What changed with Armstrong Post-Cancer?

Page 9 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 9, 2009
583
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Well Stephens wont be happy with you as you make the claim that LA doped - but yes, there are many other factors at play here too.

Huh? I do not deny Armstrong doped. I'm just somewhat more skeptical about "evidence" against him than many here. My gut feeling is he did/does basically the same thing as everyone else, and if he benefitted from it more than the others did, then that's fine with me. I find it no more unfair than friends of mine getting much faster than me on the exact same training programs. There is great diversity amongst the species.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
stephens said:
Huh? I do not deny Armstrong doped. I'm just somewhat more skeptical about "evidence" against him than many here. My gut feeling is he did/does basically the same thing as everyone else, and if he benefitted from it more than the others did, then that's fine with me. I find it no more unfair than friends of mine getting much faster than me on the exact same training programs. There is great diversity amongst the species.

Ok - thank you for clarifying - you are entitled to your opinion on the evidence against LA.

But I disagree completely with your assertion on taking PED's - it is not that it is unfair, immoral, cheating, fraud - for me it is because this now 'forces' others to do the same in order to compete, and they are then putting their health (or lives) in the hands of untested PED's by people unqualified to do so.

However we have debated this particular point on a different thread.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Never said you did BPC - that responce was to Stephens, which is why I quoted him, thanks.

Looks like BPC has another sockpuppet and forgot to log in under the right username
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Dr. Maserati said:
Never said you did BPC - that responce was to Stephens, which is why I quoted him, thanks.

I flagged the post by BPC and sent it into the moderators. Hopefully they will show some backbone and ban the guy. It is obvious that he has multiple user names.

The End
 
May 9, 2009
583
0
0
For the record, I don't know who BPC is and all views expressed are my own. I post here, on RoadBikeReview and on BikeForums (under the name "pacificaslim" on those two forums). I've been pretty consistent in my opinions. I'm old enough that Hinault was my first cycling hero but not so old that I remember Eddy riding. I'm not involved in pro-cycling or the bike industry in any manner. My degree is in Philosophy not Medicine so all I know about blood comes from research I've done trying to make sense of my own health problems. (I will admit that I'd rather have a 50% hematocrit than the 35% I have at the moment! it makes climbing especially hard...)
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
stephens said:
For the record, I don't know who BPC is and all views expressed are my own. I post here, on RoadBikeReview and on BikeForums (under the name "pacificaslim" on those two forums). I've been pretty consistent in my opinions. I'm old enough that Hinault was my first cycling hero but not so old that I remember Eddy riding. I'm not involved in pro-cycling or the bike industry in any manner. My degree is in Philosophy not Medicine so all I know about blood comes from research I've done trying to make sense of my own health problems. (I will admit that I'd rather have a 50% hematocrit than the 35% I have at the moment! it makes climbing especially hard...)

Firstly - i do not believe you are sockpuppet - either of BPC or anyone else for that matter and this is the only bike forum that I am a member of.

While I disagree with part of your viewpoint I respect your opinions - but would prefer to get this thread back on topic - but if you have any views on anything else we brought up by all means feel free to bring it up in the relevant thread )if you can locate it) or indeed start a new one.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
stephens said:
For the record, I don't know who BPC is and all views expressed are my own. I post here, on RoadBikeReview and on BikeForums (under the name "pacificaslim" on those two forums). I've been pretty consistent in my opinions. I'm old enough that Hinault was my first cycling hero but not so old that I remember Eddy riding. I'm not involved in pro-cycling or the bike industry in any manner. My degree is in Philosophy not Medicine so all I know about blood comes from research I've done trying to make sense of my own health problems. (I will admit that I'd rather have a 50% hematocrit than the 35% I have at the moment! it makes climbing especially hard...)

I remember "pacificaslim" from RBR.

While I am sure you a good and well intentioned person I did not agree with you there either.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
This is getting old. Stephens to the ignore (BPC, Oldnell, WonderLick and now Stephens). Anyone know what the capacity of the ignore list?? I think I'm running out of room...
 
Sep 10, 2009
16
0
0
I am new to the forum. Have been reading all the posts with much interest. I checked out the link recommended by sars, and was surprised to see that Eddy Mercx was caught doping. My impression is that he is still considered to be a great champion and won the Tour de France 5 times.

I do not support doping in any form. I wish it didn't exist in any sport, but I do not live in a perfect world. However, I do believe in the premise that a person is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I do not respect any person who publishes an article in the paper about any person with their personal speculation or interpretation - - I don't care what initials are beside their name. It would be like a neighbour of mine telling a story to the paper that they think I have done something criminal without a shred of proof, without a police investigation, but perhaps because they didn't like me. When we go down that road, we all lose our fundamental human rights. Free speech is one thing, deliberately trying to smear a person in a newspaper and not going through the proper channels of reporting something to the authorities first, is another.

Cycling is not the only sport that needs cleaning up. Have any of the people posting on this site written to WADA, UCI, USADA or any other organizations with their "suspicions"? If so, what was their response? I am curious.
 
Read 10 pages and you actually get a page or two of great input. Not quite as destructive as the usual overnighter.
I found some of the links and stats, fascinating. Certainly outweighing the troll smokescreen.
Dr M: You appear a matyr of self-restraint and moderation!
Keep up the good work, all.........well almost all!
 
Sep 10, 2009
16
0
0
Most reports of Lance's cancer that I have read was that he did not just have testicular cancer which is actually more common in cyclist's than any other sport. From what I have read on that subject it has something to do with pressure on the testicles and prostate gland while riding a bike, i.e. inflammation, circulation, etc. and the ingestion of serious amounts of car pollution out on the road. He also had lung and brain cancer. This could be erroneous information, but I have read this in a magazine article and saw/heard it in a documentary.

From my experience with friends who have had cancer, some who have died and somewho have survived, steroids are used as part of the treatment, ie. prednisone (sp) to protect the lining of the lungs during chemotherapy, other steroids designed to shrink the swelling caused by tumours so that critical arteries are not cut off by the tumour. Of the fortunate few who survived, their bodies did change including muscle mass, fat ratio to lean. Their weight returned to pre-cancer state, but their bodies were physically different to look at. The ones who survived made drastic changes to their diets and lifestyles. Most of my friends who survived became almost fanatical when it came to ingesting or taking any medications of any kind into their system including herbal supplements and even basic aspirin.

Perhaps he changed his lifestyle including what he ate. Maybe he stopped eating McDonald's and switched to a more healthy way of eating. I remember looking at a picture of a breakfast set up for Silence Lotto prior to the 2008 TdF when Popovich first started training with them. I am a fan of his and was interested in their website. There wasn't a vegetable or fruit visible. Nothing but deep fried puff pastry stuff, greasy meat, etc. I know cyclists burn lots of calories, but surely a balanced and healthy diet will make a difference in the long run. I understand that Astana had an excellent nutritionist on their team. From what I have read, during the Discovery Channel years, they had a top notch nutritionist. If you have a large budget for medical staff, nutritionists and the like, surely that would improve a cyclists performance? I find it hard to believe that person who had a 20% chance of survival if you read the reports, and did in fact survive, and stay in remission for this long, would pollute their body. So we can surmise, suppose and say anything, but we really do not know for a fact.

A lot of cyclists went to be coached by Ferrari and he other guy, Ciccione (sp). From what I have read about them, not all of their client's were involved in their doping regimes and they even said so when interviewed. They offered it, but it was the cyclist's choice. (Also extremely expensive). They also did a lot of training about positioning on the bike, how to get the best power out of their legs on flats and hills, and designed training and exercise programs for each individual who hired them depending upon their physical attributes and abililities. They were scientists as well as sport coaches.

It's like saying that because I went to Dr. Morgenthaler for a female physical check up, I had an abortion because that is all he ever did. Yes, he is famous because of the legal issues surrounding that subject, but he was also one of the world's best gynecologists.

I agree with the person who defined "hearsay". Evidence, Evidence. I want to see it to believe it. Not read it from some hack newspaper who only want to sell their product. I want several independent sources to confirm that evidence and from sources that I respect, and which are independent and do not have any axe to grind.

This is not because I am a Lance Armstrong fan - - I am not. I used to be, but no longer and that has nothing to do with the possibility that he doped or that he didn't or doesn't. It is because of his total lack of graciousness surrounding his behaviour towards Contador. I cannot possibly imagine what it must have been like for Alberto Contador.

But he deserves the same respect as any one else on this planet. Besides, this forum seems to be filled with people who are judging a person without even knowing him personally or intimately. All we see is a human being who has faults and failings, and we read stuff which may or may not be true, as he has become a celebrity. People who cannot stand him probably are jealous. He has too much and achieved too much, is arrogant and he is the kind of person who people either dislike intensely or admire very much. He does not inspire any insipid or wishy-washing feelings.

I for one will continue to watch the TdF and follow cycling, because there is nothing more exciting and there is no sport for me that demonstrates the herculean effort that these atheletes are required to do day in and day out. It boggles the mind that any person can ride a bicycle for 21 days, maybe 7 hours per day without dying. The amazing strength that it takes emotionally, physically and psychologically blows me away.
 
Jul 13, 2009
425
0
0
gloryb141 said:
I agree with the person who defined "hearsay". Evidence, Evidence. I want to see it to believe it. Not read it from some hack newspaper who only want to sell their product. I want several independent sources to confirm that evidence and from sources that I respect, and which are independent and do not have any axe to grind.
Fact is that Armstrong tested positive several times for EPO. If you can find fault with the science at work there, good for you, but I have never seen anything discrediting it. I think the science is sound and it found EPO, end of story.

As for the broader picture - Dr. Ferrari, the testimonies by a soigneur and a teammate, the direct evidence given by Betsy Andreu, etc. - they are all evidence, and quite damning evidence indeed. Convincing enough, but if you absolutely, positively need a gun smoking so much that it can be seen from Paris to Texas, read this.

Link was given in another thread by Race Radio.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
gloryb141 said:
Most reports of Lance's cancer that I have read was that he did not just have testicular cancer which is actually more common in cyclist's than any other sport. From what I have read on that subject it has something to do with pressure on the testicles and prostate gland while riding a bike, i.e. inflammation, circulation, etc. and the ingestion of serious amounts of car pollution out on the road.......

Welcome to the forum - all your points here have been carefully gone over in detail on various doping threads about Lance Armstrong.
There is a search button on the top of the Clinic thread that will help you locate it.

If you wish to refute anything written there it is best to bring it up on that thread.

And I have actually met him - not intimately :eek: - although his attention to detail and single-minded focus were apparent I will say i found him approachable and friendly.

I have never read or heard that cyclists were more prone to testicular cancer - that could make an interesting thread on its own, can you remember what publication it was written in or the documentary?
 
Sep 10, 2009
5
0
0
I would just like to comment that if they are going after Armstrong (yet again) then I hope the gentlemen/experts who brought this up are also closely looking at other top riders.
Just for instance Contador - who oddly has not raced at all since Le Tour and not even at his home event. Perhaps Wiggins who suddenly became amazingly good and who didn't post his pre-Tour results only the Tour ones.....there are several others to look at also.
Personally I think they are clean but no doubt a great drama will erupt once again. I think that if Armstrong was doping back in the day when everyone else was - then for goodness sake he was still the best. I wish everyone would grow up about this and that we can enjoy racing once again without the witch hunts.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
teresa said:
I would just like to comment that if they are going after Armstrong (yet again) then I hope the gentlemen/experts who brought this up are also closely looking at other top riders.
Just for instance Contador - who oddly has not raced at all since Le Tour and not even at his home event. Perhaps Wiggins who suddenly became amazingly good and who didn't post his pre-Tour results only the Tour ones.....there are several others to look at also.
Personally I think they are clean but no doubt a great drama will erupt once again. I think that if Armstrong was doping back in the day when everyone else was - then for goodness sake he was still the best. I wish everyone would grow up about this and that we can enjoy racing once again without the witch hunts.

Seriously, there is a "Lance Fanboy/Fangirl Handbook" they pass out before they let you people post, isn't there?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
teresa said:
I would just like to comment that if they are going after Armstrong (yet again) then I hope the gentlemen/experts who brought this up are also closely looking at other top riders.
Just for instance Contador - who oddly has not raced at all since Le Tour and not even at his home event. Perhaps Wiggins who suddenly became amazingly good and who didn't post his pre-Tour results only the Tour ones.....there are several others to look at also.
Personally I think they are clean but no doubt a great drama will erupt once again. I think that if Armstrong was doping back in the day when everyone else was - then for goodness sake he was still the best. I wish everyone would grow up about this and that we can enjoy racing once again without the witch hunts.

I know this is your first post - so welcome - but again I would suggest checking some of the threads in the Clinic as there has been plenty of discussion on both Contador and Wiggins, including his profile from the Giro!

Also not everyone was doping even back in the 90's - although those that didnt were at a serious disadvantage and also different teams could afford different 'medical programmes' - but again all these details have been well covered in other threads.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5
0
0
ME - OW!
Sorry to disappoint you Mr Thoughtforfood but I am NOT a Lance fan - I'm a George Hincapie fan.
Judge not etc....
But have a good day none-the-less.
:)
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
teresa said:
I would just like to comment that if they are going after Armstrong (yet again) then I hope the gentlemen/experts who brought this up are also closely looking at other top riders.
Just for instance Contador - who oddly has not raced at all since Le Tour and not even at his home event. Perhaps Wiggins who suddenly became amazingly good and who didn't post his pre-Tour results only the Tour ones.....there are several others to look at also.
Personally I think they are clean but no doubt a great drama will erupt once again. I think that if Armstrong was doping back in the day when everyone else was - then for goodness sake he was still the best. I wish everyone would grow up about this and that we can enjoy racing once again without the witch hunts.

I agree with the Dr. There has been plenty of speculation about other riders, particularly Wiggins and Contador. With both Wiggins and Armstrong, they have openly invited public scrutiny by releasing their blood profiles. I doubt that this is a good PR move, particularly with Armstrong's results being SO suspect, and Vaughters definitely did not want Wiggins to release his results. But yet they invited the scrutiny and the comments by releasing their results. Contador has wisely not done this and hence all the pundits can comment on are his amazing results and links with Operation Puerto years ago. Not much solid evidence there. Armstrong on the other hand has plenty of solid evidence which is supported by his recent blood profiles during the TdF. He is also such an outspoken and polarizing figure that he is going to attract stronger polar opposites as supporters and detractors.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
teresa said:
ME - OW!
Sorry to disappoint you Mr Thoughtforfood but I am NOT a Lance fan - I'm a George Hincapie fan.
Judge not etc....
But have a good day none-the-less.
:)

...oh, well that makes ALL the difference in the world...:rolleyes:

Funny, your diatribe could have been copied and pasted from the first post of one of a hundred Lance Fanboy/Fangirls, and yet you are not a fan...amazing!
 
Jul 13, 2009
425
0
0
Also, and I apologise for repeating myself here, Armstrong has been presented/presented himself as the frontrunner of a kind of 'new cycling' - no doping and more efficient training methods. The idea that Armstrong trains and prepares better has been extensively argued against on this board. So it's not just a focus on this one rider, it's the concept he himself has put forward that many contributors, including me, don't believe in. The old caricature that 'Armstrong trains and the old generation of doped europros use EPO' is being given the final deathblow here, as far as it was still alive.

The strong backlash against Armstrong can only be understood in the light of how cycling developed since 1998 and what role he played. It's not as simple as a bunch of fans against a bunch of haters.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I am just wondering, is Lance racing in some Tour de France that I don't know about? Because, it is starting to look a lot like July in here the past week.
 
Thoughtforfood said:
I am just wondering, is Lance racing in some Tour de France that I don't know about? Because, it is starting to look a lot like July in here the past week.

No, just enjoy watching a clean BPC for the second straight day out front riding tempo against a bunch of know dopes(sic - dopers). Praying for the second coming of Martin Jackson won't make it July either.
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
gloryb141 said:
Most reports of Lance's cancer that I have read was that he did not just have testicular cancer which is actually more common in cyclist's than any other sport. From what I have read on that subject it has something to do with pressure on the testicles and prostate gland while riding a bike, i.e. inflammation, circulation, etc. and the ingestion of serious amounts of car pollution out on the road. He also had lung and brain cancer. This could be erroneous information, but I have read this in a magazine article and saw/heard it in a documentary.

He just had testicular cancer, but it had metastasized (or spread) to his lungs and brain. There is no evidence that cycling is linked with testicular or prostatic cancer to the best of my knowledge. Do you have links to this statement? Perineal pressure can cause urethral/urinary problems, hence the number of cut-out saddles, but not cancer.

gloryb141 said:
A lot of cyclists went to be coached by Ferrari and he other guy, Ciccione (sp).

No - Armstrong had exclusive access to Ferrari with select members of the US Postal/Discovery Team.

gloryb141 said:
I agree with the person who defined "hearsay". Evidence, Evidence. I want to see it to believe it. Not read it from some hack newspaper who only want to sell their product. I want several independent sources to confirm that evidence and from sources that I respect, and which are independent and do not have any axe to grind.

Good luck with that. Unless you are on the Biological Passport committee or supervising professional cyclists 24/7, then you'll have to make do with what is released to the media.

gloryb141 said:
But he deserves the same respect as any one else on this planet. Besides, this forum seems to be filled with people who are judging a person without even knowing him personally or intimately. All we see is a human being who has faults and failings, and we read stuff which may or may not be true, as he has become a celebrity. People who cannot stand him probably are jealous. He has too much and achieved too much, is arrogant and he is the kind of person who people either dislike intensely or admire very much. He does not inspire any insipid or wishy-washing feelings.

The jealousy card - are you kidding? He is definitely polarizing, but why do people produce the jealousy card when someone criticizes Armstrong? This is just bizarre IMO. If any of us were a professional cyclist, then there might be some jealousy involved (but doubtful). But the majority of us are not professional cyclists, we're just fans who enjoy the sport (despite some of its ugliness). I cannot fathom how someone can construe jealousy as a reason for our criticisms. Additionally, he is a celebrity and it is an image that he has garnered himself. As a celebrity and a famous person, he is open to comment based on what is presented to us through the media and his own PR machine.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
elapid said:
No - Armstrong had exclusive access to Ferrari with select members of the US Postal/Discovery Team.
The most notable thing about Ferrari is just how many of his riders got popped for/are suspected dopers. His list of riders reads like a who's who of doping over the years.

Moser
Rominger
Berzin
Argentin
Furlan
Bugno
Tonkov
Olano
Gotti
Chiappucci
Bortolami
Simeoni
Sinkewitz
Mazzoleni
Vinokorouv

But I'm sure Lance was the exception. :cool: