How Lance could prove he is not on EPO

"brianb" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

why doesn't he let himself get tested every day for two months before
the tour? Then maybe that would prove that he is not on it?

Lance doesn't have anything to prove anymore. He's done it all. It's up to
those [censored] to prove he's a cheater, and that will never happen. I can't
believe anyone who has nearly died from cancer, scared [censored], would then
[censored] around with drugs. Go figure. Lance doesn't even know how long he will
live. His cancer could return. Do you think he is really that careless. His
incredible discipline, cool demeanor and prudent judgement doesn't give
itself to those kinds of risks.

Sierraman said:

Lance doesn't even know how long he will live.

Something he has in common with most of us. Not to knock Lance or
anything, just a litte friendly reminder.

[email hidden] (brianb) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

why doesn't he let himself get tested every day for two months before
the tour? Then maybe that would prove that he is not on it?

Because EPO only has about 2 weeks of effect and he is tested every
day for 3 weeks without showing anything abnormal in his blood?

I really like the medical experts here giving us all of the great ways
of "proving" stuff. The fact is that Lance is tested so much that he
looks like a pin cushion. EPO is only directly detectable for a couple
of days but the effects on your blood are EASILY detectable and if he
were using EPO there would have been a massive leak from one of the
laboratories describing immature red blood cells and several other
side effects from using EPO.

I guess I also have to wonder how Lance had been shown from an early
age to be greatly talented and a national class triathlete BEFORE EPO
had been developed.

Luckily Lance is able to laugh at all of this because he is a
multimillionaire now and most of his detractors would be lucky to be
hundred-aires.

"Ernst Noch" wrote...

Quoted message said:

Sierraman said:

Lance doesn't even know how long he will live.

Something he has in common with most of us. Not to knock Lance or
anything, just a litte friendly reminder.

You mean some of us know how long we will live?

JF

Jim Flom said:

"Ernst Noch" wrote...

Quoted message said:

Sierraman said:

Lance doesn't even know how long he will live.

Something he has in common with most of us. Not to knock Lance or
anything, just a litte friendly reminder.

You mean some of us know how long we will live?

Absolutely. Sadly, these moments of clarity are nearly always quite short.

"Jim Flom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:dQUJc.47571$Rf.15353@edtnps84...

Quoted message said:

"Ernst Noch" wrote...

Quoted message said:

Sierraman said:

Lance doesn't even know how long he will live.

Something he has in common with most of us. Not to knock Lance or
anything, just a litte friendly reminder.

You mean some of us know how long we will live?

You can always cast your lot early, so much for the fatalists.

Quoted message said:

JF

Jim Flom said:

"Ernst Noch" wrote...

Quoted message said:

Sierraman said:

Lance doesn't even know how long he will live.

Something he has in common with most of us. Not to knock Lance or
anything, just a litte friendly reminder.

You mean some of us know how long we will live?

Yeh if you walk in to a gang house and state your opinion that they are
all homosexuals and need to find Jesus, you can be sure your lifespan
will be in the minutes to hours range.

If he cracked tomorrow, that would prove it.

Sierraman said:

Lance doesn't have anything to prove anymore. He's done it all. It's
up to those [censored] to prove he's a cheater, and that will never
happen. I can't believe anyone who has nearly died from cancer,
scared [censored], would then [censored] around with drugs.

Again with this nonsensical rationalization. People who survive cancer still
smoke, and they're not being paid 100s of thousands of $$ to do so. Simply
because he survived cancer is no reason to leave the drugs alone.

Kyle Legate said:

Sierraman said:

Lance doesn't have anything to prove anymore. He's done it all. It's
up to those [censored] to prove he's a cheater, and that will never
happen. I can't believe anyone who has nearly died from cancer,
scared [censored], would then [censored] around with drugs.

Again with this nonsensical rationalization. People who survive cancer still
smoke, and they're not being paid 100s of thousands of $$ to do so. Simply
because he survived cancer is no reason to leave the drugs alone.

and of course the assumption is that he's on something as plebian as
EPO.... You woukld expect that with his resources, should he decide he
needed that [censored], he'd have acess to the very finest, cuytting edge, non
detectable stuff. You know the stuff that noone has heard of yet.

Faster Bordello said:

and of course the assumption is that he's on something as plebian as
EPO.... You woukld expect that with his resources, should he decide he
needed that [censored], he'd have acess to the very finest, cuytting edge, non
detectable stuff. You know the stuff that noone has heard of yet.

Kinda like 1989?

I read countless articles on Google groups on doping issues. "Does
Lance use Drugs," "Mayo has to be on something to beat Lance by 1:30"
.. The bottom line is this; Just like the kids in school who smoke
weed, the people that cut on their taxes, and George bush who has
screwed Millions of people. Yes athletes take performance enhancing
drugs. Not all of them, just the few who are greedy for success,
money, and power to kick everyone else's ass. Like cheating in a
simple game of poker they feel guilt just like everyone else. The
only difference is when you take performance enhancing drugs there is
no telling home years it takes off you life. If they want to take
drug and cheat, Fine. If they want to take years off their life, its
ok. It is their decision and if they get caught they have to deal
with the consequences.

Why does the amateur cyclist/fans have such a fascination with Doping
in their favorite professional athletes? The same reason you want to
hear the sad ending to a happy sorry. There is still some excitement
to being let down. Unless any professional athletes test positive or
get caught with drugs it is not right to accuse them of taking them.
How would you like to be accused of murder and be innocents? For an
innocent professional athlete to be accused of drugs is like killing
their heart. I feel for sorry for the first person that won or will
win the Tour de France clean. There will always be that person that
says they cheated. Only they will know if the are right or wrong.

You can not compare the pure satisfaction of winning a race clean or
Dirty. One person always sleeps better at night. Get off the subject.
Lance Say's he is clean. So he is clean.

J

"Kyle Legate" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Sierraman said:

Lance doesn't have anything to prove anymore. He's done it all. It's
up to those [censored] to prove he's a cheater, and that will never
happen. I can't believe anyone who has nearly died from cancer,
scared [censored], would then [censored] around with drugs.

Again with this nonsensical rationalization. People who survive cancer

still

Quoted message said:

smoke, and they're not being paid 100s of thousands of $$ to do so. Simply
because he survived cancer is no reason to leave the drugs alone.

Not nonsense. Why would anyone start smoking again after cancer? That's
pretty stupid! All the money in the world won't do you any good if you are
not around to spend it. That makes it sound like Lance cares more about
money then he does about his health? I would argue he cares about Bike
racing as a career but back then he had no idea he would ever be this good
or making this kind of doe. Also back then, he had what 50/50 chances. He
was scared [censored], he knew he could die and after he licked it I am sure
he was quite sober about what drugs he puts in his body. EPO might of been
ok for cancer treatment, but back then the question is what would be the
continued use of EPO and it's long term effects? It seems to me the prudent
choice would be not to use it beyond what his doctor described. Since being
in remission and the threat of cancer returning was probably always in his
mind, I don't think he would be careless just so he could maybe return on
top for a short while to win a few races. Heck, look at all Pros that fail
and have other decent careers now? I am sure Lance had plans if he couldn't
win races anymore. He certainly had no idea he would be making millions!

In article <[email hidden]>, "Sierraman" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Kyle Legate" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Sierraman said:

Lance doesn't have anything to prove anymore. He's done it all. It's
up to those [censored] to prove he's a cheater, and that will never
happen. I can't believe anyone who has nearly died from cancer,
scared [censored], would then [censored] around with drugs.

Again with this nonsensical rationalization. People who survive cancer

still

Quoted message said:

smoke, and they're not being paid 100s of thousands of $$ to do so. Simply
because he survived cancer is no reason to leave the drugs alone.

Not nonsense. Why would anyone start smoking again after cancer? That's
pretty stupid!

Yep, it would be pretty stupid. But we're talking about human beings
here - some of whom are prone to doing stupid things. Besides, you have to
consider that smoking is addictive as hell. I know some people whose
relatives had cancer (some with good endings, other not) and that has not
affected their smoking at all. "Puff, puff, pass..."

--
tanx,
Howard

So far, so good, so what?

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Howard Kveck said:

Quoted message said:

Not nonsense. Why would anyone start smoking again after cancer? That's
pretty stupid!

Yep, it would be pretty stupid. But we're talking about human beings
here - some of whom are prone to doing stupid things. Besides, you have to
consider that smoking is addictive as hell. I know some people whose
relatives had cancer (some with good endings, other not) and that has not
affected their smoking at all. "Puff, puff, pass..."

When I visited a relative in a clinic where you go for recovery after
heart operations, I saw myself guys (and gals) who have had a *bypass
operation* like two months ago standing outside, smoking.
There are people 35 years old who had achieved needing such an operation
just by smoking and eating, at least that is what the doctors said, that
if you live unhealthy enough, you can heavily damage your cardiovascular
system in that age without your body having special negative prerequisites.

So, there are no frontiers.

[email hidden] (brianb) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

why doesn't he let himself get tested every day for two months before
the tour? Then maybe that would prove that he is not on it?

How he can prove it?? if his hematocrit level has dropped below 40 on
the Champs Elysées and if his hematocrit level is not over 45 at the
start of the tour. How come the riders of pro cycling teams have an
average hematocrit level between 45 and 50 if a normal healthy person
has a hematocrit in the lower 40's?? Seems a bit strange to me. A
hematocrit level of 48 is unnaturally high. Even if it is below 50
and even if he has spent some time in the mountains or has this
simulating oxigen chamber.

Kenny

Ernst Noch said:

When I visited a relative in a clinic where you go for recovery after
heart operations, I saw myself guys (and gals) who have had a *bypass
operation* like two months ago standing outside, smoking.

When I picked up my wife from work at a hospital in downtown
Annapolis, the only time you'd NOT see people walking around with a
rolling IV smoking cigarettes was if it was raining (you had to smoke
outdoors). Some were her patients and she was a shift oncology nurse
at the time. Pathetic. Of course, if they needed to cadge a cig, they
could ask a surgeon...

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

"Kenny" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

How he can prove it?? if his hematocrit level has dropped below 40 on
the Champs Elysées and if his hematocrit level is not over 45 at the
start of the tour. How come the riders of pro cycling teams have an
average hematocrit level between 45 and 50 if a normal healthy person
has a hematocrit in the lower 40's?? Seems a bit strange to me. A
hematocrit level of 48 is unnaturally high. Even if it is below 50
and even if he has spent some time in the mountains or has this
simulating oxigen chamber.

On one hand, I'd say riders (or any aerobic _truly_world class athlete) on
average would have a higher haematocrit, if only because they are
physiologically abnormal in the first place. On the other hand, as we know,
hematocrit decreases in aerobic athletes due to inherent increased blood
volume.

I do agree though, the vampires should/could do comparative pre-Prologue and
pre-Champs Elyesees tests, though the results could only be more
circumstantial evidence.

[email hidden] (Kenny) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (brianb) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

why doesn't he let himself get tested every day for two months before
the tour? Then maybe that would prove that he is not on it?

How he can prove it?? if his hematocrit level has dropped below 40 on
the Champs Elysées and if his hematocrit level is not over 45 at the
start of the tour. How come the riders of pro cycling teams have an
average hematocrit level between 45 and 50 if a normal healthy person
has a hematocrit in the lower 40's?? Seems a bit strange to me. A
hematocrit level of 48 is unnaturally high. Even if it is below 50
and even if he has spent some time in the mountains or has this
simulating oxigen chamber.

I had a blood test, my hemocrit was 47.2. I'm not on anything.

Anyway, I'm confused, are you saying that the hemocrit would fall to
40 (on the Champs Elysees) due to riding so hard?

So what are his hemocrit levels and what do you conclude? If his
hemocrit is not over 50 or so, doesn't that prove he is not being
affected by a doping agent?

Quoted message said:

Kenny