If I read that right it is saying that the way that Lance beat the testing was to only take EPO out of racing. If he were relying on EPO in a three week race in which he would have had to take it no later than two weeks before the Tour began, he would be getting progressively weaker as his hematocrit dropped, perhaps dramatically, due to the fact that EPO causes such rapid generation of red blood cells that they don't have the same lifespan as a natural RBC.
In other words, if EPO was the cause and since he wasn't shown positive in the Tour despite all the testing, any LOGICAL person would expect him to grow progressively weaker. Instead we see that generally he grew relatively stronger like most Tour winners. But one thing is certainly, Lafferty won't hesitate one second to defame anyone. Especially someone that's looked up to.
We can we expect the Lafferty expose' of Albert Einstein?
If I read that right it is saying that the way that Lance beat the testing was to only take EPO out of racing. If he were relying on EPO in a three week race in which he would have had to take it no later than two weeks before the Tour began, he would be getting progressively weaker as his hematocrit dropped, perhaps dramatically, due to the fact that EPO causes such rapid generation of red blood cells that they don't have the same lifespan as a natural RBC.
In other words, if EPO was the cause and since he wasn't shown positive in the Tour despite all the testing, any LOGICAL person would expect him to grow progressively weaker. Instead we see that generally he grew relatively stronger like most Tour winners. But one thing is certainly, Lafferty won't hesitate one second to defame anyone. Especially someone that's looked up to.
We can we expect the Lafferty expose' of Albert Einstein?
Heavy smoker. Would never have had the power of concentration necessary if he didn't have all that nicotine in his system.
If I read that right it is saying that the way that Lance beat the testing was to only take EPO out of racing. If he were relying on EPO in a three week race in which he would have had to take it no later than two weeks before the Tour began, he would be getting progressively weaker as his hematocrit dropped, perhaps dramatically, due to the fact that EPO causes such rapid generation of red blood cells that they don't have the same lifespan as a natural RBC.
In other words, if EPO was the cause and since he wasn't shown positive in the Tour despite all the testing, any LOGICAL person would expect him to grow progressively weaker. Instead we see that generally he grew relatively stronger like most Tour winners. But one thing is certainly, Lafferty won't hesitate one second to defame anyone. Especially someone that's looked up to.
L'Equipe addresses this issue. They say there appear to have been three different doses: the first before the prologue (which produced the positives for the prologue and stage 1), then a second just before the Alps (producing the positives for stages 9 and 10), then a final dose in the Pyrenees (the 12th and 14th stages).
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 18:17:45 +0200, "Robert Chung" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
Tom Kunich said:
If I read that right it is saying that the way that Lance beat the testing was to only take EPO out of racing. If he were relying on EPO in a three week race in which he would have had to take it no later than two weeks before the Tour began, he would be getting progressively weaker as his hematocrit dropped, perhaps dramatically, due to the fact that EPO causes such rapid generation of red blood cells that they don't have the same lifespan as a natural RBC.
In other words, if EPO was the cause and since he wasn't shown positive in the Tour despite all the testing, any LOGICAL person would expect him to grow progressively weaker. Instead we see that generally he grew relatively stronger like most Tour winners. But one thing is certainly, Lafferty won't hesitate one second to defame anyone. Especially someone that's looked up to.
L'Equipe addresses this issue. They say there appear to have been three different doses: the first before the prologue (which produced the positives for the prologue and stage 1), then a second just before the Alps (producing the positives for stages 9 and 10), then a final dose in the Pyrenees (the 12th and 14th stages).
The way they handled it pre-urine test was to spend some time getting some saline infusion to make sure the Hct was under 50%.
I would have thought that Postal was smarter than to actually take EPO during the tour since it was known they would be storing the samples into perpetuity. I think LA even mentioned in an interview that he knew they stored his samples and would be able to test them. It gave me a chill when he said that.
If I read that right it is saying that the way that Lance beat the testing was to only take EPO out of racing. If he were relying on EPO in a three week race in which he would have had to take it no later than two weeks before the Tour began, he would be getting progressively weaker as his hematocrit dropped, perhaps dramatically, due to the fact that EPO causes such rapid generation of red blood cells that they don't have the same lifespan as a natural RBC.
Blah blah blah, wrong. EPO increases the volume of rbc production, not the rate of rbc maturation. There's no difference in the rbc quality.
"Kyle Legate" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Tom Kunich said:
If I read that right it is saying that the way that Lance beat the testing was to only take EPO out of racing. If he were relying on EPO in a three week race in which he would have had to take it no later than two weeks before the Tour began, he would be getting progressively weaker as his hematocrit dropped, perhaps dramatically, due to the fact that EPO causes such rapid generation of red blood cells that they don't have the same lifespan as a natural RBC.
Blah blah blah, wrong. EPO increases the volume of rbc production, not the rate of rbc maturation. There's no difference in the rbc quality.
You're full of [censored] as usual. It increases the speed of RELEASE of rbc's and hence a large percentage of those cells released aren't mature and hence have significantly shorter spans if memory serves on the order of half the life of a normal rbc.
"Kyle Legate" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Tom Kunich wrote:
>If I read that right it is saying that the way that Lance beat the >testing was to only take EPO out of racing. If he were relying on EPO >in a three week race in which he would have had to take it no later >than two weeks before the Tour began, he would be getting progressively >weaker as his hematocrit dropped, perhaps dramatically, due to the fact >that EPO causes such rapid generation of red blood cells that they >don't have the same lifespan as a natural RBC. >
Blah blah blah, wrong. EPO increases the volume of rbc production, not the rate of rbc maturation. There's no difference in the rbc quality.
You're full of [censored] as usual. It increases the speed of RELEASE of rbc's and hence a large percentage of those cells released aren't mature and hence have significantly shorter spans if memory serves on the order of half the life of a normal rbc.
Tommy Boy,
Even if you were right, which you're not, your argument holds no water because the average lifespan of a RBC is 90-120 days. So even if, as you suggest, EPO induced RBCs only 'lived' half as long that would be 45-60 days e.g. more than enough time to get through the Tour which only lasts 21 days. Furthermore, RBCs aren't released as mature cells from the bone marrow. They are released as reticulocytes which then mature into RBCs. As Kyle said, EPO works quantitatively not qualitatively.
