I swam 100 meters in 10mins when I was five. One year later, I finished 100 meters in 5mins. I took loads of drugs to half the time!
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspicionshttp://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-great-olympic-feats-raise-suspicions
这个我同意：
dwcontrol 说：
I agree that sudden or improbable improvement should raise suspicions. My problem with the Nature article is that the author did not define what is sudden, improbable improvement, and suggested that Ye's improvement was such a case without giving us any supporting evidence. As people have pointed out, Ye's improvement is not unique in either the time frame (1-2 years) or the magnitude (5-7 seconds). Other players have achieved similar or more substantial improvement. I would think that if you want to make a point, you should pick as example a player that either achieved the same magnitude of improvement within the shortest time frame (sudden), or the biggest improvement in the same time frame(improbable). And that is why I think the original author either lacks scientific training, or is a little biased.