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. But 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 bizarre, 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 but interesting 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 that 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 Amelia and Ellie Pell are so often injured. As am I, as am I.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment