My experince with drugs and blood doping

[Roadrash Dunc]

I'm no fan of drugs in cycling and I agree it doesn't help to slander other riders, but man, keep a civil tongue in your head and let people hold their own opinions. It doesn't do you well to come out swearing and insulting people and then claim to have rationality on your side. I feel some interesting things are being said in this thread - if you don't, feel free to read a different one.

The thread is an interesting discussion about EPO and for ti-man we have him to thank.But ive no time for internet liars so i'll call a spade a spade.
He knows how he can make me eat humble pie.Give his name.Otherwise , start a debate on epo properly - without all the bluster and bs , otherwise expect to get called on it.It is the net afteall , and im free to read and comment on what i like (but which doesnt include slander and telling porky pies)

 

[TiMan]

We used the first gen SRM power meter.


I guess I am done with this thread...too many insults, defensive people and closed minds. Thanx goes out to all that were civil to me and discussed things like adults....
there are a lot of kids on this forum I think.

All I can say in closing is that I have told you all the truth.....
Yes I did attain to continental pro level sustainable power output, with the use of drugs, but it means nothing really.

I cannot tell you who I am because then people could find me and hassle me and my young family. I don't want to hurt my former teams or anyone that I used to race with either.

BYE

TiMan

 

[Roadrash Dunc]

We used the first gen SRM power meter.


I guess I am done with this thread...too man insults.

All I can say in closing is that I have told you all the truth.....
Yes I did attain to continental pro level sustainable power output, with the use of drugs, but it means nothing really.

I cannot tell you who I am because then people could find me and hassle me and my young family. I don't want to hurt my former teams or anyone that I used to race with either.

BYE

TiMan

Disappearing to yahoo messenger to pretend youre a 21 year old Nympho who likes older men now? Bye.

 

[ives]

I'm no fan of drugs in cycling and I agree it doesn't help to slander other riders, but man, keep a civil tongue in your head and let people hold their own opinions. It doesn't do you well to come out swearing and insulting people and then claim to have rationality on your side. I feel some interesting things are being said in this thread - if you don't, feel free to read a different one.

Agreed.
If you can't at least be civil, Roadrash Dunc, then please I request that you leave out the personal insults and swearing. Being brash and rude does not make you right, so please, refrain from it.
thank you.

there are a lot of kids on this forum I think.

So, it seems.

Anyway, thanks for you testimony, TIMan. Most interesting and informative.

 

[Roadie_scum]

We used the first gen SRM power meter.


I guess I am done with this thread...too many insults, defensive people and closed minds. Thanx goes out to all that were civil to me and discussed things like adults....
there are a lot of kids on this forum I think.

All I can say in closing is that I have told you all the truth.....
Yes I did attain to continental pro level sustainable power output, with the use of drugs, but it means nothing really.

I cannot tell you who I am because then people could find me and hassle me and my young family. I don't want to hurt my former teams or anyone that I used to race with either.

BYE

TiMan

Thanks mate. Appreciate your candour.

 

[Roadrash Dunc]

Its not a question of right and wrong.
If it means anything Ti-Man i genuinely apologise for getting personal there (having a bad day fixing a bike ) but part of your initial post was rather moronic thats all , although its no reason to call you one.

I still dont believe your personal claims and think youre using that invented persona to gain some form of credibility to the dope debate.Which is highly ironic.

You declined to proffer a name even though you say youre retired (although i can understand that) but you dont even say which team(s) you were on or which races you won.
You cannot expect credibility in such a situation.I could quite easily start a new a/c and pretend to be a pro who doped but say i didnt think *everyone* was doing it , or this that and the other.You can see that.


Its a sad day indeed when people are prepared to take the word of a self confesed cheat , an anonymous self confessed cheat , on an internet MB over the word(s) of face-value hardworking pros.
That i cannot understand , perhaps someone can enlighten me and tell me why i should believe a single word in this situation.

Its a good read , but youre all bonkers

G'night.

 

[Nishiki09]

I totaly disagree with what you say about Lance Armstrong. If he ever had anything slightly close in comparison to a drug in his body we would know within 24 hours of when he did it. He is the most drug tested athlete in the world. If he was blood doping,taking testosterone, or even drinking a Sobe Power hed be getting critisized for it right now by people who dislike him (ahem). Im not saying Lance Armstrong is some hero but I know he doesnt artificially enhance himself.

 

[Roadie_scum]

I totaly disagree with what you say about Lance Armstrong. If he ever had anything slightly close in comparison to a drug in his body we would know within 24 hours of when he did it. He is the most drug tested athlete in the world. If he was blood doping,taking testosterone, or even drinking a Sobe Power hed be getting critisized for it right now by people who dislike him (ahem). Im not saying Lance Armstrong is some hero but I know he doesnt artificially enhance himself.

I have no idea whether armstrong uses drugs or not, but if he did (protectors of LA's virtue - note use of conditional) it is unlikely he would get caught. There are numerous drugs and illegal methods that are undetectable with today's testing methods. The two things to which you refer, blood doping and taking testosterone (when monitored to avoid going over the threshold testosterone-epitestosterone level) are, ironically, both undetectable. I know this and I am an amateur cyclist who has never used a performance enhancing drug and hve no specific expertise or training in sports science or medicine. I'm pretty sure any pro who is going to take drugs would have access to better info again.

 

[Nishiki09]

You have a point but there are labs thats are studying ways of testing all the new drugs found. Lance Armstrong was a successful Triathelete at the age of 14, hugely successful. There was never a humongous jump in his athleticism that I know of and unless he started at 14 i dont think hes doing any enhancing drugs. He has too much to lose if they find ways of tracking the newer drugs. And if he has any ability for kindness in him which i believe he does he wouldnt do something like that to the millions of fans and cancer patients who are crazy about him. Imagine being in his shoes even in your worst mood could you honestly do that to people.

 

[MJtje]

Hehe you want to go after Flyer...........!

Disappearing to yahoo messenger to pretend youre a 21 year old Nympho who likes older men now? Bye.

 

[House]

I am going to say that TI wants attention, pure and simple. Why else would he feel the need to post this in two forums (now moved to just one)? He makes claims that his story is some sort of proof that all pros and Cat 1's dope yet if you read he has not shown anything other then "because I said so." This logic has continued through every one of his responses. Read his comments about Lances' abilities before he had cancer and you will realise that Ti doesn't know as much as he claims. I'm with Dunc on this one, he's either a bitter man because he failed or just wants attention.Notice how he got called out and tried to ignore all the tough questions in the other thread, so he decided to get on a different one. Why? More of what we have seen from some people on here who have been banned, but at least it's with some civility.

 

[Ashley3]

I am going to say that TI wants attention, pure and simple. Why else would he feel the need to post this in two forums (now moved to just one)?

Allow me to differ with you a bit. My take on this thread is that TI has shared his personal experience with and perspective on doping. I've found it both interesting and enlightening, and I thank him for that. I see no reason to question his motivation any more than I would challenge the personal account someone might give of any other aspect of their cycling experience.
Whether or not his opinion that Armstrong used performance enhancing substances should be accepted is another matter, and that seems to be the issue more readily debated -- and it seems to be what's generating all the heat.
Serious question: has any other cyclist ever be as loved and hated as Armstrong?

 

[House]

Allow me to differ with you a bit. My take on this thread is that TI has shared his personal experience with and perspective on doping. I've found it both interesting and enlightening, and I thank him for that. I see no reason to question his motivation any more than I would challenge the personal account someone might give of any other aspect of their cycling experience.
Whether or not his opinion that Armstrong used performance enhancing substances should be accepted is another matter, and that seems to be the issue more readily debated -- and it seems to be what's generating all the heat.
Serious question: has any other cyclist ever be as loved and hated as Armstrong?

You quote me saying he wants attention since he felt the need to post the same thing on two forums and then you try to argue his motivation without mentioning what I actually said. If you read the other thread he started you would know I had my doubts before he ever mentioned Lance. He made an assertion in his first post and refused to provide the actual proof of the knowledge he claimed he had proven. He has made many excuses about not telling what teams or what races. If he really was all about being forthcoming he should tell all or nothing. You don't make the claims he made without the substance to back it up (more then "because I said so") he did, he was questioned, he suddenly left the other thread with many questions unanswered and based on his last post he has decided to leave this one with as many unanswered questions. This fits the exact profile of someone wanting attention on a forum.

 

[3_days]

Has Armstrong ever commented on his relationship with Ferrari? Not taking a side, but just wondering if he ever said anything about it. (I'm more ****** that Armstrong is retired than whether he's clean or not ...)

As far as Timan's credibility goes, he has a pretty good grasp of drug dosage, interaction(s), prescription and effect - his posts are far from worthless. I understand various posters and their defense of Armstrong and demands for credible evidence, but I don't think any of us would or should post our name and personal information on the internet.

Does anyone have the wattage numbers from last year's Tour, Armstrong's TT on Alp D'Huez? If I recall, he blazed up it at about 15mph!!!

 

[Ashley3]

You quote me saying he wants attention since he felt the need to post the same thing on two forums and then you try to argue his motivation without mentioning what I actually said. If you read the other thread he started you would know I had my doubts before he ever mentioned Lance. He made an assertion in his first post and refused to provide the actual proof of the knowledge he claimed he had proven. He has made many excuses about not telling what teams or what races. If he really was all about being forthcoming he should tell all or nothing. You don't make the claims he made without the substance to back it up (more then "because I said so") he did, he was questioned, he suddenly left the other thread with many questions unanswered and based on his last post he has decided to leave this one with as many unanswered questions. This fits the exact profile of someone wanting attention on a forum.

"You quote me." I didn't "quote" you about anything.
And the profile of someone "wanting attention on a forum?"
What's that all about? A forum exists so that those who choose to do so can bring attention to their ideas. So, the sin here is that someone used a forum as it's intended to be used?
Just as, I should point out, you are doing youself.
The only difference between the two of you is that Ti purported to be revealing, candidly, that he violated the rules of his sport -- and perhaps the law -- and cheated in the hope of winning. Now, if that "attention getting" revelation somehow is glorious, it escapes me.
You, on the other hand, seem eager to engage in personal attack.
While he is admitting to a dishonorable past, the dishonor of this hour belongs to you.

 

[MJtje]

House got to disagree with you again........seems that you don't like the subject doping a bit!!!!!

What was timan supposed to say: do you really think he will give names of his friends who doped and teams and years.........naive on youre part!

Example: when lotz doped maarten ducrot (commentator NOS) told that there is whole cycling community that lives in Lanaken and that Lotz couldn't have doped alone............whoaaaah De Groot didn't want to talk to the NOS and also other riders didn't like the comments of ducrot (epo-user, he would know....). The omerta rules the peloton......if you speak up youre 'non grata'.......same with cat 1's or in real live......never put the dirty laundry outside.....

Still I think it's good that someone tells there personal experience......and what's up with not believing people anymore......do people really need to give there name etc before you or I need to believe them?????

You quote me saying he wants attention since he felt the need to post the same thing on two forums and then you try to argue his motivation without mentioning what I actually said. If you read the other thread he started you would know I had my doubts before he ever mentioned Lance. He made an assertion in his first post and refused to provide the actual proof of the knowledge he claimed he had proven. He has made many excuses about not telling what teams or what races. If he really was all about being forthcoming he should tell all or nothing. You don't make the claims he made without the substance to back it up (more then "because I said so") he did, he was questioned, he suddenly left the other thread with many questions unanswered and based on his last post he has decided to leave this one with as many unanswered questions. This fits the exact profile of someone wanting attention on a forum.

 

[House]

House got to disagree with you again........seems that you don't like the subject doping a bit!!!!!

What was timan supposed to say: do you really think he will give names of his friends who doped and teams and years.........naive on youre part!

Example: when lotz doped maarten ducrot (commentator NOS) told that there is whole cycling community that lives in Lanaken and that Lotz couldn't have doped alone............whoaaaah De Groot didn't want to talk to the NOS and also other riders didn't like the comments of ducrot (epo-user, he would know....). The omerta rules the peloton......if you speak up youre 'non grata'.......same with cat 1's or in real live......never put the dirty laundry outside.....

Still I think it's good that someone tells there personal experience......and what's up with not believing people anymore......do people really need to give there name etc before you or I need to believe them?????

I guess that's the difference between you and I. I want evidence, not "because I said so" while you, apparently are happy if someone sounds like they know what they are talking about.

 

[Verite]

I guess that's the difference between you and I. I want evidence, not "because I said so" while you, apparently are happy if someone sounds like they know what they are talking about.

How does the act of giving one's name constitute evidence? Are you saying that if you knew this person's name then you would suddenly find his statements credible? I personally find that hard to believe. It seems to me that people such as yourself will choose to never accept the fact that pro cyclists in general, and your 'heroes' in particular, are fully doped up. And this is in the face of overwhelming evidence, albeit sometimes circumstantial. Even in the face of a logical, cohesive argument, such as the one Veloflash gave regarding LA's POSITIVE control in the 99 TdF you still choose to stick your head in the sand and blindly tow the party line. In order for you to believe that someone is guilty you claim you need evidence, presumably in the form of a positive dope test. But as soon as this happens people of your ilk protest the effectiveness of the test (i.e. the Hamilton case). Its almost as if in order to believe a rider has doped you need to physically see him inject himself. Additionally, most of the drug testing is completely ineffectual. For example, a rider can begin an EPO treatment 5 weeks before a big event and then stop 1 week before the start of the race. By doing this they will not test positive but will benefit from an increased oxygen carrying capacity for several weeks due to the fact that the lifespan of a red blood cell is roughly 90 days. Regarding TiMan's posting, I find it credible because there is a level of detail in his descriptions that would be difficult to totally fabricate. One more thing, before you attempt to dismiss my posting as a personal attack, let me assure you that this is not the case. I don't even know you so how can I attack you personally?

 

[House]

How does the act of giving one's name constitute evidence? Are you saying that if you knew this person's name then you would suddenly find his statements credible? I personally find that hard to believe. It seems to me that people such as yourself will choose to never accept the fact that pro cyclists in general, and your 'heroes' in particular, are fully doped up. And this is in the face of overwhelming evidence, albeit sometimes circumstantial. Even in the face of a logical, cohesive argument, such as the one Veloflash gave regarding LA's POSITIVE control in the 99 TdF you still choose to stick your head in the sand and blindly tow the party line. In order for you to believe that someone is guilty you claim you need evidence, presumably in the form of a positive dope test. But as soon as this happens people of your ilk protest the effectiveness of the test (i.e. the Hamilton case). Its almost as if in order to believe a rider has doped you need to physically see him inject himself. Additionally, most of the drug testing is completely ineffectual. For example, a rider can begin an EPO treatment 5 weeks before a big event and then stop 1 week before the start of the race. By doing this they will not test positive but will benefit from an increased oxygen carrying capacity for several weeks due to the fact that the lifespan of a red blood cell is roughly 90 days. Regarding TiMan's posting, I find it credible because there is a level of detail in his descriptions that would be difficult to totally fabricate. One more thing, before you attempt to dismiss my posting as a personal attack, let me assure you that this is not the case. I don't even know you so how can I attack you personally?

A few comments of response:

1) I never asked for his name (perhaps you should do a better job of reading before you post)

2) Everything I said in my discussion about the '99 corticoid test was logical. Veloflash didn't agree but couldn't prove me wrong. We have two different opinions, so be it.

3) You truly believe that everything about the Hamilton case was cut and dried, no oddities, nothing? The two negatives that suddenly turned positive when tested by the maker of the test, the fact that it is not a positive or negative test, but a test of numbers in the middle of a scale. I have said over and over that I don't know if Tyler is guilty or not, just that there are too many oddities for people "of your ilk" to say with 100% certainty he is guilty.

4) The level of detail Timan gave is credible because he could have looked it up on google and got the same info. I could claim to be a mad bomber and give you details about making bombs but I can easily find that and sound credible using google. Try a search on some topic you know nothing about read an article or two and see if you can create a couple of paragraphs that sound credible. Any college student can do it with ease.

5) You say this wasn't a personal attack...obviously you didn't read what you wrote since it was all a personal attack.

 

[Verite]

A few comments of response:

1) I never asked for his name (perhaps you should do a better job of reading before you post)

2) Everything I said in my discussion about the '99 corticoid test was logical. Veloflash didn't agree but couldn't prove me wrong. We have two different opinions, so be it.

3) You truly believe that everything about the Hamilton case was cut and dried, no oddities, nothing? The two negatives that suddenly turned positive when tested by the maker of the test, the fact that it is not a positive or negative test, but a test of numbers in the middle of a scale. I have said over and over that I don't know if Tyler is guilty or not, just that there are too many oddities for people "of your ilk" to say with 100% certainty he is guilty.

4) The level of detail Timan gave is credible because he could have looked it up on google and got the same info. I could claim to be a mad bomber and give you details about making bombs but I can easily find that and sound credible using google. Try a search on some topic you know nothing about read an article or two and see if you can create a couple of paragraphs that sound credible. Any college student can do it with ease.

5) You say this wasn't a personal attack...obviously you didn't read what you wrote since it was all a personal attack.

1) Perhaps not expressly, but by asking for a team affiliation and past results its effectively the same thing.

2) No, in your disscussion with Veloflash you were illogical because in spite of irrefutable evidence that LA tested positive for a banned substance you chose to believe that he was innocent. In the face of concrete facts, there is no room for opinion. That's like saying 'Okay, all scientific evidence indicates that the world is round but its my opinion that the world is flat and hey, since its my opinion, its valid.

3) The only thing I find odd about the Hamilton case is his defense. In spite of what he and his camp want you to believe, chimeras and vanishing twin syndrome are extrordinarily rare conditions. Search PubMed if you don't believe me. What two negatives are you referring to? As far as I know there was a re-examination of his Athens test but the Vuelta test was conclusive. To state that the test is flawed because it is not a 'positive or negative' test is to display a fundamental lack of understanding of the science of the test. Flow cytometry is used to detect, among other things, markers on cells, be they red blood cells, immune cells, or any other type of cell. Flow results are in the form of a histogram showing distribution of the markers in question, in effect showing that a cell is either positive or negative for them. Combine that fact with the fact that all of a person's RBCs should have the same markers on them and you can see how the test can be used to differentiate a positive vs negative blood doping sample. I should remind you that Hamilton's defense is not that the test is inherently flawed, he's not disputing that there was a mixed population of RBCs in his body. He is stating that the test can't determine where they came from. Hence, the preposterous defense of a vanishing twin or chimera. Also, much noise has been made over the fact that one of the arbitrators agreed with him however you should know that in arbitration proceedings each side gets to pick a representative and those two in turn pick a neutral third party to join the panel. So in Hamilton's case what happened in all likelyhood is that the neutral party found that there was sufficient evidence to believe that Hamilton had doped.

4) Sure, a person could google the different drugs used by endurance athletes. But, there is a difference between just having the information and having a personal narrative where dosages, schedules, and most importantly personal motivations and experiences are discussed. If TiMan had said 'I took EPO and it made me fast' then I would be less inclined to believe him. But because of his detail I find him credible.

5) No, it wasn't a personal attack. A personal attack would have been me saying that you're retarded for holding your opinions. I merely said that you are not willing to accept the fact that some of your favorite cyclists are using dope just because you consider them 'heroes' even in the face of convincing evidence.