Sheryl Crow and Lance Armstrong

[Tinman]

This thread is way off. In an attempt to steer it back the below perspectives.

Famous dutch quote: "schoenmaker blijf bij je leest", translated as "cobbler stick to your last", loosely meaning "don't espouse opinions on stuff you know little about".

Most cancer research (finding what causes the disease and how to treat it) is done by drug companies and academic institutions). None is done by Livestrong although they provided some funding in the early days (cynics incl. me would say this was to be able to make the "funding research" claim. Cancer awareness - as opposed to research - is "promotional activity to increase awareness of cancer", and can include making available supportive materials/programs for sufferers. This is what Livestrong does, all the while building the "Lance" brand and influence.

Cancer research is difficult and very costly because cancer has mutliple causes. Progress in understanding these is generally slow and very gradual. We all HOPE that we can have a magic cure but chances of this happening are close to zero. It is the playing on this HOPE and the link to Lance's own cancer which is so devious, particularly as his - quite rare - testicular cancer was likely caused by his taking of drug coctails as a junior cyclist.

Question regarding Livestrong is "do we need yet more cancer awareness and support programs, and do you understand/want to contribute your money to this. And if so do you think Livestrong is the best organization to do this? Or would you prefer to donate to academia or indeed suppport drug companies with active research programs, eg. by buying stock?"

Suggest we get back to Sheryl. Much more interesting.

 

[LauraLyn]

This thread is way off. In an attempt to steer it back the below perspectives.

Famous dutch quote: "schoenmaker blijf bij je leest", translated as "cobbler stick to your last", loosely meaning "don't espouse opinions on stuff you know little about".

Most cancer research (finding what causes the disease and how to treat it) is done by drug companies and academic institutions). None is done by Livestrong although they provided some funding in the early days (cynics incl. me would say this was to be able to make the "funding research" claim. Cancer awareness - as opposed to research - is "promotional activity to increase awareness of cancer", and can include making available supportive materials/programs for sufferers. This is what Livestrong does, all the while building the "Lance" brand and influence.

Cancer research is difficult and very costly because cancer has mutliple causes. Progress in understanding these is generally slow and very gradual. We all HOPE that we can have a magic cure but chances of this happening are close to zero. It is the playing on this HOPE and the link to Lance's own cancer which is so devious, particularly as his - quite rare - testicular cancer was likely caused by his taking of drug coctails as a junior cyclist.

Question regarding Livestrong is "do we need yet more cancer awareness and support programs, and do you understand/want to contribute your money to this. And if so do you think Livestrong is the best organization to do this? Or would you prefer to donate to academia or indeed suppport drug companies with active research programs, eg. by buying stock?"

Suggest we get back to Sheryl. Much more interesting.

Beste schoenmaker, goed opletten!

Cancer Research UK is an NGO. The European Organization for Research & Treatment of Cancer is an NGO. The International Agency for Research on Cancer is a WHO Institution. Far far from all cancer research organizations are academic or pharma.

The question with LiveStrong is not only what it does (and what it doesn't do), but what people have been led to believe about Lance Armstrong and cancer. In my very serious opinion, the LAF is part of a life of lies and deception and this is not needed in the world of cancer.

Mais bon, rentron-nous dans le monde de Madame Crow et son affaire avec Lance.

 

[kielbasa]

That would be external containimation. Did you not read the post?

http://pacificcancer.org/Resources/Cancer/Breast/Guidel_breast_bj_selected_topics.pdf

This is a fascinating read on breast cancer rates around the world. If you compare North America to Eastern Europe to say Northern Europe you can correlate that cancer is a disease of western societies.

There are several research papers on the topic. It's a theory for the reasoning but the data is rather compelling.

It does stir up emotion. Western counties like to tout there medicine and health practices as the best in the world whereas prevention from such diseases should be viewed as the goal.

Of course you realize, that the "global incidence of breast cancer" chart is indicative of breast cancer DETECTION rate, not occurrence. I bet they've got a lot of reliable data on African women there too.

FYI, I happen to be married to an Eastern European woman with breast cancer. If she lived back home, she'd probably still be waiting for a correct ("free") diagnosis. To keep this somewhat on topic, we don't use cell phones that extensively and I think that link to breast cancer is mostly poppyc0ck.

breastcancer.org

 

[Velodude]

This is utter nonsense. There are many studies showing a direct link between smoking and tobacco....<snip>..

Okay, I'll throw down the gauntlet.

I challenge you to show me one peer reviewed study of any standing that proved there was a link between smoking and tobacco.

 

[kielbasa]

European study of effects of second-hand smoke:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9776409?dopt=Abstract

"CONCLUSIONS:
Our results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk. We did find weak evidence of a dose-response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS. There was no detectable risk after cessation of exposure"

 

[Tinman]

Oui je sais, vous etes correct. Trying to keep it simple. Vlaanders ex employee qui se reveilla. Mum's the word.

 

[LauraLyn]

Okay, I'll throw down the gauntlet.

I challenge you to show me one peer reviewed study of any standing that proved there was a link between smoking and tobacco.

In plain language: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/healthyliving/smokingandtobacco/smoking-and-cancer

"Thanks to years of research, the links between smoking and cancer are now very clear. Smoking is by far the most important preventable cause of cancer in the world."

"Smoking causes more than four in five cases of lung cancer. Lung cancer has one of the lowest survival rates of all cancers, and is the most common cause of cancer death in the UK. The good news is that most of these deaths are preventable, by giving up smoking in time."

If you are serious: here is a listing of studies going back to the 1950's: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045(09)70401-2/fulltext

If you want a great read on cancer (for the layperson), read: The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer (2011) by Siddhartha Mukherjee

 

[thehog]

Of course you realize, that the "global incidence of breast cancer" chart is indicative of breast cancer DETECTION rate, not occurrence. I bet they've got a lot of reliable data on African women there too.

FYI, I happen to be married to an Eastern European woman with breast cancer. If she lived back home, she'd probably still be waiting for a correct ("free") diagnosis. To keep this somewhat on topic, we don't use cell phones that extensively and I think that link to breast cancer is mostly poppyc0ck.

breastcancer.org

I didn't come here to fight. As I stated these are "theories". Whether you like it or not (and spare the jokes in regards to Eastern European health systems - try living in the US) there are several studies of children growing up in Soviet countries growing immunity to germs and diseases.

This is not an exact science. I'm saddened that you're using topic as way to throw it into my face and cause an argument - your Chernobyl joke was low.

 

[LauraLyn]

I didn't come here to fight. As I stated these are "theories". Whether you like it or not (and spare the jokes in regards to Eastern European health systems - try living in the US) there are several studies of children growing up in Soviet countries growing immunity to germs and diseases.

This is not an exact science. . . . .

Health science never was and never will be mathematics or physics. But it is a serious and important activity in our society, for cyclists as well.

In this case Tinman's Dutch proverb is correct.

 

[mastersracer]

Health science never was and never will be mathematics or physics. But it is a serious and important activity in our society, for cyclists as well.

In this case Tinman's Dutch proverb is correct.

you are writing/responding faster than your neuron(s) can keep up. Read what you stated the first time (and Velodude's challenge - carefully).

This is too serious an issue for clinic driveby sniping. Anyone who is interested should consult the World Cancer research fund and their expert reports. The most authoritative: http://www.wcrf.org/

 

[kielbasa]

I didn't come here to fight. As I stated these are "theories". Whether you like it or not (and spare the jokes in regards to Eastern European health systems - try living in the US) there are several studies of children growing up in Soviet countries growing immunity to germs and diseases.

This is not an exact science. I'm saddened that you're using topic as way to throw it into my face and cause an argument - your Chernobyl joke was low.

I'm not fighting you, I do live and have lived in the U.S. for 30 of my 45 years, and it wasn't a joke. My wife is a Chernobyl downwinder (thank you Eastern Europe) and I fully expect her to live to ripe old age, because she's an American now. Believe me we've had this discussion many times, and if you think that was a joke, it may be on you.

Again, the aforementioned charts show better detection rates, not occurrence of breast cancer. That's why developed countries shows higher incidence. It's really not more complicated than that.

 

[Ozzie2]

When Ms. Crow says Lance trains harder than anybody else, that is an indictment of his doping. It's really pretty obvious.

I dont think its a code really

Plus we don't know the context of the question and answer. ie "miss crow, did you ever see anyone train harder than Lance?"

I think she's giving him some respect for the effort and work that he clearly must have put into his preparation.

As a non athlete, I don't think she would understand the subtle undertone of it. I think she's just acknowledging his work. Maybe thats being nice to him?

(Note I have been a non LA fan since day 1 and detest what I understand his character is- I don't support him or the wife stealer Cheryl Crow at all)

I wouldnt be surprised if she testified, and if she did she probably spoke to half the others in his teams who said Cheryl, there is nothing you can say that we haven't, or words to effect.

In all reality if she just said "i don't recall seeing that" then how can anyone have anything on her?

I really doubt Tyler or Floyd or Frankie would need to say "oh yeah Cheryl was in the room too when he passed around the vials" or whatever, to strengthen their testimony. I sincerely doubt they would bring the wives or women into it, any further than to repeat what they know they have publically said anyway (ie Betsy Andreu)

My feel is that she was called, spoke freely but didn't say anything, and then now, when its pretty clear everyone knows, and Lance knows she knows, and she knows he knows...etc..to come out and say he trained hard, is probably a compliment to Lance, that he wasn't a donkey.

Remember if she saw Lance dope she saw more every other cyclist she knows do it too. And yeah, I am sure she did see other cyclists train too

 

[Ozzie2]

I think Crow is a breast cancer survivor, yes?

Without wishing to detract from the severity of her genuine and personal health issues there, can I irreverently comment that she possibly also hosted one of those toxic cancerous bodies from time to time?...as in, the 6 inch long variety that was occasionally located inside the cervix.

It iself part of a larger 6" tall organism known as the "psychopathic tyrant"- being a rare strain of cancer called the LA Cervical cancer...(also known as "The C*nt).

Nasty one that- was known to f*** a few women up good and proper that one

Is that pushing it too far?

 

[Bosco10]

well.. maybe

 

[Ozzie2]

Okay, I'll throw down the gauntlet.

I challenge you to show me one peer reviewed study of any standing that proved there was a link between smoking and tobacco.

screw that

discovering lance doped did not surprise me
if i learned Cadel doped, would hurt me
But are you telling me that Millie Vanillie lip synced?
Ah man thats a low blow.
This thread makes me sick.
To think of all the teenage girls I pulled in 1989 because I could do the rock and slide move really well. I'll have to find them on facebook and apologise.
Those guys
You just can't trust anyone

 

[Ozzie2]

Well well well
The Plot thickens
I just wikipeadia'd the Millie Ray Vanillie page and well, if you think the LA map I have on my wall (of all key players and sponsors and UCI people, and drug agencies) is impressive and incriminating, wait until you see this
None other than Dr Ferrari and Balco were involved in the Millie Vanillie Grand Jury testimonies
It would also appear that one of them vanillies is in the Witness Protection Program
Anyone else care to do some research on this and see what else we can uncover?

I want blood here. Those guys just stole the best part of October 1990 from me with their deception

 

[Ozzie2]

Ok strike that.

Its okay.

I did a bit more research on Wikipedia and discovered those 2 guys were clean after all. It wasn't_they_who were lipsyncing.

Thank goodness for that.

I'd hate to think a part of my childhood and the innocence was taken away by cheating lipsincers.

Those of you who told me they were lipsyncers and (therefore) cheats have a lot to answer for my feelings you know. You need to think more before you make unfounded accusations okay.

Anyway. I'm off to tell my 9 year old daughter to take the Millie Ray Cyrus posters down- apparently SHE was the lipsyncer and we know she drives a Ferrari and regularly exposes herself to 6" cervical tumours.

I'll tell her she's a dope taker too. Might as well cover all bases

(wags fingers) You people

 

[Velodude]

screw that

discovering lance doped did not surprise me
if i learned Cadel doped, would hurt me
But are you telling me that Milli Vanilli lip synced?
Ah man thats a low blow.
This thread makes me sick.
To think of all the teenage girls I pulled in 1989 because I could do the rock slide dance really well. I'll have to find them on facebook and apologise.
Those guys
You just can't trust anyone

I believe you missed the point of my post when I challenged LL to provide authorities into her claim.

LL, resident bot from Demand Media writing for Livestrong.com & EHow.com., had a wrench/spanner in the works when she wrote @ post #75:

"This is utter nonsense. There are many studies showing a direct link between smoking and tobacco."

After my post there was allegedly human intervention into the bot and "tobacco" was amended to "cancer".

 

[Ozzie2]

I believe you missed the point of my post when I challenged LL to provide authorities into her claim.

of course i missed your point

1) this is the internet and an anonymous chat room

2) tbh, i really don't understand

3) if I did, i probably wouldnt care

Now, back to the thread

Well, those clowns certainly have a lot to answer for. My wife just told me I'm sleeping in the shed for a week now that I "allegedly" broke my little girls heart telling her that Mille Cyrus was responsible for Lance getting busted

That worked well

Not

 

[sittingbison]

...as in, the 6 inch long variety that was occasionally located inside the cervix....Itself part of a larger 6" tall organism known as the "psychopathic tyrant"...

This is complete and utter rubbish. Ashenden clearly indicates in the NYVelocity interview, paragraph "Cloak of Secrecy" that:
"... it was surprising to find that he didn't lose any weight post cancer. And not only that, he's listed as 5' 9", 5' 10", but we know from speaking to his teammates he's more like 5' 5", 5' 6"....".

It has NEVER been the case he is six foot tall....BTW you have used the 'inch' label for 'foot'.

Which leads me to suspect that as you have exaggerated his height by 7.7%, you have probably also exaggerated his length. I will up the exaggeration to 10% because men always add a bit, so his ACTUAL length is NOT 6" but 5.45". Not enough to satisfy Sheryl let alone reach the cervix.

 

[Ozzie2]

Wow. I've been b*tch slapped and pawned all in the one post
I agree with the 10% exhaggeratino assessment
I've been saying for years men should all find a woman with small hands. Works wonders for the confidence

 

[Ozzie2]

The ad on the side of the page also reminds me about the other marital suggestino I have for all men

Never show black man p0rn to your wife. never

only ever sit down and watch videos with small, asian men and very fat women.

this is called a win/ win for everyone

again. it is all perspective

 

[cineteq]

Remember if she saw Lance dope she saw more every other cyclist she knows do it too. And yeah, I am sure she did see other cyclists train too

After reading about Kristin Armstrong's implication, I wonder how really implicated Sheryl was.

 

[Race Radio]

After reading about Kristin Armstrong's implication, I wonder how really implicated Sheryl was.

I doubt you will see either in the USADA report

 

[Berzin]

I doubt you will see either in the USADA report.

Then why was the story of Kristen Armstrong giving American riders cortisone tablets at the 1998 World Championships in the David Walsh article?

Where did he get this information from?