Sky/Froome Talk Only (No Way Sky Are Cleans?)

Page 80 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 15, 2012
3,064
0
0
The Hitch said:
you mean before when you were arguing about bilharzia, you hadn't even looked it up?

Well, I guess it's good that you are honest about it
I tend to be. Unlike some others. I've never claimed infalliblity.

, to admit that you will took skys side on an issue without having even looked it up. Shows that you don't really care about the facts, just will take the side purely because it's yours, right or wrong.

Shows nothing of the sort, though it's interesting you can only see things in view of sides. Says you care more about sides than the truth. which isn't news, frankly, but always good to be reminded.

It shows only that my memory proved to be somewhat faulty - after all, i did make it clear it was from recollection, not research.

"as far as I know"

However, the basic central point, that a 'relapse' was a rare but noted phemoneum, because of eggs left embedded in tissues after the medicine was taken, is still correct, isn't it?

And I wasn't 'arguing' a point. When i'm arguing with you, you'll now about it.

Covered a million times, ffs make the effort to research the subject and look over the previous discussions before commenting thinking you are offering something new.
Think that's one of them there ex-agerr-ma-ations, so it is. More to the point, ffs, within the rules, I'll post what i like, ffs, how i like, and i won't be seeking your ffs permission to do it - and when i get things wrong, I'll own up to it.

ffs.



If froomes problems is the eggs remain, then why does it keep appearing and disappearing (and offer some sources please, as those of us who are taking the discussion seriously and not trolling have done)

And explain why froome and Brailsford explicitly state that this is NOT what is happening. They have said it is the parasite not the eggs that affect him.

Why? Explain.
You must have missed the point where I clearly said i hadn't a notion if this applied to him. Up front. from the start. And, surprise though it may be, i'm not his doctor, so I don't have any access to find out.

now if you want to accuse me of trolling based on a memory lapse which does not actually affect the basic point. feel free to take it up with a mod and see how you do. Because I don't give a sh!t what you think, and i'm not overly concerned about the temper tantrums.

I made a general comment on the disease based on memory, which turned out to be faulty in a particular, so I, voluntarily, and publically, owned the mistake and corrected as i learned more. If you have a problem with that, well, you have the problem, not me.
 
Parker said:
Here's an experiment for you. Go and find a friend of yours and ask them what the worst illness and injury they have ever had is. Then ask them to describe in detail the mechanism of the illness/injury.
Then match what they say with a medical text book. They will have got a lot of things wrong - because they aren't doctors. They just picked up a few vague snipets of what the doctor said to them and then repeated it (probably incorrectly).
It's the same with Froome
Nice sleight of hand attempt but no, froome and brailsford are not getting a few tinnie winnie details wrong. They do not understand the fundamentals of the disease. more.importantly their actions - froome has had 4 treatments over 2 years, make no sense.


Froome thinks bilharzia is a disease for life. That's not a patient who doesn't know a few details about their disease, it's someone who claims to have a broken leg being seen playing football a week later.
 
The Hitch said:
Nice sleight of hand attempt but no, froome and brailsford are not getting a few tinnie winnie details wrong. They do not understand the fundamentals of the disease. more.importantly their actions - froome has had 4 treatments over 2 years, make no sense.


Froome thinks bilharzia is a disease for life. That's not a patient who doesn't know a few details about their disease, it's someone who claims to have a broken leg being seen playing football a week later.
That bit in bold is my point exactly. You are judging them as though they have the knowledge of a doctor - they don't. All they know about the disease came from an appointment with a doctor. I had a hernia operation once. I didn't really understand what it was then and I still don't. All I know is there was a bulge and they did something with some gauze.

Now if they were making it all up they would get the details right wouldn't they? Because the only source would be looking it up and writing the script themselves.

And repeating the treatment is just a precaution. If there's traces left then better safe than sorry.

Also, thinking that a parasite which is found throughout Africa and beyond is somehow uniform throughout is a little fanciful.
 
Parker said:
That bit in bold is my point exactly. You are judging them as though they have the knowledge of a doctor - they don't.All they know about the disease came from an appointment with a doctor.

An appointment with a doctor?

Froome is on record saying he has had no less than 4 seperate treatments for the disease all of which involved him taking time off his bike and going to Africa.

His soon to be wife is on record saying she was by his side for these treatments and describes them.

Moreover he claims to have had the disease as a kid too?

1 Appointment? For the disease that almost destroyed his career, for which he continues to get treatment for since 2010, for the disease that he thinks he will continue to suffer from for the rest of his life?

Sometimes you really don't think these things through before you post do you?

Now if they were making it all up they would get the details right wouldn't they? Because the only source would be looking it up and writing the script themselves.
.
Maybe maybe not.

That is not nor ever will be an actual argument.

Otherwise anyone who ever got caught doing something wrong would just say "if I was actually at fault I would have tied to cover it up harder wouldn't I".:rolleyes:

Also, thinking that a parasite which is found throughout Africa and beyond is somehow uniform throughout is a little fanciful
You are saying Froome's version of Bilharzia may differ from the ones we have read up on.

Ok then could you show me some sources for this? Show me a study or a book or an article where it says that Bilharzia has different strands and show me the one you think Froome suffers from (the one for which Froome's story would make sense).

Until you do, then that is not a valid argument.

You can't just not do any research at all on the subject and casually fire off theories you have no idea of as if they were actual scientific fact "oh maybe Froome's Bilharzia differs from the others".
Does it. Show me where you read that.

And repeating the treatment is just a precaution. If there's traces left then better safe than sorry.
Based on what? How do you know its a precaution? What has caused you to reach this conclusion.

If it is just a precaution then why does Froome think he is being once again receiving a cure for the real thing?

Schistomasis is a serious disease. Why is Froome saying he has had a relapse of a serious disease if he is just getting a precaution checkup.

And don't tell me that is the same as someone with a hernia operation not knowing how it works. There is a major difference between having a disease and not having it and if Froome thinks he has it then someone somewhere has ****ed up big time.
 
The Hitch said:
An appointment with a doctor?

Froome is on record saying he has had no less than 4 seperate treatments for the disease all of which involved him taking time off his bike and going to Africa.

His soon to be wife is on record saying she was by his side for these treatments and describes them.

Moreover he claims to have had the disease as a kid too?

1 Appointment? For the disease that almost destroyed his career, for which he continues to get treatment for since 2010, for the disease that he thinks he will continue to suffer from for the rest of his life?

Sometimes you really don't think these things through before you post do you?



Maybe maybe not.

That is not nor ever will be an actual argument.

Otherwise anyone who ever got caught doing something wrong would just say "if I was actually at fault I would have tied to cover it up harder wouldn't I".:rolleyes:



You are saying Froome's version of Bilharzia may differ from the ones we have read up on.

Ok then could you show me some sources for this? Show me a study or a book or an article where it says that Bilharzia has different strands and show me the one you think Froome suffers from (the one for which Froome's story would make sense).

Until you do, then that is not a valid argument.

You can't just not do any research at all on the subject and casually fire off theories you have no idea of as if they were actual scientific fact "oh maybe Froome's Bilharzia differs from the others".
Does it. Show me where you read that.



Based on what? How do you know its a precaution? What has caused you to reach this conclusion.

If it is just a precaution then why does Froome think he is being once again receiving a cure for the real thing?

Schistomasis is a serious disease. Why is Froome saying he has had a relapse of a serious disease if he is just getting a precaution checkup.

And don't tell me that is the same as someone with a hernia operation not knowing how it works. There is a major difference between having a disease and not having it and if Froome thinks he has it then someone somewhere has ****ed up big time.
Yes there are different variations of the disease. Even Wikipedia lists five different types of Schistosoma which infect humans and several more that infect animals. Within these types there will be variations too. It's a small creature which exists in its billions, probably thousands of billions across the vast continent of Africa and beyond with a short reproduction cycle. If you think that it will have developed uniformly in all environments in complete contradiction to all evolutionary biology then we will have to just disagree.

It infects around 100 million Africans - not all cases are the same. What you have done is try to homogenize it from scraps you have read and then picked out variations between what Froome had and your model.

And as for doctors. I've yet to have any one of them give me a full lecture on what my illness/injury is. It's always a brush stroke overview and then focus on the treatment. You see to think that Froome had to attend a University medical lecture and sit a test before he was allowed treatment.

You can think that the whole thing was faked as part of some conspiracy if you like but I doubt you'll find many takers outside this forum. After all, plenty of other riders have managed to dope without such an elaborate pantomime. Many on here like mentioning Occam's Razor. Well here the simplest explanation is that an African got a disease that many millions of Africans get.
 
Jun 19, 2009
11,437
0
0
Parker said:
Yes there are different variations of the disease. Even Wikipedia lists five different types of Schistosoma which infect humans and several more that infect animals. Within these types there will be variations too. It's a small creature which exists in its billions, probably thousands of billions across the vast continent of Africa and beyond with a short reproduction cycle. If you think that it will have developed uniformly in all environments in complete contradiction to all evolutionary biology then we will have to just disagree.

It infects around 100 million Africans - not all cases are the same. What you have done is try to homogenize it from scraps you have read and then picked out variations between what Froome had and your model.

And as for doctors. I've yet to have any one of them give me a full lecture on what my illness/injury is. It's always a brush stroke overview and then focus on the treatment. You see to think that Froome had to attend a University medical lecture and sit a test before he was allowed treatment.

You can think that the whole thing was faked as part of some conspiracy if you like but I doubt you'll find many takers outside this forum. After all, plenty of other riders have managed to dope without such an elaborate pantomime.
Who is claiming that?

Thats appears a strawman - and I have a zippo on hand.
I doubt anyone believes the badzhilla is made up - unless you want to show otherwise, thats your conspiracy theory gone.

There is not much doubt he has had badzhilla.
But it is being used by Froome/Sky as the main reason for his transformation. That appears to not stand up to scrutiny.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
But it is being used by Froome/Sky as the main reason for his transformation. That appears to not stand up to scrutiny.
It's part of the reason. General rider development would be another part.

And as for the scrutiny - whose scrutiny? Posters with no scientific or medical qualifications who spend every single day posting saying how everyone is doping? That's not actually scrutiny.

Or by a random doctor who has probably never been in the same country as Froome let alone seen or examined him. Also not really scrutiny.
 
The Dawg is all about tranperancy... :rolleyes:

"It really is important for us and hopefully that's something a new president in the UCI can help us to achieve, which is move past that old image and the baggage from the past and show people that the sport really has turned around since those darkest days," said Froome.

"It is frustrating, but I have got perspective on it and can see it from the fans' point of view and the media's point of view. I too used to follow those races and support those riders, so I can understand where the anger and frustrations are coming from, and it is up to us now to show that we have moved on."
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/15703/Chris-Froome-backs-Brian-Cookson-to-rid-cycling-of-its-old-dope-tarnished-image.aspx#ixzz2ilPgKnUI
 
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
I thought cycling had already cleaned up its image and has been clean since 2011. I guess its double clean now that Cookson is UCI president. :rolleyes:
 
Apr 19, 2010
935
0
0
Tour de France champion Chris Froome (Sky) has backed new UCI president Brian Cookson to rid the sport of its doping culture and usher in a new dawn.

He's a cheeky little ****er isn't he.
 
Jun 19, 2009
11,437
0
0
Parker said:
It's part of the reason. General rider development would be another part.

And as for the scrutiny - whose scrutiny? Posters with no scientific or medical qualifications who spend every single day posting saying how everyone is doping? That's not actually scrutiny.

Or by a random doctor who has probably never been in the same country as Froome let alone seen or examined him. Also not really scrutiny.
More straw.

The highlighted is not a rebuttal - its an attempt at a smear, (seen it before too). I certainly do not think everyone dopes and regardless of the poster they have posted where they got their info.

That your attempted answer is to smear instead of disprove or educate is telling.
 
Parker said:
Yes there are different variations of the disease. Even Wikipedia lists five different types of Schistosoma which infect humans and several more that infect animals. Within these types there will be variations too. It's a small creature which exists in its billions, probably thousands of billions across the vast continent of Africa and beyond with a short reproduction cycle. If you think that it will have developed uniformly in all environments in complete contradiction to all evolutionary biology then we will have to just disagree.
If there was a type of Bilharzia which produced eggs that hatch and grow into adults, inside the human body maybe one of the hundreds of health websites about it would have mentioned that, instead of explicitly stating that it does not happen with Bilharzia.

Once again, do you have any links. I have offered you links where it says explicitly that with Bilharzia, eggs CANNOT, hatch inside the body.

If you want to claim there is a variant that does that, you HAVE to provide a link.



. You see to think that Froome had to attend a University medical lecture and sit a test before he was allowed treatment.
What a strawman.

No Froome doesn't need a doctorate in medicine to know whether he HAS it or NOT.

Do you understand that difference? Its pretty simple.

According to you Froome doesn't have Bilharzia any more and is just going for a checkup.
According to Froome he does have the Bilharzia and needs to go to get treatment for it.

To suggest one needs to have any specific qualifications to understand from a doctor the difference between having a disease and not having one, is Bull ****.

You can think that the whole thing was faked as part of some conspiracy if you like but I doubt you'll find many takers outside this forum. After all, plenty of other riders have managed to dope without such an elaborate pantomime. Many on here like mentioning Occam's Razor. Well here the simplest explanation is that an African got a disease that many millions of Africans get.
Troll strawman. Never said any of that.
 
thehog said:
the sceptic said:
I thought cycling had already cleaned up its image and has been clean since 2011. I guess its double clean now that Cookson is UCI president. :rolleyes:
happychappy said:
Tour de France champion Chris Froome (Sky) has backed new UCI president Brian Cookson to rid the sport of its doping culture and usher in a new dawn.

He's a cheeky little ****er isn't he.
Oh dear. :rolleyes:
 
Apr 20, 2012
4,238
0
0
It would be nice when journalists like Shane Stokes and Paul Kimmage were pointed to these very contradicting thingies on the Bad Sally story. Does it affect red or white blood cells? Or both? Or none?

Why do the collective cycling media accept the Bad Sally story for what it is? Havent they learned from the past?

Why is a former Bad Sally victim suddenly the best GC rider in the world?

Bad Sally.

Pretty silly story.
 
Feb 10, 2010
8,095
0
0
Parker said:
It's part of the reason. General rider development would be another part.
False. If his domination was the result of "general rider development" we'd see frankly amazing domination at lower ranked races all the way back to South Africa. There were none. Zero. His trip to Agile would have clearly identified him. But it didn't.

Parker said:
Posters with no scientific or medical qualifications who spend every single day posting saying how everyone is doping? That's not actually scrutiny.

Or by a random doctor who has probably never been in the same country as Froome let alone seen or examined him. Also not really scrutiny.
Nice two-fer personal attack here.

We're forbidden from using and deriving conclusions from the widely available public health reports on badzilla? Because we aren't badzilla-specialist-MD's of some secret special kind whose statements you do trust?

Based on your beliefs then, those public health specialists who aren't MD's have no business authoring treatment research.

I could keep going, but the point is this argument is a total failure.
 
May 26, 2009
2,762
0
0
thehog said:
Time to usher in a new dawn where mid pack riders can blow up dirty dopers times up Ventoux :rolleyes:

Not sure I like this new dawn.

Like a zombie movie.
Well in the 'new' Zombie movies they do move alot faster than the Zombies in the old movies. Maybe that's where Dave Brailsford got his 'clean riders can beat dopers times on climbs' from, I mean if stuff like that happens in the movies it can happen in real life too! :)
 
BYOP88 said:
Well in the 'new' Zombie movies they do move alot faster than the Zombies in the old movies. Maybe that's where Dave Brailsford got his 'clean riders can beat dopers times on climbs' from, I mean if stuff like that happens in the movies it can happen in real life too! :)
Zombie movie, you have to watch this trailer!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2cS5Fv5xIQ

I think it was produced by Brailsford Productions.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Who is claiming that?

Thats appears a strawman - and I have a zippo on hand.
I doubt anyone believes the badzhilla is made up - unless you want to show otherwise, thats your conspiracy theory gone.

There is not much doubt he has had badzhilla.
But it is being used by Froome/Sky as the main reason for his transformation. That appears to not stand up to scrutiny.
If people were doubting it as a reason for the improvement then they would focus on the disease itself.

But they are focussing Froome's testimony of having it. The implication being that he did't actually have it.

(PS my personal view - anyone who bleats on about 'strawman' isn't interested in open conversation, just arguing. It's a lacklustre gambit of someone devoid ideas grasping for a ready made defence mechanism. Who ever uses the word in real life?)
 
Jul 3, 2009
17,039
1
0
happychappy said:
Tour de France champion Chris Froome (Sky) has backed new UCI president Brian Cookson to rid the sport of its doping culture and usher in a new dawn.

He's a cheeky little ****er isn't he.
Just a winner :cool:

Will not be doing a "Wiggins" anytime soon.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M The Clinic 34
Similar threads
Tour de Cleans?

ASK THE COMMUNITY