Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 0
That's exactly the point....they didn't

They were published in about 2005, IIRC, and within a few weeks were being questioned by competent researchers in the field WRT plausibility......just like The Scientific Method is designed to work. No one wanted to listen back then.....especially Coyle.

I wasn't clear. I didn't mean to imply that Coyle's study had scientific merit. As you said, the data was VERY poor and the study was quickly discredited, though not until the media had a field day and planted the seed in everyone's mind that Armstrong was a unique physiological specimen.

I meant to say that the original claim I made about oxygen-vector drugs turning mules into racehorses. That has scientific merit, but the possibility of ever having a fully developed study on professional athletes is slim to none. I don't want to imply that Armstrong was a mule but he certainly was never a rider considered to contend for the Tour de France.
Print the post  


When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.