fan of Clarence's videos but I largely disagree with his arguments on doping. With that said, I think that it's overall a good thing that he's come out to be more open about his usage and his opinions, I only wish for as many people as possible to engage with the actual substance of the issues at hand rather than leaping to simplistic conclusions about it. I think Clarence makes a far better defender of the position to end drug testing than the person who carelessly suggests that all the Olympians should get as juicy as possible because they think that sounds more fun (I'm sure we've all heard this ad nauseum).
U should try a video on best snatches from box or hang maybe
Such a divisive subject. It is interesting to hear the back and fort, and I am a lifter that competed many, many years natural and the last couple of years on testosterone. I am torn personally, and I try to take a more "libertarian" stance on it simply because I have no right to police the morality of other individuals, but the issue that I have is that there are way too many people willing to cheat, and it is way too easy for them to do it, which does leave a massive disadvantage to those that are willing to play by the rules. I don't think it is as prevalent in power-lifting simply because there are two divisions, one specifically untested, but the fact remains that people do still cheat in the tested division simply because it is easier to snag a record than it is competing in untested. The sad thing about it is that the majority of amateur lifters are doing it simply for the love of the sport, because most of us will never be good enough to compete at an elite level anyway, so.... should it even matter at that level? It isn't like we are making money or taking it from someone. That being said, I did at one point in my competing set a national tested record, which put me in with some pretty high level lifters, and the guy that eventually beat me had me wondering about whether or not he was natural, simply because I was competing at the age of 44, weight 220, and his numbers at that weight were absolutely astronomical for a natural athlete. It was the reason why I finally decided to start taking TRT, because in order to reclaim the records, I would be competing against untested lifters anyway, and I was at the age where my natural test was declining. I dunno.... short story long, if we can't do it in a way that is actually equitable and fair to all parties involved, why are we doing it?
so why mk677 (greline secretagog -->growth hormone) is banned? you can buy it on amazon
the two things I don't understand about anti-doping is
Why are they illegal for the negative health impacts? Every single athlete has sustained a sports injury that has affected them long term.
How is it an unfair advantage? Are we really saying that an athlete in the USA has the exact same access to nutrition, coaching, legal supplements, and biology as an athlete in north korea?
I can't really see how PEDs are any different from any other facet of the lifestyle of an athlete.
I just wish it was all clean its so depressing as a kid from the UK who wants to compete lmao
Great Point Seb. We need to find a middle ground for sure.
Good arguments on both sides. The only thing I would mention is the safety issue of steroids is quite overblown. Steroids are a known quantity, and can be taken for long periods of time with little to no health risks. To indicate that any steroid course compromises health is just not accurate. Can they be abused, and thus create health risks? Of course. If you take only 3-5x the recommended dose of Tylenol, you can destroy your liver, but it's still available OTC. It's seems rather arbitrary that some substances can be legal, readily available and safe that clearly help performance (creatine), and others cannot (many steroids).
Have 2 separate categories. In one let people take literally anything they want and not test for anything. In the other one test for any and all compounds or markers known to science. Like be extremely rigorous. The only problem with steroids is the stigma. If it weren't illegal nobody would care. In the current situation, literally all the top athletes are on something, and EVERYONE knows this but for some reason we pretend they're not because of some "tests".
we will never get good enough tests, meaning PEDs will be in the "clean" category.
On snap.... Haven't finished the vid yet, but this tea is going to be hot!
Splitting hairs on the PEDs reminds me of another area that could split hairs on who is a better lifter than another, and that is having the right body proportions and thus levers to maximize lifts. Body weight and gender are not the only factors. Be nice if there could be anthropomedic codes assigned to each lifter that adds or subtracts from their total to gauge a true ability. This will never happen and I therefore agree with Clarence that there are too many factors to trace including natural hormone productions.
These counter arguments surprisingly really well thought out, and made a lot of sense! I agreed with clarence but I agree even more with you!
whats the name of the PHD resercher you named at the begging?
Alex Kolliari-Turner
Here are two episodes with him:
The Sport is Steroids - podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-sport-is-drugs-doping-analysis-w-alex-kolliari-turner/id1231131481?i=1000507289683
How Athletes Pass Drug Tests, & The History of PEDs in Weightlifting - www.weightliftinghouse.com/2020/01/21/how-athletes-pass-drug-tests-the-history-of-peds-in-weightlifting-w-alex-kolliari-turner/
@@WeightliftingHouse thanks
I always wonder what a powerlifting/strongman/bodybuilding model of unregulated drug use might look like for weightlifting.
Overall, I think a partial-doping approach might be the most sustainable/policeable. Like, allow for a certain range of heightened test/test ratio values, and, like, one or two other non-tren PEDs. Similar to a lot of countries takes on narcotics. This clearly doesn’t solve all problems, but I think it might be a reasonable compromise.
Exactly my thoughts. I agree with most of the points he made but the conclusion of removing it for good as the only option feels illogical. You don’t solve a problem by removing it, you don’t fix a car by taking the train
I think it would be best if you and @Clarence0 came together and have a talk about it in person or Skype or whatever. i think it's superior to making response videos. If there are any misconceptions they can be dealt with on the spot, and you can cover alot more ground, and maybe even come to some kind of consensus.
Quality video as per usual
Thanks Seb. By the way, doping in professional sport in Germany is sanctioned with up to 5 years in prison and 10 years if you willingly risk serious health issues or death. It is generally a more severe crime (according to the law) than shoplifting. People need to acknowledge that. It is a crime against peoples health, an economic offence and fraud. Not just bad manners. Usually I would not never support harsh sanctions, but a strict sanction like this could maybe help people changing their mind.
It is the sport of weightlifting and not the sport of who dopes the best. Just because it is not perfect doesn't mean it is worthless, at least we are trying to make it as fair as we can.
brilliant video, thank you Seb!
Is there a weightlifting news website where articles are posted?
Seb sites Inside the Games on a regular basis. Might be a good place to start.
Very good response. I agree with both opinions on this topic. Hopefully, more people can objectively watch both videos and formulate a new opinion
So Lasha is natty? Clarence approachs seems less hypocrital, because calls the things as they are. Or should we start building the cross to the crucifixion of Lashas as was done with Ilya when the mighty fall from the highs?
@@Buran01 no one between the two said Lasha is clean
@@AlexiosKarakatsanis Yes, and I have no problem with Lasha or others competing on PEDs, while his posture seems to be "it's ok if you're cheating as long as we don't catch you", which seems hypocrital to me.
@@Buran01 I think the argument is more "Innocent until proven guilty and keep trying to make the testing stronger and stronger"
@@AlexiosKarakatsanis The other side of the argument would be: legalize doping so athletes could openly discuss with doctors about the caveats and advantages; also children would known beforehand what means trying to compete at high level.
I also disagree in removing antidope rules. It's the future of the kids and the sport that end up being jeopardized by doping and number chasing in sports. And my counter to the argument that "you need PED's to be elite" is simply:
Imagine if the world never had PED's in sports. Would viewers (your customers) care about the numbers on the stage/screen? Would they be less impressed if the heaviest CJ was just 200kg? Would the stories of Pyrros Dimas, Michael Jordan or even Clarence be less inspiring? I highly doubt it.
The only thing they need to improve is MARKETING to get more money/funding to enforce this rule universally (and no it's not impossible to enforce anti-doping). Not simply relying on dope itself to progress the sport will greatly benefit future athletic growth and ofc REMOVING the cherry picking executives of the sport.
We have two issues, human evolution and our current physiologic/genetic state. Currently, we have a dilemma where we are attempting to push the human body to untoward limits and unlocking more capability. The PED helps with unlocking more capabilities than an athlete who doesn’t use them. Greg Doucette does a very good job explaining an individuals own genetics coupled with an individuals ability to respond to PEDs, the two factors don’t always add up, when they do you the sky is the limit (metaphorically). I am a pharmacist, in response to the metabolism of these andergenic hormones and the glucuronosyltransferase family and the numerous polymorphisms being used as a “biological passport” does hold weight. However, the absence of testing, especially robust measures does lead to more unethical behaviour. I do believe we need to have an ethical measuring stick to enhance the sport, robust testing and adherence is a key part of this. Mr Kennedy also does provide some insight on the use of more dangerous or untested compounds without the benefit of proper clinical trial to determine safety and efficacy and ultimate harm to the athlete over time. Drugs like testosterone proportionate have been proven to be somewhat dangerous because of the abuse potential and overall long term damaging effects to the human endocrine system, this is why testosterone propionate is a C(V), schedule V, pharmaceutical under the DEA’s list of legend drugs. The others have been proven to have long term physiological effects such as organomegaly, congestive heart failure, non-viral hepatitis, fatty liver disease, choleastic liver failure, osteoporosis, extreme risk for TIA, stroke, heart attack, PE, and DVT. Keep in mind, those of us in medicine do not recommend or support the use of PEDs for things other than physiological hormone replacement therapy. Outside of this indication, the use of these drugs becomes recreational at best, highly damaging and life span reducing at worst.
I really like your point about sacrificing your body from training is expected, but forcing people to use PED’s if they want to be competitive is too far. I have beloved this for a long time and am glad someone like you shares my opinion. As some background I watched clarence’s video and really liked it but your points are very good and similar to the thoughts and criticisms I had.
You're deluded if you think that people aren't already forced to use PEDs to be competitive...
@@patmanrick This has occurred to me since commenting.
Agree with Clarence. Anti-doping strongly favors the wealthier athletes/nations that can develop PEDs that are not detectable and won't trigger blood passports either. As for health concerns, there is a strong argument that doping can actually be healthier as the body doesn't break down in the same way. Further, anyone who thinks elite level sport is about health is undoubtedly not an elite athlete. Moderation is healthy, but pushing your self to the absolute limit is abusive to the body and that goes for any sport. Take a step back and ask yourself why are we trying to police sport with anti-doping, but no other industries? Why is it fair for upwards of half of college students to be taking unprescribed ADHD meds to get ahead of their clean counterparts? Why aren't they tested? What about silicon valley techies taking modafinil or micro-dosing with LSD or psylocibin tested given the immense advantages those substances give them over their clean counterparts in that industry? Drugs pervade every single industry in our society and while the romantic notion of being clean is nice when you're young and naive, the fact of the matter is that is not reality and it never will be in sport just as it never will be in any industry. Doctors take drugs. Judges take drugs. Policemen take drugs. Firefighters take drugs. Most of our senior citizens take drugs. Women and teenage girls take drugs to not get pregnant. Drugs are everywhere...but somehow we're to believe it's just athletes that shouldn't be taking them? It's an absolute fantasy to think anti-doping is working the way it's intended to. Better to accept reality than to deny it.
I appreciate both your views.
And to be honest I somehow reason with both of you.
The only add on is that Clearance's views are coming out of frustration and anger against the committee/organization who governs this.
It is unfair , as simple as that.
Either you make the sport completely clean or don't call it clean.
I like how NOBODY is talking about drug use in e.g. football/soccer and everything's fine and dandy?
That conversation will be an interesting one to have but it makes sense it hasn't been brought up. It's probably better to be done by a channel specifically covering football/soccer.
Good to see great points from both parties. Clarence's arguments blow you out of the water though.
The one point I do not understand is this: Are there different Anti-Doping Agencies for every sport? Because the medal example might be true for the US in weightlifting but let's just look at them in ANY other olympic sport, let alone all the other sports that exist.
believe it or not, I thought you are Clarence! omg, there is no limit of how I can confuse myself
I understand the urge to draw parallels to explain why making weightlifting a free for all isn't the right answer. However, I think we need to look at this specific context, instead of making comparisons to things like shoplifting or even strongman.
In the current state of weightlifting, there's no way to fully enforce testing because of the international aspect and the time it takes to enter a given country. Making the sport un-tested would at least take away the advantage of time and bureaucracy. Then yes, there's an advantage for countries with more developed science, but that was already there. So at least some of the advantage would be nullified.
A yearly steroids aren't that hard to get in other undeveloped or lesser developed countries. Iron bibi lives in a rural area of the west african jungle and still gets tons of food and steroids
In terms of fairness, Clarence believes that for now the best to worst systems are:
1. perfect testing
2. no testing
3. imperfect testing
and his logic is that since we don't have 1, we should have 2, and that is a obvious thought process, to have the second best thing if we can't get the best.
However, we should always pursuit for the best thing and not settle for the second best. Isn't that also the spirit of sports as well? Always trying to be higher, faster, stronger, and better, and to pursuit for a perfect testing system, we need at least have a testing system at all. If we are going down the road of no testing, then no matter how testing science develops or how the system perfects, we are never gonna have the best, a perfect testing system, because there would be no system to begin with, no system to perfect, nothing to build on. We can't act like the current testing system is hopeless and stationary when in fact the testing has gradually become more strict and better over the years. It has many flaws but we should believe that we are going to fix them. I'll leave the comparison of current testing and no testing and which is better alone, but just by looking at the argument that we shouldn't settle for the perhaps second best thing, we should have testing and try to perfect it rather than abandoning it completely.
Wouldn't it make sense to look at other sports (eg powerlifting) where you have tested and non-tested competitions? How is it there (corruption, health of athletes, etc)?
Well done. Both provocative pieces that have their own valid points. The answer may likely be somewhere in the middle, where certain PED’s could be tested and approved. Perhaps similar to formula 1 technology, where a special brake cooling system or downdraft spoiler comes out, gets banned for the season until tested again, determined “safe/beneficial” to the overall F1 program, and the technology is distributed to the rest of the teams. ?
Powerlifting has tested and untested comps
@@Jackmerius_Tacktheritrix5733 the problem with that is that the IOC will never accept an untested sport in the olympics. So the tested one will still have people taking PEDs.
I agree and this isn’t being talked about enough. Some more effort should be put into health screening and certain approved drugs such as basic testosterone and no synthetics for example. Basic test and HGH will not only improve performance but extend the length of careers by improving recovery and resistance to injuries.
What's the PhD channel he was talking about?
The last point about creatine blew my mind
I personally don't like the "genetically gifted one should win" argument. Why should someone who's mad passionate about a certain sport accept the potential he or she has been born with which they have no control over it ? Why should you just accept that you "suck" because of genetics ? It's not like enhanced athletes sit on their asses all day. I would %100 support the idea of a "super drug" that would eliminate genetics out of the equation.
PS: I'm a pharmacist so I know drugs can't just "eliminate" genetics out of the equation that's not how they work but you get the idea.
Love the video,but please, skip the ominous background music.
Has Clarence NOT played BIOSHOCK?
I completely agree with the points made in the video.
Having a bad system/rules/laws/government doesn't automatically means having NO such systems will make everything better. It is almost always better to improve the current system than scrap it altogether.
Clarence's arguments are all correct for anyone that empathise with his position. But not everyone came from a developed western country where any lower middle class family will be able to encourage and support their kids from discovering their passion in sports at a young age.
Clarence's supporter assume legalising doping will put well funded state sponsored sporting countries at a disadvantaged. I actually believe the opposite is true. Because fewer proportion of athletes from wealthy countries will be willing to sacrifice their health for glory where most athletes from poorer countries with state funded sports programs won't get that choice because of economic reasons.
Corruption is human nature and a constant struggle that we all need to work harder to fight against and try our best to create an environment where there is less incentive for people to become corrupt.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely though. When you centralize power to a single entity that will always be more corrupt than an environment where competition exists which creates checks and balances (not saying perfect but better). Put it this way everything the government does is backed by the threat of force (men with guns who will lock you in a cage) the same cannot be said for Walmart.
@@robbarber7253 I wasn’t trying to making political point. I’m simply saying getting rid of WADA will more than likely make international multi sport championship worse for people like Clarence and his supporters.
It’s like arguing for open book tests simply because some people cheat. Thinking since you didnt cheat, having open book test will improve your test result ranking. Guess what? Life dont normally follow the “simulation” of our little brain. In my experience. Open book test ranks mostly turn out the same for the same group of people as Close book test ranks.
Btw. Since you are a political zealot arguing for anarchy. Maybe wise up and consider the implication of having a weak government/ no government. What you will end up with is basically a monarchy. Not weak hereditary monarchy. But when biggest and strongest become king for 1 or 2 generation before being overthrown by another stronger guy starts a war.
Your current democracy is basically a version of weak hereditary monarchy much like the one in the UK. Where the bloodless wars are fought within two tribes each with multiple factions every 2-4 years in DC. Just look at the age and career path of Pelosi, McConnell and every other major figure with real power. And they have people like you arguing over whether they should have more power or less power over YOU. What a joke. you won’t even recognise true/ real/ absolute power when you see it. Never mind arguing to limiting it.
My opinion is to do away with temporary bans after you test positive or are found to use a banned substance. Once you test positive you are done with that sport, simple. Too many ridiculous excuses on why its in your system, its there, too bad, the athlete has the responsibility of knowing what goes into his or her body. Probably harsh to most people but if you want to stop this ridiculous problem there needs to be a real deterrent. Are we suppose to think that once a person tests positive somehow they find a way to become just as competitive as they were before? or even better? It should be this way in all sport too. Thank you, nice show as always. Have a nice day.
To me, knowledge and connections is the key to dealing with all drugrelated issues. So if you want drugs to do less harm the worst thing you can do is trying to make them disappear.
There is not one country in the world where hard laws against drugs has led to fewer deaths and incarcerations. So I would argue that it also causes more general harm, because it also suppresses the gathering of information and hide problems. Sweden is hard on drugs and we recently became number one in the EU on drugrelated deaths.
I think research, education and harmreduction overall is a much better way to deal with this problem.
Why the soundtrack?
Hey, I just saw part 2 of Clarence video, responding to this one. I even felt compelled to leave a comment, I think I should leave it here too so that get a chance to see it. So this is what I wrote under Clarence second video: "I first saw the W|H-video, and thought he had some valid points. Then I saw the original video from Clarence, and understood much better his points. Now I saw this video, and when I see the clips from W|H that Clarence responds to here, it becomes completely obvious who "won" the arguments, and also that the W|H-arguments at times are kind of ugly and in a subtle way are trying to make it seem like Clarence's arguments are uneducated and naive (W|H of course don't say that out loud, but they hint at it in a way that seems very sneaky to me now when I think about it)." So this might sound harsh on you, but the more I think about it, the more I feel that you are the one that really have double standards. And like other comments here points out: You have no problems in promoting e.g. Lasha and Loredana Toma; that is completely double standards (I repeat myself, but English is not my first language), and that "don't sit well with me". Coming from Sweden where both doping and street drugs are highly demonized, I am so completely tired of these arguments why we should keep the war on street drugs, even when we can compare to e.g. the Netherlands and see for ourselves what the consequences are in that case. I haven't really thought much about doping before I saw your videos, but it seems to me that it's exactly the same double standard that I hear from you, and from the people here in Sweden that supports hard punishment for using street drugs (and even have them in your system), and if you are unlucky in your youth and gets caught with something, then it will haunt you for >10 years, if you get caught with not even that large amount of some narcotics in customs you can go to prison for >10 years etc. (And in Sweden, that's about as hard of a punishment you can get, save 1st degree murder.) Well, that's my two cents on the issue; I really love your content usually, because I am completely in love with this sport now, and it's incredible to see your footage from competitions and training-sessions, I learn so much, and seeing Loredana Toma doing just here warm-up and training gives me so much input to better my own snatch. But I feel that you were dishonest, and most of all, as I have now repeated, have double standards. I really hope that you make a reply to Clarence second video. But I have not seen any, even though its been a year, and I suspect the reason for that is that you realize that you lost this discussion big time, and on top of that, you do come forward as being very radicalized by the anti-doping propaganda. So maybe you realized yourself that it's better to do your awesome weigthtlifting-journalism, and keep you eyes closed about the fact that most top lifters are on gear.
great summary
I think that there are no "clean countries" as was stated. As Clarence said, there are certain ways how to beat doping test, or how to deal with them. For example, how many lifters have been caught for human growth hormone? Insulin? There are also mask substances, which can confuse doping tests. If we look back and see that an athlete was caught and later passed the doping test with an even better result, does it mean that he is on creatine now? To the topic, I can imagine something like a natural federation of bodybuilders. With very strict Lifetime bans etc. And I also imagine that the result will be similar. It would be very rare to C&J 200, and the popularity of this sport will decrease. And moreover, with lack of popularity will come a lack of money. And Who would pay for a better anti-doping test?
there's no apparent argumently-based correct side of things so, If I have to choose one side or another, I choose cleaner/ethically correct/fairer/healthier/fewer corrupted/more transparent side of elite weightlifting... but I respect another opinions too, it's just sad the weightlifting sport situation is in... I have been a clean athlete competing internationally for over 10 years now, 2 Olympics on my back and I feel that I've accomplished so much being clean, probably I've already reached my top level without anything, so only I've left is enjoy the rest of the way... hopefully in Tokyo Olympics, but without any hope weightlifting is going to be clean by then...
I believe drugs are bad, because that's what my mommy told me.