Armstrong Misleads & Swindles Livestrong Donors

Page 8 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

involution

BANNED
Mar 7, 2014
5
0
0
Digger said:
You are allowed to reply or disagree with hog but he can't disagree or reply to you...yea that seems fair :rolleyes:
Oh dear. It has been talked about in PMs, DMs, and emails. The information is being passed to-and-fro. Many are aware of what is going on, and it is surfacing for all to see now. A corrupt governing body, backroom deals, protected posters, targeted scapegoats, and a legion of followers to attack anyone who questions the official story. The parallel is shocking. A Friedrich Nietzche quote seems apt. "Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster." Yes. The lead hater has hounded Armstrong for so long that he has taken on Armstrong's personality traits and methods.

Where is Walsh when you need him? Where is the CIRC to investigate how many members have been ordered not to respond to Race Radio or face banishment? How many have been exiled because they thought it unfair and responded anyway? How many people has he sicced the moderators on? It was only a few days ago that he let slip that andy1234, of all people, was his latest target.

It is amusing how complete the transformation is. The same person who led the charge against Armstrong's ex-girlfriend, Sheryl Crow, for standing by Armstrong stood by watching people attack the employees of Cycling News for stonewalling about Joe Papp, even though he told them he did not want anything done about Papp. The hypocrisy is staggering.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
zigmeister said:
Nice try...you should be banned for that ridiculous crap that you are supposedly quoting me that I'm a Livestrong/Armstrong fan.

Just pathetic bro...

US Health Care Reality check people.

Each and every person is 100% responsible for the cost of their health care in this Country. We don't need another thread on this subject, this is the reality and facts of it listed right here.

That guy can whine/cry all he wants post cancer treatment in front of a crowd because of some d-bag comment, he was looking for somebody to pay his bills and give him free "health care". Plain and simple. He said over and over he had no health care. He forgets to add, he made a conscious choice to NOT have health care which he could have purchased prior to any diagnosis of cancer. He would have got it nearly 100% covered by the health plan.

It is called taking ownership and responsibility for yourself, not put the blame on every other Tom, D*ck, Jane and Harry because somehow you feel entitled and have a story to tell.

How that reflects on ANY charitable organization is beyond comprehension, sensibility, reason and logic in all shapes and forms. Which goes for your sad sad fake quote.

Did you read the part I wrote above closely about how each person is 100% responsible for their own health care in the US??? You can buy an insurance plan, you can have an employer that offers one, Medicare/Obamacare...whatever, you have to pay out of pocket for the premium, cost of deductible etc...or entire cost out of pocket cash, your free choice.

So...how much did this guy, who decided willingly to not have a health insurance plan spend on traveling to Europe to race, compete, or around the US on racing/training in the sport??? 100K? 200K? Yet, he wants to fill out a form at Livestrong, and expect what exactly??? Some doctor to run thousands of dollars of tests, or a charity to pay for this follow-up?

He could have found a job and went to any oncologist, and said hey, how much to check me out, put some money aside to cover the costs. Or, did he keep spending it on racing instead?????? Or expect to fill out a form and Livestrong would do what? Cover the costs? He didn't need Livestrong to provide any resources/direction. As a cancer patient, he knew exactly that any oncologist, whose specialty is treating guess what, cancer, is where you go to be "checked out"!!!! So that makes his statements about Livestrong, or any charity for that matter, absolutely silly and holds zero value to most people. Surely his cancer doctors told him, hey, you better go to your local oncologist for checkups. Yet, he says for a year, he chose NOT to seek any treatment or get a job and pay for the costs. Also, ALL insurance companies are required to provide you with a health care plan, even if he had a pre-existing condition, that means cancer! So he could still get health insurance and pay for it to this day.

This isn't Canada, England, or any other socialist country, it is the USA.

That is how it works here.
Cool story bro.

So Livetrong's job is to sell $4,000 bike rides with Lance, not to give advice to cancer survivors.
 
Jan 27, 2010
921
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Actually, that is false.

Health insurance premiums are high in part due to hospital care charges which are high in part to non-compensated care provided.
.
With respect Scott, I think there are other reasons why your own Country's HC costs are so high.

US Hospitals, HMOs and MDs make sure they make money first, and a lot of it. Does a total hip replacement really cost 60K? And does all the ancillary costs of the surgery and staying in hospital need to cost 120K for a week? No, just follow health care costs in Scandinavia, UK and Canada. That preferentially raises HC costs and essentially excludes about 40 Million Americans from staying healthy (my entire country), which makes insurance for the rest of the USA abusively high. So, I disagree. Your HC insurance premiums are high mostly due to outlandish costs to getting HC. The rich get richer and healthier, and people like the speaker in that video cannot afford HC from day one, or in his case initially blow through their limited care plans which renders themselves poor or bankrupt for any future HC needs.

I don't think anyone would expect any organization like LS to pay for everyone's HC but they could set up entry into research trials, experimental drugs, redirect them to social sites(State hospitals) that can help them, or for free visits with MDs that believe in social medicine...if it truly wanted to help.

PS: Canada's HC is not perfect either, it needs some major work trust me.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
zigmeister said:
.......more yella trash talk.......

That is how it works here.
Livewrong takes peoples money on the pretence that they are doing good in the cancer community, whether it was 'research' in the early days or so called 'awareness'.

The only awareness they gave was, "Wanna ride with Lance, pay big bucks"...

This thread is not for discussing world healthcare programs for cancer sufferers.
 
Neworld said:
I don't think anyone would expect any organization like LS to pay for everyone's HC but they could set up entry into research trials, experimental drugs, redirect them to social sites(State hospitals) that can help them, or for free visits with MDs that believe in social medicine...if it truly wanted to help.
They could do this, yes, umm "if they truly wanted to help" - If they had a budget of 500 million a year.

So let's say we're to do as you suggest; with a country the size of the US and its population they'd have hard time sending out MDs all of the country to the 1 in 4 with cancer. And these MDs would happily do so unpaid and pay for all their travel and medical supplies.

Then what? They have to take blood marker tests and send those to where? A analysis unit somewhere who'll also do it for free, whom are qualified etc. then what if it's discovered the person needs an immediate blood transfusion due to their platelet count. Where would send this person for further medical care?

Then you have this horrible issue in the US of medical liability whereas the medical insurance is not so much that you receive treatment but the doctor and yourself are protected against malpractice.

Then all of sudden look what you're trying to create with a charity - a healthcare system!

That's why in the UK with the example I gave of MacMilllian that sending out a nurse for "comfort" worked extremely well. The nurse was not their to diagnose, or asses or replace an MD but to comfort. All paid for by donations. But it complimented the healthcare system which already had managed the actual treatment.

Perhaps a little thought of what is involved with cancer without palming it off that some $30m a year charity could do in their spare time.

Livestrong were a lot of (stupid) things. But they are not a replacement for actual medical care.
 
Benotti69 said:
This thread is not for discussing world healthcare programs for cancer sufferers.
No this thread is not to discuss world healthcare problems but it certainly demonstrates the "stigma" attached to cancer that people still have such an uncomfortable time dealing with it and actually talking about it.

Because with your statement alone demonstrates some of the ignorance associated with cancer; those with cancer are not "sufferers". When you have cancer you don't want to be labelled a "sufferer". Because you're still the same person as you always were. What is found is the isolation and the fact that people can no longer look you in the eye or know what to say to you when you've lost all your hair and that's why you hate being called a "sufferer".

Livestrong offered a counselling service for this component. They also set up support groups for those with cancer and their families to talk about what they are dealing with. Trust me that type of service goes a long way. Because cancer isn't just medical care. It's also comfort and understanding.

My comments on livestrong are well documented on this forum but the issue of cancer, it's charities, healthcare and associated stigmas are all intrinsically linked. That cannot be avoided.

We could just post stuff on how bad Armstrong, livestrong is and agree with each and be done. Or perhaps we could discuss the issue that relates directly to the thread, the topic of Smith and the bigger issue if cancer treatment and learn something?

What I find so disappointing is that some here want to use cancer as a springboard to sh1tbag Armstrong.

Sure to ahead and sh1tbag him but don't use a disease like cancer to do so. And don't do it without actually understanding the disease, the care of those with cancer and support thereof.
 
Aug 16, 2011
10,821
0
0
Let's keep any discussion of health care/health care system and cancer treatment only as they pertain to Armstrong, Livestrong, and RL Smith's connection with those in the case of the discussion at hand.
 
Afrank said:
Let's keep any discussion of health care/health care system and cancer treatment only as they pertain to Armstrong, Livestrong, and RL Smith's connection with those in the case of the discussion at hand.
That makes good sense.

I don't actually know much about Smith or his treatment etc.

But it would be actually good to get an elaborated view on what occurred with his interaction with Livestrong. I'm genuinely interested to know his experience with Livestrong.

Also to understand why he didn't have health insurance etc.

Don't know if he's on twitter or something but welcome him to drop by and tell us what occurred with LS, good bad or indifferent.
 
Benotti69 said:
Yep and asking a broke cancer sufferers for money stinks.
Much bait on that hook? :rolleyes:

You should have layered it better by telling me Sheryl Crow didn't need Livestrong because she had health insurance.

Next time you're in the US drop me a line. I'll take you for a walk through a cancer center. You'll meet some very interesting people who can tell you their own stories.

Then you can judge.

Deal?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
thehog said:
Much bait on that hook? :rolleyes:

You should have layered it better by telling me Sheryl Crow didn't need Livestrong because she had health insurance.

Next time you're in the US drop me a line. I'll take you for a walk through a cancer center. You'll meet some very interesting people who can tell you their own stories.

Then you can judge.

Deal?
Be there next tuesday.
 
Benotti69 said:
Be there next tuesday.
Another joke? Why does that not surprise me.

Nevertheless the offer is open. I'll introduce you to parents of children with cancer. You can call them "broke cancer sufferers" because they can't meet their insurance payments. But will allow you to make your own mind up.

I'm very serious. If you want to do it I'll pass on my email address to CN who can forward it to you.

Let me know what you decide.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
thehog said:
Another joke? Why does that not surprise me.

Nevertheless the offer is open. I'll introduce you to parents of children with cancer. You can call them "broke cancer sufferers" because they can't meet their insurance payments. But will allow you to make your own mind up.

I'm very serious. If you want to do it I'll pass on my email address to CN who can forward it to you.

Let me know what you decide.
Enough of my family members have suffered and passed away from cancer. i dont need your platitudes to tell me what it is like.

See you tuesday
 
Benotti69 said:
Enough of my family members have suffered and passed away from cancer. i dont need your platitudes to tell me what it is like.

See you tuesday
Now we're getting somewhere.

Perhaps with those experiences you could elaborate on charities that assisted and how healthcare helped or didn't help?

I'm interested on your take.
 
thehog said:
Livestrong offered a counselling service for this component. They also set up support groups for those with cancer and their families to talk about what they are dealing with. Trust me that type of service goes a long way. Because cancer isn't just medical care. It's also comfort and understanding.
I thought this was what they were about. I never understood the charity to recommend clients to certain doctors, let alone pay any of their costs. I thought they mostly helped people navigate the system, i.e., be clear about their options, learn more about their particular kind of cancer and the available treatments for it.

IOW, I thought they furnished information that anyone could find on the internet, but which was so immense and widely distributed that someone with a recent diagnosis is bewildered by it all and maybe doesn't have the time to go looking for it all. It wouldn't cost a charity much to gather all this information, and once it's done, it only has to be updated periodically. Most of the cost, I thought, was for counselors who would provide this information to clients, and maybe answer any questions related to it.

So if Smith was looking for a specific doctor, let alone someone to pay his expenses, of course that would be unreasonable. As I now understand it, the charity was willing to do that if he raised the money. That makes the situation a little more understandable to me. Still, $4000 is a lot of money to raise for a ride, I've been on charity rides and I don't think anyone I knew ever raised that much. It's certainly not a reasonable request to apply to large numbers of people. Maybe they should just drop it and stick to the information side.

P.S. - Excellent post, Neworld. There is no question that in the U.S. the uninsured pay far more for services that are uncovered by people who are insured. At one time I had an individual policy with a high deductible, and I thought if a particular service cost less than the deductible, I would have to pay the entire cost. I eventually woke up to the fact that even if the cost is below the deductible, and even if the service specifically is not covered by the policy, the insurer still can knock the price down considerably, usually more than 50%. It's never been clear to me if this is because doctors and HC centers think they need the extra money they get from the uninsured to maintain the lower rates to the insured, or are just taking advantage of the uninsured because they can get away with it. Either way, it's not very pretty.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
Merckx index said:
I thought they mostly helped people navigate the system, i.e., be clear about their options, learn more about their particular kind of cancer and the available treatments for it.
Precisely.

The Lance Armstrong Foundation unites, inspires and empowers people affected by cancer.
I can't seem to get the site to load at the moment :rolleyes: but that has always been their mission statement.

Frankly, I have no idea what RL Smith is getting at here with his accusations. What was it that he expected, exactly?

This is older but still relevant.

LIVESTRONG Foundation Manifesto
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SDBOHpKI6g
We believe that in the battle with cancer, unity is strength, knowledge is power and attitude is everything. To find out more, please visit http://www.livestrong.org!
Excerpts:

"We believe in information, not pity."

"And if it comes to it, being in control of how your life ends."



I also have to believe that RL's version of events...
If you can raise $4,000.00, you can come down to Texas and ride your bike with Lance.
is a gross oversimplification of whatever the entirety of that conversation actually was.


But that's just me...being rational about this.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Merckx index said:
So if Smith was looking for a specific doctor, let alone someone to pay his expenses, of course that would be unreasonable.
He wasn't. He was looking for a post treatment screening, something that is available for cheap/free in Colorado. Livestrong offered him a $4,000 bike ride
 
Merckx index said:
I thought this was what they were about. I never understood the charity to recommend clients to certain doctors, let alone pay any of their costs. I thought they mostly helped people navigate the system, i.e., be clear about their options, learn more about their particular kind of cancer and the available treatments for it.

IOW, I thought they furnished information that anyone could find on the internet, but which was so immense and widely distributed that someone with a recent diagnosis is bewildered by it all and maybe doesn't have the time to go looking for it all. It wouldn't cost a charity much to gather all this information, and once it's done, it only has to be updated periodically. Most of the cost, I thought, was for counselors who would provide this information to clients, and maybe answer any questions related to it.

So if Smith was looking for a specific doctor, let alone someone to pay his expenses, of course that would be unreasonable. As I now understand it, the charity was willing to do that if he raised the money. That makes the situation a little more understandable to me. Still, $4000 is a lot of money to raise for a ride, I've been on charity rides and I don't think anyone I knew ever raised that much. It's certainly not a reasonable request to apply to large numbers of people. Maybe they should just drop it and stick to the information side.

P.S. - Excellent post, Neworld. There is no question that in the U.S. the uninsured pay far more for services that are uncovered by people who are insured. At one time I had an individual policy with a high deductible, and I thought if a particular service cost less than the deductible, I would have to pay the entire cost. I eventually woke up to the fact that even if the cost is below the deductible, and even if the service specifically is not covered by the policy, the insurer still can knock the price down considerably, usually more than 50%. It's never been clear to me if this is because doctors and HC centers think they need the extra money they get from the uninsured to maintain the lower rates to the insured, or are just taking advantage of the uninsured because they can get away with it. Either way, it's not very pretty.
Thanks for the post. I promised I'd follow up and I haven't.

I don't expect anyone to read this but it's clear what LS do;

http://www.livestrong.org/we-can-help/

There they offer counselling, how to understand your insurance and what is covered, what is not etc.

I'm not aware of any charity that pays for people's medical cover from one phone call. I really don't know all the details but what was Smith expecting?

The other part & this perhaps will be contentious but was Smith a Livestrong donor? Why did he expect to pick up the phone and have them pay for his medical care?

It's not unusual for a charity if haven't donated in the past to meet a minimum standard of donations.

I worked with a Leukaemia foundation who has this exact policy. Once I went past $3000 I was entitled to services, life membership etc.

Charities have to remain sustainable. How else can they survive without expecting a person to commit to them so they can assist them and others.

I just can't see how a charity could just provide free health care to whomever decided to call them up.

Smith is not really telling us the entire story here. I feel for him but he has only given part of the story. Why did he not have insurance and had he donated to LS before to help others like him?

I don't know the anwser those questions so welcome him to elaborate on what occurred.

--

PS I was wrong about congress and them asking who you voted for and how much you donated. My bad for believing an anecdotal conversation.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
OK, what just happened in this thread in the past three minutes?


Freaky. :eek:


(I'm going back to reading Cycle of Lies...)
 
Ok, someone just sent me an email. A friend whom I argue with about the validity of Livestrong.

They said that they were aware Smith was diagnosed in 1996 but were unsure of his remission date and when he required post cancer treatment and review. But unlikely it was after 2000.

(http://www.instepboulder.com/about-step)

They said the LAF was founded in 1997 and intially very small and concentrated on research and grants. Later it moved to survivorship.

It wasn't till 2005 when they had enough money to offer the "navigation" services.

If Smith has called in when they were still a very young organisation he may not have been able to get the same level of service that you would get today. They said back then when they were based on research were forbidden by law to offer such services with the appropriate licences - I believe this to be a tax exempt law but don't really know - ie foundation, charity, non-profit etc, authorised counselling service etc.

I did take the time to cross referenda this with Gifford's article from Outside magazine.

The walk-in center is a hands-on version of the online and telephone support services that Livestrong has offered since 2005. Dammert leads me upstairs to an area where two “navigators” are settling into their cubicles. This is where patients or loved ones can phone in to a hotline with questions. Depending on their needs, callers are either directed to one of two in-house social workers for emotional support or referred to outside agencies.
They also said whilst Livestrong could never divulge confidential information on individuals and what assistance they received they would ask someone in LS for a comment on the youtube video and the statements made within.

They also stated they do not cover medicated treatment as they are not authorised to. It would be against the law to do so. They also said they everyone on their contacts lists receives information on how to donate and it's not unusual to be asked to make donations or to join fundraising programs.

I'm still not enamoured by Livestrong but I get the feeling if Smith did call them he called a foundation who at the time was very young, it's objective was grants and research and didn't have the dedicated help assistance they have today.

To be honest, I don't know. Perhaps he called in prior to 1999? I have no such information.

Only he can provide the full story. If it turns out he received bad information or was hit up for money without assistance then I'll happily join him in the condemnation LS.

There's still that nagging question on insurance. Did he have it, did he not, was he denied insurance due to his previous illness? That part doesn't add up.

I guess his soundbite got the desired attention.
 
Race Radio said:
Agreed. In fact this incident happened many years ago, almost a decade. Back then Livestrong was primarily a promotional tool for Lance. These days they have resources to address just these types of questions. I doubt someone would get the same response today......besides nobody is paying $4,000 to ride with Lance anymore
Appreciate (as do others) your objectivity (and background) on this particular issue.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
thehog said:
Ok, someone just sent me an email. A friend whom I argue with about the validity of Livestrong.

They said that they were aware Smith was diagnosed in 1996 but were unsure of his remission date and when he required post cancer treatment and review. But unlikely it was after 2000.

(http://www.instepboulder.com/about-step)

They said the LAF was founded in 1997 and intially very small and concentrated on research and grants. Later it moved to survivorship.

It wasn't till 2005 when they had enough money to offer the "navigation" services.

If Smith has called in when they were still a very young organisation he may not have been able to get the same level of service that you would get today. They said back then when they were based on research were forbidden by law to offer such services with the appropriate licences - I believe this to be a tax exempt law but don't really know - ie foundation, charity, non-profit etc, authorised counselling service etc.

I did take the time to cross referenda this with Gifford's article from Outside magazine.



They also said whilst Livestrong could never divulge confidential information on individuals and what assistance they received they would ask someone in LS for a comment on the youtube video and the statements made within.

They also stated they do not cover medicated treatment as they are not authorised to. It would be against the law to do so. They also said they everyone on their contacts lists receives information on how to donate and it's not unusual to be asked to make donations or to join fundraising programs.

I'm still not enamoured by Livestrong but I get the feeling if Smith did call them he called a foundation who at the time was very young, it's objective was grants and research and didn't have the dedicated help assistance they have today.

To be honest, I don't know. Perhaps he called in prior to 1999? I have no such information.

Only he can provide the full story. If it turns out he received bad information or was hit up for money without assistance then I'll happily join him in the condemnation LS.

There's still that nagging question on insurance. Did he have it, did he not, was he denied insurance due to his previous illness? That part doesn't add up.

I guess his soundbite got the desired attention.
Thanks for the very informative and very balanced post.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 2

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS