- May 18, 2009
I have an agenda? Of course I do, but it happens to coincide with what I think regardless of the circumstances. At least I can admit it....you have to stick to your "opinion" that roids don't give much benefit because that would start jamming your agenda. But you have zero proof, just zingers slung at my opinion as being "baloney".Dr. Maserati said:You think 'ChrisE' has a fair point?
Of course he doesn't - he has an agenda, please do not confuse the two.
That is why he mentions riders names as opposed to debating the information at hand.
I realize this comes across as abrasive, but why should I (and you) sit on my hands and not encourage a mature and proper debate on the information.
*Snip remaining circular "opinion" babble*
It's easy to say somebody has an agenda then dismiss what they have to say, regardless of logic. It's almost as bad as putting somebody on ignore, so I have to give you credit for not doing that.
I do agree with you that roids give advantage up to cardiovascular limit, as I alluded to upthread by saying they compliment eachother because EPO would enable the body to reap the full benefit of that increased strength. Thus I obviously believe both used in combo with eachother gives far greater advantages than alone. This is proven out by the cocktail of PED's shown to be used by cyclists, and by our logic.
But, and this is the final thing I will say about this unless you bring something new to the table, I do not believe ie my opinion is that it would be very difficult, maybe even impossible, for somebody to consistently beat the competition even if those two drugs were taken independently. I have no scientific proof of this other than my experience, and you don't either to have the opposite opinion (inre to roids). All you have is your agenda.