3 ms·

It's interesting, but not a scientific experiment. Can we draw any conclusion with "1 datapoint"? The 7% increase may be explained by familiarity with the effor

• nl 11y ago
  No. VO2 tests are pretty well understood, and just don't vary like that (unless someone is sick).
• jusben1369 11y ago
  I think the biggest failure here is not tracking the 4 months prior. Each week, given he undertook dedicated training under the guidance of a professional, he would have seen an improvement in his results. I'm sure his measurements and ride data would have looked meaningfully different between week 2 and week 12 of his 4 month run up period. Now some of that would taper but he'd still see performance improvements after 4 months with regular dedicated training in place. So it would be key to have that context. Perhaps the increase due to doping is 3-5% vs the 7%. Still substantial either way.
• gus_massa 11y ago
  I almost agree. Probably the 7% is too much for only getting use to the setup and training, but to be sure I think this experiment would be much better if he compare again the performance after he stopped taking the drug. Something like a A-B-A test. Article about A-B-A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_research http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-subject_research Much more information and other variations: https://onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/stat509/book/export/html/123 https://onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/stat509/book/export/ht...