Armstrong doped?

Mansmind said:

Okay Mr. Holmes! Now unless I'm sadly mistaken, Armstrong had surgery, AND chemo.. before the brain tumor was ever discovered. "Testicular" cancer, remember?!? He had more than one cancer surgery, how hard is that to understand?

Read the post from above. The translation from Lemonde. Guilty. End of story.

whiteboytrash said:

Read the post from above. The translation from Lemonde. Guilty. End of story.

I did read it, and he may be...but I don't think this "story" proves it. Actually, my opinion is that he did (or has). Too much smoke for no fire. Still, there's no real proof.

The fact is, the more I read about this stuff, it seems apparent to me that basically all of them dope. You think Jan came in right behind a doping Armstrong so many times clean?? Not likely. Again no proof of any of that ...so it doesn't matter. Just a bunch of opinions.

It would be nice to have the sport clean, but with the present methods and the climate regarding profits of sponsors.. it doesn't appear to be an obtainable goal.

Say Bidon said:

Yet, during a September 21, 2004, telephone conversation with Greg LeMond, Stephanie McIlvain had said that if called to testify, she would repeat what she had heard on October 26, 1996 in the Indianapolis hospital. The three-time Tour winner recorded the conversation. In that conversation, Stephanie McIlvain told Lemond“If I’m called, I’ll do it (…). Because I’m not going to lie. You know, I was in that room, I heard.” The tape was introduced as evidence.

Three other people were with Lance Armstrong on October 28, 1996: his then girlfriend, Lisa Sheilds; Chris Carmichael, his first trainer; and the latter’s wife, Paige. None of the three were called to testify by Armstrong’s lawyer, nor were the operating physicians, Craig Nichols and Scott Shapiro.

[last three paragraphs deleted]

The three other people were not called upon by SCA Promotions either. If SCA had a solid case, and remember they lost, they would have called upon the doctor. There was a good reason they did not call upon the doctors.

I don't remember the tape being introduced as evidence. But even going beyond that is the fact the doctor never asked if he used them during his career. Thise drugs are used in cancer treatment. I am not sure about growth hormones though.

This is another case of things being twisted out of porportion..... The anti-Lances need to come to grips with the fact that LA was the best TDF rider of all time......

Remember if you suggest that Merckx was..... He was a convicted 3 time doper. Merckx is the greatest sporting fraud of all time in the sportsworld. Merckx may never have won a race without dope.

wolfix said:

Maybe the journalists should ask themselves and dig up a story as to why the Frech have had no TDF contenders since the mid 80's......

They do that every week and no the story is not old, it's not about the medicine he took during the cancer treatment it's about the time before that.

Mansmind said:

I did read it, and he may be...but I don't think this "story" proves it. Actually, my opinion is that he did (or has). Too much smoke for no fire. Still, there's no real proof.

The fact is, the more I read about this stuff, it seems apparent to me that basically all of them dope. You think Jan came in right behind a doping Armstrong so many times clean?? Not likely. Again no proof of any of that ...so it doesn't matter. Just a bunch of opinions.

It would be nice to have the sport clean, but with the present methods and the climate regarding profits of sponsors.. it doesn't appear to be an obtainable goal.

Mr Armstrong published two books in which he claimed to have never, ever taken PED's.

Either his statement in his book was a lie OR he lied to his doctors on Oct 28th 1996.

Given that his life was in danger I think we can work out which is the truth and which was (another) lie.

wolfix said:

The three other people were not called upon by SCA Promotions either. If SCA had a solid case, and remember they lost, they would have called upon the doctor. There was a good reason they did not call upon the doctors.

I don't know the US laws very well but here in Germany it's not allowed for a doctor to give any information about his or her patients to anybody (including police, judges and so on) unless the patient allows his doctor to do so.

edit: and LA didn't ask and allow his doctor to testify. Would be intresting to get the dossier of the court case...

wolfix said:

The three other people were not called upon by SCA Promotions either. If SCA had a solid case, and remember they lost, they would have called upon the doctor. There was a good reason they did not call upon the doctors.

I don't remember the tape being introduced as evidence. But even going beyond that is the fact the doctor never asked if he used them during his career. Thise drugs are used in cancer treatment. I am not sure about growth hormones though.

Just two clarifications... As for the companie's loss in court:

At the end of the article they say that the court decided in Lance's favor without judging the heart of the doping matter, "judging that the assurance company should have paid the bonus before contesting it on doping suspicians, and since sporting authorities had not put the American's 2004 victory into question."

Sounds like the courts were able to del with a contract dispute without ever getting to the heart of the doping allegations.

And for the tape being introduced as evidence, I think a better translation than my firt attempt would be "the tape was added as evidence to the case file," which may leave room for the possibility of the tape never being played in court... I don't speak lawyer in any language.

Say Bidon said:

Sounds like the courts were able to del with a contract dispute without ever getting to the heart of the doping allegations.

Agreed as the Vrijman report also was able to del with procedures without ever getting to the heart of the doping allegations.

Not to drag this wretched example of grasping at straws out but... Mr. Armstrong clearly states in his first book that he was prescribed EPO as part of his chemo. He even noted to the doctors - this would get me banned if I were in competition. As part of his chemo, it kept him from dying.

It is quite possible, although he does not detail this, that other PED's were also used as part of the therapy. Most PEDs were developed to help very sick people to recover from disease, which is why they also happen to work well for endurance athletes seeking a shortcut to recovery from the rigors of competition.

limerickman said:

Mr Armstrong published two books in which he claimed to have never, ever taken PED's.

Either his statement in his book was a lie OR he lied to his doctors on Oct 28th 1996.

Given that his life was in danger I think we can work out which is the truth and which was (another) lie.

JohnO said:

Not to drag this wretched example of grasping at straws out but... Mr. Armstrong clearly states in his first book that he was prescribed EPO as part of his chemo. He even noted to the doctors - this would get me banned if I were in competition. As part of his chemo, it kept him from dying.

It is quite possible, although he does not detail this, that other PED's were also used as part of the therapy. Most PEDs were developed to help very sick people to recover from disease, which is why they also happen to work well for endurance athletes seeking a shortcut to recovery from the rigors of competition.

Yep, PED's were created to treat people who are sick.

In the sporting context, Armstrong claimed to have never, ever, used PED's.
Most cycling fans can accept that he used EPO as part of his cancer treatment. Therefore this is a non-issue.

It is however clear from the testimony that the discussion about EPO in the court case was not about his treatment.

But HGH is NOT used in cancer treatment. And Armstrong never sought exemption for taking EPO etc. after 1999 - he had NO exemption certificates for the TdF - which he stated quite publicly.

For people who don't know Frankie Andreu (one of the 2 witnesses who made the allegations, the other is his wife)

More about him at:
toyota-united.comindex.phpOpen ↗

and at:

frankieandreu.comfrankieandreu.comOpen ↗

Ullefan said:

Frankie and his wife swore under oath in court? Is this the insurance company case that doesn't want to pay for his 6th win?

Frankie and his wife testified under oath.
So did the Oakley Respresentative also in the room who denied it.
So did Lance who denied it.
The insurance company LOST.
They already paid the 6 million or whatever.
Case closed.

Even IF, even IF Lance used PEDs before 1996, it had no impact on the case about settling the insurance debt although some would say in may have.
This is yet one more instance of public character assassination.
Interesting how the press keeps reporting Lemonde et al that Arsmtorng finaky admiited he did use.

He did not admit using PEDs and denied it under oath.

Asked why Kathy Andreu would testify she heard him say all those things Lance said under oath in deposition "Probably because she hates my guts."
Now THAT has the ring of truth about it.

Frankie had been one of the big boys with Lance, would have medalled in the Olympic games 96 had he not been asked to wait for Lance who couldnt get it done because he was already sick with cancer, Lance took him to Cofidis, he came back to Postal and Lance dumped him becasue he could not do well in the TTT and could not get over the mountains. Pure and simple, the wife hates Lance.

Interesting that you find it so plausible that Mrs Andreu should hate your boy Lance...and funny how he surrounds himself with all these close associates who apparently hate his guts - me, I'd want to be surrounded by people I liked and who liked me...

bobke said:

Frankie and his wife testified under oath.
So did the Oakley Respresentative also in the room who denied it.
So did Lance who denied it.

But a third person present at the hospital in 1996, Stephanie McIlvain, an employee of Armstrong's sunglasses sponsor Oakley, denied the Andreus' version of events. In her testimony on November 14, 2005, she said that there was no conversation like that between Armstrong and his doctors. But her story has been questioned by Greg Lemond, who recorded a phone conversation with McIlvain on September 21, 2004, where she said, "If I am cited, I'll do it...For I won't lie. You know I was in the room. I heard."

cyclingnews.comnews.phpOpen ↗

I was really surprised that Lance denied it.🙄

This probably explains his decision announced yesterday not to attend the Tour this year with the Disco crew. You could say it makes him look guilty but he's probably just had enough of it all now. I don't care if he doped or not becuase let's face it you couldn't have competed in a Grand Tour then (and maybe still couldn't today) without artificial help of some kind. Anyone who thinks otherwise is dafter than [censored] Pound.

micron said:

Interesting that you find it so plausible that Mrs Andreu should hate your boy Lance...and funny how he surrounds himself with all these close associates who apparently hate his guts - me, I'd want to be surrounded by people I liked and who liked me...

ummm....I think the point is Mrs. Andreu probably hated Lance after Franky was unceremoniously dumped from the team after 2000, duh. 😎

Some people who were in the room during the alleged incident were the DOCTORS whom Ms. Andreu apparently said LA made the confession to, including Dr. Nichols.

"In a sworn affidavit, Dr. Craig Nichols said he and other medical personnel visited with Armstrong that day about his medical history before he started chemotherapy. Nichols was one of doctors treating Armstrong at Indiana University Medical Center. He is now the chair of hematology-oncology at Oregon Health and Sciences University. "Lance Armstrong never admitted, suggested or indicated that he has ever taken performance-enhancing drugs. Had this been disclosed to me, I would have recorded it, or been aware of it, as a pertinent aspect of Lance Armstrong's past medical history as I always do," Nichols said. "Had I been present at any such 'confession,' I would most certainly have vividly recalled the fact," Nichols said. "I would have recorded such a confession as a matter of form, as indeed, would have my colleagues. None was recorded."

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AshQuyomm.I._p4h08mw06B.grcF?slug=ap-armstrong-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns

Other factors supporting Andreu's lying:

1. No other people (i.e., people other than Andreu) heard the alleged statement, including the doctors who were treating LA. This would have been a key fact the doctors would have taken down; their notes and their recollection have no indication of the alleged statement. Dr Nichols provided a sworn statement saying LA did not way what Andreau say he did.

"There were probably 10 people in the room. Betsy was apparently the only one that recalls this alleged incident," Herman said. (Hernan is LA's attorney)

2. Also, do people think LA would be so stupid as to admit the alleged statement in front of people other than his doctors, instead of a one-on-one session with his doctors where he would have a better argument regarding doctor/patient privilege?

3. Andreu biked as LA's teammate for some time. If the only instance he has of LA allegedly doping is what his wife heard, that supports that USPS was clean.

4. Andreu is probaby jealous of LA's monetary and cycling accomplishments.

Here are some excerpts from Frankie Andreu's website (a Q&A session he hosted) that shows his ambivalence about LA:

"Hayduke [Person questioning in Q&A]: Hi Frankie. you say some things on your home page regarding the TdF and cycling in general, and i am confused as to your feelings. on one hand you seem to say that the TdF is good for cycling and lance's habits are too, but you also seem to espouse a belief that they have changed cycling in a negative way by saying such things as "no longer will the stars of cycling have to race or even show up unless it's for their ultimate goal. The access we once had at races will be gone and their presence will be nonexistent", as well as "in Georgia, lance did not come out to talk with the press. lance would vanish after the race to the comfort of the team bus and then talk into a tape recorder about his thoughts of the stage. after a few minutes someone would emerge from the bus and press play on the tape recorder to hear Lance's words. No interaction, no follow up questions, no presence". these are setting negative trends, in my opinion, but perhaps they are inevitable. but then you later say "...it makes a great Giro, but no one knows or can predict, how the riders from the Giro, that decide to also do the Tour, will recover. not even the riders can control this. It's as much a gamble as just focusing only on the Tour". this seems to be a contridiction in that you seem to promote all riders racing only for the tour. again in my opinion, it is in having one giant race that all riders want to win the most that creates this kind of racing style that lance has promoted and perfected. personally, i don't like it and miss the old gritty riders who did them all! go frankie!

Frankie: Hayduke, my point is that Lance has changed the way riders ride the races and pick the races to win. Lance can get away with not training and winning races. I'm not saying this is a good thing because we need the stars of cycling to show up at other races and race and promote the sport throughout the year...."

http://www.frankieandreu.com/qna.html

musette said:

Some people who were in the room during the alleged incident were the DOCTORS whom Ms. Andreu apparently said LA made the confession to, including Dr. Nichols.

"In a sworn affidavit, Dr. Craig Nichols said he and other medical personnel visited with Armstrong that day about his medical history before he started chemotherapy. Nichols was one of doctors treating Armstrong at Indiana University Medical Center. He is now the chair of hematology-oncology at Oregon Health and Sciences University. "Lance Armstrong never admitted, suggested or indicated that he has ever taken performance-enhancing drugs. Had this been disclosed to me, I would have recorded it, or been aware of it, as a pertinent aspect of Lance Armstrong's past medical history as I always do," Nichols said. "Had I been present at any such 'confession,' I would most certainly have vividly recalled the fact," Nichols said. "I would have recorded such a confession as a matter of form, as indeed, would have my colleagues. None was recorded."

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AshQuyomm.I._p4h08mw06B.grcF?slug=ap-armstrong-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns

"There were probably 10 people in the room. Betsy was apparently the only one that recalls this alleged incident," Herman said. (Hernan is LA's attorney)

Also, do people think LA would be so stupid as to admit the alleged statement in front of people other than his doctors?

Thank you for stating so clearly what others refuse to accept or believe.
No doctor by the way would take a personal history with a crowd in the room.
And assuming he wanted correct answers he would know better than to ask with ten onlookers, have you ever doped.
Sort of like asking a guy in the hospital, with ten of his best friends aroud, have you ever had trouble getting an erection.
The press dredging this up is so full of [censored].

musette said:

Some people who were in the room during the alleged incident were the DOCTORS whom Ms. Andreu apparently said LA made the confession to, including Dr. Nichols.

"In a sworn affidavit, Dr. Craig Nichols said he and other medical personnel visited with Armstrong that day about his medical history before he started chemotherapy. Nichols was one of doctors treating Armstrong at Indiana University Medical Center. He is now the chair of hematology-oncology at Oregon Health and Sciences University. "Lance Armstrong never admitted, suggested or indicated that he has ever taken performance-enhancing drugs. Had this been disclosed to me, I would have recorded it, or been aware of it, as a pertinent aspect of Lance Armstrong's past medical history as I always do," Nichols said. "Had I been present at any such 'confession,' I would most certainly have vividly recalled the fact," Nichols said. "I would have recorded such a confession as a matter of form, as indeed, would have my colleagues. None was recorded."

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AshQuyomm.I._p4h08mw06B.grcF?slug=ap-armstrong-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns

"There were probably 10 people in the room. Betsy was apparently the only one that recalls this alleged incident," Herman said. (Hernan is LA's attorney)

Also, do people think LA would be so stupid as to admit the alleged statement in front of people other than his doctors?

Well that's pretty much the slam dunk on the whole thing isn't it. The Dr has far more credibility in this instance than anyone else. In fact if the Dr wanted to hide something he would have simply raised Dr Client priveledge and been mute about it.

Armstrong 2
French Press 0

Edit: By the way this happened in 2004-2005, why has no other press entity picked up on it, and why is it comming to light days before the TDF. Slimmy journalism?