Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 125696	2012-07-13 09:17:00	lance armstrong - dope ?	globe (11482)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1288363	2012-08-27 22:29:00	I've thought about this statement and although it appears like he got snowballed by the process and couldn't afford a war chest with which to fight the accusations - if he had even the smallest leg upon which to stand, some legal defense league and/or group or even an anonymous donor would have paid to defend him. With no-one coming forth, it obviates the point that he was guilty as charged, I disagree. If the anti-doping people can pick up traces of chemical from a skin cream (which is obviously applied externally) in the system, why can they not pick up the drug(s) he is alleged to have taken to win these competitions in urine and/or blood samples? And if they can't pick up the actual drug(s), then why can't they pick up the masking agents that he must be using? Are they incompetent? I wouldn't accept hearsay evidence (especially from proven drug cheats who may have ulterior motives for telling stories that an anti-doping agency wants to hear) - positive hard proof should be required.	johcar (6283)
1288364	2012-08-27 23:22:00	They DID pick up the drugs in Armstrong's system from urine and/or blood samples. That is the point. The traces of the drug (cortisone) were then explained away by Armstrong's presentation of a pre-dated prescription for a cream (that contained cortisone) allegedly prescribed to treat saddle sores. Problem with that is that his masseuse said if he had saddle sores she would have known about it and treated them herself. The other problem is that Armstrong must have had powerful support to get away with this rort (and to bury his other failed test), possibly from as high as UCI. The dialogue now seems to be shifting away from Armstrong to an examination of the UCI itself. There are a series of good articles at Cycling News. Here is one: www.cyclingnews.com and another: www.cyclingnews.com Armstrong is history, and a distraction from the main issue which is drug abuse in professional cycling, and alleged corruption or incompetence at UCI. At the very least, there is a coterie of people who pee in each other's pockets, and who have no real commitment to ridding the sport of drugs. By the way, in the second article above, Pat McQuaid alleges that WADA has been conducting a vendetta against cycling for a decade ('vendetta' in this context probably means a concerted effort by WADA to hold cycling and UCI to account and bring the sport into line with all other forms of sport in the 21st century). I worked alongside David Howman for several years, and cannot imagine a man with more integrity. That is more than most people will say about the people at the top of UCI.	John H (8)
1288365	2012-08-27 23:27:00	I've thought about this statement and although it appears like he got snowballed by the process and couldn't afford a war chest with which to fight the accusations - if he had even the smallest leg upon which to stand, some legal defense league and/or group or even an anonymous donor would have paid to defend him. With no-one coming forth, it obviates the point that he was guilty as charged, Not sure that that follows.	Cicero (40)
1288366	2012-08-28 01:42:00	Not sure that that follows. Quite agree as he could have been just so sick of it all that he couldn't be bothered and I don't see how that US outfit has any right to take his wins away from him. Surely it would be up to the Tour de France outfit to do that. If the US outfit are so sure of what they have why won't they give him the evidence so that he can defend himself. Seems like the USA has no sense as to what true justice is any more. Money rules everything there now.	mikebartnz (21)
1288367	2012-08-28 01:45:00	Problem with that is that his masseuse said if he had saddle sores she would have known about it and treated them herself. Having not seen her I am not sure about that.:D	mikebartnz (21)
1288368	2012-08-28 02:29:00	One sick lot over there for sure. Joe can come here if he likes, we will make a good keen man out of him, Barry Crump wise.	Cicero (40)
1288369	2012-08-28 03:39:00	They DID pick up the drugs in Armstrong's system from urine and/or blood samples. That is the point. The traces of the drug (cortisone) were then explained away by Armstrong's presentation of a pre-dated prescription for a cream (that contained cortisone) allegedly prescribed to treat saddle sores. Problem with that is that his masseuse said if he had saddle sores she would have known about it and treated them herself. The other problem is that Armstrong must have had powerful support to get away with this rort (and to bury his other failed test), possibly from as high as UCI. The dialogue now seems to be shifting away from Armstrong to an examination of the UCI itself. There are a series of good articles at Cycling News. Here is one: www.cyclingnews.com and another: www.cyclingnews.com Armstrong is history, and a distraction from the main issue which is drug abuse in professional cycling, and alleged corruption or incompetence at UCI. At the very least, there is a coterie of people who pee in each other's pockets, and who have no real commitment to ridding the sport of drugs. By the way, in the second article above, Pat McQuaid alleges that WADA has been conducting a vendetta against cycling for a decade ('vendetta' in this context probably means a concerted effort by WADA to hold cycling and UCI to account and bring the sport into line with all other forms of sport in the 21st century). I worked alongside David Howman for several years, and cannot imagine a man with more integrity. That is more than most people will say about the people at the top of UCI. OK - they found cortisone in his system. Once. That doesn't necessarily follow that he won 7 TdF titles using cortisone. I can't see that there is any benefit in the UCI covering up drug use in cycling. However I can see why cyclists might WANT to cheat - there is huge money to be made in winnings and sponsorship and endorsements As an aside, cortisone (en.wikipedia.org) is a steroid: "Cortisone suppresses the immune system, thus reducing inflammation and attendant pain and swelling at the site of the injury". I can see how that might assist with muscle recovery, and as such I can see how it might be considered a "performance enhancing" drug for a cyclist doing long distances on consecutive days. But it doesn't improve oxygen uptake or build muscle...	johcar (6283)
1288370	2012-08-28 04:48:00	I have no idea what beneficial effect cortisone might have for a competing athlete. I imagine though that reduction of inflammation in muscles would be a good thing, and promote good blood circulation; perhaps recovery times as you say? However, I am just guessing - there must be a reason why it is a banned substance. And no, of course it doesn't suggest that it was implicated in LA's 'winning' of 7 titles. One of the journos in an article I have just read pointed out that all but one of the recent winners of the TdF have had their titles stripped, and that was Carlos Sastre. Sorry, I cannot recall the source now - I was searching for articles on Pat McQuaid at the time. The general sense seems to be that there is a code of omerta in professional cycling, and that the UCI is complicit in that. The suggestion that I have read is that if they let people lift the lid, then cycling will come into disrepute (ha!) and there will be huge losses to the cycling industry. Certainly the UCI seems to have more interest in important issues like regulating saddle angles than they do in combating drug abuse. An interesting book to read (for its own sake as well as about the UCI's petty bureaucrats and their selective biases) is The Flying Scotsman by Graeme Obree. PS - apparently a key effect of cortisone is pain reduction in muscles and joints, so an advantage could accrue there. PPS Here are the recent winners of the TdF: List of recent Tour de France Winners: Contador Sastre Landis Armstrong Pantani Ulrich Riis Indurain List of recent Tour de France winners who have had doping allegations: Contador Landis Armstrong Pantani Ulrich Riis Indurain	John H (8)
1 2 3 4 5