Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

[IndianCyclist]

Day by day the narrative gets exponentially fantastic. Magic, Miracles and Mystique is round the corner.

 

[CTQ]

The bilharzia story is I think more PR. But Froome's situation is simply tragic. I can't blame him for milking it.

But really if we are being objective we would agree his 2019 crash was unfortunate and very serious. It has cut his career short.

The other thing I believe is I think Froome was already in slow decline before his Dauphine crash. Froome's absolute peak was in 2013 when he was 28. 2018 Giro wasn't close to that level as he was very inconsistent and few expected his win on the Finestra. This is why with his advancing age a serious comeback is even less likely even without the crash effects. He is 36 years old now.

so, you think Adams and doctors of the team have invented this story?

 

[bigcog]

Assuming he really did have it, is it a chronic infection that he's never really got rid of or has got reinfected again in his travels in Africa ? If the latter you'd have thought he'd be more careful given his position ... If it's a chronic infection that is reoccurring he really needs to get rid of it for once and all as it can lead to some very nasty consequences if it's chronic, let alone what it does to his performance on a bike.

 

[Bolder]

so, you think Adams and doctors of the team have invented this story?

I don’t know enough about tropical diseases to say definitively, but I think we would have heard about it reoccurring at several points in the last 9 years….

 

[red_flanders]

Absolutely laughable. A new chapter in the ever recurring disease which in all other cases is easily treated by a single day of treatment with praziquantel.

A complete embarrassment. Makes Vandenbroucke’s dog seem believable.

 

[bigcog]

Absolutely laughable. A new chapter in the ever recurring disease which in all other cases is easily treated by a single day of treatment with praziquantel.

A complete embarrassment. Makes Vandenbroucke’s dog seem believable.

If it's that easily treated, why is there a chronic form ?

 

[Froome]

Absolutely laughable. A new chapter in the ever recurring disease which in all other cases is easily treated by a single day of treatment with praziquantel.

A complete embarrassment. Makes Vandenbroucke’s dog seem believable.

I don't want to imagine your comments(not just you) if froome in 2022 wins the tour again after being treated for bilharzia again, it would be awesome

 

[SHAD0W93]

If it's that easily treated, why is there a chronic form ?

Because it goes untreated, especially in those populations that do not have access to medical care. Which is not where Froome lived while in Kenya and South Africa.

 

[red_flanders]

If it's that easily treated, why is there a chronic form ?

Maybe just read up on that yourself. Not super complicated. That anyone would entertain this story isn’t a medical question, its a question of gullibility, credulity, and lack of critical thinking.

 

[SHAD0W93]

Maybe just read up on that yourself. Not super complicated. That anyone would entertain this story isn’t a medical question, its a question of gullibility, credulity, and lack of critical thinking.

Now I would say it is possible that he had Bilharzia, I find it incredibly unlikely he would suffer from it for extended lengths of time. It can lay dormant like tuberculosis and you do not know you have it because it does not show any signs or symptoms and you can’t transmit it to anyone. You just have it, waiting for it to activate. But when it does, and he goes to the doctor with the complaints (especially with his geographic history) you would test for that. It would get even more obvious after the two week as symptoms worsen and it spreads. Especially after a year mark. Nor is the treatment anywhere near as extensive as tuberculosis’s 6-9 month STRICT regimen with just having to take the medication once or twice. Unless there was incompetence on multiple levels from Froome, to the teams he raced for, and healthcare it is highly unlikely he can have it for longer than a year and no one know about it as Dave theorizes is the case for his results before 2010 when they said he contracted it.

 

[red_flanders]

Now I would say it is possible that he had Bilharzia, I find it incredibly unlikely he would suffer from it for extended lengths of time. It can lay dormant like tuberculosis and you do not know you have it because it does not show any signs or symptoms and you can’t transmit it to anyone. You just have it, waiting for it to activate. But when it does, and he goes to the doctor with the complaints (especially with his geographic history) you would test for that. It would get even more obvious after the two week as symptoms worsen and it spreads. Especially after a year mark. Nor is the treatment anywhere near as extensive as tuberculosis’s 6-9 month STRICT regimen with just having to take the medication once or twice. Unless there was incompetence on multiple levels from Froome, to the teams he raced for, and healthcare it is highly unlikely he can have it for longer than a year and no one know about it as Dave theorizes is the case for his results before 2010 when they said he contracted it.

Literally anything is possible. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. He claims not only that he had it, but that it was the cause of his very average career up to the point of the Vuelta 2011, and having been cured of it was the reason he was able to then, incredibly, destroy the peloton for the better part of a decade.

That's a lot of claims to prove. I won't re-legislate the entire Foome + Sky threads, but to say there are holes in the "evidence" provided for those incredible claims, is an understatement of mind-boggling proportions.

If he wants anyone rational to believe that it has now re-surfaced, and was the cause of his poor performance last year, great. Show us the evidence. Don't want to? No problem, absolutely his prerogative. Just don't expect anyone with a functioning brain to take such a preposterous claim at face value.

But that's really not the goal, is it? The goal is to create room for the credulous and those who want to believe to feel OK about what they're watching.

 

[SHAD0W93]

Literally anything is possible. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. He claims not only that he had it, but that it was the cause of his very average career up to the point of the Vuelta 2011, and having been cured of it was the reason he was able to then, incredibly, destroy the peloton for the better part of a decade.

That's a lot of claims to prove. I won't re-legislate the entire Foome + Sky threads, but to say there are holes in the "evidence" provided for those incredible claims, is an understatement of mind-boggling proportions.

If he wants anyone rational to believe that it has now re-surfaced, and was the cause of his poor performance last year, great. Show us the evidence. Don't want to? No problem, absolutely his prerogative. Just don't expect anyone with a functioning brain to take such a preposterous claim at face value.

But that's really not the goal, is it? The goal is to create room for the credulous and those who want to believe to feel OK about what they're watching.

Not disputing any of that, just that it is possible he had it because it can lay dormant. No way do I think it can lead to chronic without negligence on multiple levels that it affects his level like we are told and he is a completely different rider with he is healthy. Especially when the treatment isn’t 1% as strenuous as say Tb.

 

[red_flanders]

Not disputing any of that, just that it is possible he had it because it can lay dormant. No way do I think it can lead to chronic without negligence on multiple levels that it affects his level like we are told and he is a completely different rider with he is healthy. Especially when the treatment isn’t 1% as strenuous as say Tb.

I understand. Just trying to shift the conversation in a more, what I deem rational or at least skeptical, direction. Of course it's possible that he had it. But he also claimed to have treated it multiple times, which in and of itself is a wild claim with no basis in evidence. If he did have it, and treated it multiple times, the chance that he still had it a decade later is near zero, and would require extensive, verified evidence to accept the claim as likely true.

Which of course you will never see.

Never mind proving that having had it, having had it recur magically a decade later, would affect his performance in specific ways. Good luck proving that.

Again, the point of these claims isn't to actually prove anything. It's to give the credulous something to hang onto.

 

[bigcog]

Maybe just read up on that yourself. Not super complicated. That anyone would entertain this story isn’t a medical question, its a question of gullibility, credulity, and lack of critical thinking.

Calm down its a cycling forum thread, not the lancet.

 

[red_flanders]

Calm down its a cycling forum thread, not the lancet.

Compelling response.

 

[bigcog]

Compelling response.

What a sad sack ...

 

[sir fly]

Calm down its a cycling forum thread, not the lancet.

And those are offseason vignettes.
... something to keep us occupied more than to believe in.

 

[red_flanders]

What a sad sack ...

Let me know when you have anything resembling a a compelling point rather than a personal attack. Always interested to hear a well argued post.

 

[bigcog]

Let me know when you have anything resembling a a compelling point rather than a personal attack. Always interested to hear a well argued post.

Personal attack ? haha, read your first reply ...

 

[red_flanders]

Personal attack ? haha, read your first reply ...

I'm surprised you don't seem to appreciate the difference in this case between attacking a position or point of view, and attacking a person personally. "Your argument is idiotic because..." is an attack on a position. I'll grant you it's not particularly nice, but it's not a personal attack. "You're an idiot" is a personal attack. In all cases the personal attack is not a valid argument.

More specifically, all of my response did not necessarily apply to you. I had no idea if you believed his claims, so the third sentence is not aimed at you, but rather a general comment. However if the shoe fits and all that.

 

[Escarabajo]

so, you think Adams and doctors of the team have invented this story?

We are not sure. But it is in their high interest not to look stupid!

 

[Summoned]

We are not sure. But it is in their high interest not to look stupid!

They almost have to issue a clarification on this, as what has been stated as of this time explains very little, and was completely unnecessary. So why was there any statement made at all? I think that something must be going on that made it seems like a good idea to put this out there, and am fascinated by what comes next.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

...meanwhile, inside Froome's intestines:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muUZjovOFRg

 

[Extinction]

Another PR stunt and now I'm beginning to wonder if the whole crash and recovery thing were not staged, to avoid further scrutiny over Salbutamolgate.

 

[Ripper]

Literally anything is possible. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. He claims not only that he had it, but that it was the cause of his very average career up to the point of the Vuelta 2011, and having been cured of it was the reason he was able to then, incredibly, destroy the peloton for the better part of a decade.

That's a lot of claims to prove. I won't re-legislate the entire Foome + Sky threads, but to say there are holes in the "evidence" provided for those incredible claims, is an understatement of mind-boggling proportions.

If he wants anyone rational to believe that it has now re-surfaced, and was the cause of his poor performance last year, great. Show us the evidence. Don't want to? No problem, absolutely his prerogative. Just don't expect anyone with a functioning brain to take such a preposterous claim at face value.

But that's really not the goal, is it? The goal is to create room for the credulous and those who want to believe to feel OK about what they're watching.

And to suspend disbelief when he find thermonuclear legs once again. Honestly, if he suddenly find race winning form again it is pure clinic territory.