Page 9 - Armstrong used EPO in 99?

26-08.-2005, 08:11 AM

#121

VeloFlash

Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 696

Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sub55

... and was there not another WADA accredited lab saying - "Gee I didn't know you could do that?" ?

Reference?

Quote:

The issue is not with the "lab results" ... we may be reasonably certain that the results are the results however an expected first question has to be with chain of custody.

But not to get bogged down on the lab as in as much as it should not have know whose sample is whose - therefore one can assume it has no vested interest in the outcomes.

The link is between the results and the "documentation" that connects the dots and/or the people that helped connect the dots. This is the blackhole - who blew the whistle? Were they sought out by L'Equipe? Did they get paid? Did they seek out the newspaper and sell a story? Did L'Equipe get the information out of a garbage can by dumpster diving? Is it odd that Leblanc who in effect works for the company that owns the newspaper comes out with the party line?

These are things that I don't know - but for me those pieces of information may help - until I do, or the UCI comes out and says they have investigated all the alleged facts in the case and this is there determination and the accused person has had an opportunity to respond - until then I won't take any rash positions one way or the other

Unless the lab and L'Equipe issue statements providing all the information you believe is essential to throw a light on your black hole then you will continue chasing your tail.

The UCI appears to be the only entity empowered to start an investigation. But as LA has donated dope testing equipment to the UCI they may be reluctant to be seen biting the hand that feeds them.

Failing procuring any information maybe you could fly to France (I am presuming you don't live there) and knock on a few doors and bang on a few desks.

__________________
VF

"Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat"

26-08.-2005, 08:48 AM	#122
sub55 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 78	Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99? or, the alternative as suggested by your response appears to be is to pass judgement based upon one newspaper article? Remind me to look you up when we need a good lynching to happen.

26-08.-2005, 10:52 AM

#123

House

Banned

Join Date: Aug 2004

Posts: 860

Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99?

Quote:

Originally Posted by VeloFlash

Sub55 and House

You are going to have to accept that it is a fact of life that the free media in a free society are the initiating point of publicly revealing all types of illegal and irregular activities that result in formal investigations and then due process.

I am certain that given the long time frame L'Equipe would have considered and reconsidered their French legal position on the evidence they held before reporting. It is standard process for editors to consult lawyers and receive written opinions prior to publishing.

The London Times (?) must have considered their legal position under British law before publishing extracts of 'LA Confidential'. They were selective in their publication compared with the French because of the differences in the law and interpretation of the law.

If L'Equipe have got it wrong then Armstrong will have his day in court which he says will cost him about $US1.5m.

I answer you point by point and this is your only response???? Very disappointing, at least in the saddle cream discussion you actually tried to make some salient points. You yourself said that "all talk is speculation and meaningless" without knowing the chain of custody was maintained. Apparently when you reailsed what you wrote you decided to change tacts to this. Ask Dan Rather and CBS News about considering legal positions in advance. Still waiting for those other sources and the contradiction of your Post example explained. If you would rather just stick with what you wrote above, be my guest.

26-08.-2005, 10:53 AM

#124

VeloFlash

Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 696

Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sub55

or, the alternative as suggested by your response appears to be is to pass judgement based upon one newspaper article?

Remind me to look you up when we need a good lynching to happen.

If you want to argue about due process and rights USA v France then closer to home I would suggest that incarceration without trial and judgement at Guantanamo Bay is not a shining example of the application of the international rules of law and human rights.

It makes any allegations against L'Equipe look comparatively like a church picnic.

__________________
VF

"Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat"

26-08.-2005, 11:31 AM

#125

VeloFlash

Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 696

Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99?

Quote:

Originally Posted by House

"You yourself said that "all talk is speculation and meaningless" without knowing the chain of custody was maintained."

My statement: "Until such time as the organisation that was charged with the control of those samples is asked to officially account about the procedures and evidence of enforcement of those procedures that were in place to ensure the chain of custody was maintained then all talk is speculation and meaningless."

So unless you have evidence that the chain of custody was broken what is the point of speculating about the possibility it may have been broken.

Quote:

If you have seen many, then please share them with us, don't just quote one. This is a doping forum, a place to provide as much info as possible to help people know about and make decisions about doping. Don't hold out or you will start sounding like Flyer.

Firstly read CyclingNews where they speak in the plural. I will check on my "history" to find another forum's references to particular quotes by industry experts criticising the good Canadian scientist's opinions which, if you read a prior Biscayne post on this thread (#103), she has now gone into damage control from the professional criticism by saying or retracting:

"I don't dispute their findings," Ayotte said. "If there's residual EPO after five years, it was properly identified."

Quote:

The Post did not have him in their cross hairs proves that a paper with a history of attacking the subject coming up with something is not odd??? L'Equipe has been known to run anything and everything that was negative towards Lance whether confirmed or not.

So what is your argument? If The Washington Post was going for Nixon's jugular over a period of time then the subsequent reporting of the Watergate break-in connection to the White House would have no credibility or should not have been published?

Remember Woodward and Bernstein were not relying on publicly accountable evidence that could be admissible in a court of law. They were relying upon an undisclosed informant, "Deep Throat", who they met at all times clandestinely and whose identity was only released after 30 years. The source of evidence by L'Equipe has more standing on that front.

You are trying to offer an unsustainable plea that as L'Equipe had been in pursuit of Armstrong over a period of years any "evidence" produced of LA's doping violations must be considered suspect. Is the WADA accredited lab involved in this conspiracy too?

__________________
VF

"Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat"

26-08.-2005, 12:00 PM	#126
House Banned Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 860	Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99? 1) Your answer to the issue about Chain of Custody shows how closed minded you are on the topic. Since their is no proof that there was a break in the chain there is no point speculating, while ignoring the fact that there is no proof that the chain is pristine, thus you shouldn't speculate otherwise. You are suddenly picking and choosing what is appropriate to speculate on and what isn't...and conveniently what is ok fits your side. It seems logical that a predigious WADA approved facilty like this one in France (like the one in Canada by the way) would be quick to say that the chain was pristine if it was true, why haven't they? You speculate on things that there is no proof on but tell others not to do the same. Try looking in the mirror. 2) As I said (but you are now ignoring, like the Pantani stuff, etc.) She is commenting in a professional way, not ripping her colleagues but saying a key word "if." In other words she still questions it. 3) You tried to argue that L'Equipe's constant attacks were ok because they equate to the Post and Watergate, but then admitted that the Post wasn't out to get Nixon. You contradict yourself. Now you try to argue the other way. Contradiction.

26-08.-2005, 01:13 PM

#127

Verite

Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2005

Posts: 14

Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99?

Quote:

Originally Posted by House

1) Your answer to the issue about Chain of Custody shows how closed minded you are on the topic. Since their is no proof that there was a break in the chain there is no point speculating, while ignoring the fact that there is no proof that the chain is pristine, thus you shouldn't speculate otherwise. You are suddenly picking and choosing what is appropriate to speculate on and what isn't...and conveniently what is ok fits your side. It seems logical that a predigious WADA approved facilty like this one in France (like the one in Canada by the way) would be quick to say that the chain was pristine if it was true, why haven't they? You speculate on things that there is no proof on but tell others not to do the same. Try looking in the mirror.

2) As I said (but you are now ignoring, like the Pantani stuff, etc.) She is commenting in a professional way, not ripping her colleagues but saying a key word "if." In other words she still questions it.

3) You tried to argue that L'Equipe's constant attacks were ok because they equate to the Post and Watergate, but then admitted that the Post wasn't out to get Nixon. You contradict yourself. Now you try to argue the other way. Contradiction.

You are assuming that L'Equipe was out 'to get' Armstrong. Once again I'm going to ask you for proof of that. I don't want your opinion, I want you to give us all proof that this newspaper was out to get Armstrong. Of course you won't because you can't and you know it. All you can do, and all you've been doing, is using double-talk to attempt to support your incredibly weak arguments. By the way, since you claim to be an expert on any and all things ever published by L'Equipe that means you must speak french so when you reply to me please respond en francais. Et ne t'inquiete pas. Je parle francais donc je comprendrai tout ce que vous allez dire. Un chose de plus, t'est vraiment con.

26-08.-2005, 01:17 PM

#128

VeloFlash

Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 696

Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99?

Quote:

Originally Posted by House

Your logic or illogic has lost me here. I have never speculated. You have by saying we need confirmation of "this" (meaning chain of custody). You are not satisfied it has been maintained because it relates to the credibility of an American Hero and, in assisting to discredit, the lab should have presented parallel statements with L'Equipe, or quickly thereafter, about the chain of custody history of LA samples as evidential support [rolleyes]. Is this correct?

Quote:

2) As I said (but you are now ignoring, like the Pantani stuff, etc.) She is commenting in a professional way, not ripping her colleagues but saying a key word "if." In other words she still questions it.

She said "I don't dispute their findings," Ayotte said "If there was residual EPO there after 5 years, it was properly identified."
Where does the word "if" make it conditional if she now says she does not dispute their findings. Contrast to her previous stand where she claimed the EPO protein quickly degraded and was undetectable after 3 months plus, in her opinion, the 2004 findings were the application of a newer mathematical model on old 2000 or 2001 testing results. Now she must concede it was not the application of a newer mathematical model to old data but an actual analysis of 5 year old samples.

Quote:

3) You tried to argue that L'Equipe's constant attacks were ok because they equate to the Post and Watergate, but then admitted that the Post wasn't out to get Nixon. You contradict yourself. Now you try to argue the other way. Contradiction.

No I did not. Whether The Washington Post or L'Equipe would have credibility, using your argument, to publish damning evidence was totally dependent upon their past behaviour towards the "victim." L'Equipe should not publish because of their past anti Armstrong position. Pretty dopey logic.

__________________
VF

"Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat"

26-08.-2005, 02:08 PM	#129
sub55 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 78	Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99? tell ya'what ... we've all stated our positions, argued back and forth and doesn't seem as if any of us are going to surrender, so lets wait and see how this all unfolds and maybe when the dust all settles we'll see if any of knew what the heck we were talking about. Unless of course you want to say "sorry" now in which case I humbly accept your apology.

26-08.-2005, 05:33 PM

#130

holli

Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2003

Location: Winnipeg, MB, Canada

Posts: 152

Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99?

Quote:

Originally Posted by House

Conveniently ignoring this quote:

"EPO in it's natural state or the synthesized version- is not stable in urine, even if stored at -20 degrees"

I would say that was something that was dismissed...by you as well. The line you quote is defined by two things: 1) Professionalism- she wasn't going to just come out and say her colleagues suck. 2) The word "if" an obvious way of maintaining prefessionalism while saying you disagree.

MJte- Don't know what your deal is, but I was responding to veloflash taking one doctors word and not anothers. Didn't really add much to this except a little bit of a fit, did you?

If I understood everything right they don't try to find EPO from the samples. They look for changes EPO causes in urine. It's true that EPO has very short half-life and that might be one reason why there wasn't more positive results. It also depends on a question which this Canadian was answering, because if they asked could EPO be found from five year old samples she'd definitely answer no because EPO as protein would be undetected after 6-12 months of storage even in -20c.

I'm waiting for more information, other than something provided by newspapers.

__________________
Pain is just weakness leaving the body.

26-08.-2005, 06:52 PM	#131
pantani_lives Registered User Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 13	Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99? Armstrong's whole career is based on doping. It's a public secret. He will never get a sanction, because he paid the UCI for protection and because WADA and USADA are protecting him too. What L'Equipe wrote is true, what Simeoni said is true. People who don't want to see this are brainwashed by seven years of bad taste propaganda. He should be disqualified for every race since 1999. As long as this doesn't happen, cycling is a hypocrite sport.

26-08.-2005, 10:15 PM	#132
huhenio Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: SE Penna Posts: 529	Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!! To try a new EPO testing technique .... who in his right mind would use a 7 year old sample? - NPR - If you are just "testing" a new lab method , there are plenty perfecly non controversial EPO positives - like medicated patients under EPO - to perform the new test with. If the spamles are unstable and the EPO protein breaks down .... what in heaven's name prevents the "unbiased" scientists to get fresh samples that would yield absolute positive and absolutely negative? They where "just testing" after all. Dont come here and tell me that there is a world shortage of samples. How convenient that the key for matching samples with the cyclists "leaked" - pun intended - to the world to know the sample owner. This is crooked from the beggining. And lastly ... If there such obvious slack on security - the key ppl, the key - and the names leaked ... what prevents "unkown" hands to get a hold on the samples - or results for all that matters - and contaminate them? For me ... it is all so crooked that make me want to pee all over the place. If Armstrong cheated is only for him to know at this point. I hope that this crappy fanzine sold enough copies to cover the expenses for the libel lawsuits to come. __________________ 2003 Gary Fisher Zebrano (standard gearing) Comfort commuter with drop and aero bars. Think of a Buick. 1974 Schwinn Traveler Fixed Gear Conversion (42x13) Think of some medieval torture element that goes fast Wheelist, show me the bike!!!!!!!

26-08.-2005, 11:38 PM	#133
House Banned Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 860	Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99? Velo- your rebuttal skills have gone downhill fast, you are approaching Flyer level. It's pretty sad that you've fallen to crap like that considering how enjoyable it was to debate you in the past. Now you are down to contradicting yourself, ignoring accusations you made that were refuted and playing dumb. I guess my role in this discussion is over having obviously driven you to the bottom of the barrel. I guess we'll chat in the next thread.

26-08.-2005, 11:49 PM

#134

Borg

Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2004

Posts: 79

Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biscayne

If L'Equipe was really "out to get" Armstrong, they would have cut a deal with a major U.S. daily (like the NY Times or USA Today or The Sporting News) for a reprint in English and broad distribution in the U.S. As it stands, the U.S. is where Armstrong's endorsements are, etc. If somebody was "out to get him," that's the first thing they would have done.

Is there animosity? I'm sure there is. Armstrong mocked, demeaned, dismissed and impugned the European media his entire career. Imagine how you'd feel if you simply did your job and reported the news of USPS dumping the Activegin and insulin vials, only to have your professionalism attacked and your character impugned by Armstrong. I think anyone would bear some animosity. And, after years of having someone attack your professionalism and character and arrogantly mock you as a bunch of wrong-way Corrigans, and wag his finger in your face and say, "I'm so friggin' good at this you'll never catch me, you bunch of buffoons. You'll never be able to prove it, and I can get the people to dismiss you." Damn straight when the reporters finally nail his ass to the wall, there's going to be some attitude attached to it, and there will be a sense of satisfaction that he got what he had coming, and that he made his own bed.

It's very popular to talk about how horrible it is that anyone would dare question Armstrong's character. Yet nobody says squat about Armstrong's relentless and meanspirited attacks on other people's characters, many of whom were simply doing their jobs.

Beautifully put Biscayne!!! Don't forget his chastisement of Filipo Simeoni last year...

27-08.-2005, 03:15 AM	#135
tsm26 Registered User Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 2	Re: Armstrong used EPO in 99? I have a suggestion for everyone on the side of L'Equipe. Please don't write in almost every post something attacking the entire American public, and saying things like "American sheep" and that we are all stupid. It doesn't help your case that Europeans on message boards are often just out to attack Americans any time they can. "When in doubt discount their comments because they are an American" The funny thing is that I am leaning toward the report being true and have been since the beginning. I have no loyalty to Lance, and never enjoyed his personality. It is an insult to someone like me who lived in Ukraine for several years, and has a German grandmother, and family who knows many European languages to have the same people attack us. Let me tell you from first hand knowledge that Europe and America are both full of idiots, neither has a monopoly. Stop the generalizing or the poster just comes off as being bitter, "intellectual", envious jerks.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode