GaryvdM

Thanks, that's much more in depth.

The medical condition they were treating was not asthma, but reportedly respiratory infection. Yes, prednisolone administered dermatological is useless for treating respiratory infection, and hence they got a TUE for oral administration. But the administration is not the crux of the matter. The issue is that if there is a rule that states that a TUE for a corticosteroid can only be grated for out of competition use, did the UCI ignore this by allowing it in competition. If such a rule does exist, they have some explaining to do. If it does not exist, and the quote I posted above is incorrect, then yes, it is a non issue.

As opposed to say dermatological which does not require a TUE. Orally, intravenous injection, intramuscular injection, or rectally require a TUE http://www.uci.ch/templates/UCI/UCI2/layout.asp?MenuId=MTU2ODY&LangId=1

Because it is a performance enhancing drug that would give him a unfair advantage? I don't know for sure. That's why I'm asking these questions. There is a conflicting statements in the media. One article I read said: But the UCI claims that they have done nothing wrong. Can anybody familiar with the rules point us to the rule mentioned above?

According to the article, it was for the treatment of his respiratory infection. The question is, if the infection is so bad that he needs a band substance, shouldn't he be sitting it out.

The drug in question is Prednisolone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prednisolone

I think you are maybe referring to the issue of the Salbutamol inhaler. This is a different issue.

http://velonews.comp...steroids_331970 What's your opinion? I have a question about the rules: Is there such a thing as a TUE that stipulates that a drug can be take out of competition, but not proceeding or during competition? Edit: More in depth and insightful article: http://inrng.com/2014/06/jdd-uci-froome/

White lightning epic ride is one of the worst lubes there is in terms of chain power efficiency. See the attached report. velo-friction_facts_lube_test.pdf

Welcome back to the hub Johan!

No. Anecdotal evidence is unreliable in contrast to scientific evidence. In this topic, it is particularity prone to confirmation bias. If there was a lack of scientific evidence on the topic, I would consider the anecdotal evidence, but since there is plenty of scientific evidence, I choose to ignore the anecdotal evidence. The scientific evidence can't tell use everything, e.g. for the question of to what degree a helmet prevents injuries in an accident, the scientific evidence is conflicting. It's still more reliable than anecdotal evidence. My reason for asking the question I'm interested to see if there is a correlation in South Africa to this observation: http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1261.html Just to make my position clear: I'm against helmet laws, and the promotion of helmet use, because it reduces the number of people cycling, and this in tern makes the roads more dangerous. (This is back up by scientific evidence.) I'm not say you should not wear a helmet.

A picture says a thousand words: (please excuse that it's a road bike.) Most chains are designed with a pitch of 1/2", so 12 link pairs should have a length of 12". Measure how long 12 link pairs is on your chain. Subtract 12". This is the wear. (This chain is has done over 8000km road use. It's starting to encroach on 1/16" wear. Almost time to to be replaced.)

Argumentum ad hominem...

Out of curiosity, question to those who have kindly offered their anecdotal evidence. How many of you were cycling as a sport (either training, or racing) and how many of your were commuting?

Chain life is mostly to do with how clean and well lube it is kept. Very little to do with power output. Not sure exactly how much wear 1% is on your measuring tool. If possible, please could you measure your chain using this method: sheldonbrown.com/chains.html#wear

You can send him a message via youtube: www.youtube.com/inbox?to_user_ext_ids=cZ9PZ4liStfOfWYefAuBPw&action_compose=1

Side note https://community.bikehub.co.za/topic/131589-strava-heatmap/, Beat you to it

Not very impressed by the article. His statement sounds mostly based on anecdotal evidence, with slim sliver of real scientific data. This is then countered by more anecdotal evidence. And then, as per usual, lots of replies on the hub here of more anecdotal evidence. For those interested in real science: http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1157.html

I trust you noticed the date of the article?

I trust you noticed the date of the article?

The only time the sides of the chain should touch the sides of the sprockets is the 1 second during a gear change. (If this is not the case, one should get ones derailleurs adjusted.) Then there is movement between the chain and the face of the teeth when the chain comes together with, and comes apart from the sprockets. You want this movement to happen between the inside of the roller and the bushing. You don't want the outside of roller to slip on the teeth of the sprockets. Hence, you want as little lubrication on the outside of the chain, as it tends to get a lot of dirt sticking to it, and lets the rollers slip on the teeth. There are 3 place where there needs to be lube on a chain: 1) between the roller and the bushings, 2) between the bushings and the pin, 3) between the inner links and the outer links (less important)

The ultimate in chain cleaning and lubrication: http://sheldonbrown.com/chainclean.html

Getting setup to do melted wax is a bit of a schlep. If you want to try out melted wax before making this investment, bring your chain round to my house and I will do it for you. PM me if you would like to take me up on this.

P.s. Lots of other tests from Friction-facts: http://www.friction-facts.com/test-results/individual-reports. You can get a report package which is cheaper: http://www.friction-facts.com/test-results/report-packages/report-package IMO worth the money if you are interested in the topic.

New chains come with a very good lube applied, so may be you are referring to running the chain with said lube, but it that case, this is not without lube. But if you clean that lube off, the the chain will be much less efficient. Friction-facts did a test on this: http://www.friction-.../dry-chain-test Here is a quote from that test: So, no, running a chain without lube is not more efficient.