Lance Armstrong and the Tour de France (Page 4)

LMAO!  Fantastic

Remember, Hgh IS NOT detectable.

My dad has been such an inspiration to me, that I hope he is never shown to have robbed a bank, and I will continue to give him the benefit of the doubt.

However, the thing that will always bother me is this: My Dad is so obsessive about every aspect of financial preparation (stocks, mutual funds, doing late-night research, etc.), it's hard for me to see how he could have avoided utilizing something like robbing a bank that can make such a huge difference in one's financial standing. I saw one study showing that robbing banks can increase one's net worth by 54% - now, this was a small study, and not in professional bank robbers, so an amateur like my dad probably wouldn't get that degree of benefit, but still, it would make a significant difference. But if you're obsessing over the daily price of a stock, or five basis points, how can you ignore something that many others are doing that increases net worth 20-50%?

Please don't shoot me - save your bullets for when you rob the bank, I love my Dad and he's changed my life in such a positive way, that I hope it's shown that he has never robbed a bank.

I have been following the discussion.  A few things have not been mentioned  or barely touched in all this: 1) the declaration process of drug testing, 2 the obsessive nature of the drug testing agencies to prove LA guilty 3) the reliability of the labs and the testing procedures used, and 4) the pain threshold of Lance.

1)      All athletes are able to make declarations of drugs that are in their system when submitting to drug testing…including banned substances that are being used for legitimate medical purposes, ie.  Cortisone injections.  They have to have the paperwork to back it up.   One thing, we have never been privy to are those declarations.  Remember, he was still undergoing treatment for cancer approx. 5 years after Oct 1996.  Lance may have received EPO, hGH, or other "performance enhancing substances" during his recovery from cancer and chemotherapy treatments but was able to declare them and passed as a result.   Also, the levels he may have been taking did not cause his various marker levels to go outside the norms so again he passed. 

2)      It amazes me that the LA frozen “B” samples are still being used to test the reliability of new drug testing procedures.  If that’s not obsessive, I don’t know what is.  I read Landis' book, Falsely Positive.  He describes how during the first phone call between the USADA lawyers, his lawyers, and he that a deal was offered to him.  He would get a 6 months suspension and be back for TDF 2007 if he gave up big names, ie Lance.  He said he couldn’t because he never saw and never heard anything regarding LA doping.    The other obsessive issues relates to the close relationship that these labs all seem to have with that one French paper who seems to always get the scoop…L’Equipe.  That is not ethical medical practice by any stretch. 

3)      I would question the reliability of any lab and the tests. I have read research articles regarding the reliability of testing to detect certain drugs in urine and blood.  They weren’t too impressive.  The tests are neither reliable nor foolproof.  It comes down to skill and care of the technician performing the test.  Unless the same person is performing the test time and time again in the exact manner each time, I question the intra-tester reliability.  I still even question the inter-tester reliability based upon consistency in the method used. The WADA organization utilizes 500 different labs around the world.  I am sure they are close but close only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes.  Also, after reading  a few books about doping and performance enhancing drugs (I teach a drug testing section), There is not a consistent norm as to what is considered illegal.  The doping agencies in the various countries have different standards as to what is considered illegal.  Also, the doping agencies are also self-governed.  They answer to know one.  They is no oversight organization to keep them honest.  They have been known to make up their own rules as they see fit.

4)      Pain tolerance.  Pain tolerance is individualistic.  The message I get from reading about TDF success is the athlete’s ability to suffer and push through the suffering better than the rest of the field.  Lance is physiologic freak that has been discussed in articles, TV, etc...   He has a high pain threshold in general due to the feakish physiological makeup.    Landis’ AVN of the hip helped to increase his pain tolerance.   Think of the pain you feel when you really push yourself up a steep climb.  Now, put that in the perspective of climbing in the Alps, could you really continue that long?  There is a lot to be said for working at high levels despite the pain…10% physical 90% mental isn’t that they saying?

Sorry for the length.

Are you sure that Lance was still receiving treatment for cancer up to 5 years after Oct 96?

He had regular checkups until the 5 year mark (which is when he was officially declared cancer free) but I don't think that he was receiving any treatment during this time.  This 5 year period was just when, if the cancer was going to come back, it was most likely that it would, hence the reason for regular checkups and why LA celebrates this 5 year mark.

No I am not sure.  We will never know what he was on and for how long after.  It is a possibility that no one has ever acknowledged.  Personally, I know that I will be on my cancer related drugs until 5 years for some and for the rest of my life for other to keep cancer at bay.  Since I am early in this process....I am hoping to get "the Lance Effect".

So reading through this thread, and reading NLs great response.. the only argument I see put forth for why LA doped is that he was a cyclist, and others did it. This is the weakest argument of all, you are stating guilty by association.. association through the sport in which  he is competing.

From hence forth, Bonds, Clemens, Jones all did not dope because most of their peers have not been busted for doping. I don't care what the tests say.. it just has to be that they didn't do it, because others weren't doing it 

???????????

The 'tests' say none of those athletes ever doped either.  They got 'caught' because someone else ended up fingering them.  Only Jones has actually admitted it (right before she was about to be sentenced for perjury).  So Bonds & Clemens are innocent until proven guilty too.

Although I am loathe to post anything in this thread, I just have to say.....

well played sir [golf clap]

Haha.. I hate when facts get in the way.. see the media has done so much to sway me.. that I thought they had actually tested positive on a test 

Ha, I missed that.  Well done.