NY Times labels cycling as 'most linked' to drugs. It's an opinion but what about weightlifting, baseball, football...

OK, it's just an opinion piece - and largely a positive one about cycling cleaning up its act - but why do the authors make these sort of value judgements? Upon what research is cycling deemed to be top of the heap here? And yes, I know it gets said a lot - but why? Because the mass media itself repeats and encourages it? Because cycling is a fringe sport that doesn't bite back? Because of Landis, Hamilton and Armstrong? Because cycling publicises its own infringements rather than hiding them?

Anyway, here's the NYT quote and link:

More than any other sport, bicycling has been linked to drugs. Podium finishers in nearly every Tour over at least the last two decades have failed drug tests, admitted to doping or been linked to high-profile investigations.

As I said, it's mostly positive. It just grates a bit when I know that most cyclists who have obtained PEDs have in my admittedly limited experience got them through other sports people, usually via contacts in a gym. Whilst many of the highest-profile infringements and legal pursuits have indeed been of cyclists, what about the equally infamous drug busts related to football, baseball and athletics? Did they get their PEDs via cyclists, as you may imagine from the anti-cycling hype? Not to my knowledge, no. 

Indeed it's common enough knowledge that for many casual users looking for steroids and other 'help' the trail often starts with a conversation at a gym. It's as logical as going to a dodgy doctor, another anecdotal yet 'logical' approach. More recently the internet has gained some credence as a source, too. And whilst I have nothing more than anecdotal evidence for all of this I can't see any solid evidence that things have greatly changed. It may be more organised than 20 years ago, less haphazard. But it surely affects all sports and especially those cashed-up ones. Gyms are full of sports people of various codes who want to build up and maintain muscular strength or recover from injury. That doesn't mean that gyms are in on the whole thing, just that they are logical points of first contact, nothing more. If we are going to label cyclists in particular as 'most bad' then let's actually do the hard yards first and investigate the number and depth of penetration across all sports. Please.