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

[knewcleardaze]

I just want to thank all the folks on this forum for their insightful posts. I've enjoyed cycling (as in riding a bike) since I was a fifth grader. With the arrival of cable television, I started to watch what cycling was available, namely the TdF.Where I live, Versus is the only channel that shows any bike racing. I think the main reason what drew me to watching the Tour was that for me, it was the poor man's vacation to France. The great heli shots, moto camera work and just the beautiful scenery. The bike racing was entertaining as well. I never gave much thought to Lance Armstrong, one way or another. As to the doping allegations, I suppose the constant "I'm the most tested athlete on the planet, and I've never tested positive for PEDs" was good enough for me.Many of the posts on here have piqued my interest to do some further reading. I see a trip to the library in my immediate future. Again, thanks to all for the well written and thoughtful posts.

 

[Natalyah44]

Welcome to the site, thank you for supporting the site. It's people like you who read and try things yourself that make our lives a bit easier. Thank you.
simulation rachat voiture pret automobile taux calcul credit autoUne simulation credit auto instannee et facile ici si vous avez une
voituresimulation rachat voiture pret automobile taux calcul credit auto

 

[usedtobefast]

On another website I posted on how, to me, Michael Phelps is very suspicious as he eats like a pig and has almost no body fat. According to the 1998 Festina doctor all the riders were eating like crazy and still losing weight because of the drugs. The responses to my post were the same as the Armstrong groupies. He just trains hard; it is his unique physique; he has always been good; no positives; all-American boy, etc., etc.

As much as I despise the Republican poster boy that is Lance Armstrong, (he doesn't seem to mind the plutonium warheads that were used by the US and its allies in Yugoslavia which UN doctors have said will vastly increase cancer rates for many years, as he says he is trying to fight the disease, right?), doping and corruption doesn't start and finish with him.

i don't think he is a republican.

 

[Kingsley A]

OK, I have dealt with this one numerous times.

Let me put it to you on a personal level, so you see why I give Lance the benefit of the doubt.

I grew up in a very poor and crime ridden area. Many of my childhood friends are now convicted criminals. I rose above that, sought out a commission in the US Army, I've lead troops in battle, worked at very high strategic levels, and have moved beyond my background so to speak.

However, in the guilt by association methodoloy, I am also a criminal because many of the boys I grew up with are criminals. My honor is tarnished, and my accomplishments are non-existant.

Doesn't quite work that way does it.

I will be the first to say that it is entirely possible that Lance did dope. That stands in stark contrast to the Lance Haters who refuse to acknowledge the opposite side of that zero sum question and conceed the possiblilty that Lance Armstrong did not dope.

The standard that must be met is that Lance must have verifiably and testably committed an anti-doping violation. That is not my standard, that is the systems's standard.

I will admit that I am playing a bit of devil's advocate on this thread. However, simply saying, "Gree is spreading misinformation by punching holes in my theory," is not how the system works. If what you say is true, if the evidence is solid, Lance will be convicted based on that analysis.

If a big, dumb, grunt can drive holes in it, imagine what a good attorney can do to it? That is the system: That's guilt, that's innocence.

(It is also the Constitution I swore an oath to).

Probably a little late, but do you have any idea about the differences between the US constitution and the Italian? The difference between Common Law legal systems and Napoleonic Code ones? How the burden of proof varies between the two? Or possibly more relevant, how the Italian constitution and legal system have been continuously revised to make any form of prosecution for corruption almost impossible over the last 10 or so years for the sole purpose of keeping Silvio Berlusconi out of the dock?

It's not for nothing the Italy is widely regarded as the most corrupt country in what is traditionally regarded as "Western Europe" and their anti-corruption laws are just as laughable as Britain's libel laws.

Strangely enough though, despite both sets of laws only existing to protect the rich and famous, Armstrong has never brought a successful case against Walsh, Kimmage, Andreu, O'Reilly et al in the British High Court.

 

[Ozzie2]

OK, I have dealt with this one numerous times.

Let me put it to you on a personal level, so you see why I give Lance the benefit of the doubt.

I grew up in a very poor and crime ridden area. Many of my childhood friends are now convicted criminals. I rose above that, sought out a commission in the US Army, I've lead troops in battle, worked at very high strategic levels, and have moved beyond my background so to speak.

However, in the guilt by association methodoloy, I am also a criminal because many of the boys I grew up with are criminals. My honor is tarnished, and my accomplishments are non-existant.

Doesn't quite work that way does it.

I will be the first to say that it is entirely possible that Lance did dope. That stands in stark contrast to the Lance Haters who refuse to acknowledge the opposite side of that zero sum question and conceed the possiblilty that Lance Armstrong did not dope.

The standard that must be met is that Lance must have verifiably and testably committed an anti-doping violation. That is not my standard, that is the systems's standard.

I will admit that I am playing a bit of devil's advocate on this thread. However, simply saying, "Gree is spreading misinformation by punching holes in my theory," is not how the system works. If what you say is true, if the evidence is solid, Lance will be convicted based on that analysis.

If a big, dumb, grunt can drive holes in it, imagine what a good attorney can do to it? That is the system: That's guilt, that's innocence.

(It is also the Constitution I swore an oath to).

man that reads like more LA press releases. honour, battle, constitution

could only be a republican american write that

and LA isn't going to be convicted. he's too big for that now

and went into battle? what, dropping DU and cluster bombs on stone age farmers somewhere in crackafarkistan? maybe at the Somme or Dunkirk, but not Iraq or Afghan make me laugh

notwithstanding, I don't follow your analogy re guilt by association

you can do better than that surely?

guilt by association because you grew up with them and they committed crimes? sorry.

how about guilt by association if you have credit card receipts from the same hooker they visited too? thats closer.

The standard that must be met is that Lance must have verifiably and testably committed an anti-doping violation.

systems's standard? i don't follow

and when you say "That is the system: That's guilt, that's innocence....It is also the Constitution I swore an oath to.

Sorry. dont talk to me about the US consititution being what soldiers today figh tfor. As Dubya said "its just a g-d damned piece of paper". considering how your country is full or stop lossing, secret torture bases, Bagram, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, enemy conbatants, well, they aren't constitutional. nothign cruel and unusual didn't it say?

i don't know how you can link that ra-rah into burdens of proof on LA. ??

 

[HL2037]

http://www.dr.dk/Sporten/Cykling/2009/09/02/190848.htm

My translation of the first lines:

"A lot indicates that Lance Armstrong used blood doping during this years Tour de France. Says one of Denmark's leading blood scientists, Jakob Mørkebjerg from Bispebjerg Hospital, to DR Sporten after seeing the americans blood values. ... "

The whole thing in danish:

"Armstrong med suspekte blodværdier
02. sep. 2009 20.34 Cykling

Meget tyder på, at Lance Armstrong brugte bloddoping under årets Tour de France. Det siger en af Danmarks førende blodforskere, Jakob Mørkebjerg fra Bispebjerg Hospital, til DR Sporten, efter at han har set amerikanerens blodværdier.

Både hæmatokritværdien (antallet af røde blodlegemer) og hæmoglobinværdien var stort set den samme på førstedagen og sidstedagen af Tour'en, hvilket er helt usædvanligt. Ydermere steg hæmatokritværdien i perioden 11.-14. juli, altså midt under Tour'en, fra 40,7 til 43,1, og det er også bemærkelsesværdigt, mener Jakob Mørkebjerg.

- Det vi ved fra vores forskning er, at under hårdt arbejde som et Tour de France vil man se et markant fald af disse blodværdier, og det ser vi ikke hos Lance Armstrong, siger Jakob Mørkebjerg, der netop har lavet en phd-afhandling om bloddoping.

Hvad kan det skyldes?

- Det kan skyldes, at han har fået nogle blodtransfusioner. Dermed ikke være sagt, at han har fået det, men det kunne være én af forklaringerne.

Kan der være andre årsager?

- Har han f. eks. haft diarré og er dehydreret, vil det kunne betyde en forøgelse i blodværdierne, siger Jakob Mørkebjerg og uddyber:

- Men billedet modstrider det vi normalt vil se. Lance Armstrongs værdier er uændrede fra den første til den sidste prøve, og normalt vil man forvente et fald. Det fald ser man også i hans værdier under Giro d'Italia et par måneder før, men altså ikke under Tour de France.

DR Sporten har forgæves forsøgt at få en kommentar fra Lance Armstrong, der blev nr. 3 i årets Tour de France."

 

[issoisso]

Let me help.

Summarized by a danish guy on another forum:

One of Denmarks leading blood doping experts (wrote his thesis and PhD on blood doping) is Jakob Mørkebjerg.

He's had a look at Armstrong's blood values from the Tour de France and says that his values are very irregular compared to what you'd normally expect.

"His haemotocrit and haemoglobin values are pretty much the same on the first and last day of the Tour, and that's highly unusual. Even more unusual is it that his haemotocrit value increased in the middle of the Tour.

What we know from research is that these values should normally drop during hard work, such as the Tour. But Armstrong's values don't reflect that."

Interviewer: Why is that?

"Blood transfusions is one possibility. I'm not saying he did it, but it's one explanation"

Mørkebjerg also says that Armstrong's values during the Giro were perfectly normal.

I'll make just one comment on this: His haematocrit increased during a three-week Tour. That leaves no doubt whatsoever in my mind what he did. Haematocrit increasing just DOES. NOT. HAPPEN.

 

[Anonymous]

I read a Google translation. Interesting, that has always been the marker. Your levels don't change when that is physiologically impossible over a 3 week tour. Hmm...who'd a thunk Armstrong was blood doping this year??? Or maybe he just had real REAL bad diahareha the whole 3 weeks?

 

[Cobber]

Let me help.

Summarized by a danish guy on another forum:



I'll make just one comment on this: His haematocrit increased during a three-week Tour. That leaves no doubt whatsoever in my mind what he did. Haematocrit increasing just DOES. NOT. HAPPEN.

+1... I completely agree. I think Armstrong's performance during the Giro is what he can currently do without doping, and the Tour is what he can do with blood doping.

For me, and I know it has been thrown around a lot on these forums, the only solution seems to be a limit in deviation of blood values from the previous test. (ie. something along the lines of your blood values cannot change by more than X% from your previous test - where X would be normal variation plus 1 or 2 standard deviations.). This way, the only way to dope and beat it would be to tranfuse 5-10 ml of blood every single day.

The current bio-passport limits are an absolute joke.

 

[issoisso]

http://cdn-community2.livestrong.co...c981f7be-e46c-4245-aa9d-d61ae110a264.Full.jpg

Notice the DOUBLE spike in HcT during the Tour. Yet because there is no test for autologous transfusions, this can't be declared a positive. Ridiculous.

The two HcT spikes are as the mountains start and for the Ventoux. Convenient.

 

[samb01]

The current bio-passport limits are an absolute joke.

It's hardly perfect, but it does have value. Without it, Armstrong would have ridden the tour with a 48+ hematocrit.

 

[issoisso]

It's hardly perfect, but does have value. Without it, Armstrong would have ridden the tour with 48+ hematocrit.

For reference, his blood tests from 1999 have a 49% haematocrit. But of course we all know he rode that Tour clean, since the fanboys have told us so

 

[mikkemus23]

He`s not doing it for us. Why should he not be free to use the same medics as those he does do it for?


Can`t wait for the twitter rebuke from LA. I`m guessing some newfound trainingmethods made his hematocrit levels increase.


C A D E N C E

 

[the truth.]

Lance Armstrong impressed in his Tour de France comeback this year with a third place. But maybe it was not surprising for one of Denmark's leading blood researchers, James Dark Mountain from Bispebjerg Hospital, has looked at American's blood values over and they can indicate the use of blood doping, "he DR gate.

Both the number of red blood cells, hematocrit and hemoglobin were essentially the same on the first day and last day of Tour'en, which is quite unusual.

Furthermore, increased hematocrit value during 11th-14th July, representing the middle of Tour'en, 40.7 to 43.1, which is also strange, does Dark Mountain.

Can also be caused by diarrhea
- What we know from our research is that the hard work as a Tour de France will see a marked decrease of these blood values, and it seems we are not in Lance Armstrong, he says to DR, and suggests that there may be due blood transfusions.

- This does not mean that he has received it, but it could be one explanation, he says, but insists that another reason may be diarrhea or dehydration.

- But the picture the contradiction that we would normally see. Lance Armstrong's values are unchanged from the first to the last sample, and would normally expect a decline. This fall also sees the cyclists values during the Giro d'Italia a few months before, but not so during the Tour de France


http://translate.google.com/transla...article1215712.ece&sl=da&tl=en&history_state0 <http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=da&js=y&u=http%3A%2F%2Fekstrabladet.dk%2Fsport%2Fcykling%2Farticle1215712.ece&sl=da&tl=en&history_state0> =
The name of the Scientist is Jacob Moerkebjerg

TV Clip that broke the story:
http://www.dr.dk/NETTV/Update/2009/09/02/221200.htm

Made by Niels Chr. Jung who did the classic TV documentaries revealing Bjarne Riis, Sorensen and the doctors Ferrari + Conconi

Armstrongs data:
http://www.livestrong.com/lance-armstrong/blog/tag/testing/

 

[issoisso]

There's already a topic on this. Post it there

 

[workingclasshero]

Lance Armstrong impressed in his Tour de France comeback this year with a third place. But maybe it was not surprising for one of Denmark's leading blood researchers, James Dark Mountain from Bispebjerg Hospital, has looked at American's blood values over and they can indicate the use of blood doping, "he DR gate.

Both the number of red blood cells, hematocrit and hemoglobin were essentially the same on the first day and last day of Tour'en, which is quite unusual.

Furthermore, increased hematocrit value during 11th-14th July, representing the middle of Tour'en, 40.7 to 43.1, which is also strange, does Dark Mountain.

Can also be caused by diarrhea
- What we know from our research is that the hard work as a Tour de France will see a marked decrease of these blood values, and it seems we are not in Lance Armstrong, he says to DR, and suggests that there may be due blood transfusions.

- This does not mean that he has received it, but it could be one explanation, he says, but insists that another reason may be diarrhea or dehydration.

- But the picture the contradiction that we would normally see. Lance Armstrong's values are unchanged from the first to the last sample, and would normally expect a decline. This fall also sees the cyclists values during the Giro d'Italia a few months before, but not so during the Tour de France


http://translate.google.com/transla...article1215712.ece&sl=da&tl=en&history_state0 <http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=da&js=y&u=http%3A%2F%2Fekstrabladet.dk%2Fsport%2Fcykling%2Farticle1215712.ece&sl=da&tl=en&history_state0> =
The name of the Scientist is Jacob Moerkebjerg

TV Clip that broke the story:
http://www.dr.dk/NETTV/Update/2009/09/02/221200.htm

Made by Niels Chr. Jung who did the classic TV documentaries revealing Bjarne Riis, Sorensen and the doctors Ferrari + Conconi

Armstrongs data:
http://www.livestrong.com/lance-armstrong/blog/tag/testing/

that made me laugh. it's all over in the official la is a doper thread btw

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I'll make just one comment on this: His haematocrit increased during a three-week Tour. That leaves no doubt whatsoever in my mind what he did. Haematocrit increasing just DOES. NOT. HAPPEN.

But if you have a heart the size of a pumpkin, wouldn't your recovery rate be greater than that of 10 men? And if you have a really high cadence, you wouldn't be burning as much energy, so you'd make better use of rest days, and those long flat days when you're just spinning along, are about the same as you and I sitting in a recliner watching TV, right? And what if you started the race and had the test taken when you were water logged, and the last test taken after you were severely dehydrated because you forgot to guzzle, or drank whiskey the night before?

 

[issoisso]

But if you have a heart the size of a pumpkin, wouldn't your recovery rate be greater than that of 10 men? And if you have a really high cadence, you wouldn't be burning as much energy, so you'd make better use of rest days, and those long flat days when you're just spinning along, are about the same as you and I sitting in a recliner watching TV, right? And what if you started the race and had the test taken when you were water logged, and the last test taken after you were severely dehydrated because you forgot to guzzle, or drank whiskey the night before?

Of course, he could be pregnant. That would explain the HcT increases

Over here when someone's self-important, we say they're "carrying the king in his belly". Seems apt.

 

[Digger]

But if you have a heart the size of a pumpkin, wouldn't your recovery rate be greater than that of 10 men? And if you have a really high cadence, you wouldn't be burning as much energy, so you'd make better use of rest days, and those long flat days when you're just spinning along, are about the same as you and I sitting in a recliner watching TV, right? And what if you started the race and had the test taken when you were water logged, and the last test taken after you were severely dehydrated because you forgot to guzzle, or drank whiskey the night before?

Maybe he got the diarrhoea from drinking water, accidentally, whilst in the shower, as he has been known to spend half an hour in there.

 

[elapid]

For those that "know" me, I am no Lance fan. However, these hematocrits are reported without reference to other values, most importantly total protein. Hematocrit can be artificially high with a decreased plasma volume which occurs with dehydration. With dehyrdation, total protein will also increase. Autologous blood transfusion should be suspected if there is no dehydration (ie, total protein levels are not increased) and hematocrit increases. So doping allegations based on a single blood parameter (hematocrit) can be difficult when we do not have the full story.

 

[Cobber]

http://cdn-community2.livestrong.co...c981f7be-e46c-4245-aa9d-d61ae110a264.Full.jpg

Notice the DOUBLE spike in HcT during the Tour. Yet because there is no test for autologous transfusions, this can't be declared a positive. Ridiculous.

The two HcT spikes are as the mountains start and for the Ventoux. Convenient.

It looks like he got a nice big infusion before the 6/16/09 test as well, with his HCT and OFF-scores jumping from 38.2-45.7 and 73.4-112 in a period of 2 weeks. An OFF-score of 112 is really high, but still within the UCI limits. From Wiki..

A normal score is 85-95 and scores over 133 are considered evidence of doping.

So.. LA's OFF-score was within the normal range for almost an entire year before the 6/16/09 test, jumped well above this range for 2 tests right before the TdF, and then remained just above 95 thereafter. Notice that before 6/16/09, he didn't have a single OFF-score above 90 (except for a 90.3 on 2/19/09) and then after 6/17 he didn't have a single OFF-score below 93.3, and this was during the TdF when these values are supposed to drop.

Just for kicks, I ran a T-test on the 8 values prior to the 6/16 test versus the 8 subsequent samples (6/16 onwards) and got a p value of 0.0012. Thus, there is a 99.98% chance that these 2 sets of samples are different!

 

[Cobber]

For those that "know" me, I am no Lance fan. However, these hematocrits are reported without reference to other values, most importantly total protein. Hematocrit can be artificially high with a decreased plasma volume which occurs with dehydration. With dehyrdation, total protein will also increase. Autologous blood transfusion should be suspected if there is no dehydration (ie, total protein levels are not increased) and hematocrit increases. So doping allegations based on a single blood parameter (hematocrit) can be difficult when we do not have the full story.

Elapid, since OFF-score is based on the ratio of hemoglobin to reticulocytes, should it not counter that arguement? Since with dehydration, the concentrations of both would go up but their ratio should stay the same?

 

[Hugh Januss]

I'm not a scientist like some of you guys are, but I can add 2+2. Both of the crit spikes occur right after rest days. So apropos of the discussion on that other thread, nobody would have to sneek anything in to the hotel. Lance would have just had to take a couple hour field trip.

 

[HL2037]

And there you have it. That's a pretty normal occurrence after rest days. The report doesn't claim LA blood doped, just that this one guy couldn't rule it out. Seems a bit of a non-story. I think we would have heard a lot more about this before now if it was a problem.

It wouldn't be the same Denmark place that tried to claim Wiggins might have blood doped, would it, that was greeted with howls of laughter? Because its Armstrong everybody thinks its a scoop.

On the contrary:
http://politiken.dk/sport/article766139.ece

 

[elapid]

Elapid, since OFF-score is based on the ratio of hemoglobin to reticulocytes, should it not counter that arguement? Since with dehydration, the concentrations of both would go up but their ratio should stay the same?

True - I am guilty of the same thing. I only looked at the hematocrit and not the OFF score. Woops. OK, then to change tack, there is no way any GT rider's hematocrit would increase during the race without supplementation. There are papers documenting progressive decreases in hematocrit over the period of a GT, presumably because of bone marrow suppression resulting from prolonged intense racing stresses. These decreases result in the cyclist being borderline clinically anemic by the end of the GT.