Lance Armstrong cheated?!

[Red Fighter 1073]

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=2141710

apparently, the french have found that Lance Armstrong cheated during the Tour De France. what happened is that during the '99 Tour, Armstrong gave six urine samples which tested positive for the red blood cell booster, EPO.

now, im not trying to sound racist but, as people who are on the show "Pardon The Interruption", have said, im not quite sure i can trust the french. after all, Lance came in and beat them at their own race. SEVEN TIMES! also, how can you be certain that the urine sample was really Lance's?? just a possibility i was thinking of.

anyway, what are your thoughts on this issue??

[PyrosNine]

EPO? What the heck is that? And why did they only discover this now, a good 6 years later?

And I can't quite see what effect boosting red blood cells would have upon an athlete. It may just be a simple misunderstanding, like his medical condition affected the test.

[Staizer]

more red blood cells would mean more oxygen being carried through the body. It is pretty odd that they should discover this now, as opposed to when they did the tests, apparently it didn't matter then, so why should it matter now?

[meb955]

oxygen is the key here. the drug is designed to increase red blood cells, which builds stamina. and it was discovered now because the technology didn't exist until now to discover the drug (which, although undetectable, was still illegal in 1999). armstrong used the drug during his cancer treatments and cited it as a reason he's still alive.

however, on the other side, the magazine that broke the story has ben against armstrong almost from the beginning and has leveled accusations before with no evidence. it wrote after the last one was over that a sigh of relief had gone up in the sport over armstrong's retirement. also, since the main samples were destroyed in testing 6 years ago, nothing could be done now. plus, there are serious questions about the validity of the sample and the id the magazine used.

plus. most fellow competitors have jumped to armstrong's defence. while the coordinator of the tour works for the same company that owns the magazine and has been criticized by france's own anti-doping director.

it's much too early to draw any conclusions on this, one way or the other.

[shiney]

It's just sour grapes. They have been trying since he first won to discredit him because Lance Armstrong damages french pride like no other. If they strip him of his titles or try to levy any sort of fine, restriction, penalty or punishment on him, it's not going to be pretty.

This is just ridiculous and petty. They need to man up and admit they lost.

[G.I.R.]

They can't, Shiney... they're french. It's not in their genetic code.

[shiney]

Surrendering is. So losing should be too. But I guess false pride and ignorance overrules morality and doing what's right.

[Megiddo]

To quote Robin Williams:

And every year the French go:

"He is on chemicals."

I'm going it's chemo-therapy you little toadsuckers.

"Okay he has one testicle, he's aerodynamic. Everybody cut off your balls, you'll be quicker. Do it!"

[Lockeownzj00]

The thing a lot of people fail to realise is drugs have not been the exception, but the norm in biking and the tour de france for years.

I read an article during the last tour de france with interviews of several former and current bikers, many anonymous, talking about the misconception that it was only a few players--indeed, amphetamines, and various other "boosting" drugs were used routinely, with the winners further being based off the drugs as the base skill, not their...well, real base skill.

I wouldn't necessarily put it past him, but I highly doubt it.

Also, see maddox's "i'm not racist, but..." (http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=racist)

[Megiddo]

btw how do u change the color of text?

[Meister]

Megiddo, don't just ask that kind of stuff in the next best thread, especially not in Discussion. It's completely off topic. Here (http://forum.nuklearpower.com/misc.php?do=bbcode) is what you're looking for, but please try and be mindful of these things in the future. Thanks.

[meb955]

there is a reason why i suggested it was too early to comment intelligently on the issues of this story. things just keep coming out about it, like in today's usa today:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How can you prosecute a guy when there have been what must be violations of the WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) code?" Armstrong asked. "The code says when there is just one sample available, that sample must always be anonymous. Second, that sample can't be used without permission. These are serious violations."

Canadian physician Christiane Ayotte, director of the World Anti-Doping Agency-certified lab near WADA headquarters in Montreal, told VeloNews magazine Tuesday that, "We are extremely surprised that (1999) urine samples could have been tested in 2004 and have revealed the presence of EPO. EPO in its natural state or the synthesized version is not stable in urine, even if stored at minus 20 degrees."

The test also has been recently overturned for producing false positives. Belgian triathlete Rutger Beke was cleared Aug. 9 of EPO doping charges despite two positive tests because a review showed he naturally excreted proteins that would give a positive result.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2005-08-24-tour-director_x.htm

the longer this story goes on, the stupider the tour director looks (he's now threatening to take away the 1999 victory, which people have pointed out is illegal) and the magazine that thought it finally had some supporting evidence after years of doping accusations against armstrong with none.

[Archbio]

Now I have a feeling this comment might get a "this wasn't meant to be taken seriously" or "lighten up" response... so if what I'm replying to were jokes, you can juste check this alternative reply: "NOT FUNNY".

The original response: there's no call for the racism. I think the "genetic code" comment as the official signal that there is, in fact, racism. Not that the answer according to which the accusations are motivated by chauvinism is essentially racist. I think it seems likely, if one assumes that the lack of supporting evidence should be interpreted as meaning that he's clean, and the fact that the newspaper in question has always had it out for Amstrong means that it's not trustworthy.

While the racism infused responses actually covers this, they also spill out everywhere. THE french has in it for Amstrong, they say. You know how THEY are, is implied. No matter that the french people quoted in the article have a much more ambiguous reaction, overall, to the information that the comments here let on. And then, there's the suggestion, by Shiney, that they might "strip him of his titles or try to levy any sort of fine, restriction, penalty or punishment on him" while this seems to be put clearly out of the question by officials in the article.

So there you have it: decrying chauvinism while sounding like one is under the influence of chauvinism themselves.

The "THE french" formulation I've seen before around here. In the European Constitution thread, for example, where it was used despite the nonsensical conclusions that it would have led to if it had been thought through.

Also, "surrender" jokes never get old. Ho ho, France was occupied, leading to the death of many! What mirth!

[meb955]

And then, there's the suggestion, by Shiney, that they might "strip him of his titles or try to levy any sort of fine, restriction, penalty or punishment on him" while this seems to be put clearly out of the question by officials in the article.Tour director Jean-Marie Leblanc has threatened to strip Armstrong of the 1999 win, but most point out he doesn't have the authority under the sport's existing doping regulations to do that. he is looking rather foolish for jumping on the side of the magazine so early ("armstrong fooled us" -- and, of course, the tour is put on by the same company that owns the magazine), but at least responsible people in the sport are willing to point out his stupidity in this. it will be interesting how his personal fortunes go as this plays out.

and, as a side note, i'm ashamed to admit it took me hours to identify your sig after i first saw it -- and charades is one of my favorite movies. :(

[Archbio]

Tour director Jean-Marie Leblanc has threatened to strip Armstrong of the 1999 win

I missed that in your previous post (under the dotted line), sorry. Too much too soon, in any case. And if I understand, too much for anytime.

and, of course, the tour is put on by the same company that owns the magazine

Is it possible it's being coordinated? I really don't see what the Tour would gain by this. Like the Sports Minister said, it would be damaging to cycling all around if it was confirmed true; but the unconfirmed accusations are already damaging. And while it would justified to get to the bottom of this if it was true, if the accusations are baseless there's the damage without the justification.

Either way this is a mess.

[meb955]

Is it possible it's being coordinated? I really don't see what the Tour would gain by this. Like the Sports Minister said, it would be damaging to cycling all around if it was confirmed true; but the unconfirmed accusations are already damaging. And while it would justified to get to the bottom of this if it was true, if the accusations are baseless there's the damage without the justification.i doubt the coordination -- leblanc would be out of a job immediately if that was ever confirmed, or even shown likely, and where would he ever find a better one? i think it more likely that leblanc jumped the gun to show he's on the anti-doping side after all the drug use the tour has endured in the recent past, and try to isolate armstrong from the tour if it was true. but he's still looking very foolish, and cyclists are beginning to jump on him today for his convicting before trial.

i wouldn't be surprised if armstrong is correct -- the headlines sold more papers and made the magazine a hot item because at last it had "proof" of a charge it's been making for years. and leblanc just fell into it.