Hamilton Doping?

[Shawn]

bri719 wrote:
> TM wrote:
>
>> Your hypothetical dna test is redundant in this instance.
>>
>> The fact is he has the red blood cells of two individuals in his
>> system. He
>> needs to explain it. There are explanations; surgery, chimera,
>> maternal/fetal transfer; he needs one quick.
>>
>>
>
> what about.....mixed samples (not as likely because two different tests
> produced the same issue) -- or a loss of blood from an accident which
> required administration of a volume of someone else's blood to his system.
>
> does that equate "blood doping"? I sure would hope not. but if that's
> the case I'm sure it would be explained, and if he needs to be banned
> for something as minor as replacing a lost pint of his own blood, that's
> pretty sad.

If he required a transfusion for medical reasons, he would've disclosed
it without any significant repercussions.
Also people aren't typically transfused because they're a pint low. If
he'd been injured or had surgery where he would've bled out a couple
quarts (people will get lots of fluid to replace volume, before being
transfused*), it would've made they cycling press.

Shawn

*Transfusions are a form of tissue transplant. They always come with
significant risks. I know about this stuff because I spent a decade+ in
a lab developing a synthetic RBC substitute. Our product eventually
tanked for a number of reasons, but others are still kicking.
http://tinyurl.com/55pzn
http://tinyurl.com/3poxo
The competition:
http://www.biopure.com/

 

[bri719]

Shawn wrote:

> If he required a transfusion for medical reasons, he would've
> disclosed it without any significant repercussions.
> Also people aren't typically transfused because they're a pint low.
> If he'd been injured or had surgery where he would've bled out a
> couple quarts (people will get lots of fluid to replace volume, before
> being transfused*), it would've made they cycling press.
>
> Shawn
>
> *Transfusions are a form of tissue transplant. They always come with
> significant risks. I know about this stuff because I spent a decade+
> in a lab developing a synthetic RBC substitute. Our product
> eventually tanked for a number of reasons, but others are still
> kicking. http://tinyurl.com/55pzn
> http://tinyurl.com/3poxo
> The competition:
> http://www.biopure.com/


I'm sure you're way ahead of the curve here, but just to paraphrase from
Tyler's website, here's what his wife had to say in response to all of this:

"At the end of the day, Tyler will tell you he loves his bike, his
career, his team, racing and his life overseas. But he will also admit
this is just bike racing. He has proven he is willing to dedicate his
life to this sport, but he is not willing to risk his life for it.

Transfusing blood from a foreign source is dangerous business. We know
this because our dog Tugboat faced the need for a transfusion in June.
He had been bleeding internally and had lost over half his blood supply.
When the veterinarian recommended a transfusion we agonized over the
option for the better part of week. We feared contamination and disease.
Only when the situation became "life or death" did we opt to move forward.

When a second transfusion was needed, we reluctantly moved forward
again. This time, the effects were devastating. Tugboat was left
paralyzed on the left side of his face in reaction to the blood. He
never recovered. His final days were more uncomfortable as a result.

With the dangers of transfusing blood so fresh in our minds, it is
ridiculous to think Tyler would consider taking another person's blood. "


I think it would be hard to argue with that reasoning....the whole
letter is more convincing when you read it in it's full context.

and especially:


"Tyler is devastated to be accused of being dishonest. After all the
years of hard work he has devoted to his racing career, he feels as
though he is being stabbed in the back. He is angry. If we have to drain
our bank accounts to get to the bottom of this we will. And when Tyler
can speak freely about all of this, he will.

There are a number of questions that have to be answered regarding the
situation Tyler now faces in light of the charges against him. We will
do everything in our power to address them. Tyler's family, friends,
supporters, team and sponsors deserve answers as much as he does. We'll
get there. The peaks and valleys ahead will not derail us from clearing
Tyler's name. "

so it's clear the truth will come out...it's only a question of when.

bri

 

[Ride-A-Lot]

bri719 wrote:

> Shawn wrote:
>
>> If he required a transfusion for medical reasons, he would've
>> disclosed it without any significant repercussions.
>> Also people aren't typically transfused because they're a pint low.
>> If he'd been injured or had surgery where he would've bled out a
>> couple quarts (people will get lots of fluid to replace volume, before
>> being transfused*), it would've made they cycling press.
>>
>> Shawn
>>
>> *Transfusions are a form of tissue transplant. They always come with
>> significant risks. I know about this stuff because I spent a decade+
>> in a lab developing a synthetic RBC substitute. Our product
>> eventually tanked for a number of reasons, but others are still
>> kicking. http://tinyurl.com/55pzn
>> http://tinyurl.com/3poxo
>> The competition:
>> http://www.biopure.com/
>
>
>
> I'm sure you're way ahead of the curve here, but just to paraphrase from
> Tyler's website, here's what his wife had to say in response to all of
> this:
>
> "At the end of the day, Tyler will tell you he loves his bike, his
> career, his team, racing and his life overseas. But he will also admit
> this is just bike racing. He has proven he is willing to dedicate his
> life to this sport, but he is not willing to risk his life for it.
>
> Transfusing blood from a foreign source is dangerous business. We know
> this because our dog Tugboat faced the need for a transfusion in June.
> He had been bleeding internally and had lost over half his blood supply.
> When the veterinarian recommended a transfusion we agonized over the
> option for the better part of week. We feared contamination and disease.
> Only when the situation became "life or death" did we opt to move forward.
>
> When a second transfusion was needed, we reluctantly moved forward
> again. This time, the effects were devastating. Tugboat was left
> paralyzed on the left side of his face in reaction to the blood. He
> never recovered. His final days were more uncomfortable as a result.
>
> With the dangers of transfusing blood so fresh in our minds, it is
> ridiculous to think Tyler would consider taking another person's blood. "
>
>
> I think it would be hard to argue with that reasoning....the whole
> letter is more convincing when you read it in it's full context.
>
> and especially:
>
>
> "Tyler is devastated to be accused of being dishonest. After all the
> years of hard work he has devoted to his racing career, he feels as
> though he is being stabbed in the back. He is angry. If we have to drain
> our bank accounts to get to the bottom of this we will. And when Tyler
> can speak freely about all of this, he will.
>
> There are a number of questions that have to be answered regarding the
> situation Tyler now faces in light of the charges against him. We will
> do everything in our power to address them. Tyler's family, friends,
> supporters, team and sponsors deserve answers as much as he does. We'll
> get there. The peaks and valleys ahead will not derail us from clearing
> Tyler's name. "
>
> so it's clear the truth will come out...it's only a question of when.
>
> bri
>

Holy ****! I'm more upset that they would put the animal through that
much stress and pain. How very inconciderate of them to not think about
the animal and only themselves. I would never let my pets go through
that much duress. I have had the unpleasant pain of having to put two
of my dogs down. I can tell you that my first dog needed a transfusion
but she was clearly in pain and it certainly would not have made
whatever time she would gain very pleasant. You can see it in their
eyes when they are ready. I certainly agonized over it. I wanted my
dog, my best friend. At least they get the benefit of leaving with
dignity if people realize that your pet's happiness is more important
than your own. A pet gives you unconditional love, prolonging their
agony is no way to repay it. How very sad. Now I have no respect for Tyler.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

 

[bri719]

Ride-A-Lot wrote:

>
> Holy ****! I'm more upset that they would put the animal through that
> much stress and pain. How very inconciderate of them to not think
> about the animal and only themselves. I would never let my pets go
> through that much duress. I have had the unpleasant pain of having to
> put two of my dogs down. I can tell you that my first dog needed a
> transfusion but she was clearly in pain and it certainly would not
> have made whatever time she would gain very pleasant. You can see it
> in their eyes when they are ready. I certainly agonized over it. I
> wanted my dog, my best friend. At least they get the benefit of
> leaving with dignity if people realize that your pet's happiness is
> more important than your own. A pet gives you unconditional love,
> prolonging their agony is no way to repay it. How very sad. Now I
> have no respect for Tyler.
>

any surgery is a risk. if your vet said your best friend and pet needed
a life-saving surgery and there was a (let's say) 75% chance they'd make
it through OK, would you say yes?

what about that other 25%??? I guarantee the vet felt no guilt in
performing such procedures -- and you'd have a hard time arguing
veterinarians don't care for the well being of animals.

bri

 

[Ride-A-Lot]

bri719 wrote:

> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>
>>
>> Holy ****! I'm more upset that they would put the animal through that
>> much stress and pain. How very inconciderate of them to not think
>> about the animal and only themselves. I would never let my pets go
>> through that much duress. I have had the unpleasant pain of having to
>> put two of my dogs down. I can tell you that my first dog needed a
>> transfusion but she was clearly in pain and it certainly would not
>> have made whatever time she would gain very pleasant. You can see it
>> in their eyes when they are ready. I certainly agonized over it. I
>> wanted my dog, my best friend. At least they get the benefit of
>> leaving with dignity if people realize that your pet's happiness is
>> more important than your own. A pet gives you unconditional love,
>> prolonging their agony is no way to repay it. How very sad. Now I
>> have no respect for Tyler.
>>
>
> any surgery is a risk. if your vet said your best friend and pet needed
> a life-saving surgery and there was a (let's say) 75% chance they'd make
> it through OK, would you say yes?
>
> what about that other 25%??? I guarantee the vet felt no guilt in
> performing such procedures -- and you'd have a hard time arguing
> veterinarians don't care for the well being of animals.
>
> bri
>


I know about the risks but there is more to it. You really have to look
in their eyes. I know my two babies told me without words that it was
time. You also have to think about what is causing the condition. With
my two dogs, it was cancer. Even with an operation, there was no
guarantee that the cancer would be gone. It's a quality of life
decision. It's tough to make that choice, but the pain goes away and
the memories of the good times last forever.

Tyler's dog was bleeding internally. Given the age of the dog, I don't
think it would of had a goog QOL.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws

 

[bri719]

Ride-A-Lot wrote:

>
> I know about the risks but there is more to it. You really have to
> look in their eyes. I know my two babies told me without words that
> it was time. You also have to think about what is causing the
> condition. With my two dogs, it was cancer. Even with an operation,
> there was no guarantee that the cancer would be gone. It's a quality
> of life decision. It's tough to make that choice, but the pain goes
> away and the memories of the good times last forever.

I hear ya man....I'm not a dog owner but I have been. I find them to be
very rewarding animals. in a way I guess I'm "fortunate" I've never had
to put a dog down. but I definitely think about the one I used to own
from time to time...

have you ever casually MTB'd with your dog along for the ride?? just
curious

bri

 

[Ride-A-Lot]

bri719 wrote:

> Ride-A-Lot wrote:
>
>>
>> I know about the risks but there is more to it. You really have to
>> look in their eyes. I know my two babies told me without words that
>> it was time. You also have to think about what is causing the
>> condition. With my two dogs, it was cancer. Even with an operation,
>> there was no guarantee that the cancer would be gone. It's a quality
>> of life decision. It's tough to make that choice, but the pain goes
>> away and the memories of the good times last forever.
>
>
> I hear ya man....I'm not a dog owner but I have been. I find them to be
> very rewarding animals. in a way I guess I'm "fortunate" I've never had
> to put a dog down. but I definitely think about the one I used to own
> from time to time...
>
> have you ever casually MTB'd with your dog along for the ride?? just
> curious
>
> bri
>

LOL

I have three miniature schnauzers and a Wheaton Terrier. They're not
exactly trail dogs. Those little legs would have a very hard time
keeping up, even with my slow ass.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws