Lance Armstrong's blood values from the Tour de France looks suspicious and indicate

[El Imbatido]

Come on guys, can't we all just play nice. It is a public forum, so everyone is entitled to their opinion and no matter what you think of their views on any subject you should have a civil and intelligent debate on it and never degenerate to name calling and insults.

Now, please play nice and also stay on topic.

 

[starnason]

Long time listener, first time caller.

I finally registered just to use the "ignore" option for that fine fellow. It actually makes the threads readable now! Fantastic! I should have done this months ago.

 

[BroDeal]

Long time listener, first time caller.

I finally registered just to use the "ignore" option for that fine fellow. It actually makes the threads readable now! Fantastic! I should have done this months ago.

And this is precisely why everyone ignoring him won't work. It will be fine for the regulars but it will still suck for everyone else.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

And this is precisely why everyone ignoring him won't work. I will be fine for the regulars but it will still suck for everyone else.

If all the regulars updated their signatures with their ignore list, occasional visitors will be able to see how to make the forums readable, and no-one will need to respond / wreak the thread.....and yes, this is another off topic comment, but the trolls have made this forum unbelievable boring. If the moderators wont do anything about it, the posters need to, or the whole discussion turns into a ***-fest, with no new ideas or info

 

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

Come on guys, can't we all just play nice. It is a public forum, so everyone is entitled to their opinion and no matter what you think of their views on any subject you should have a civil and intelligent debate on it and never degenerate to name calling and insults.

Now, please play nice and also stay on topic.

This is exactly what I wanted to say.

I'd really like to avoid coming back here just with the sole purpose of deleting posts, but to be quite honest, reading some of them is giving me an itchy trigger finger. If you could avoid the name calling, threats, and over-all horrible table manners, ... that would be great.

Please tone it down to a more cordial level.

Thanks,

RDV

 

[Oldman]

This is exactly what I wanted to say.

I'd really like to avoid coming back here just with the sole purpose of deleting posts, but to be quite honest, reading some of them is giving me an itchy trigger finger. If you could avoid the name calling, threats, and over-all horrible table manners, ... that would be great.

Please tone it down to a more cordial level.

Thanks,

RDV

More than that: this whole thread was started on a weak premise and sadly weak responses on all parts. Time to kill it.

 

[Mellow Velo]

More than that: this whole thread was started on a weak premise and sadly weak responses on all parts. Time to kill it.

Absolutely the wrong way to go.
The thread was started, as in other forums, because there was some physical evidence, for once. This made it a high interest topic.
There has been informed debate, that has become the subject for the usual defensive troll sabotage, simply because the balance of reasoning weighs against Armstrong.

BPC wins.

However, the debate itself could do with another kick start....

 

[WonderLance]

***Sighs*** More people desperate to ruin the thread by talking about me and making wild allegations.

This isn't your forum - most users don't want the threads spoilt by your little conspiracy theories and adhominen attacks on me. I hope the mods will just start removing these posts now - if you can't think of anything to say on the topic then SHUT YOUR MOUTH! If you don't like reading my posts because they disagree with you, then PUT ME ON IGNORE!

I am little bit confused why Digger has called me a "piece of scum". In response to what? You're lucky you don't get banned for saying something like that.

Good on you, dont let them attack you personally. You are one of the true believers and provide a good dose of truth on this forum. However, i disagree with you about the ignore feature, these people have obviously come here to hear the truth about doping issues in cycling and you, and I suspect only you can provide them with it. They cannot hear it with their eyes and ears closed.

to bpc

you were absolute scum of the earth in the thread where betty andreu weighed in.

troll or no troll, you went about things as a right dìckhead. normally you are a stupid fúckwit overlooked by most people here, but in that thread your personality changed

How dare you call him that! He is just trying to defend truth and righteousness and you have to use that dirty language.

 

[badboyberty]

I know hardly anyone else can see his posts, but is it just me or is Wonderlance starting to get surreal?

Sorry to get off topic but this thread is getting weirder than someone's haemocrit levels rising in the middle of a grand tour.

 

[elapid]

Absolutely the wrong way to go.
The thread was started, as in other forums, because there was some physical evidence, for once. This made it a high interest topic.
There has been informed debate, that has become the subject for the usual defensive troll sabotage, simply because the balance of reasoning weighs against Armstrong.

BPC wins.

However, the debate itself could do with another kick start....

+1 except for BPC winning. BPC only wins if the winner is the person that shouts the loudest and the longest. But that's just schoolyard bullying tactics. In between BPCs numerous inane and disruptive posts, there is some good and well argued posts and information. These are the winners, not BPC. It would be nice to go back to the Clinic Forum pre-BPC where we could learn about doping from doctors and ex-pros without the threads being disrupted and diluted by meaningless trolls.

 

[Anonymous]

This is exactly what I wanted to say.

I'd really like to avoid coming back here just with the sole purpose of deleting posts, but to be quite honest, reading some of them is giving me an itchy trigger finger. If you could avoid the name calling, threats, and over-all horrible table manners, ... that would be great.

Please tone it down to a more cordial level.

Thanks,

RDV

If you are reading BPC's and WonderLance's posts and you do not see what they are, then I have to wonder how much experience you have in reading and responding in forums. The ridiculous nature of their statements and constant barbing in posts is a clear indication that they are merely trolls. That isn't name calling, it is an internet term that describes that specific type of behavior. I don't care if they are banned or not, but to suggest that they are serious in their posts is to be woefully ignorant of the content therein. To then suggest that the commentary regarding them by other posters is on an equal level is insulting at best. People like Scribe and gregod hold a different opinion about things than many here, and conflict with them does happen. That is COMPLETELY different than what is happening with those two and possibly a couple of others who are most likely sock puppets.

Say what you want, but you are ignoring the reality here.

 

[elapid]

If you are reading BPC's and WonderLance's posts and you do not see what they are, then I have to wonder how much experience you have in reading and responding in forums. The ridiculous nature of their statements and constant barbing in posts is a clear indication that they are merely trolls. That isn't name calling, it is an internet term that describes that specific type of behavior. I don't care if they are banned or not, but to suggest that they are serious in their posts is to be woefully ignorant of the content therein. To then suggest that the commentary regarding them by other posters is on an equal level is insulting at best. People like Scribe and gregod hold a different opinion about things than many here, and conflict with them does happen. That is COMPLETELY different than what is happening with those two and possibly a couple of others who are most likely sock puppets.

Say what you want, but you are ignoring the reality here.

+1. Mods please do not discount this. May be we need a petition or a poll to show how many posters do not appreciate the disruptive efforts of the likes of BPC and WonderLance. May be the mods have access to the ignore list and can see how many posters have BPC and WonderLance on their ignore list and realize how their trolling is ruining The Clinic for everyone else.

 

[WonderLance]

+1. Mods please do not discount this. May be we need a petition or a poll to show how many posters do not appreciate the disruptive efforts of the likes of BPC and WonderLance. May be the mods have access to the ignore list and can see how many posters have BPC and WonderLance on their ignore list and realize how their trolling is ruining The Clinic for everyone else.

Please dont take BPC away from me. Not after you took the other one.

 

[Anonymous]

+1. Mods please do not discount this. May be we need a petition or a poll to show how many posters do not appreciate the disruptive efforts of the likes of BPC and WonderLance. May be the mods have access to the ignore list and can see how many posters have BPC and WonderLance on their ignore list and realize how their trolling is ruining The Clinic for everyone else.

I think the best we can do is just ignore them and have a discussion around them. Its funny, I unignored BPC to see what he has been writing. A lot of it was about me, and obviously he is the one that went to the moderators (because I have never flagged any of his posts, or PM'd them about it), so he is even trolling them. And he was successful. Well, that is precisely what he wants, so I guess we will just have to live with it and work around it. The moderators are:

 

[53 x 11]

Please dont take BPC away from me. Not after you took the other one.

your a little wierd right?

 

[Ex-trackie]

Sigh....

In my naive optimism, I keep checking back here to see if there is any interesting progress in the discussion about blood values and doping only to find time after time that all people seem interesting in discussing is trolls and disruptive behaviour.

PLEASE STOP!!!!!

If what you are going to fire off is not a useful part of the discussion pertinent to the thread topic, then DON'T POST.

 

[Race Radio]

Back on topic.

And interview with Moerkeberg

http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/armstrongs-bio-passport-critic-speaks

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

Back on topic.

And interview with Moerkeberg

http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/armstrongs-bio-passport-critic-speaks

He claims if a rider publishes their own values online discussion of values becomes an open forum but he is being extremely careful not to even speculate on how any of these strange fluctuations might have been achieved.

I wonder if anyone dropped him a line informing him what might happen should he do so.

 

[Jonathan]

He claims if a rider publishes their own values online discussion of values becomes an open forum but he is being extremely careful not to even speculate on how any of these strange fluctuations might have been achieved.

I wonder if anyone dropped him a line informing him what might happen should he do so.

It is probably justified to be so careful. People called on to draw conclusions about these values are usually scientists, and in science it is not done to say one cause is the explanation when there are several possible causes. The article Joe Papp linked to makes it clear that there is no signal that can only be explained by doping.

 

[Black-Balled]

But was it really a plane that struck the Pentagon?

 

[Anonymous]

In my naive optimism, I keep checking back here to see if there is any interesting progress in the discussion about blood values and doping only to find time after time that all people seem interesting in discussing is trolls and disruptive behaviour.

PLEASE STOP!!!!!

If what you are going to fire off is not a useful part of the discussion pertinent to the thread topic, then DON'T POST.

But your post isn't on topic either...

 

[Mellow Velo]

Seems to have more to say on Wiggins, than uncle Lance.
Odd, to say the least.
Especially, as he is casting doubt's on Bradley's values, which are nothing compare to Tex's.

I've been unable to get anyone to comment on the record regarding Jaekob Moerkeberg's statements about Armstrong's Tour blood values, so I went to the source himself.

Armstrong's extensive legal team doesn't include a few ex-KGB, wet workers, does it?

 

[elapid]

Interesting interview, both for what he says and what he doesn't say.

For what he says:
AS: Of course, now I'm going to ask you a question about the variations in the middle. Jonathan Vaughters and Frankie Andreu, in that famous IM session, referred to a 'rest day blood refill'. Also, Sinkewitz said he got his transfusions on rest days. Is it significant that the spikes in the middle occur after the rest days.

JM: Prefer not to comment on that.

and ...

JM: The variations are within the noise, but that is if you're not doing anything. If you're not doing strenuous exercise, you wouldn't expect these values to change. You would expect these small variations that you see, but the reason I'm saying these values are suspicious is that he's doing strenuous exercise, and then you would expect to see a decrease, as you see in his values during the Giro. That's what's suspicious.

and ...

JM: If you look at his values during the year up to the Tour, the reticulocyte values are pretty much what you would expect, around 1%. There are analytical variations and biological variations to that parameter as for any other parameter. Then at the beginning of the Tour, it's half, .5%, which is producing half the red blood cells that you would expect. The reason why you get a decrease in your reticulocyte values is when you have an increased amount of hemoglobin. Your body does not have to produce as much as usual.

And for what he doesn't:

AS: There's also a spike in the off score before the Tour, is that something significant?

JM: If you apply it to the cutoff that they use, no.

Does he mean he thinks the cutoff is too high?

Based on this interview, as we have been discussing all along in between the disruptions, is that physiologically stable or increases in hematocrit or hemoglobin concentration [Hb] during a GT are not in accordance with all published studies, that a low reticulocyte count with an increased [Hb] or hematocrit is not possible naturally, and that both hematocrit and [Hb] increase with a low reticulocyte count after rest days in the TdF is highly suspicious.

 

[Anonymous]

Interesting interview, both for what he says and what he doesn't say.

For what he says:
AS: Of course, now I'm going to ask you a question about the variations in the middle. Jonathan Vaughters and Frankie Andreu, in that famous IM session, referred to a 'rest day blood refill'. Also, Sinkewitz said he got his transfusions on rest days. Is it significant that the spikes in the middle occur after the rest days.

JM: Prefer not to comment on that.

and ...

JM: The variations are within the noise, but that is if you're not doing anything. If you're not doing strenuous exercise, you wouldn't expect these values to change. You would expect these small variations that you see, but the reason I'm saying these values are suspicious is that he's doing strenuous exercise, and then you would expect to see a decrease, as you see in his values during the Giro. That's what's suspicious.

and ...

JM: If you look at his values during the year up to the Tour, the reticulocyte values are pretty much what you would expect, around 1%. There are analytical variations and biological variations to that parameter as for any other parameter. Then at the beginning of the Tour, it's half, .5%, which is producing half the red blood cells that you would expect. The reason why you get a decrease in your reticulocyte values is when you have an increased amount of hemoglobin. Your body does not have to produce as much as usual.

And for what he doesn't:

AS: There's also a spike in the off score before the Tour, is that something significant?

JM: If you apply it to the cutoff that they use, no.

Does he mean he thinks the cutoff is too high?

Based on this interview, as we have been discussing all along in between the disruptions, is that physiologically stable or increases in hematocrit or hemoglobin concentration [Hb] during a GT are not in accordance with all published studies, that a low reticulocyte count with an increased [Hb] or hematocrit is not possible naturally, and that both hematocrit and [Hb] increase with a low reticulocyte count after rest days in the TdF is highly suspicious.

And the only defense is the diarrhea defense. Yes, those values do create a picture of what happened. The problem is that the values themselves do not constitute a doping offense. The only outcome is more testing for him. I do find it funny that he was tested at 6:30am the day after the first article was published.

 

[Bala Verde]

As if scientists are going to deliver 'us' from all our problems.

The charts and numbers have to be interpreted by some, and even scientists will in the end be divided over the subject. An example was recently given by the discussion on Coyle's efficiency improvement paper. Coyle & Coggan vs. Ashenden et. al.

X: Yes, but the percentage is off by a mere 0.006%
Y: Agreed. The alternative explanation could be that ....
Z: Perhaps, but you are ignoring x,y,z.
A: Interesting, but I must put forward that your testing procedures leave much to be desired.

It's like looking for the Higgs particle. Some say it exists, others don't.

Next thing is that the number of scientists who speak in favour or against an outcome, will determine whether or not someone doped. Science is much more similar to a court of law than is commonly assumed.

On a different note:

A graph is already a perversion - a summary if you will - of 'reality' and the working of a human body. 'Arbitrary' values that are measured and monitored randomly through tests. That's what these 'scientists' or doctors use to form an opinion on the reality of doping.

To read that graph - which has come into existence due to the arbitrary selection of certain criteria associated with endurance sport ie cycling, running speed skating - they assume certain (cor)relations between the variables as depicted in a graph (the abridged version of reality).

Since we are dealing with a graph, which is the basis for monitoring and detection, anyone can come to understand the relations - underlying assumptions - between these variables.

So when a scientist or professor explains the relationships between variables (ie A up --> B must go down unless 1, 2, 3), you don't need to be an expert to interpret the data/graph. You are doing the exact same, following the exact same lines of thinking, as the scientists do, admittedly it is a snap shot to identify certain bodily functions and trends, but nonetheless a scientific snap shot that has been created to easily identify dopers. If you apply the assumption underlying the model that is the basis for the blood passport, you too can read a graph.

So to say that you need to be a scientist to interpret the data as depicted in a graph, is ludicrous.

PS> You do need to be an expert to establish the correct relations between variables, and to devise tests that would enable one to identify 'doping'. Or, if there are unexplainable anomalies - meaning not incorporated in the asumptions that form the basis of the graph - to further hypothesise where these anomalies stem from.