Boring GC! / EPO

Rude Dog said:

Pertaining to EPO:
1. What makes anyone believe LA would not or does not use performance
enhancing drugs? Because he said so, or because he hasn't come up positive?

Can we back up just a second here? I, personally, like reasons TO
believe things as opposed to reasons NOT to believe something. The
distinction is huge.

What makes you believe you don't have a colony of Plutonians living in
your underwear?

See? We can say anything at all. Never mind that there is no evidence
that Plutonians DO live in your underwear, I DEMAND proof that they do not.

Looking for reasons NOT to believe a thing instead of vice versa
indicates a desire to believe it. And if you want to believe, then no
evidence is necessary and no evidence to the contrary is enough.
Religions get started this way.

--

--------------------

Remove CLOTHES to reply

What about Basso as a contender?

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

Tim Lines wrote in message <5zVJc.89238$JR4.49189@attbi_s54>...

Quoted message said:

Rude Dog said:

Pertaining to EPO:
1. What makes anyone believe LA would not or does not use performance
enhancing drugs? Because he said so, or because he hasn't come up

positive?

Quoted message said:

Can we back up just a second here? I, personally, like reasons TO
believe things as opposed to reasons NOT to believe something. The
distinction is huge.

What makes you believe you don't have a colony of Plutonians living in
your underwear?

See? We can say anything at all. Never mind that there is no evidence
that Plutonians DO live in your underwear, I DEMAND proof that they do not.

Looking for reasons NOT to believe a thing instead of vice versa
indicates a desire to believe it. And if you want to believe, then no
evidence is necessary and no evidence to the contrary is enough.
Religions get started this way.

I agree that there should be proof. Lemond is an [censored] for spouting off.
Armstrong is also an [censored] for saying he let basso win. If you're going
to let someone win because you've lost the killer instinct and are too lame
to sprint, then keep your mouth shut and let them have the glory. Armstrong
thinks he's more capable than he is in those situations and he taints the
very victory he "gives" when he talks about bequeathing it. I wouldn't care
less if Armstrong got caught now if they do find real proof.

Rude Dog said:

3. LA could easily have a doctor's prescription for such performance
enhancing drugs to keep his cancer at bay and his immune system peaked.
Certainly a valid reason to use such drugs.

ya know what? recent findings suggest that patients that use EPO to
recover from chemo are more likely to get cancer again.

"gym gravity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Rude Dog said:

3. LA could easily have a doctor's prescription for such performance
enhancing drugs to keep his cancer at bay and his immune system peaked.
Certainly a valid reason to use such drugs.

ya know what? recent findings suggest that patients that use EPO to
recover from chemo are more likely to get cancer again.

Can you give us a cite to that? Any indication that it may cause onsets of
first cancers? Thanks.

Some clueless troll wrote:

"Rude Dog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Pertaining to EPO:

Quoted message said:

3. LA could easily have a doctor's prescription for such performance
enhancing drugs to keep his cancer at bay and his immune system peaked.
Certainly a valid reason to use such drugs.

Hardly, since EPO would do nothing for one's immune system. It is only used
adjunctively in cancer treatment because the toxicity of chemotherapeutic
drugs reduces red cell production. Once you're off chemotherapy and have
restored your red cell mass, there's no legitimate reason and no benefit
(from a health/survival perspective) to keep taking EPO.

Andy Coggan

"Rude Dog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

5. It would not be difficult to hide the use of performance enhancing

drugs

Quoted message said:

if you only raced a few months each season.

I believe it is more likely that LA uses performance enhancing drugs

during

Quoted message said:

his build up for the tour, (but not during competition) than not.

How often he races has nothing to do with when he is tested. Ullrich got
busted with an out of competition test, Lance has been subjected to them as
well. You have no basis for these beliefs.

-T

B. Lafferty said:

"gym gravity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Rude Dog said:

3. LA could easily have a doctor's prescription for such performance
enhancing drugs to keep his cancer at bay and his immune system peaked.
Certainly a valid reason to use such drugs.

ya know what? recent findings suggest that patients that use EPO to
recover from chemo are more likely to get cancer again.

Can you give us a cite to that? Any indication that it may cause onsets of
first cancers? Thanks.

Can't ya look it up for yourself? I can't be bothered. My wife is a
Heme/Onc fellow and occasionally Amgen sponsors a dinner where spouses
are invited. They make us listen to a talk about this drug or that,
while we eat steak and drink quality wine. Often they talk about EPO.
At the most recent one about a month ago, the Amgen rep was fending off
questions about this latest study. I was too drunk to notice the
authors, or to care about the difference between
recurrence/metastasis/mortality and whatnot, and when I quickly looked
at medline today just before posting, I didn't see anything in the first
10 titles that looked promising. call me lazy. call me too lazy to
spellcheck too.

Andy Coggan said:

Some clueless troll wrote:

"Rude Dog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Pertaining to EPO:

Quoted message said:

3. LA could easily have a doctor's prescription for such performance
enhancing drugs to keep his cancer at bay and his immune system peaked.
Certainly a valid reason to use such drugs.

Hardly, since EPO would do nothing for one's immune system. It is only used
adjunctively in cancer treatment because the toxicity of chemotherapeutic
drugs reduces red cell production. Once you're off chemotherapy and have
restored your red cell mass, there's no legitimate reason and no benefit
(from a health/survival perspective) to keep taking EPO.

Andy Coggan

Neupogen might.

"Rude Dog" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just as I stated, second day in the hills, Lance would dust everyone, so
predictable it is... well boring!

However, nice ride by Basso! And as I stated before, the Tour is not
boring, just the GC competition.

Pertaining to EPO:
1. What makes anyone believe LA would not or does not use performance
enhancing drugs? Because he said so, or because he hasn't come up

positive?

Quoted message said:

2. LA stated himself his recovery was not miracle, simply he had the best
doctors, i.e. medicine.

3. LA could easily have a doctor's prescription for such performance
enhancing drugs to keep his cancer at bay and his immune system peaked.
Certainly a valid reason to use such drugs.

4. I believe even for Lance his recovery from cancer was quite remarkable
and I think Greg Lemond's observations are logical. Didn't LA go from not
being able to ride out of his driveway to winning the tour in under 18
months?

5. It would not be difficult to hide the use of performance enhancing

drugs

Quoted message said:

if you only raced a few months each season.

I believe it is more likely that LA uses performance enhancing drugs

during

Quoted message said:

his build up for the tour, (but not during competition) than not.

It's called the "presumption of innocence". It's one of the foundations upon
which our country was built. You don't convict someone on rumor and
innuendo.

Dave

Quoted message said:

4. I believe even for Lance his recovery from cancer was quite remarkable
and I think Greg Lemond's observations are logical. Didn't LA go from not
being able to ride out of his driveway to winning the tour in under 18
months?

Rude Dog's 4th point gives me hope after all.

Tony said:

Tim Lines wrote in message <5zVJc.89238$JR4.49189@attbi_s54>...

Quoted message said:

Rude Dog said:

Pertaining to EPO:
1. What makes anyone believe LA would not or does not use performance
enhancing drugs? Because he said so, or because he hasn't come up

positive?

Quoted message said:

Can we back up just a second here? I, personally, like reasons TO
believe things as opposed to reasons NOT to believe something. The
distinction is huge.

What makes you believe you don't have a colony of Plutonians living in
your underwear?

See? We can say anything at all. Never mind that there is no evidence
that Plutonians DO live in your underwear, I DEMAND proof that they do not.

Looking for reasons NOT to believe a thing instead of vice versa
indicates a desire to believe it. And if you want to believe, then no
evidence is necessary and no evidence to the contrary is enough.
Religions get started this way.

I agree that there should be proof. Lemond is an [censored] for spouting off.
Armstrong is also an [censored] for saying he let basso win. If you're going
to let someone win because you've lost the killer instinct and are too lame
to sprint, then keep your mouth shut and let them have the glory. Armstrong
thinks he's more capable than he is in those situations and he taints the
very victory he "gives" when he talks about bequeathing it. I wouldn't care
less if Armstrong got caught now if they do find real proof.

I can understand that point of view. I've seen 2 quotes from Lance. In
one of them he comes off like an ass and in the other he did not. I
wonder what order he said those things in and whether he realizes
himself how ridiculous the quote you're talking about sounded.

--

--------------------

Remove CLOTHES to reply

Quoted message said:

Pertaining to EPO:
1. What makes anyone believe LA would not or does not use performance
enhancing drugs? Because he said so, or because he hasn't come up

positive?

He is using EPO. Almsot everyone is juiced. Like Lemond, I noticed the big
change in 1989/90. There were lots of guys who suddenly became very fast.
More than a few riders in their prime suddenly couldn't win a thing. Gianni
Bugno was very vocal on this.

Know what though? I don't care. Being juiced doesn't make this race easy,
nor does it diminish the accomplishment of winning it.

Even Eddy was juiced (steriods - he was caught).

Quoted message said:

2. LA stated himself his recovery was not miracle, simply he had the best
doctors, i.e. medicine.

Greg is the only one saying LA's recovery was a miracle. WTF does Greg know
about medical miracles? He did not operate on himself, he was a patient. He
wasn't with LA during his recovery. I mean, LA did not come back overnight.
It was hard and his progress at the time was well documented.

Quoted message said:

3. LA could easily have a doctor's prescription for such performance
enhancing drugs to keep his cancer at bay and his immune system peaked.
Certainly a valid reason to use such drugs.

Sure. Anything is possible.

Quoted message said:

4. I believe even for Lance his recovery from cancer was quite remarkable
and I think Greg Lemond's observations are logical. Didn't LA go from not
being able to ride out of his driveway to winning the tour in under 18
months?

He was riding a trainer during chemo. He had no energy and lost lots of
muscle mass.

Quoted message said:

5. It would not be difficult to hide the use of performance enhancing

drugs

Quoted message said:

if you only raced a few months each season.

Drugs may have helped him catch up. Maybe it was hard to rear himself off.

Quoted message said:

I believe it is more likely that LA uses performance enhancing drugs

during

Quoted message said:

his build up for the tour, (but not during competition) than not.

He doesn't race that much. This is possible.

hol99 said:

It's called the "presumption of innocence". It's one of the
foundations upon which our country was built. You don't convict
someone on rumor and innuendo.

There's no conviction, just an accusation. Is that against the rules, also?

"Kyle Legate" wrote...

Quoted message said:

There's no conviction, just an accusation.

Really, just an opinion.