THE FINAL STRAW

Quoted message said:

I think that does it for me with being a fan of pro cycling. Landis

SNIP

Quoted message said:

For myself, and I'm sure many others, this positive is the final straw.
It's too bad - bicycle racing is a beautiful and epic sport.

Don't you think it's rather nieve to think that the labs arn't
infallible?

or just maybe, just maybe, those drug test aren't as reliable as
the labs are telling everyone. Cmon, there in the lab business to
make money. Of course they tell you their tests are 100%.

Have you been to your doctor lately? I've had 2 out of my last 3
urine test, and a blood test get screwed up. Just this year...

or just maybe, just maybe, the frogs are out to get any rider who's
not from france and wins a big race?

I for one don't believe for a second that all these guys are using
drugs.
I stand behind LA, Landis, and Hamilton until they can come up with
some PROOF other than a drug test.

CowPunk said:

Quoted message said:

I think that does it for me with being a fan of pro cycling. Landis

SNIP

Quoted message said:

For myself, and I'm sure many others, this positive is the final straw.
It's too bad - bicycle racing is a beautiful and epic sport.

Don't you think it's rather nieve to think that the labs arn't
infallible?

or just maybe, just maybe, those drug test aren't as reliable as
the labs are telling everyone. Cmon, there in the lab business to
make money. Of course they tell you their tests are 100%.

Have you been to your doctor lately? I've had 2 out of my last 3
urine test, and a blood test get screwed up. Just this year...

or just maybe, just maybe, the frogs are out to get any rider who's
not from france and wins a big race?

I for one don't believe for a second that all these guys are using
drugs.
I stand behind LA, Landis, and Hamilton until they can come up with
some PROOF other than a drug test.

Is it true that any cyclist who has ever challenged a positive
testosterone test has won?

x-no-archive: yes

7 TdF wins, Armstrong was probably tested (and PASSED!) more than any other
rider in history.

jealousy is no foundation for casting horrid and potentially libelous
rumours.

in 517949 20060727 165241 'fb said:

Quoted message said:

or just maybe, just maybe, the frogs are out to get any rider who's
not from france and wins a big race?

Idiot.

CowPunk said:

I for one don't believe for a second that all these guys are using
drugs.
I stand behind LA, Landis, and Hamilton until they can come up with
some PROOF other than a drug test.

What would that be?

I'm on the other side. I think all of the top riders use "help" and
that testing does not differentiate dopers from non dopers--only htose
who get caugt from those that don't.

fb said:

Is it true that any cyclist who has ever challenged a positive
testosterone test has won?

No.

fb said:

CowPunk said:

Quoted message said:

I think that does it for me with being a fan of pro cycling. Landis

SNIP

Quoted message said:

For myself, and I'm sure many others, this positive is the final straw.
It's too bad - bicycle racing is a beautiful and epic sport.

Don't you think it's rather nieve to think that the labs arn't
infallible?

or just maybe, just maybe, those drug test aren't as reliable as
the labs are telling everyone. Cmon, there in the lab business to
make money. Of course they tell you their tests are 100%.

Have you been to your doctor lately? I've had 2 out of my last 3
urine test, and a blood test get screwed up. Just this year...

or just maybe, just maybe, the frogs are out to get any rider who's
not from france and wins a big race?

I for one don't believe for a second that all these guys are using
drugs.
I stand behind LA, Landis, and Hamilton until they can come up with
some PROOF other than a drug test.

Is it true that any cyclist who has ever challenged a positive
testosterone test has won?

I am not sure, but the 6:1 limit is not considered an impossible one to
reach without doping:

"...the rule is based on a ratio higher than the usual population
(cut-off 6:1) but they accept the obligation to perform additional
research in order to exclude the small percentage of people having high
T/E ratios due to physiological or pathological conditions (Donike M.
et al., 1993; Baezinger J. et al., 1994; Kicman A.T. et al., 1990)."

http://www.blues.uab.es/olympic.studies/doping/segura.htm

See also:

"Dutch rider Gert-Jan Theunisse was busted during the 1990 Tour, for
the second time in two years, but was given a stay of execution because

of a procedural mix-up. The other riders, believing he should have been

banned, went on strike. This may have been somewhat hypocritical in
certain cases. Theunisse's defence was that his body produced unusually

high levels of testosterone ."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/feature/story/0,13026,989709,00.html

CowPunk wrote:

"Don't you think it's rather nieve to think that the labs arn't infallible?"

Labs are frequently wrong. I've had a recent health problem that nearly
took me off of my bike (or at least would have had me riding with a carbon
fiber prosthetic limb). While being treated for a serious bone infection of
my tibia, I took frequent blood tests. When I visited the infectious
disease specialist, he pointed to my blood test form and asked me: "Were
you dead on this day?" Apparently, my blood sugar level came back at 30.
Anything lower than 50 is dead. If it was just a fluke reading, he wouldn't
have been concerned, but I frequently came back with readings of 30s, 40s,
and 50s. He recommended I purchase one of those units that diabetics use to
check their blood to test myself. I bought such a unit, and my blood sugar
readings are continuously in the 90s (normal). I've yet to see a reading
below 91.

I'll wait to see what the "B" sample says on Landis.

mikey D said:

x-no-archive: yes

7 TdF wins, Armstrong was probably tested (and PASSED!) more than any other
rider in history.

jealousy is no foundation for casting horrid and potentially libelous
rumours.

Armstrong did take EPO '99 for this Tour win (if they retrospectively
test all his other samples I'm sure they would find a rake of [censored]).

I not sure what the big deal is about Landis - he was only doing what
his Phonak buddies Hamilton and Perez did.

The "biggest" riders are the biggest dopers and the yanks are leading
this league at the moment - stick that in your gee-wizz Outdoor Life
Network pipe and smoke it.

Ned Buntline said:

CowPunk wrote:

"Don't you think it's rather nieve to think that the labs arn't infallible?"

Labs are frequently wrong. I've had a recent health problem that nearly
took me off of my bike (or at least would have had me riding with a carbon
fiber prosthetic limb). While being treated for a serious bone infection of
my tibia, I took frequent blood tests. When I visited the infectious
disease specialist, he pointed to my blood test form and asked me: "Were
you dead on this day?" Apparently, my blood sugar level came back at 30.
Anything lower than 50 is dead. If it was just a fluke reading, he wouldn't
have been concerned, but I frequently came back with readings of 30s, 40s,
and 50s. He recommended I purchase one of those units that diabetics use to
check their blood to test myself. I bought such a unit, and my blood sugar
readings are continuously in the 90s (normal). I've yet to see a reading
below 91.

I'll wait to see what the "B" sample says on Landis.

Of course labs get "wrong" results. That isn't the issue. The issue is
the huge number of positive results that get reported and the huge
number of top riders for whom these results are reported.

Labs get false postive for whole sorts of medical tests. Are you
arguing we should aboandon these tests becasue of say a 2% false
positive rate? (Or whatever the rate for a test may be, assuming it is
rreasonabley small)
So, even if a small number of the results are wrong there is still a
huge issue.

I think that folks who sseriously believe that doping isn't endemic
among pro riders have a) never been around pro athletes, b) have no
personal experience with just how much drugs improve performance, c)
like to ignore reality d) all of the above.

"CowPunk" <[email hidden]> solemnly wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

or just maybe, just maybe, the frogs are out to get any rider who's
not from france and wins a big race?

Remember TDF 98 and the Festina scandal. Richard Virenque who was adored by
the French was kicked out of the race. Stop French bashing.

Quoted message said:

I for one don't believe for a second that all these guys are using
drugs.
I stand behind LA, Landis, and Hamilton until they can come up with
some PROOF other than a drug test.

It has been proved that LA did take EPO in 1999.

Quoted message said:

I think that does it for me with being a fan of pro cycling. Landis
positive after winning the Tour. Pantani kicked out of the Giro while
leading, with a 53% hematocrit. Heras positive and stripped of Vuelta
title. Musseuw revealed to be a cheat after retiring. Massive
speculation about Armstrong, but still no smoking gun.

What's the point of following a sport where ANY victory you see is
suspect? Why invest the emotional energy into supporting a successful
rider when history shows that those at the top are very, very likey a
doper?

For myself, and I'm sure many others, this positive is the final straw.
It's too bad - bicycle racing is a beautiful and epic sport.

Goodbye and good riddance...chump

mikey D said:

7 TdF wins, Armstrong was probably tested (and PASSED!) more than any other
rider in history.

jealousy is no foundation for casting horrid and potentially libelous
rumours.

So the positive test for EPO on his 1999 samples is just garbage?

Passing lots of tests at this point in time is really not that big of
an accomplishment.

critposer said:

I think that does it for me with being a fan of pro cycling.

Dumbass,
Why don't you become a fan of fatty master racing ? In fact I'll sell you
my personally autographed Phonak kit at a special price to get you started.

Keith said:

Goodbye and good riddance...chump

Yeah, sorry I'll miss out on your second about-face on Landis.

Donald Munro said:

critposer said:

I think that does it for me with being a fan of pro cycling.

Dumbass,
Why don't you become a fan of fatty master racing ?

Did the whole fatty master's thing 10 years ago. Yuck.

gds wrote:

"Labs get false postive for whole sorts of medical tests. Are you arguing we
should aboandon these tests becasue of say a 2% false positive rate? (Or
whatever the rate for a test may be, assuming it is rreasonabley small)"

I'm not saying that at all. Test away. But I'm waiting on further results
before I banish Landis (and I am one who is VERY skeptical of his
eight-minute comback).

In my case, blood glucose level results were 37.5% false positive. I
wouldn't consider that number "reasonably small."

Ned Buntline said:

Quoted message said:

In my case, blood glucose level results were 37.5% false positive. I
wouldn't consider that number "reasonably small."

But I'll bet you that all of the blood glucose level tests that are run
do not have an overall false positive rate anywhere near that high. You
are trapped by the small sample size.

Remember if the chance is only one in million of a bad event but you
are the one you have a serious problem. Still it isn't a big problem
from the point of view of every one else.