Malcolm Gladwell's Sad Apology

This isn't a full blog post; it's more a response to the recent The Science of Sport podcast episode, hosted by Ross Tucker and Mike Finch, featuring Malcolm Gladwell. I can't top Sarah Barker's take or J.K. Rowling's response on Twitter (X), but below are some thoughts I've had. I really hope people take the time to click on the two previous links and absorb what Rowling and Barker are saying. 

Immediately after Gladwell, with all the panache of Alvy Singer, confessed that he was cowed --as others pointed out, he should have said "I was a coward" instead -- into supporting trans athletes in women's sport, Tucker went on social media in an effort to defend Gladwell and call him an ally. Tucker is usually a most reasonable, level-headed, fair, and considerate individual, and he wanted people to move beyond Gladwell's comment and listen to the rest of the interview. He felt, controversy aside, Gladwell made some interesting points during their conversation. I can't say I agree that Gladwell's ideas about scoring for cross country are among them, but Tucker seemed to think this and other topics of discussion were worth a listen. 

It's probably hard for men or those who favor inclusion over fairness to understand how angry some of us are for being abandoned, criticized, called bigots and other names, and penalized for standing up for women. Again, Sarah Barker and J.K. Rowling summed everything up very concisely, so I won't beat a dead horse too much more. I agree with Sarah, though, that when Tucker compared his evolution on the topic to Gladwell's, he was wrong. 

The major difference is that while Tucker has always voiced his opinion based on his knowledge at the time (as many of us have), Gladwell knowingly lied and omitted the truth. And he is considered a journalist, a prominent cultural thinker and such. Tucker changed his stance after conducting further research and after more information became available. Gladwell admitted that he knew there was a male advantage at the time he was supporting the idea of inclusion in the female category.

Several people have brought up other ways in which Gladwell either outright lied or distorted the truth. Those of you familiar with the Munk Debates may remember back in 2022 when Gladwell and Michelle Goldberg attempted to debate Matt Taibbi and Douglas Murray on the topic of trusting the mainstream media. Perhaps if Gladwell hadn't been so busy trying to come up with cringy zingers to hurl at his opposition, he could have focused on the debate itself; however, not only did he fail miserably to sway the audience, he lied and got called out on previous lies as well. He has admitted bias regarding his book The Tipping Point and wrote inaccurately about Northern Ireland in his book David and Goliath. The guy is just not trustworthy. 

Taibbi addressed what happened during the Munk Debate in a Substack post and on X (Twitter). Gladwell is really good at twisting the facts, yet, at the time, he wanted to assure everyone that it's OK to trust the media. It's good to trust the media. You can trust the media. During the debate, Gladwell suggested Taibbi was longing for the days of Jim Crow because Taibbi made reference to a respected reporter, Walter Cronkite. It was so off base that I was actually surprised Gladwell had the balls to lie so blatantly in public. Why he didn't immediately apologize is beyond me, but Gladwell only seems interested in apologizing if it serves him in some way. 

Since the tide is turning and public opinion overwhelmingly supports the extreme notion that women actually just might deserve sex-based rights, Gladwell is suddenly "brave" enough to come forward and admit he was a wanker. But as a cherry on top for those of us who see who Gladwell is, think what you will about Douglas Murray, his response to Gladwell's continual disrespect during the debate was fucking brilliant. 

In The Science of Sport podcast, Gladwell also suggested that he's an authoritarian when it comes to dopers in sport, but then went on to suggest that we should welcome those who have served bans back into the sport with open arms. This is pretty much the opposite of being an authoritarian. I've stated plenty of times that I'm for lifetime bans. I realize, and Tucker also pointed out on social media, that lifetime bans wouldn't be feasible because of legal factors, but there needs to be some sort of zero-tolerance policy put into place, not just for the athletes but for everyone involved. 

The whole system is so completely fucked right now that it's almost pointless to debate the topic. More money put toward testing, better testing methods, fewer corrupt officials and athletes, and stricter punishments could possibly improve the situation slightly. I'm afraid professional and even amateur sport is so dirty that it's beyond repair. 

The way testing works now is that, as ridiculous as an excuse might be (burrito contamination), we are forced to accept the possibility that the explanation for why the athlete tested positive could be accurate and not assume the person knowingly used performance enhancers. 

It would be like watching someone in a wig and big sunglasses carrying a large bag around a store looking suspicious, and then getting stopped by employees right outside of the store. When a search of her bag reveals unpaid items from the shelves inside, we must assume that they could have accidentally fallen into her zipped-up sack. Or maybe someone else put them there! 

While most everyone knows the items are stolen, several people will actually believe they're not and defend the thief. Other people will know they're stolen and still defend the thief. Very few will both know the truth and actually condemn the thief, and even those who do will be forced to admit that there's a possibility, no matter how small, that she could, in theory anyway, be innocent. Because that's the way the law works. In rare cases, lifetime bans have been handed out for certain classes of drugs after a certain number of violations have been reached in certain sports, or for gambling or other violations. 

I'm not saying we should take anyone's right to due process away, but the way things are being run now is a farce. Technology will never catch up to new methods of doping, and money will always be too much of a factor. Organizations don't want to bust big names that draw spectators, and improved testing costs too much money. Athletes want to win, so there's also their incentive to consider. And all of this isn't even touching on the more subtle ways of cheating, like using thyroid medication or other substances that can potentially improve performance but are not on any lists of banned drugs. 

On that bright and cheery note, I say adieu until the next time. Excuse any errors. I rushed through this and might need to go back and do some editing later..or not. 

Nikki Hiltz Is Only Fast On The Track

**Trigger warning for mentioning suicide**

In my last post, I said that Nikki Hiltz, an American 1500-meter runner, is a mean girl. This is because she publicly belittled a woman for having the temerity to speak up about fairness for women in the Boston marathon, an event Hiltz doesn’t run. I’m not saying a middle-distance runner shouldn’t comment on longer events, but the way she went about it was cruel. She really comes off as arrogant in her approach.

Though Hiltz demands others use they/them pronouns when referring to her, I won’t because she is biologically female and races in the women’s division. Cutting off her breasts or other body parts doesn't change her sex, so she is allowed to continue racing in the women’s division. And I’m allowed to call her “she” regardless. 

After she claimed she was a transgender individual and then changed that to nonbinary, probably to avoid addressing any backlash for not wanting to compete in the men's division if she felt so strongly about being a man, it's hard to believe much of what she says, though she could just be confused and suffering from body dysmorphia or gender dysphoria. At one point, she claimed she was both, which isn’t possible unless you live in make-believe land. 

In addition to being a standout on the track in middle-distance events, Hiltz is outspoken about transgender and non-binary rights. In other words, she promotes biological men racing against women, even though she has the luxury of competing and profiting by running in a protected category for her event. She’s OK if other women don’t have that right, is how that translates.

Regarding biological men in the women’s division, Hiltz claims that nonbinary and trans athletes aren’t winning and seems to suggest they’re not even competing at the elite level at all, but, contrary to her claims, it does happen, more than she thinks it does. Here’s an ongoing list of events that, according to Hiltz, don't happen: The Lists - search by category. Apparently, she forgot about what happened in the Olympics in Rio in 2016, too. There, three biological men took top honors in the 800. These three are DSD athletes, but what follows and her comments address that as well. 

None of this affects her directly, though, so her attitude is one of not giving a shit. The only thing she seems to care about is spewing rhetoric. But why doesn't she care about younger athletes? As a top athlete, shouldn't she be concerned about the future of women's sport and providing girls and young women with the opportunity to compete on a level playing field? I sure want that. I hope young girls and women get a chance to feel what it’s like to break the tape and confidently toe the line knowing they stand a chance to win.

In a recent interview, if you want to call it that, Hiltz complains about the new policy World Athletics has put in place to protect the female category. This policy includes a one-time cheek swab or blood test to detect the SRY gene for anyone competing in the women's field. It is an extremely accurate, non- invasive test and is correct in determining testes 99.99 percent of the time. An anomaly would require further investigation and a conference with the athlete and his or her trainers. The point is to prevent what happened at the Olympics in Rio in the 800 from happening again. This policy is designed to protect women and the women's category in sports.  

In the interview, Hiltz admits that she doesn't have a clue what she’s talking about, and it’s unlikely she has any interest in learning more about DSD conditions or genetics, or the actual test put in place by World Athletics for that matter. I will add more information on this at the end of the post for anyone who is interested. 

Hiltz basically babbles the equivalent of, "I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THIS TEST IS FOR, BUT HERE'S MY OPINION ANYWAY!" Imagine not knowing what the test is, yet acting all high and mighty, and then speculating about what it means for the test to be in place. It's utterly absurd. Her arrogance is truly stunning here. 

What’s most shocking is how freely and loudly she spews complete horseshit. The lies just roll off her tongue, and it’s clear she doesn’t give a crap about facts or about others. She comes off as someone who only wants to hear herself talk. She just loves that spotlight. 

In what might be considered the dumbest response of all time, Nikki Hiltz claims that the World Athletics policy is a "slippery slope." She falsely claims that, even though this test is harmless, it could set a precedent and lead other organizations to conduct more invasive testing, only it doesn't and wouldn't. 

These spooky organizations Hiltz created in her own head wouldn't be able to successfully use invasive methods to test sex if World Athletics won't recognize these make-believe investigations as valid. There is zero evidence that any kind of invasive testing would happen. If it did, it wouldn't be because of the policy. But Hiltz has an agenda. Truth doesn't really matter as long as she gets her message out, that non-binary and trans athletes' rights trump everyone else's.

As one reader already pointed out, Hiltz established herself as a liar when she posted incorrect information about a non-binary teen, claiming this person was murdered when the cause of death was actually suicide. She never addressed the issue again, even after major publications and the media as a whole clarified what had happened, that the death was self-inflicted. In this particular tragedy, the young teen threw water at a group of individuals, and then there was an altercation that did not result in the teen's death. Sadly, the teen later committed suicide. If Hiltz meant that possible bullying may have contributed to a suicide, that's not what she said. Hiltz outright claimed the teen was murdered. Words matter. Accuracy matters. Hiltz does not care. 

Continuing with the interview, Hiltz grabs all kinds of fake statistics out of her own ass. She claims that two percent of the population is intersex and that it's as common as red hair. It's not. The correct statistics state it's closer to .018 percent and not nearly as common as having red hair. Again, she shows her ignorance, yet is so unbelievably confident in her fabrications. 

In another jaw-dropping moment of stupidity, she then claims that some people may have been "growing a Y chromosome" at some point, and then it POOF just goes away, disappears, just like that. This is so ridiculous it's hard to know how to address the claim, but no, chromosomes don't suddenly disappear like that. Sex is fixed before the birth of the baby. 

Perhaps realizing that she's flailing around in unfamiliar territory, Hiltz then uses whataboutism after stumbling through her clownish explanation of genetics and claims that abusive coaches and doping (lol) are more important to consider than women having their category erased. The whole thing is cringy to watch. I almost feel bad for her for being so naive (or is she cunning?), but, sadly, there are fans of hers who will stand behind her, no matter how ridiculous her claims.

It's unfortunate that so many podcasters, journalists, and fellow athletes support her, even when she is lying or intentionally being unkind. I think with this latest video interview, though, at least more people will realize she shouldn't be taken seriously. 

For those interested, below are some links that are helpful when discussing the topic of biological men in women's sports:

Male advantage in sports

DSD conditions and sex

World Athletics policy and testing

SRY gene

Swyer Syndrome

Imane Khelif boxing kerfuffle 

Nonbinary and gender dysphoria

Burn It All Down

The other day, a friend of mine sent me a link to Allie Ostrander's latest YouTube video. Whenever I look at anything she does, it's always in the back of my mind that she's a cheat. I don't understand her fans and their enthusiasm for her "content", but she has quite a few diehard groupies constantly cheering her on in whatever she does, be it racing or reveling in sorrow. Unless someone points out something she has done or said, I tend to ignore her. 

It's not that she doesn't occasionally bring up something worthwhile; it's that she doesn't appear to give a shit about her audience. And she’s a cheater and a liar. I don’t respect her, and that won't change, unless she suddenly starts telling the truth and apologizes for taking shortcuts and for knowingly producing triggering videos after claiming she is raising awareness about eating disorders. 

As I was watching her complain about her training and not feeling right, a common theme in her posts, I wondered what direction her video might take. The title was something about reaching a breaking point, and she hinted at knowing she was possibly overtraining. Where has her coach been in this? 

This isn't the first time she has discussed these low moments throughout her career, and I don't usually find talk about overdoing it and continuing to do so, digging an already deep hole deeper, helpful. However, when she moved toward possible solutions after having fallen into the trench, I thought maybe she had something of value to offer her viewers after all. 

Admitting she needed to take a step back, either for emotional reasons or physical or both, seemed not just sensible for herself but a great suggestion for anyone who's feeling off in training. It's not new or earth-shattering information, but it beats some of the "LOOKIT WHAT I EAT" type videos she makes. Then all of a sudden, I could have sworn I dropped into the first episode in season seven of Black Mirror. I actually had a WTF moment when Allie, with a straight face, went from talking about athletes needing enough rest straight into a full-blown advertisement for a mattress. 

It's one of the most bizarre things I have ever witnessed on a runner's channel. What a turn-off and how strange, but this is the world we live in now, like it or not. Having promos as part of (not separate from) a serious conversation is jarring, and that's the nicest thing I can think of to say about her plug or her channel.

On so many levels, Allie is a huge disappointment. I question why she decided to work with David Roche and have suspicions about him and several individuals associated with the whole Some Work, All Play cult, too. I'm glad I'm not the only one. Because I suspect these types of people are not as kind and easy-go-lucky as they pretend to be, I'll make it clear that I'm expressing an opinion, speculating, wondering aloud, not accusing, exactly. Wink wink. I have questions, though, and I scratch my head a lot when thinking about these types.

People say sprinting is the dirtiest sport in running, but ultras are as close to unregulated as possible while still implementing some testing -- only in the big races, though. Most races that actually bother to have testing of any kind, the Leadville 100 and Western States included, mention on their websites that they might implement testing at the race site. In other words, do your doping with enough time before and after so that you don't get caught. And with microdosing and new methods of cheating, it's harder to catch scammers anyway. 

A weird study regarding ultrarunners and doping was conducted in 2024. Basically, pee samples were collected from urinals at ultra races and tested for drugs. This doesn't really prove anything because, again, runners are warned about possible testing at the race sites of the more well-known races; however, in what amounts to the equivalent of a blind sample, tests showed the following:

Among 412 individual urine samples, 205 (49.8%) contained at least one substance, and 16.3% of the samples contained one or more prohibited substances. Substances detected in urine included nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) (22.1%), acetaminophen (15.5%), opioids (6.6%), diuretics (4.9%), hypnotics (4.4%), glucocorticoids (2.7%), beta-2 agonists (2.2%), cannabinoids (1.9%), and stimulants (1.2%). None of the samples contained erythropoietin-receptor agonists or suspicious testosterone. Drug use was not associated with the participants’ characteristics or ranking. Respondents to the questionnaire reported using acetaminophen (13.6%) and NSAID (12.9%); however, no prohibited substances were declared.

The study draws some interesting conclusions based on this result. While only 16.3 percent of the samples contained something fishy, something other than non-performance-inhancing substances, diuretics should be a red flag since that's often a mark of a masking agent. Additionally, if someone is using opioids, and, according to these findings, over 6 percent are, isn't that a concern? 

But none of these results really point to much because of the way and where the samples were collected. It's like a Baltimore cop announcing that she's going to be patrolling for illegal street gambling at 9 p.m. on Friday, September 25th, and then being surprised she didn't catch anyone throwing dice on a street corner. And yet, in 2024, a few random cheaters in the ultra-running community didn't get the message.

I can speculate all I want, but it would be great to see better regulation, better testing, and life-long bans for those caught, even if what's uncovered is a masking agent commonly found in acne medication. Nobody believes a pro athlete wouldn't get a TUE for any medication containing a diuretic or a metabolite of a diuretic when WADA is extremely clear on these and other drugs that are prohibited at all times. Well, people who like to play make-believe might fall for some bullshit about not getting an exception because ---insert ridiculous explanation here, but most rational people are aware of who's lying. And don't trust all the new training fads. Those are red flags, too. 

If you have read the last few posts I've made, it's probably obvious that Allie rubs me the wrong way. It's not just that she's a cheater and not just that she lied; it's her whole narcissistic approach to social media. I really tried to have sympathy for her when she cried on a video about her unspecified eating disorder and made the decision to get treatment. I truly wanted her to get well and still do. Whatever demons are in her head, nobody deserves that. 

Having been at some incredibly low points with my own illness, I feel for anyone deep in the muck and the mire, however, I think a content creator who responds to an individual asking if her videos might be triggering by insisting something along the lines of, "It's my journey!" maybe shouldn't be an advocate for recovery. It's OK to simply post content without trying to be an advocate or without claiming it's about raising awareness when there are better ways to do so. Her channel is not about helping. She's making a living, selling shit and racing. That's all. 

I'm sure there are super fans of hers who will claim Allie is heroic and offers inspiration, but that's not what I see. Again, how do you take a person's "honesty" and "openness" at face value when you know she's a liar? I'd like to know how far back the cheating goes. Admit it and talk about that, and then I might have some respect. 

On a side note, but speaking of courageousness, I've mentioned that I work in a vet clinic, and the other day an older woman called about her dog that was attacked by a mountain lion. She told me that she kicked the mountain lion after she came into her yard and saw the wild cat with the dog in its mouth. I said, "You did what?" and she repeated, " I kicked it. It was facing away from me, so I kicked it." And she rescued the dog. Now, that is heroic and badass! The dog is fine, and the mountain lion ran away. She's fine, too. But I digress …

Someone who's far more intellectual and thoughtful in her approach on social media is Amelia Boone. Despite her ties to David and Megan Roche, she seems at least a little more trustworthy and real. Though she admits she worries about what others think when she addresses sensitive topics, she's far more helpful in offering solutions and admitting she, like most of us, doesn't have it all figured out. 

My biggest criticism of her blog is that, like many others who write about recovery, the focus is on eating in order to run, not recovery itself, even though the two are not entirely separate. I understand how big or even little victories around eating more in order to train and race harder are stepping stones, but recovery is about so much more than that. 

Runners tend to focus on outcome, finishing a race, training, or finding success in a specific workout, but eating disorders take away from overall health, not just running-related achievements. 

So often, advocates neglect simply living and focus entirely on the athletic aspect. Oh, but look at me, all judgmental and critical of others when I don't have my own shit together. Far from it. And I feel bad that people like Amelia and Ellie Pell are so often injured. As am I, as am I. Ellie has at least moved away from her godawful, potentially damaging and triggering “What I eat in a day” videos, so that shows some growth.

I also understand Amelia’s concern when she says even cautious writing can anger some readers, but at least she's not intentionally belittling her audience like Lauren Fleshman, Nikki Hiltz, and others in the running community often do. God, Hiltz is a mean girl. 

I appreciate Amelia's willingness to be honest, and her content is far more useful, even if it is self-absorbed. Any blogger, myself included, has at least a little bit of a narcissistic streak, some more than others. I won't even mention influencers because they're in another stratosphere when it comes to being egotistical. I think it's the nature of the beast for those of us with eating disorders to become navel gazers. I often have to force myself out of my self-preoccupation. That's not to deny how often those with eating disorders are too selfless, a strange contradiction. 

As much as I complain, audience members can usually find tidbits of good information in most of the blogs and videos I mentioned. I worry that the triggering, unnecessary, and sometimes even harmful content outweighs the informative material, though. 

Tabitha Farrar is one of the few recovery advocates I admire. It helps that she shows herself living more freely and fully, but she's also not afraid to say what she feels or believes about recovery. I think Rachael Steil does a good job promoting recovery as well. I used to admire several advocates who associate themselves with the body-positive movement. That was until it became more of an angry, anti-thin, pro-fat group instead of a coterie of individuals who support all bodies. 

But, really, who am I to tell others whom they should admire or follow? I mean, if following a liar and cheater or someone who shits on others brings you happiness, go ahead and indulge yourself. I'm not going to stop you. 

A Short List of Ideas That Never Went Anywhere

Throughout the years, I've had ideas that never went anywhere. I attempted a few product designs here and there, the most successful being a vegan truffle recipe I created well before veganism was much of a thing. At the time, the cost of making them wouldn't have yielded a profit. In fact, because I would have had to rent a commercial kitchen, I likely would have lost money in the process, despite several local health food stores expressing interest. I thought the cool chocolate bars I made combining either dark and milk or dark and white chocolate with various toppings had potential. Sadly, I didn't take either idea far enough. Again, money was an issue. 

Not that it means anything now, but here is a list of ideas I had that never amounted to anything, except to demonstrate that I sometimes have good ideas, ones I can't seem to get off the ground. And then I have to witness somebody else's success with the same or similar ideas.

The list:

When I was in college and after, I was tired a lot. One day, a friend and I were talking about the difficulties of being tired in public. I mentioned that someone should come up with a Rent-A-Cot. Several years later, I stumbled upon this:  https://www.businessinsider.com/japanese-pod-hotel-rent-rooms-9-hours-2017-8 

My friend came up with the idea for Rue Paul's Drag Race while we were joking about how the trend of reality television opened the doors to air pretty much anything, boring, raunchy, or not. Little did we know his joke would become a reality TV show. 

Chelsea Handler stole the format I was using for my own podcast and used it for her show, Chelsea Lately. This proves that my idea of including a segment of bizarre but true news stories everyone could comment on was ahead of its time, not that she listened to my show.

While working in an art gallery, I came up with the idea for what basically became Artsy and even reached out to a few website designers about it. Sadly, nobody was interested in helping me put something together. 

A long, long time ago, I came up with a design for a pasta cooker similar to the one in this link but with one container solid for the sauce and the other slotted instead of just the one slotted container:  https://www.wayfair.com/kitchen-tabletop/pdp/henckels-85-qt-stainless-steel-pasta-pot-with-lid-and-strainers-icql1201.html

A few years ago, I mentioned to a friend of mine how beneficial it would be for women or anyone being abused to have access to a safety button. I thought it could even be hidden in everyday items. My idea never went anywhere. This is a similar idea:  https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/VA-news/ROA-Times/issues/1995/rt9506/950601/06010070.htm

Since I have struggled with dyslexia from the time I can remember, I had an idea very similar to this reader: https://www.amazon.com/Reading-Highlight-Colored-Bookmarks-Childrens/dp/B07QNV8D7T/ref=asc_df_B07QNV8D7T/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=344004268544&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=6237448330705343635&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9028821&hvtargid=pla-810832828037&psc=1&mcid=b10f4cdd8ca339428c8472b2a5c1b7c8&tag=&ref=&adgrpid=66044533621&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvadid=344004268544&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=6237448330705343635&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9028821&hvtargid=pla-810832828037

And, on a similar note, I came up with an idea for a book projector but for adults so they could read in bed without having to hold anything:  https://www.amazon.com/Moonlite-Storytime-Projector-Together-Storybooks/dp/B0BSNZLNHH/ref=asc_df_B0BSNZLNHH/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=647285669408&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=14613848338109693823&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9028821&hvtargid=pla-1963869996452&psc=1&mcid=61047dde23bb3400a285faf8ec6598ab

Although this isn't very exciting, I suppose it should encourage me to continue dreaming. I wonder if the story I keep saying I'm writing (but rarely work on) will show up in print before I actually write it, too. Sign. 

The Latest Doping Scandal

By now, people have had time to react to Ruth Chepngetich's suspension for doping. The world record holder and Chicago Marathon winner was caught using a masking agent, which, although not as satisfying for the “I told you so!” crowd or as telling as agents uncovering the actual enhancing drug, still establishes her as a cheater. 

This is the same way Allie Ostrander was busted, and anyone who believes Allie simply didn't ask for a TUE for her acne medication because she knew, after admitting to Googling the substance beforehand, that the masking agent itself doesn't enhance performance, is purposefully ignoring the obvious. Had she told the truth, she would have either admitted that Google specifically lists canrenone as a banned substance and she doesn’t give a shit about integrity or rules, or she made a mistake and used a masking agent because she is, indeed, doping. Which do you honestly believe? Also, any coach willing to take on a doper and liar is suspect as well. But I digress. My feeling is that it's impossible to trust anyone after they have been caught, but I'd like to know how far back the cheating goes. 

When discussing these issues with a friend the other day, I started to wonder how it is with athletes who supposedly don't know their coach is doping them, either by giving them vitamins that aren't really or by using special creams for massages. In 2022, there was a bizarre doping case involving a Russian ice skater and supposedly some heart medication. First, she blamed her grandfather for accidentally contaminating her dessert, and then, when this excuse fell flat, she was punished, despite the hand her crew played in supplying banned substances and coaxing her into cheating. She was very young, but it seems the athletes, more than anyone else, will continually be the ones to take the fall. Fall they absolutely should, but not alone. Perhaps if more people involved were held accountable, there wouldn’t be as much of a problem. But the desire to win at all costs is incredibly strong, so maybe not. 

When you examine Chepngetich's progression, it's blatantly obvious that her leaps and bounds into world record territory have been questionable. Her marathon history is something else, really something extraordinary, even considering the drugs. Someone forgot to rein her in to make the world record look at least plausible. She went from a 2:22 debut to 2:14, ran a 2:15, and then jumped all the way to 2:09, shaving several minutes off the previous record. It's absurd, but then you look at her marathon itself and realize how much more insane is it. To PR in shorter segments in a marathon or longer race isn't unheard of, but when you're smashing a 10k and half-marathon time by such huge margins, it becomes almost funny to think people even remotely believe this shit, that she just might be clean. 

Even if you forget her ties to Federico Rosa for a moment and look at her running, there's no way you can believe she's not on something, no way, at least if you have a working brain. My neuronal firing doesn't work all that well at times, and even I can see how obvious it is that Chepngetich is dirty. Who couldn't? More importantly, why would anyone pretend otherwise?

But there were people who, for whatever warped reason, gave her the benefit of the doubt, similar to die-hard Lance Armstrong fans. The benefit of the doubt isn't necessarily bad in general terms, of course, but when all evidence points to a certain conclusion, why should anyone be chastised for expressing suspicion? 

Alison Wade, notorious for her "do as I say, not as I do" attitude, especially when it comes to the coverage of young athletes (don't draw attention to them unless you write for Fast Women) and a strong advocate for biological men in women's sport, implied that everyone should avoid speculating and assumptions about a runner unless authorities catch her. Um, no. Look at the overwhelming evidence and get back to me.

Not only did Wade avoid calling a runner out based on her connections and extremely questionable progression, she felt quite OK speculating that Chepngetich could have run even faster...still possibly clean! In her latest post on the topic, though, readers could almost feel how badly she must have wanted to add a disclaimer about diuretics. Hopefully, Wade is aware of the quantity (190 times higher than what would be expected in any kind of contamination case) found in Chepngetich's sample and how silly any wavering at this point would look. 

But now she’s claiming she believed the marathoner was most likely dirty all along. Wait, what? 

Is this someone too afraid to rock the boat, even with extremely strong evidence, or someone who actually thought for a moment that Chepngetich could be avoiding the sauce and still running those times and showcasing that progression? Either way, it's a bad look for any kind of journalism or coverage of the sport, to waver and then retroactively claim, "Oh, I knew it all along," and an equally bad look to not know what times are ridiculous versus those that could be a legitimate possibility. It's bad enough that the world record will stand because officials *have* to assume Chepngetich ran the record-setting pace clean. We don't need anyone even remotely suggesting the effort was actually clean. My guess is Wade will eventually go hard on the coaches and other handlers and excuse the athlete. They're all dirty, though, all of them.

More and more, the media are insisting their audience not trust their own eyes or their gut feelings. Whether it's insisting trans women are actual women or they don't have a physical advantage in sport (they do), or pretending there isn't a massive doping problem in all sports at all levels, we are asked to go along with a lie, to accept the absurd as fact. Only recently has there been some backlash, but it often feels like we're living in some bizarre version of Oceania. 

As we move into an era of more sophisticated doping strategies and more types of drugs and masking agents available, it will be less likely that catching dopers will continue, not that many have been caught. It definitely won't get any better. Ultra running is an even bigger joke. As I mentioned before, race directors give athletes a time and date for possible testing, and there are no real consequences if an athlete is caught. Maybe he or she won't be invited back to the race, maybe not. The incentive to win money, or in some cases, glory, is too high. 

I was planning to go more deeply into topics for this post, but I found out very recently that a friend of mine passed away after years of struggling with anorexia. As a result, my brain is a little foggy and my emotions are running high. I'm also in some physical pain from the usual.  I may have more to say on that at another time, but for now, rather than push to make this a better effort, I'm going to leave it as is and make a more strategic attempt next time. Since my long lapse from blogging, it's important to get a few posts out there for my own sake. I guess it's a little like practicing the scales in music.  

Thank you to the few individuals who reached out or commented. I was very touched that anyone actually read my last post, even more so that anyone took the time and effort to respond. That was very kind.

Excuse My Long Lapse in Writing

I'd ask for forgiveness for letting so much time pass between blog posts, but I don't think many people read this blog. Instead, my plan will be to write something, anything, in order to break the silence. It's not that I haven't jotted words down or done anything at all in the last year or even longer, but I can't really call stumbling over the keyboard here and there or producing a sentence or two writing. So, yeah, I've let things slide and not just with writing. 

The end of July will mark the one-year anniversary of my mom's passing. Anyone who knew her understands what an extraordinary woman she was. I was her caretaker right up until she passed and wish I could have done a better job with everything. I'm sure there are people who do far worse, but I know I could have been a better daughter overall, though she always told people I was amazing and wonderful and all kinds of great. I know in my heart I'm not. She wasn't herself the last year or two, but she was, as always, beautiful and wise, even as she lost some of her mental capacity due to tumors in her brain. I haven't fully processed my feelings over everything, so I'll leave it at that and shove the sadness and grief I feel down for now. 

Since then, I've moved to a very small apartment and continue working at a vet clinic in reception. The job is as hard as ever but also rewarding. It's fast-paced and sometimes overwhelming. My favorite time is when everything is caught up, and I can focus on little side projects. My least favorite time is when it's crazy busy, people are calling and in the lobby, and it seems we will never catch up with the duties that need to be completed. Fortunately, my coworkers are all very helpful where they can be, and the environment, while stressful, is a healthy one. 

I've worked a couple 10+ hour shifts, and it's a struggle to recover. I'm glad most of the longer shifts I've worked have been on a Friday, leaving the entire weekend to relax, though relaxing isn't my most successful activity, unless I'm sleeping, which I do a lot of. Otherwise, I'm way down deep in the OCD routines, leaving very little time or energy to be social, which is difficult for me anyway because I tend to not like being around people, even those I like. 

Yesterday, I was about to go for a jog or wobble around the block -- that's about all I can do lately because of the high hamstring and foot issues -- when I saw a wee little baby bunny that didn't look quite right. When I got up closer, I could see there was a piece of a label, probably from a packaged product, stuck in its fur on its backside. I got very close, but it eventually ran into the bushes. I waited but finally gave up and felt terrible knowing I could have helped this little (so smol!!) guy out but failed. In the afternoon, I was still fretting about it, so I went out again to search for it and found the wee little thing in the grass. This time, I was able to very slowly get right up to it and finally pulled off the label! It might not seem like much, but it felt good knowing I helped make one little creature more comfortable in the world. 

I don't have a whole lot more to report. I've been very glad to read Sarah Barker's Substack posts. She's very thorough in addressing trans athletes in women's sports. I've also been glad to see individuals on Let's Run take on David Roche. It's not the first time Let's Run has dedicated many pages to flaying the mock modest coach/athlete. Ross Tucker and Mike Finch also mentioned him and also addressed the NIKE sub-four spectacle in a recent podcast episode that's worth a listen. 

I don't follow running a whole lot anymore. The sport is such a joke at this point that it might as well be called the enhanced games. With so many athletes in general admitting they cheat, you can imagine how many more there are who keep quiet about it. And it's at all levels, including high school. Anyone who thinks an athlete who hasn't been caught is clean isn't thinking clearly. This is especially true when it comes to ultras with rules that state exactly when an athlete could possibly be tested. And with the use of masking agents and micro-doping plus easier access to products, it's almost a given that the majority of top athletes are cheating. 

Well, sigh. I know this is short and probably not so sweet, but I wanted to post something to say I'm still here, even though there are days I wish I weren't. 

To end on a brighter note, I have read some very good books lately. I don't read a ton and haven't been working on my novel, but I have a Goodreads account with the more recent books I've read listed. I would say that "The Patient" was one of the better picks, and I'm surprised I like Karen Slaughter's books. I'm not sure why I thought her writing wouldn't be to my liking. Of course, Stephen King remains one of my all-time favorites, and I'm in the middle of "The Stand" while also tackling Jo Nesbo's "The Snowman". Neither is for the faint of heart. 

Wishing everyone well, if anyone ends up reading this.