Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but Premium users receive great benefits. Premium benefits include:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2026 SX, MX, and SMX series.
Also:
"There's no question [Adderall] is a performance-enhancing drug," says Dr. Gary Wadler, a past chairman of the World Anti-Doping Agency's Prohibited List Committee.
The Shop
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
Free shipping: VITALMX
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Pit Row
Maybe this isn't the thread for this but I'm gonna say it anyway. Why does everyone get so bent out of shape about PED's? Most have probably never even thought, critically, about what the term PED stands for. Sure, they know it means performance enhancing drugs. But usually all thought just stops there. "Hey...look...XYZ is taking PEDS!!!! Cheater!!! Burn him at the stake!" Which is nonsense.
Lots of athletes are willing to, that is voluntarily, take a substance that will enhance their performance in large part for our entertainment. They can enhance the performance of the bike but not the most important aspect, the human body? It seems nonsensical to me. PED's make an athlete perform better! Woohoo! And in moto, the argument could be made that it makes the athlete safer as well. I don't see the problem.
Now if a sanctioning body wants to set forth rules regarding PED's? So be it and they can enforce it with their own testing procedures (none of this WADA and USADA crap). Just like their should be competing sanctioning bodies that allow PED's. Let the athletes and the market decide. It's their body and no other man, women, or child should have any say as to what goes in said body.
Do you really want to let people go wide open and take stuff that can harm them long-term, for short-term gain?
Just from my perspective? It should be about the rider that does the best training and preparation, not the guy who has the best chemist.
I think generally the guy with the most talent should win. Talent doesn't come in a bottle, pill, or syringe.
As for me, I'll for sure test positive for Oreos, a margarita on Thursday evenings, and glucosamine for my joints.
In the case of a positive test, the rider is supposed to be notified first.
I had heard this one last week (a rider mentioned that he'd come to the forum to see if it had hit here yet). I mentioned it to an official. They'd also heard it, but hadn't received any notification from USADA. I think if it's true, they're being particularly careful, because of how oddly the news of James Stewart's positive test landed over here.
And a large part of the problem now is everything is down underground or on the black market if you will. Let everything out in the open. This breeds honesty and transparency. The doctors and chemists can sit down with an athlete and let them know how said drug will effect them, long and short-term, good and bad. This is our product and/or service. Take it or leave it if you will. As long as everything is voluntary and not forced or coerced, it comes down to the individual.
And the talent would still rise to the top. And I don't think it would take training and preparation out of the mix. Not by a long shot. It is merely another tool at the athlete's disposal. It would raise the level of performance even more. And if it's even across the board then everyone has access to it. Yes you'd still have the have's and have not's unfortunately but at least everyone would have access to it. No racer would be barred from taking them.
There's a lot we don't know with regards to Stewart's situation of course. But what if he was merely taking it for "performance enhancing" purposes? What if it did indeed help him focus thus making him faster and safer on the track? He shouldn't be allowed to take it? And maybe the most egregious violation of all, he is not allowed to make that decision?
Post a reply to: Why isn't anybody talking about the rumor about the 250 rider that failed the PED test?