• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

"Armstrong to blame for his own cancer"

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Visit site
irritated_cycling_fan said:
Common on people. Bash Armstrong all you want. Blame him for every horrible thing in cycling or the world if that makes you feel better. But please, don't do so at the expense of spreading misinformation about cancer in general and testicular cancer specifically. If you review all the credible cancer experts you will see they all say the same thing - there is no medical evidence supporting the theory that testosterone or EPO or any other drug causes testicular cancer.

.....Although medical experts don't know exactly what causes testicular cancer, any more than they know why people (mostly women) who have never smoked get lung cancer, they do know what increases the risk for testicular cancer.... Drug use of any kind isn't one of those risks.

As mentioned in some of the links below (yes, real medical information - directly from or based on medical experts and not some blow hard from MMA) what long term steroid use does do to the testicles is atrophy them and even that reverses when steroid use stops. There have been studies on steroid usage for over 3 decades at this point and if there was any link between them and testicular cancer it would be well know by now.

For those of you supporting the idea that bringing these allegations into the courtroom might make Armstrong look bad; it wouldn't happened. All the expert testimony goes in the other direction. Sure, you might be able to pay big money to some shyster doctor who will testify to whatever you pay them for but the real medical experts with the proven credentials would win out..... There's no reason to use medically inaccurate information.

You don't really say anything in your long-winded rant, but the fact remains that EPO use can cause tumor growth and there's no known cause for testicular cancer.

If you want to hang your hat on the fact that there's no known direct causal link, keep in my that this line of reasoning was used by the tobacco industry for 50 years.

Playing with these drugs is a huge risk, and many of the risks are still unknown.
 
Apr 9, 2009
976
0
0
Visit site
irritated_cycling_fan said:
Insinuating, or worse, stating out right, that testicular cancer is caused by drug use is doing a huge injustice to men and teenage boys everywhere who are diagnosed each year.

Huh?
If I say that smoking can increase the likelihood of breast cancer, am I doing an "injustice" to non-smokers who get breast cancer?
 
131313 said:
You don't really say anything in your long-winded rant, but the fact remains that EPO use can cause tumor growth and there's no known cause for testicular cancer.

If you want to hang your hat on the fact that there's no known direct causal link, keep in my that this line of reasoning was used by the tobacco industry for 50 years.

Playing with these drugs is a huge risk, and many of the risks are still unknown.

So where are all the other one-ballers in the pro peloton then ? Should be dozens yeah ?
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Visit site
Eyeballs Out said:
So where are all the other one-ballers in the pro peloton then ? Should be dozens yeah ?

"dozens"? Considering the incidence of testicular cancer, if there were "dozens" the drugs would have been pulled off of the market long ago...

As I said before, with something multicausal and of unknown origin, it's ridiculous to discount something as a potential cause because there's yet to be shown a direct link.

Likewise, if there were a higher incidences of testicular cancer in the professional peloton than in the general popluation, I wouldn't immediately claim "EPO causes cancer"...

For instance, I don't believe this is "proof" of anything:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/axelsson-positive-for-epo-faces-lifetime-ban

but it wouldn't surprise me at all if his doping contributed to his condition.
 
Jul 3, 2010
5
0
0
Visit site
So apparently with the modest results Lance had pre 1996 combined with getting cancer was convincing enough for him to take a whole bunch more of it after he was cured, enough to win 7 times in a row.

This from a B-rated MMA fighter clawing his way back from the WEC. I cant think of a more uninteresting fighter than Cael, well at least inside the ring.
 
131313 said:
"dozens"? Considering the incidence of testicular cancer, if there were "dozens" the drugs would have been pulled off of the market long ago...

As I said before, with something multicausal and of unknown origin, it's ridiculous to discount something as a potential cause because there's yet to be shown a direct link.

Likewise, if there were a higher incidences of testicular cancer in the professional peloton than in the general popluation, I wouldn't immediately claim "EPO causes cancer"...

For instance, I don't believe this is "proof" of anything:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/axelsson-positive-for-epo-faces-lifetime-ban

but it wouldn't surprise me at all if his doping contributed to his condition.

If there was a higher incidence of TC in the pro peleton than in the general population I would have thought the most the likely cause would be riding 20000 miles a year with one nut either side of a saddle

But as we've established there isn't a higher incidence. You might as well say there's a causal link between tweeting bollox and TC
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Visit site
Eyeballs Out said:
If there was a higher incidence of TC in the pro peleton than in the general population I would have thought the most the likely cause would be riding 20000 miles a year with one nut either side of a saddle

But as we've established there isn't a higher incidence. You might as well say there's a causal link between tweeting bollox and TC

Listing

Cortisone

Steroids

HgH

EPO

Amphetamines

washed down with a pot of coffee daily

mixed with full time intense training and God knows what else.

You roll the dice bro..:eek:
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Visit site
Eyeballs Out said:
But as we've established there isn't a higher incidence.

no we haven't. If you have any specific research on the subject, I'd love to see it.

Eyeballs Out said:
You might as well say there's a causal link between tweeting bollox and TC

tweeting bollox has been demonstrated to stimulate tumor growth? who knew??

your analogy is completely nonsensical
 
Aug 4, 2010
4
0
0
Visit site
what can you sue him for?

Chael Sonnen
Chael Patrick Sonnen (born April 3, 1977 in West Linn, Oregon) is an American mixed martial arts (MMA) fighter. He is currently signed as a middleweight with the UFC, and holds notable wins over former WEC champion Paulo Filho, former Strikeforce champion Renato Sobral, former IFL champion Dan Miller, Jason Miller, Jason Lambert, Trevor Prangley and Yushin Okami. He was a 2x National Champion, NCAA All-American, and he was a US Olympic team alternate. Chael also works as a real estate agent. Sonnen is currently ranked the #6 middleweight in the world by Sherdog.

pot smoking phelps also ****es him off. Maybe Lance should just bet on Anderson Silva to knock Chaels mouth off. He will make more money than he would if he sued him.
 
Jun 9, 2009
403
0
0
Visit site
USA Today has sunk to the level of grocery store tabloids publishing slop like that.

Does anyone really care what a fighter thinks of a cyclist, or vice versa?
 
May 13, 2009
3,093
3
0
Visit site
The Hitch said:
What about antequil. He died rather painfully of cancer and he took peds i think. Very weak compared to Amrstrongs doping programme i know. But still. Do people think in his case peds contributed?

The problem is that the cause of cancer can usually only be established statistically. Say, you're smoking 40 cigarettes per day since age 20, you've an x% chance to be diagnosed with lung cancer at the age of 55. Now, unfortunately, if you never smoke any cigarette at all, you still have a y% chance to be diagnosed with lung cancer at the age of 55. Now, in this oversimplified example, there are y% of the smokers who would have gotten lung cancer anyway, so only (x-y)% of the cases are really caused by smoking. There's no way of telling whether any specific case of lung cancer of a smoker is among the y% or the (x-y)%.
 
Jun 9, 2009
403
0
0
Visit site
Cobblestones speaks the truth.

Since the number of pro cyclists is so small and the doping protocols so varied and dynamic, it is almost impossible to derive any meaningful statistics.
 
May 13, 2009
3,093
3
0
Visit site
David Suro said:
Cobblestones speaks the truth.

Since the number of pro cyclists is so small and the doping protocols so varied and dynamic, it is almost impossible to derive any meaningful statistics.

Well, small numbers are another problem which I actually left out of the previous post and you're completely right that one would need large sample numbers (in terms of riders and years of data) to rule out the null hypothesis under typical circumstances.

There's some atypical cases where a specific carcinogen is very potent, and the 'natural' rate of the induced cancer is very, very small. A prime example is mesothelioma and exposure to asbestos. But nothing like that seems to be evident in cycling.

Bringing it back to Lance. I don't think there's any way one can ever make a definite conclusion that a certain type of doping caused his nut problem. At best one could say that there was an x% chance that doping caused it, where x would have to be determined from (i) the amount of stuff he took pre-cancer, and (ii) medical studies which show what stuff causes which type of cancer to how much of a degree. We might never know for sure the former, and the latter is always open for debate, since most often, taking two or more drugs may amplify each other's effect and those things are rarely studied well**. Also athletes might react differently than the more typical test subject group.

Anyway, while I think this is a dead end, only useful for speculation, the other thing is highly relevant. Did LA use masking agents which delayed his diagnosis of cancer? That could be answered scientifically in a very straightforward fashion. We know that the steroid profile changes - a lot - in the presence of testicular cancer. That should have been evident in tests, unless the signals were masked.

** the prime example is that smoking apparently isn't only bad by itself; in the presence of other risk factors, it amplifies those beyond a simple addition of risks.

The obvious conclusion is: don't smoke and don't put soap in your urine sample.
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,270
2
0
Visit site
When looking at old stories from Cyclingnews about Niklas Axelsson, Sebastien Joly, and Markel Irizar, I also came across this other news item:

Suspended amateur blasts German federation
Schulz, 29, said on the German television program ARD Sportschau Sunday evening that a rider, whose name he did not disclose, tested positive in 2007 for the hormone hCG (Human chorionic gonadotropin), usually associated with pregnancy. When found in men, it usually indicates a tumour, probably cancerous. However, hCG is also used in combination with anabolic steroids as a performance enhancing drug, to increase testosterone levels.

Schulz claimed that the anonymous rider was told by an employee of the BDR to "get a diagnosis of testicular cancer." The rider was able to get the false certificate from a cooperative doctor, Schulz said.

And the followup to that:
German cycling federation to file charges
The German cycling federation is preparing to file charges against the unkown rider who allegedly claimed the federation told him to get a false diagnosis of testicular cancer to cover up a positive doping test. Meanwhile, Philip Schulz, who told of the case, has now said that it may not be true.
 
May 23, 2010
2,410
0
0
Visit site
sektor7 said:
So apparently with the modest results Lance had pre 1996 combined with getting cancer was convincing enough for him to take a whole bunch more of it after he was cured, enough to win 7 times in a row.

This from a B-rated MMA fighter clawing his way back from the WEC. I cant think of a more uninteresting fighter than Cael, well at least inside the ring.

Anything to win..Maybe the nad patches are twice as effective for him.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
0
0
Visit site
The assertion that "EPO caused Lance's cancer" is as silly as the assertion that "EPO transformed Lance into a 7 time TdF winner".

I suppose one might be sillier than the other, hard to say. Tough choice.
 
Jun 13, 2010
263
0
0
Visit site
jimmypop said:
I don't believe that this MMA fighter is living in our universe. Despite the courageousness of the statement, this would never see the inside of a courtroom, for the same reasons Armstrong hasn't successfully sued anyone who insinuates publicly that he doped.

However, wasn't there some discussion of a correlation between EPO therapy and increased tumor growth?

Also, Armstrong's net worth is $150-200mil, according to my google-fu.

Ask Lyle Alzado if you can find him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyle_Alzado
 

TRENDING THREADS