Landis letter re drug use in cycling

[red_flanders]

Yes.






.........

Hit me up! Or am I missing the joke...?

 

[Anonymous]

anyone remember this? and this (same but different)

""I will say that the substance on people's minds, Activ-o-something (Actovegin) is new to me. Before this ordeal I had never heard of it, nor had my teammates."

Armstrong said that the wide spectrum of drugs and medical products found were simply necessary tools to treat 25 to 50 people on the Tour de France over three weeks.

"If something were to go wrong with any of them he (the team doctor) would be responsible for their well-being. That's why he would have things like adrenaline, cortisone, scissors, stitches, etc.," Armstrong said. "Some may be viewed as 'performance enhancers but they're not used in that sense."

 

[theswordsman]

Yes.

.........

Inspector Clousseau fan?

 

[theswordsman]

If anyone is trying to Google it, the name is Alain Rumpf. He's active on twitter. And he's at ATOC.

 

[thehog]

If anyone is trying to Google it, the name is Alain Rumpf. He's active on twitter. And he's at ATOC.

It’s on the Canadian CBS website. They even have video of Lance at the trial forgetting what the donations were for.

I'm out the door so I'll pull the links out of my files when I get back from dinner.

 

[theswordsman]

It’s on the Canadian CBS website. They even have video of Lance at the trial forgetting what the donations were for.

I'm out the door so I'll pull the links out of my files when I get back from dinner.

Thanks. Appreciate it.

My computer was attacked & killed Thursday night & I wisely lost every article link I ever had. Now hating those responsible with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns, & keeping things in safe places.

 

[Epicycle]

At the SCA hearings Armstrong said it was around 500,000USD. Armstrong stated he never had a receipt for the money nor knew what happened to it. Alan Rumpf accepted the money on behalf of the UCI.

That is not correct. At the SCA hearing he testified he thought the amount was $25,000.

Here is the transcript of his testimony. You can see how the meticulous Armstrong curiously forgets many important details.

https://www.yousendit.com/dl?phi_action=app/orchestrateDownload&rurl=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.yousendit.com%252Ftransfer.php%253Faction%253Dbatch_download%2526batch_id%253DdXFYbUpkOW5qV0EwTVE9PQ

 

[ProfTournesol]

Some "new" thoughts though:

1. The thought that doping may have bigger effects on the personality/stability of the user over the long term. Messing with your system like that (especially hormones/steroids) may have serious long term damage. You see it in American football players for example. And with a few racers we lost as well.

Steroids clearly do cause mood disturbance, especially in those with a genetic susceptibility. They can cause hypomania (mild mania), mania or depression. These can also come with psychotic symptoms.

 

[Anonymous]

Steroids clearly do cause mood disturbance, especially in those with a genetic susceptibility. They can cause hypomania (mild mania), mania or depression. These can also come with psychotic symptoms.

Ask Chris Benoit.. well, you could if he was still alive

 

[luckyboy]

That is not correct. At the SCA hearing he testified he thought the amount was $25,000.

Yeah, Sylvia Schenk said it was $500k

 

[flicker]

Another wondered about a refund for the book. "I guess at this point your best bet is to take it out of the nonfiction section of your bookshelf and place it in another section of your collection," an editor wrote back.

Gee I was quouted. Positivly false. Anyone, please get on Floyds' bandwagon.

It is the "intelligent thing to do"

 

[Anonymous]

im just wondering..

is it possible that the 2006 positive for testosterone WAS a stitch up, and he was genuine in his claims that he did not take testosterone that tour. Could he have already started making veiled threats to lance about one day revealing what went on at postal and the uci did lances dirty work for him

far fetched.. but then after this last week anything is possible

 

[JA.Tri]

im just wondering..

is it possible that the 2006 positive for testosterone WAS a stitch up, and he was genuine in his claims that he did not take testosterone that tour. Could he have already started making veiled threats to lance about one day revealing what went on at postal and the uci did lances dirty work for him

far fetched.. but then after this last week anything is possible

I speculate that FL had previously doped with testosterone. Shortly thereafter he "donated a pint" of his blood while testosterone still present. Then a considerable time later (during fateful TdF) he has autologous blood transfused.

FL therefore mistakenly believes he has been erroneously found to have a positive testosterone reading.

IMO

 

[theswordsman]

im just wondering..

is it possible that the 2006 positive for testosterone WAS a stitch up, and he was genuine in his claims that he did not take testosterone that tour. Could he have already started making veiled threats to lance about one day revealing what went on at postal and the uci did lances dirty work for him

far fetched.. but then after this last week anything is possible

I don't think so. Going strictly from memory when I watched, he had been really cocky the day before, and stupidly let someone get far enough away to take the jersey away from him. His complete turnaround into Superman the next day looked a whole lot like things we've seen since from Ricco, Sella, Kohl, etc. If he doped all the time for years, it's doubtful that he'd be chasing the Tour win with one totally clean. The rest would have just been ahead of the available tests, or using his own blood like he had before. But then, I don't trust anything the UCI does in the pro version of the sport, and people at labs have been accused of accepting bribes.

 

[JA.Tri]

Most of us will try to tell as much of the truth as we can (in many cases this will be the entire truth, as we perceive it). Therefore I recon cyclists do the same.

FL was blood doping, however he "knew" he was not "recently" taking testosterone. Therefore how could he have tested positive for testosterone??? He therefore denies taking testosterone (at the time).

He is being consistent and "truthful".

 

[Ripper]

I don't think so. Going strictly from memory when I watched, he had been really cocky the day before, and stupidly let someone get far enough away to take the jersey away from him. His complete turnaround into Superman the next day looked a whole lot like things we've seen since from Ricco, Sella, Kohl, etc. If he doped all the time for years, it's doubtful that he'd be chasing the Tour win with one totally clean. The rest would have just been ahead of the available tests, or using his own blood like he had before. But then, I don't trust anything the UCI does in the pro version of the sport, and people at labs have been accused of accepting bribes.

I thought he blew up the day before, and lost close to 10 minutes.

 

[Hillavoider]

I thought he blew up the day before, and lost close to 10 minutes.

yeah he did, and the next day was just so rediculas and so obvious, Lance taught him to dope but not how to go about winning. He should of copied LA's performances from previous years when journalists asked him why it looked so easy to win at the top of some of Frances highest mountains. LA always made a big deal about it being tough, "i am struggling too you know" but he never looked in trouble, he even had enough controll to give other riders the win.

 

[Epicycle]

im just wondering..

is it possible that the 2006 positive for testosterone WAS a stitch up, and he was genuine in his claims that he did not take testosterone that tour. Could he have already started making veiled threats to lance about one day revealing what went on at postal and the uci did lances dirty work for him

far fetched.. but then after this last week anything is possible

It is far fetched. The seals weren't broken when the B samples were witnessed by Floyd's expert observers. Those seals are signed or initialed by the rider when they are given. Besides I don't see how that would have been a smart thing to do to a rider making threats. It did eventually push him over the edge, something that could have happened a lot earlier. Doesn't seem logical from Lance's point of view. The most logical thing is that Floyd doesn't want to admit the testosterone positive was real because he took so much money from his fans.

 

[Wicked Witch]

I just found this article online which was posted only 13 hours ago in The Australian online (no, it's not owned by Rupert )

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/danilo-di-luca-one-of-12-riders-banned-for-testing-positive-to-epo/story-e6frg7mf-1225870278802

This was after the beginnings of the fallout from Landis' allegations. Thought it was interesting...

 

[Cerberus]

I speculate that FL had previously doped with testosterone. Shortly thereafter he "donated a pint" of his blood while testosterone still present. Then a considerable time later (during fateful TdF) he has autologous blood transfused.

FL therefore mistakenly believes he has been erroneously found to have a positive testosterone reading.

IMO

You're not the first to speculate along those lines. The thing however is that Landis has probably heard that speculation to, so if this was the case Landis should know that this is what happened and if he was coming fully clean just say so rather than keep denying. I don't think you can get around the fact that Landis is still lying, about his 2006 positive if nothing else.

 

[JA.Tri]

@Cerberus fair call. I was allowing FL "wriggle room" for avoiding/rejecting perjury charges.

 

[Cerberus]

@Cerberus fair call. I was allowing FL "wriggle room" for avoiding/rejecting perjury charges.

Well I'm not sure that perjury charges are even on the table. He didn't lie during a criminal trial. Also he did get convicted and his lies were in his own defence. In some countries you cannot be tried for lying in your own defence. Even in countries where you can, like the US, I believe perjury charges are mainly brought if you were requited the first time around and the prosecutors need a way to get around double jeopardy. Otherwise you could tack a perjury conviction on almost anybody who got convicted of anything as long as they'd testified in their own defence and that doesn't happen.

ETA: His doping trial was in the US right? If so obviously rules that apply in other jurisdictions are irrelevant. I wrote this thinking he might have been tried in Switzerland or some other place where a relevant sporting body resides, but on reflection the US seems most likely.

 

[ProfTournesol]

I just found this article online which was posted only 13 hours ago in The Australian online (no, it's not owned by Rupert )

sorry, the Australian is owned by Rupert, it's part of News Corp's Australian Empire.

 

[JA.Tri]

Well I'm not sure that perjury charges are even on the table....

Ta, accept that

 

[barn yard]

i am still trying to work out why 'the shack' published that string of emails on their website?