Cycling and bicycle racing discussion forums.   View New Forum Topics
Today's Forum Topics

Set as homepage


Go Back   Cycling Forums > Bike Racing > Grand Tours - Giro - Tour de France - Vuelta a España
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Welcome to CyclingForums.com

You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread.

By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds.


Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:15 AM   #46
limerickman
Community Team
 
limerickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: at the bar
Posts: 12,487
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by antoineg
The only 2 things that are evidence that LA does NOT dope are:

1) he has never tested positive for drugs
2) he and his team says he hasn't.

Given a little bit of time, I can point out lots of riders who were in the same category who were retroactively found to be doping. The most recent high-profile cases, off the top of my head, are Millar, Virenque, and Rumsas.

Now, the evidence that he MIGHT dope are:

1) well-known association with a guy under trial for providing drugs to cyclists
2) general acknowledgement by cycling authorities and observers that doping is still a large problem in the peleton
3) general and widespread knowledge of how to beat tests
4) observation that there are "designer drugs" like THG that are untestable, unless someone gets lucky and sends a syringe full of it to the authorities
5) Lack of penalties for doping, as witnessed by the enormous following that Virenque and Millar still have among cycling fans
6) Curious and frankly amazing comeback from serious, life-threatening cancer, in 18 months, to win the first of 6 TdF titles.
7) His pressure and intimidation of Simeoni, who is publicly accusing his personal doctor
8) comments made by Emma O'Reilly, former USPS soigneur
9) observations by French journalists of USPS staff driving 100 miles to dispose of medical waste -- found to contain actovegin, a drug that artificially thins the blood
10) lance testing positive for a corticosteroid in 1999, then getting a reputed back-dated prescription from a team doctor

I've i've missed anything (on either side) let me know.


Throw in the close relationship between Armstrong and various Bo-technological companies.
Armstrong is in receipt of considerable commercial endorsement from these companies - is it beyond the pale to suggest that he or his team may receive
drugs from same ?

Throw in his clandestine training regime and cycling program : typically doping is phased so as to avoid detection but to maximise performances when competing.
limerickman is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:25 AM   #47
RedSky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 52
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman
Throw in the close relationship between Armstrong and various Bo-technological companies.
Armstrong is in receipt of considerable commercial endorsement from these companies - is it beyond the pale to suggest that he or his team may receive
drugs from same ?

Throw in his clandestine training regime and cycling program : typically doping is phased so as to avoid detection but to maximise performances when competing.

OK, then if Lance Armstrong is caught cheating we can all buy you a pint and you can say "I told you so."

In the meantime, I'm keeping the pints to myself.
RedSky is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:25 AM   #48
antoineg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 246
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by rejobako
Your point #1 on the other side is overwhelmingly compelling in comparison to the threadbare "allegations" above, most of which amount to a slipshod indictment of the sport itself, not Lance Armstrong.

How overwhelming is it when we know of many other cyclists who have not tested positive at point A but at point B were found to have been doping back at point A?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rejobako
Maybe he's doping; maybe not.

Agreed: let's let the people decide by themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rejobako
In the meantime, however, the sheer volume of hysteria

How have I been hysterical?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rejobako
from so many people based on conjecture and hypothesis without facts

to turn the tables, it would appear from some posters' comments that even if the USPS bus were searched and the authorities found empty EPO vials you might not consider that as a "fact".
Quote:
Originally Posted by rejobako
he's also a hyper-dedicated and deserving champion of the most revered trophy in the cycling world -- six times over.

This is really what we're up against: superhero worship by people who need to put LA on a pedestal. In my humble opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rejobako
Deal with it.

I'm quite comfortably dealing with it -- are you?
antoineg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:33 AM   #49
birdman23
Registered User
 
birdman23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 571
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman
Throw in the close relationship between Armstrong and various Bo-technological companies.
Armstrong is in receipt of considerable commercial endorsement from these companies - is it beyond the pale to suggest that he or his team may receive
drugs from same ?

Throw in his clandestine training regime and cycling program : typically doping is phased so as to avoid detection but to maximise performances when competing.


Various companies? Which ones? I only know of one. He is a spokesperson for Bristol Meyer Squibb, the company that made the medications that saved his life during his cancer treatments.

Yes it is beyond pale to suggest they receive drugs from the company. It is speculation and conjecture at its worst Limerickman. You are really grasping at straws here.

Did you see the "vitamins" on LA's night stand in his hotel room. The crafty bastard put his dope right there on the night stand and told the cameras to not show the vitamins for fear of the press saying they saw pills in his room. What a brilliant strategy!! He put the drugs in plain sight and laughed it off when he said "don't show the vitamins".
__________________
May the road you ride be a good road!
birdman23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:35 AM   #50
RedSky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 52
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by antoineg

This is really what we're up against: superhero worship by people who need to put LA on a pedestal. In my humble opinion.

He's already on a pedestal, mate. This is his sixth trip. You're just trying to tear him down.
RedSky is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:36 AM   #51
birdman23
Registered User
 
birdman23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 571
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSky
OK, then if Lance Armstrong is caught cheating we can all buy you a pint and you can say "I told you so."

In the meantime, I'm keeping the pints to myself.

Exactly, so until he is caught everyone shut the hell up about it already. And I guess plan on shutting the hell up for a long time cause the guy is clean.
__________________
May the road you ride be a good road!
birdman23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:39 AM   #52
meehs
Registered User
 
meehs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Posts: 1,848
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by antoineg
The only 2 things that are evidence that LA does NOT dope are:

1) he has never tested positive for drugs
2) he and his team says he hasn't.

Given a little bit of time, I can point out lots of riders who were in the same category who were retroactively found to be doping. The most recent high-profile cases, off the top of my head, are Millar, Virenque, and Rumsas.

Now, the evidence that he MIGHT dope are:

1) well-known association with a guy under trial for providing drugs to cyclists
2) general acknowledgement by cycling authorities and observers that doping is still a large problem in the peleton
3) general and widespread knowledge of how to beat tests
4) observation that there are "designer drugs" like THG that are untestable, unless someone gets lucky and sends a syringe full of it to the authorities
5) Lack of penalties for doping, as witnessed by the enormous following that Virenque and Millar still have among cycling fans
6) Curious and frankly amazing comeback from serious, life-threatening cancer, in 18 months, to win the first of 6 TdF titles.
7) His pressure and intimidation of Simeoni, who is publicly accusing his personal doctor
8) comments made by Emma O'Reilly, former USPS soigneur
9) observations by French journalists of USPS staff driving 100 miles to dispose of medical waste -- found to contain actovegin, a drug that artificially thins the blood
10) lance testing positive for a corticosteroid in 1999, then getting a reputed back-dated prescription from a team doctor

I've i've missed anything (on either side) let me know.


I don't know if you've missed anything on the "might be a doper" side but to include such broad generalizations and hearsay on your list of "evidence" that Lance MIGHT be a doper is comical!

Let's see here are a few I could add to the "not a doper evidence list" some of which use your own broad catagorization as to what we can consider to be "evidence".

1. Lack of one single shred of physical evidence that Armstrong has doped. Only speculation and hearsay. (you seem to have missed that one, oops!)
2. Armstrong's physical and mental transformation post-cancer along with his increased dedication to training and diet are just as valid an explanation for his improvement as doping.
3. Not a single one of Armstrong's peers in the peleton has accused Armstrong of doping or even insinuated it. Only cynics and the media.
4. EPO and other performance enhancers have proven not to provide the huge performance boost that the nay-sayers would have you beleive that it has given Armstrong. Virenque, Millar, Festina... Big winners?
5. Armstrong does not perform at a unbelievably high level whe compared to his main competitors. (Are they all dopers?)
6. It would be foolish for Armstrong to risk what would happen to his career and reputation if he were busted.
7. Decision by Jean-Marie Leblanc to omit not only riders charged of a doping offense but also those under investigation.
8. It's unlikely that someone who has suffered a near death experience with cancer would want to introduce a foreign substance into their body. (Yeah I know but read some of the "evidence" on your list)

There, combined with the two you already listed, that equals your "evidence" that he might be a doper. Maybe thos of us giving Armstrong the benefit of the doubt are being naive. But some of the "evidence" that those wanting to condemn him are putting forth is ridiculous! General widespread knowledge on how to beat tests???? Yep, you nailed him! That's it! He's guilty! Gimme a break!
meehs is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:47 AM   #53
HuckFinn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 24
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Some irritating non-English parts included, but quite informative:

http://www.ergogenics.org/donati.html
HuckFinn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:47 AM   #54
meehs
Registered User
 
meehs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Posts: 1,848
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman
Throw in the close relationship between Armstrong and various Bo-technological companies.
Armstrong is in receipt of considerable commercial endorsement from these companies - is it beyond the pale to suggest that he or his team may receive
drugs from same ?

Throw in his clandestine training regime and cycling program : typically doping is phased so as to avoid detection but to maximise performances when competing.


I think that to suggest that one of Armstrong's commercial sponsors (I assume you're refering to Bristol Meyers Squibb? there's only one incedently) would supply him with drugs that would bring him down (if he were caught) and thereby destroy the credibility of their ad campaign and their company is absurd. You've completely outdone yourself in grasping at straws this time.
meehs is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 04:56 AM   #55
birdman23
Registered User
 
birdman23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 571
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
I think that to suggest that one of Armstrong's commercial sponsors (I assume you're refering to Bristol Meyers Squibb? there's only one incedently) would supply him with drugs that would bring him down (if he were caught) and thereby destroy the credibility of their ad campaign and their company is absurd. You've completely outdone yourself in grasping at straws this time.

Are you kidding Meehs? Limerickman and all the other naysayers are correct. They have finally convinced me. Of course a multi billion dollar company would stake its entire reputation for the chance to get a few more measly dollars. I am sure they had a share holder meeting about the subject. "All those in favor of giving Lance illegal drugs say I..." And of course it was unanimous.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

Limerick you are slipping here and it is disappointing. Come on man you are better than that. LMFAO
__________________
May the road you ride be a good road!
birdman23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 05:14 AM   #56
limerickman
Community Team
 
limerickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: at the bar
Posts: 12,487
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
I think that to suggest that one of Armstrong's commercial sponsors (I assume you're refering to Bristol Meyers Squibb? there's only one incedently) would supply him with drugs that would bring him down (if he were caught) and thereby destroy the credibility of their ad campaign and their company is absurd. You've completely outdone yourself in grasping at straws this time.


Southampton University tonight announced the first ever test to detect
Human Growth Hormone.
The IOC have requested this test to be used in Athens and the test will be used in Athens.
So what does have to do with Bristol Myers ?

Dr Caroline Porter project manager at Southampton University named Bristol
Myers Squibb as the leading developer of HGH in the world.
HGH has been undectable - until now that is.
Southampton University's tests can detect HGH usage within the last 36 hours and have a secondary test which can detect HGH usage during the past 84 hours.

Quote Porter "this development is radical. The bio-technology companies
are interested in profit and will develope drugs for profit primarily.
The ethical question as to how those drugs are used is immaterial.
Sport generates £26 billion per year.
The drug companies are not particularly concerned with helping the drug detection agencies in the detection of performance enhancing drugs in sport.
This new test is a positive step against the cheats - and it is also a step against the profittering of those bio-tech companies who distribute these drugs and have no concern who or how their end product is used".
limerickman is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 05:20 AM   #57
TrekDedicated
Registered User
 
TrekDedicated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Moving to the South, USA
Posts: 1,105
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

__________________
TrekDedicated no more

Orbea Orca
Full Dura-Ace
Mavic Ksyrium ES Wheels


Wake Forest Cycling

The Small Biz. Guru
TrekDedicated is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 05:20 AM   #58
antoineg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 246
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
1. Lack of one single shred of physical evidence that Armstrong has doped. Only speculation and hearsay. (you seem to have missed that one, oops!)

If by speculation and hearsay you discount Emma O'Reilly, then OK.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
2. Armstrong's physical and mental transformation post-cancer along with his increased dedication to training and diet are just as valid an explanation for his improvement as doping.

If that's all it took, then a lot of cyclists might be more superior, even without going through cancer. You act like he's the only guy that trains. Look, he's a specimen to be sure but it's not like he's competing against Barney Rubble.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
3. Not a single one of Armstrong's peers in the peleton has accused Armstrong of doping or even insinuated it. Only cynics and the media.

Not true. Former USPS riders have insinuated it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
4. EPO and other performance enhancers have proven not to provide the huge performance boost that the nay-sayers would have you beleive that it has given Armstrong. Virenque, Millar, Festina... Big winners?

Laughable. Show me the "proof" that EPO doesn't work. EPO is huge. Virenque is the all-team leader in King of the Mountains, Millar was world time-trial champion. Rumsas took third in the TdF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
5. Armstrong does not perform at a unbelievably high level whe compared to his main competitors. (Are they all dopers?)

Not sure, but some knowledgable estimates put the incidence of EPO use as high as 90%. Former rider knowledgable, not internet yahoo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
6. It would be foolish for Armstrong to risk what would happen to his career and reputation if he were busted.

Doesn't stop most people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
7. Decision by Jean-Marie Leblanc to omit not only riders charged of a doping offense but also those under investigation.

Armstrong is not under investigation for doping right now, that I know of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
8. It's unlikely that someone who has suffered a near death experience with cancer would want to introduce a foreign substance into their body.

That's your judgment, and as I pointed out, would you take cocaine for $10,000,000 a year? Many would. People do stupid shit all the time for way less of a payday than Lance gets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meehs
Maybe thos of us giving Armstrong the benefit of the doubt are being naive.

That's my judgement. Doping is very widespread in sports, and it's naive to think otherwise.
antoineg is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 05:22 AM   #59
birdman23
Registered User
 
birdman23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 571
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman
Southampton University tonight announced the first ever test to detect
Human Growth Hormone.
The IOC have requested this test to be used in Athens and the test will be used in Athens.
So what does have to do with Bristol Myers ?

Dr Caroline Porter project manager at Southampton University named Bristol
Myers Squibb as the leading developer of HGH in the world.
HGH has been undectable - until now that is.
Southampton University's tests can detect HGH usage within the last 36 hours and have a secondary test which can detect HGH usage during the past 84 hours.

Quote Porter "this development is radical. The bio-technology companies
are interested in profit and will develope drugs for profit primarily.
The ethical question as to how those drugs are used is immaterial.
Sport generates £26 billion per year.
The drug companies are not particularly concerned with helping the drug detection agencies in the detection of performance enhancing drugs in sport.
This new test is a positive step against the cheats - and it is also a step against the profittering of those bio-tech companies who distribute these drugs and have no concern who or how their end product is used".

Source please. The articles I have read about this say nothing of BMS.
Never mind the source thing I am now convinced every rider in the peloton is a doper. This must be why Lance declined going to the Olympics right? There, that was a freebie for your arsenal of speculation Limerickman.
__________________
May the road you ride be a good road!
birdman23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 29-07.-2004, 05:25 AM   #60
meehs
Registered User
 
meehs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Posts: 1,848
Default Re: Armstrong/Seimoni Round 2...

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman
Southampton University tonight announced the first ever test to detect
Human Growth Hormone.
The IOC have requested this test to be used in Athens and the test will be used in Athens.
So what does have to do with Bristol Myers ?

Dr Caroline Porter project manager at Southampton University named Bristol
Myers Squibb as the leading developer of HGH in the world.
HGH has been undectable - until now that is.
Southampton University's tests can detect HGH usage within the last 36 hours and have a secondary test which can detect HGH usage during the past 84 hours.

Quote Porter "this development is radical. The bio-technology companies
are interested in profit and will develope drugs for profit primarily.
The ethical question as to how those drugs are used is immaterial.
Sport generates £26 billion per year.
The drug companies are not particularly concerned with helping the drug detection agencies in the detection of performance enhancing drugs in sport.
This new test is a positive step against the cheats - and it is also a step against the profittering of those bio-tech companies who distribute these drugs and have no concern who or how their end product is used".


HGH is used to treat a number of different conditions and from what I understand it's becoming a new "supplement of choice" in the battle against aging (at least for those who are adverse to exercising and watching their diet ). So there a a number of ways BMS could profit from distribution of the drug outside of drug cheats.

Anyway what am I missing? How are you implying that this ties into Armstrong being a doper??? Because this Porter woman made the implication that BMS might be profiting from sport cheats? More speculation? Like I said, this time we're really grasping at straws. Sorry.
meehs is offline  
Reply With Quote

Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT +10. The time now is 09:16 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 cyclingforums.com

Links to websites we like:
Pezcyclingnews | Cyclingnews.com | Wine Zone | iinet