Lance & Drugs again

Greg Wilson said:

Saw the last bit of a story on CNN today I think, and it was about Lance
Armstrong, and I think they showed some guy that sold Lance's first bike,
and he said that without a doubt Lance Armstrong is the most elite athlete
in the world..... but then he said, but its all a fake.

Then the reporter said, if Lance could quit Pro racing and think that his
past Drug cheating tests could be laid to rest, well he is wrong.

Anyone know anything about this story.

I haven't heard a single thing about Lance and drugs, I've been out cycling.

Zoom

"Zoom" wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

I haven't heard a single thing about Lance and drugs, I've been out
cycling.

Yep.. and in other exciting news.. MSN messenger has 'push to talk' which is
kinda nifty.. Google Talk has a long catchup..

cheers,
GPL

Greg Wilson said:

Saw the last bit of a story on CNN today I think, and it was about Lance
Armstrong, and I think they showed some guy that sold Lance's first bike,
and he said that without a doubt Lance Armstrong is the most elite athlete
in the world..... but then he said, but its all a fake.

Then the reporter said, if Lance could quit Pro racing and think that his
past Drug cheating tests could be laid to rest, well he is wrong.

Anyone know anything about this story.

Not this story, but L'Equipe, a news paper in France has some strong accusations.
A doping lab in france has retested 12 samples, from the 1999 TDF.
6 came out doped.
That I think is official, they are not supposed to be able to trace the samples back to individual athletes, but L'Equipe claims to have traced one of the samples to Lance. This is a big thing already, Lance has already commented on it. True or not? The french never loved Lance so who knows.

Claes said:

Not this story, but L'Equipe, a news paper in France has some strong accusations.
A doping lab in france has retested 12 samples, from the 1999 TDF.
6 came out doped.
That I think is official, they are not supposed to be able to trace the samples back to individual athletes, but L'Equipe claims to have traced one of the samples to Lance. This is a big thing already, Lance has already commented on it. True or not? The french never loved Lance so who knows.

right or wrong..you gotta ask what motivates the French press/media to dig up stuff especially against anyone NOT French who excels in an oh so traditional french sport.... this one is prime because

• the french hate the americans, and make it quite clear every chance they get
  
• the french havnt had a decent tour rider for yonks ( a few one day riders and a few who have been allowed to carry the yellow till it mattered)
  
• this past year they got one stage victory in TdeF on Bastille day ( a "staged" stage win ?), that must hurt their escargot loving pride
  
• they havnt been able to pin LA so far
  
• they dig up stuff that cant be proven and claim it has veracity
  
• they admit that LA cant defend himself on this and print it anyway
  
• they know full well that LA admits to therapeautic Steroids in his cancer fight to help him walk again, ( see both LA books) and residuals may be present for ages ( is this what they have traces of anyway back in '99?, who knows it's frozen any and suspect, plus now of dubious integrity)
  
• there are no A samples in existence,
  
• there was no proven test for EPO in July 99 adopted by anyone.
  
• they cant accept that anyone other than a frenchman can have dominated their "evént prix" for 7 straight years,
  
• they say little about their proven drug climber Virénque
  

LA probably cant win this one now, but I'm sure he will bloody well aim to give back to the frenchy's as good as they dish out, if not more.

I now even less proud of my french heritage, fortunately it is only 20%, so that helps me at least appreciate LeTour, Vin Rouge and Paris in the spring, and acknowledge that the bleating whinges of the French press caters to their own sensitivities and is (should be) considered by everyone else as selfserving balderdash.

My Belgian side is calling for a beer, make it 8.5% Hooees "Forbidden Fruit"..ahhhhhh

Roo

Claes <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Greg Wilson said:

Saw the last bit of a story on CNN today I think, and it was about
Lance
Armstrong, and I think they showed some guy that sold Lance's first
bike,
and he said that without a doubt Lance Armstrong is the most elite
athlete
in the world..... but then he said, but its all a fake.

Then the reporter said, if Lance could quit Pro racing and think that
his
past Drug cheating tests could be laid to rest, well he is wrong.

Anyone know anything about this story.

Not this story, but L'Equipe, a news paper in France has some strong
accusations.
A doping lab in france has retested 12 samples, from the 1999 TDF.
6 came out doped.
That I think is official, they are not supposed to be able to trace

the

Quoted message said:

samples back to individual athletes, but L'Equipe claims to have

traced

Quoted message said:

one of the samples to Lance. This is a big thing already, Lance has
already commented on it. True or not? The french never loved Lance so
who knows.

I love this. Let's test the frozen decomposing protein compounds that
we shoved in the back of the freezer 6 years ago.

Ever dragged a steak out of the freezer after a couple of years in that
block of ice down the bottom?

You could find anything in such a sample. I think Lance treated it with
the disdain it deserved (see his website).

More sensationalism from another tabloid.

Cheers

BrettM

rooman said:

right or wrong..you gotta ask what motivates the French press/media to dig up stuff especially against anyone NOT French who excels in an oh so traditional french sport.... this one is prime because

• the french hate the americans, and make it quite clear every chance they get
  
• the french havnt had a decent tour rider for yonks ( a few one day riders and a few who have been allowed to carry the yellow till it mattered)
  
• this past year they got one stage victory in TdeF on Bastille day ( a "staged" stage win ?), that must hurt their escargot loving pride
  
• they havnt been able to pin LA so far
  
• they dig up stuff that cant be proven and claim it has veracity
  
• they admit that LA cant defend himself on this and print it anyway
  
• they know full well that LA admits to therapeautic Steroids in his cancer fight to help him walk again, ( see both LA books) and residuals may be present for ages ( is this what they have traces of anyway back in '99?, who knows it's frozen any and suspect, plus now of dubious integrity)
  
• there are no A samples in existence,
  
• there was no proven test for EPO in July 99 adopted by anyone.
  
• they cant accept that anyone other than a frenchman can have dominated their "evént prix" for 7 straight years,
  
• they say little about their proven drug climber Virénque
  

LA probably cant win this one now, but I'm sure he will bloody well aim to give back to the frenchy's as good as they dish out, if not more.

I now even less proud of my french heritage, fortunately it is only 20%, so that helps me at least appreciate LeTour, Vin Rouge and Paris in the spring, and acknowledge that the bleating whinges of the French press caters to their own sensitivities and is (should be) considered by everyone else as selfserving balderdash.

My Belgian side is calling for a beer, make it 8.5% Hooees "Forbidden Fruit"..ahhhhhh

Roo

Well, now the IOK and WADA has commented on it, we will se what happens.

rooman said:

right or wrong..you gotta ask what motivates the French press/media to dig up stuff especially against anyone NOT French who excels in an oh so traditional french sport.... this one is prime because

• the french hate the americans, and make it quite clear every chance they get
  
• the french havnt had a decent tour rider for yonks ( a few one day riders and a few who have been allowed to carry the yellow till it mattered)
  
• this past year they got one stage victory in TdeF on Bastille day ( a "staged" stage win ?), that must hurt their escargot loving pride
  
• they havnt been able to pin LA so far
  
• they dig up stuff that cant be proven and claim it has veracity
  
• they admit that LA cant defend himself on this and print it anyway
  
• they know full well that LA admits to therapeautic Steroids in his cancer fight to help him walk again, ( see both LA books) and residuals may be present for ages ( is this what they have traces of anyway back in '99?, who knows it's frozen any and suspect, plus now of dubious integrity)
  
• there are no A samples in existence,
  
• there was no proven test for EPO in July 99 adopted by anyone.
  
• they cant accept that anyone other than a frenchman can have dominated their "evént prix" for 7 straight years,
  
• they say little about their proven drug climber Virénque
  

LA probably cant win this one now, but I'm sure he will bloody well aim to give back to the frenchy's as good as they dish out, if not more.

I now even less proud of my french heritage, fortunately it is only 20%, so that helps me at least appreciate LeTour, Vin Rouge and Paris in the spring, and acknowledge that the bleating whinges of the French press caters to their own sensitivities and is (should be) considered by everyone else as selfserving balderdash.

My Belgian side is calling for a beer, make it 8.5% Hooees "Forbidden Fruit"..ahhhhhh

Roo

Oh yeah, both IOK and WADA wants a law passed in 2004 to be retroactive, which says that an athlete can be retested with more advanced technology, and found guilty years after the offence, potentially Lance could loose his 1999 victory. This is all speculation so far, will be very interesting to see where it goes.

Greg Wilson said:

Saw the last bit of a story on CNN today I think, and it was about Lance
Armstrong, and I think they showed some guy that sold Lance's first bike,
and he said that without a doubt Lance Armstrong is the most elite athlete
in the world..... but then he said, but its all a fake.

Then the reporter said, if Lance could quit Pro racing and think that his
past Drug cheating tests could be laid to rest, well he is wrong.

Anyone know anything about this story.

I know that the last time I believed the french they said they were done
with nuclear testing

🙂

They should leave him alone, he is a legend, and know one will ever come
close to him, never.
He is too big to risk cheating.
"dave" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Greg Wilson said:

Saw the last bit of a story on CNN today I think, and it was about Lance
Armstrong, and I think they showed some guy that sold Lance's first bike,
and he said that without a doubt Lance Armstrong is the most elite
athlete in the world..... but then he said, but its all a fake.

Then the reporter said, if Lance could quit Pro racing and think that his
past Drug cheating tests could be laid to rest, well he is wrong.

Anyone know anything about this story.

I know that the last time I believed the french they said they were done
with nuclear testing

🙂

BrettM said:

I love this. Let's test the frozen decomposing protein compounds that
we shoved in the back of the freezer 6 years ago.

Ever dragged a steak out of the freezer after a couple of years in that
block of ice down the bottom?

I don't think it's as simple as this. If you believe the reports, the
lab was using past samples to refine testing for EPO. They did not and
could not know whos samples they were (so that their testing was not
biased). The newspaper managed to get the numbers from the samples that
tested positive and then traced them back to medical reports, thus
supposedly linking it to Lance.

I hope there's nothing to all this, I really do...This article sort of
sums up how I feel about.

http://tinyurl.com/a6yoy

--
..dt
1996 Diamond Back 'Expert Tg' Roadie (7spd DT shifters, favourite bike!)
2004 Trek 2300 Roadie (9spd Ultegra)
2003 DiamondBack 'Criterium' Roadie (8spd Sora, rain bike)

Zoom said:

I haven't heard a single thing about Lance and drugs, I've been out cycling.

A real cyclist wouldn't do that. He'd be at home in front of his PC, trying
to spread FUD about better cyclists.

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

On 24 Aug 2005 08:57:28 GMT, dtmeister <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

BrettM said:

I love this. Let's test the frozen decomposing protein compounds that
we shoved in the back of the freezer 6 years ago.

Ever dragged a steak out of the freezer after a couple of years in that
block of ice down the bottom?

I don't think it's as simple as this. If you believe the reports, the
lab was using past samples to refine testing for EPO. They did not and
could not know whos samples they were (so that their testing was not
biased).

This is not exactly correct. If L'Equipe could find out whose samples they
were then (at least in theory) anyone could have known.

Quoted message said:

The newspaper managed to get the numbers from the samples that
tested positive and then traced them back to medical reports, thus
supposedly linking it to Lance.

I hope there's nothing to all this, I really do...This article sort of
sums up how I feel about.

http://tinyurl.com/a6yoy

Yet in Velo News: Top Lab Official Questions L'Equipe Conclusions
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8746.0.html

Having said this, it doesn't look particularly good for LA.

-Wheels

HellenWheels said:

Quoted message said:

lab was using past samples to refine testing for EPO. They did not and
could not know whos samples they were (so that their testing was not
biased).

This is not exactly correct. If L'Equipe could find out whose samples they
were then (at least in theory) anyone could have known.

The 'would not, could not' was on the basis that they are a lab trying
to refine a scientific process. Assuming they give a [censored] about what
they are doing, not knowing who the samples were from would have been
a mildly important point. Of course they could have gone out as L'Equipe
supposedly did, nosing through scraps of paper, but it was hardly likely
that they would.

Quoted message said:

Yet in Velo News: Top Lab Official Questions L'Equipe Conclusions
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8746.0.html

Having said this, it doesn't look particularly good for LA.

No, it doesn't. Especially given the way the information has been
released. Considering the age of the samples, and the fact that they
have been in the posession of a number of parties, if this was an issue
in a court of law, the 'prosecution' would have a hard time convincing
a a judge/jury to hang Lance. However, it also doesn't allow Lance any
easy way to clear himself either. Not unless someone can prove that you
can't test for EPO in old samples (as your linked article suggested).
Here's a link that suggests you can.

http://www.abc.net.au/sport/content/200508/s1445271.htm

--
..dt
1996 Diamond Back 'Expert Tg' Roadie (7spd DT shifters, favourite bike!)
2004 Trek 2300 Roadie (9spd Ultegra)
2003 DiamondBack 'Criterium' Roadie (8spd Sora, rain bike)

On 24 Aug 2005 11:58:47 GMT, dtmeister <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

HellenWheels said:

Quoted message said:

lab was using past samples to refine testing for EPO. They did not and
could not know whos samples they were (so that their testing was not
biased).

This is not exactly correct. If L'Equipe could find out whose samples they
were then (at least in theory) anyone could have known.

The 'would not, could not' was on the basis that they are a lab trying
to refine a scientific process. Assuming they give a [censored] about what
they are doing, not knowing who the samples were from would have been
a mildly important point. Of course they could have gone out as L'Equipe
supposedly did, nosing through scraps of paper, but it was hardly likely
that they would.

Quoted message said:

Yet in Velo News: Top Lab Official Questions L'Equipe Conclusions
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8746.0.html

Having said this, it doesn't look particularly good for LA.

No, it doesn't. Especially given the way the information has been
released. Considering the age of the samples, and the fact that they
have been in the posession of a number of parties, if this was an issue
in a court of law, the 'prosecution' would have a hard time convincing
a a judge/jury to hang Lance. However, it also doesn't allow Lance any
easy way to clear himself either. Not unless someone can prove that you
can't test for EPO in old samples (as your linked article suggested).
Here's a link that suggests you can.

http://www.abc.net.au/sport/content/200508/s1445271.htm

I don't see anywhere in the article that says you can test for EPO in old
samples in urine.

Remember anyone can -say- anything, but to get the facts to evaluate this
'experiment', I'd have to see a better controlled study.

What the testing lab apparently failed to do was set up a rack of standards
to be frozen with the samples. These standards would have a mix of regular
EPO from the body, as well as addition of various standard amounts of
recombinant-derived EPO. They would have to be stored along with any
freezer that had specimens (this would control for temperature variations
and power failures, and lots of other variables).

Upon testing the standards would be run the same time as the unknowns and
the testing individual(s) would not know which samples were standards and
which were unknown specimens.

Any samples from previous years' cyclists would be re-coded from their UCI
numbers and the new codes would not allow anyone to 'look up' something.
The re-coded original numbers would be destroyed (or highly encrypted,
under control of one or two persons with no agenda for or against cycling).

Then, and only then would this stand up in court, or, I might add, be
accepted in a peer-reviewed journal. Otherwise the results tied to any
iindividual athlete should not, could not, and would not have been
released. Too many people handled these samples, so there's no chain of
custody similar to a forensics case and there may have been inadequate or
non-existent controls. It's possible that they considered testing them, but
would they have had the foresight to include controls back in 1999? I doubt
it. This would prevent them from shoddy testing of samples earlier, or in
other sports - after all what is the point. They're surely not going to go
back and DQ all the Tour winners that have either been caught, or admitted
later that they used PEDs.

We're talking about fairly important matters here, and at all of these
points if it goes to court (and I do expect LA to sue, or at least petition
to have L'equipe reveal their source.) then the lawyers can get damages,
because the lab, nor the paper have a leg to stand on. And LA doesn't even
have to show up.

-Wheels

[QUOTE= We're talking about fairly important matters here, and at all of these points if it goes to court (and I do expect LA to sue, or at least petition to have L'equipe reveal their source.) then the lawyers can get damages, because the lab, nor the paper have a leg to stand on. And LA doesn't even have to show up. -Wheels[/QUOTE]
the absurdity and the obscenity is this allows all those with a prejudice against LA and cycling to bellow and moan.

Those with a prejudice against LA such as the french media, Simeoni ( who me lie?) and even [censored] Pound who is is claiming publicly "it proves we can catch drug cheats years afterwards"..are only too quick to condemn on the strength of shoddy methodology and summise. I'm waiting for John Coates to say his two bits worth, he is always ready to condemn any cyclist for any drug connection ( oh wait he only dumps on Ozzie cyclists that's right...)

* I digress how can a rowing stroke, who was never an athlete per se get a job on the AOC, arghh!!*

Next thing the Ozzie media will have a field day claiming all the riding commuters are druggies because they inhale exhaust fumes or the roadies are druggies because of excessive caffeine levels, or the grannies on the paths riding their basketed flat bars are druggies because of their anti-dementia medication.....

sheesh.......

the truth is out there, it just never gets printed...'cos it stuffs up a good story

What is the point in testing from the past with new technology??

Originally 6 of 12 samples tested positive and 1 was LA's sample. So who were the others? How many riders rode in the tour in 1999?

Also there is the question of is it really cheating if there is no test for it? Yeah I know its unfair for those not using it but how many riders in the tour wouldn't use it if they knew of the benefits and there was no test for it.

Before EPO could be tested for its use for training/racing was most probably wide spread. How long has the synthetic drug we know as EPO actually existed? It is possible it was in use (by selected elite athletes) well before it became widely known? What is the latest designer performance drug that few know about?

Would an operation to remove pain receptors from the brain be cheating?

In 50 years will people from today be hunted down and fined because the drove a petrol powered vehicle when there are better alternatives available? (bikes)

I know this is a ramble but there is a point hidden somewhere.

All I can say is:

French = Cheese eating surrender monkeys :p

Paulie-AU said:

What is the point in testing from the past with new technology??

Originally 6 of 12 samples tested positive and 1 was LA's sample. So who were the others? How many riders rode in the tour in 1999?

Also there is the question of is it really cheating if there is no test for it? Yeah I know its unfair for those not using it but how many riders in the tour wouldn't use it if they knew of the benefits and there was no test for it.

Before EPO could be tested for its use for training/racing was most probably wide spread. How long has the synthetic drug we know as EPO actually existed? It is possible it was in use (by selected elite athletes) well before it became widely known? What is the latest designer performance drug that few know about?

Would an operation to remove pain receptors from the brain be cheating?

In 50 years will people from today be hunted down and fined because the drove a petrol powered vehicle when there are better alternatives available? (bikes)

I know this is a ramble but there is a point hidden somewhere.

I fail to see your point regarding doping. It was forbidden then, it was doping then, they could not test it, but does that make it legal? You seem to say that if someone breaks a law, but are not found out, that is ok? You feel that about murder? Incest? I do not, it was illegal then, so if anyone, not just lance, cheated then, and are discovered now, take the victory away from them. This can only be done if the tests are considered correct, that the samples are not too old, not contaminated and so on. But as a principle, if you break a law, you are cheating. That is my view. Look at criminal law today. They happily apply DNA analyses, some times setting someone free, but also to convict people that could not be convicted before. Should those convicted argue that it was ok then, since they could not test the evidence? Now, I am not trying to start a war. I am not comparing murder and incest with doping, it is just the principle I am looking at. So, chill. 🙂

In article <[email hidden]>,

Paulie-AU said:

What is the point in testing from the past with new technology??

It's something that's been done in horse racing for some time, with
considerable success. Basically, it makes the idea of staying one step
ahead of the testers a much riskier proposition.

Quoted message said:

Originally 6 of 12 samples tested positive and 1 was LA's sample. So
who were the others?

No, they tested something like 100 samples, and 12 tested positive. Of
those 12, six were allegedly from Lance Armstrong. And they say the
others will be named in due course.

Quoted message said:

Also there is the question of is it really cheating if there is no test
for it?

That's not really a question, is it.

--
Shane Stanley