http://www.lonympics.co.uk/fantasy/cycling.htm A game where you can win teh Tour De France and take back teh Yellow Jersey
My experince with drugs and blood doping
- Thread starter TiMan
- Start date
Wayne,
Just because the guy survived cancer doesn't mean he is a good guy. Just because he is doing good by fighting cancer doesn't mean he is clean.
You want evidence he doped? Well, there is the six positive tests from the 1999 Tour. He will say that he was exonerated. However, the report that the UCI commissioned was prepared by a Belgian doping defense lawyer. And, it did not conclude that he didn't dope. It just concluded that he couldn't be punished for it. If you think this white wash by the UCI means he is innocent, you must be naive. The UCI's job is to promote cycling. Why would they do anything but protect the image of cycling's most recognizable face?
Lets look at more evidence:
1. USPS former head soigner, Emma O'Reilly, says he doped. She has first hand knowledge.
2. Most of his liutenants doped: Hamilton, Landis, Heras and now Andreu.
3. Lemond says Armstrong admitted doping to him.
4. Former Motorola rider Steven Swart says Armstrong doped.
5. Ferrarri is his doctor-need I say more?
6. Unmarked Mercedes remove bags of syringes and Actovegin from the USPS team bus during the Tour and dump the stuff in the woods.
7. Traces of corticoids found during a test during the 1999 Tour.
I'm sure that I will think of more.
The worst part about this guy is he claims to be anti-dope. However he harrasses the guys that speak out about doping. He chases down Simeoni, tells Bassons to quit and blasts Andreu.
This guy is a hypocrite. I'm glad he is gone. My vote is that he is not clean. Of course, there is no evidence...
Frigo
Just because the guy survived cancer doesn't mean he is a good guy. Just because he is doing good by fighting cancer doesn't mean he is clean.
You want evidence he doped? Well, there is the six positive tests from the 1999 Tour. He will say that he was exonerated. However, the report that the UCI commissioned was prepared by a Belgian doping defense lawyer. And, it did not conclude that he didn't dope. It just concluded that he couldn't be punished for it. If you think this white wash by the UCI means he is innocent, you must be naive. The UCI's job is to promote cycling. Why would they do anything but protect the image of cycling's most recognizable face?
Lets look at more evidence:
1. USPS former head soigner, Emma O'Reilly, says he doped. She has first hand knowledge.
2. Most of his liutenants doped: Hamilton, Landis, Heras and now Andreu.
3. Lemond says Armstrong admitted doping to him.
4. Former Motorola rider Steven Swart says Armstrong doped.
5. Ferrarri is his doctor-need I say more?
6. Unmarked Mercedes remove bags of syringes and Actovegin from the USPS team bus during the Tour and dump the stuff in the woods.
7. Traces of corticoids found during a test during the 1999 Tour.
I'm sure that I will think of more.
The worst part about this guy is he claims to be anti-dope. However he harrasses the guys that speak out about doping. He chases down Simeoni, tells Bassons to quit and blasts Andreu.
This guy is a hypocrite. I'm glad he is gone. My vote is that he is not clean. Of course, there is no evidence...
Frigo
"Armstrong is a doper as he had a corticosteroid in his system...he has been caught!!!...but most believe his cover up. Don't you get it bro......riders don't just "miss" seeing a corticosteroid in a medicine...it does not happen. The team doc goes over everything with a "fine tooth comb". And besides no rider in his right mind would ever use a cream with a corticosteroid because, as I said, it thins the skin and this all Cat 2 riders and above know."
I am not a cyclist but a bodybuilder. I came across this site as I was interested in learning a bit more about EPO. I have extensive first hadn knowledge of AAS(Anabolic/androgenic steroid) use. The problem with the corticosteroid argument is this. Coricosteroids DO NOT have any anabolic effect. Corticosteroids consist of Cortisol and the like. Is cortisol a performance enhancer? No. It helps by destroying nerve cells and is injected into boxers hands (football players used to have it injected into there knees to try and get a few more weeks out of a seriously damaged joint). It is in fact very bad for long term performance. The corticosteroid argument does not hold water.
I also noticed a problem with Ti-Mans original post. He stated that it took him a while for his sexual function and testosterone levels to bounce back. This leads me to believe that he did not follow a proper PCT (Post cycle therapy). It is extremely import for anyone who uses AAS to follow proper pct. At the very least take clomid (clomiphene citrate) after finishing your AAS cycle. Depending on which ester you employ determines how long you wait from your last shot.
Hope this helps.
I am not a cyclist but a bodybuilder. I came across this site as I was interested in learning a bit more about EPO. I have extensive first hadn knowledge of AAS(Anabolic/androgenic steroid) use. The problem with the corticosteroid argument is this. Coricosteroids DO NOT have any anabolic effect. Corticosteroids consist of Cortisol and the like. Is cortisol a performance enhancer? No. It helps by destroying nerve cells and is injected into boxers hands (football players used to have it injected into there knees to try and get a few more weeks out of a seriously damaged joint). It is in fact very bad for long term performance. The corticosteroid argument does not hold water.
I also noticed a problem with Ti-Mans original post. He stated that it took him a while for his sexual function and testosterone levels to bounce back. This leads me to believe that he did not follow a proper PCT (Post cycle therapy). It is extremely import for anyone who uses AAS to follow proper pct. At the very least take clomid (clomiphene citrate) after finishing your AAS cycle. Depending on which ester you employ determines how long you wait from your last shot.
Hope this helps.
nl5xbb said:
Corticosteroids speed recovery by dampening the inflamatory response. They are used all the time in cycling. They help you train hard without over training.
As far a PCT is concerned I did it right bro.....I used clomid at 300mg on day one post cycle starting about 2 weeks after my last test cyp injection....then I did 100mg a day for a week and then 50 mg a day for three weeks.
Trouble is I stayed on the test for over 5 months and that shrunk my balls so they took a while to get kick started by the clomid. Clomid blocks estrogen at the hypothalamus so more gonadotropin releasing hormone is sent to the pituitary ...and then the pituitary will release my LH to tell the balls to get going with the testosterone production.
I should have taken "Realgains" advice and used HCG during the cycle to prevent ball shrikage. If you have been around the bodybuilding forums you will know about "Realgains"....he is a guru when it comes to steroids etc.
Had I known you were on for over 5 months I would have suggested hcg during cycle as well. FYI, not sure if you are still interested, check out toremeifene I used it after my last cycle did wonder for me and I was on 20 weeks of a heavy dose test/deca cycle.
I did not know that about corticosteroids. While it allows you to train longer but decreasing inflammation would it not then hurt performace gains as inflammation is good for muscel size?
Here is an example, PGF2-alpha, a postaglandin works by causing inflammation in the muscle cells, it is a great muscle builder. Now this is not considering or taking into account exogenous use of it simply what is in your body normally. If you take an NSAID it will prevent inflammation but right there it will happer your gains. Sure you can train longer but you are doing more damage than you can recover from no?
I mean, I know muscle growth comes from tearing down muscle tissue and then with proper rest and nutrition the cells will regenerate/increase in size. If you traing longer than is normally possible (w/o the help of AAS or any serious anabolic promoting supplement for that matter) you will not be able to recoup the loss? Or am I missing something serious here.
I could see working out longer but needing more rest to recover would cause you to have the same net amount of work done. So therefore you may as well not take it. Cortisol, I have heard of it used in endurance events, to increase pain threshold but it is ultimately very damaging (i maybe completely full of S*** so let me know here), and therefore for an athlete who wants a full career and not just "one more round/mile/touchdown" it would not be helpful.
Let me know.
I did not know that about corticosteroids. While it allows you to train longer but decreasing inflammation would it not then hurt performace gains as inflammation is good for muscel size?
Here is an example, PGF2-alpha, a postaglandin works by causing inflammation in the muscle cells, it is a great muscle builder. Now this is not considering or taking into account exogenous use of it simply what is in your body normally. If you take an NSAID it will prevent inflammation but right there it will happer your gains. Sure you can train longer but you are doing more damage than you can recover from no?
I mean, I know muscle growth comes from tearing down muscle tissue and then with proper rest and nutrition the cells will regenerate/increase in size. If you traing longer than is normally possible (w/o the help of AAS or any serious anabolic promoting supplement for that matter) you will not be able to recoup the loss? Or am I missing something serious here.
I could see working out longer but needing more rest to recover would cause you to have the same net amount of work done. So therefore you may as well not take it. Cortisol, I have heard of it used in endurance events, to increase pain threshold but it is ultimately very damaging (i maybe completely full of S*** so let me know here), and therefore for an athlete who wants a full career and not just "one more round/mile/touchdown" it would not be helpful.
Let me know.
You are rightnl5xbb said:
Increased cortisol (known as the catabolic hormone) levels are something I would like to see in my competition and not in me.
I may have missed something but I got this as an automated message from the board.Felt_Rider said:You are right
Increased cortisol (known as the catabolic hormone) levels are something I would like to see in my competition and not in me.
<><>
"I am not into doping any more as I no longer compete with the "big boys".
Good points. I was never a 'believer" in cortico's for the reasons you site.....but taken for short periods of time they don't seem to have negative affects only positive for the endurance athlete....although the positives are not that great.
EPO is the real "boon" to the cyclist. Testosterone and "some" steroids taken in small doses hep with recovery and prevent catoblism when training hard for extended periods. The best steroids seem to be stuff like EQ and Primo as they are milder than say Trenvolin acetate. Testosterone is very powerful but taken in mslal does it is magic.
GH and IGF-1 help but are not as helpful. Testosterone taken in small doses of about 100mg a week along with EPO do "it all" in my opinion. Basically you want your test levels to be a bit above high normal...say at 1500 ng/dl...but nowhere near as high as in bodybuilding, where 400mg as week is considered a pretty moderate dose of test. If a cyclist took that much test he would gain too much water weight, even with estrogen blockers like Arimidex, and he would gain too much muscle mass too.
Muscle mass is avoided by cyclists. Basically we want to be sticks in the upper body with some but minimal mass in the legs. Just take a look at Armstrong for example. He was once, and now is again since retirement, a man with a "swimmers body"....more upper body mass. He never had decent leg size and still doesn't.
The tour winning rider that comes to mind that had the most muscle mass was Greg Lemond for sure...he even had some upper body."
<><>Now I somehow did not see this in thread only in my emails from site admin. His response begs to differ (pointing out I am full of S***). But he seems to claim it only makes sense for short periods of time. If that is the case then why in the hell did armstrong have it in his system? Would this be something used during the event or for training?
I love using "Cheque drops (milbolerone" Before boxing but would never even try to cycle it. Is this how cortisol is used?
Also, you point out igf-1 and GH are great and I think they would be. Have you looked into the newer igf analogs or the Interleukins?
Recently pegylated-MGF (mechano growth factor) has gained alot of popularity, also IL-15 shows boat loads of rpomise, if people can figure out how to not kill themselves with it. What about myostatin blockers, or is that actually disadvantageous to cyclist? I would assume since it causes more in the way of strength than size per say it would be helpful?
Also, how do you guys run epo? I have heard of BBers using (Andreas Munzer killing himself with it comes to mind) but in a far different format than you would.
The only thing I find positive about cortisol is the ability to block pain during a sporting event. However, I believe many retired professional athletes that competed in impact event like the NFL are near crippled later in life because these types of steroids are used to block the pain during the season and yet the injury continues to digress rather than heal.
I have found no other legitimate study stating that there is an increase in performance from the increase in cortisol level, natural or synthetic.
I also find it odd to use anabolics and cortisone injection at the same time since each interfere with each other in binding to the receptor. In a sense blocking one or the other out. However, many people do this temporarily because of the statement above and that is to block pain during the event. Otherwise it is more beneficial to reduce cortisol levels as much as possible (for a natural or a PED user).
Cortisone (ACTH)injections can also weaken the immune system and increase the risk of colds or flu. The positive for a cyclist perhaps could be the muscle wasting aspect for a larger more muscular athelete. It is also said to impact mood which may be a positive depending on the person and the event, but AAS also impact the mood potentially making a much more aggressive athlete.
Link
Link
My background was primarily in bodybuilding and powerlifting and my experience and use back in the day was primarily PED's associated with those events. I have no experience with EPO so I will avoid that conversation.
Present day I get the opportunity to every now and then to tell other athletes my testimony of how PED's nearly destroyed my life, legally, relationally and physically.
I have found no other legitimate study stating that there is an increase in performance from the increase in cortisol level, natural or synthetic.
I also find it odd to use anabolics and cortisone injection at the same time since each interfere with each other in binding to the receptor. In a sense blocking one or the other out. However, many people do this temporarily because of the statement above and that is to block pain during the event. Otherwise it is more beneficial to reduce cortisol levels as much as possible (for a natural or a PED user).
Cortisone (ACTH)injections can also weaken the immune system and increase the risk of colds or flu. The positive for a cyclist perhaps could be the muscle wasting aspect for a larger more muscular athelete. It is also said to impact mood which may be a positive depending on the person and the event, but AAS also impact the mood potentially making a much more aggressive athlete.
Link
Link
My background was primarily in bodybuilding and powerlifting and my experience and use back in the day was primarily PED's associated with those events. I have no experience with EPO so I will avoid that conversation.
Present day I get the opportunity to every now and then to tell other athletes my testimony of how PED's nearly destroyed my life, legally, relationally and physically.
First I thankyou for your candid post. And I have no problem with you having a certain opinion that Armstrong used banned enhancers, or believing the word of Lemond that he didn't. Or if you believe that all the top riders are doing something on the pro-tour. You are free to believe and say what you believe. But I would like to know how you publish that Marco Pantani won the tour de france with hematocrit above 55%. How do you have this knowledge?
TiMan said:
wilmar13 said:
We was good....and very good too... BUT not a grand tour winner type UNTIL he hooked up with Dr. Dope in Italy. Loosing 10 pounds of muscle mass helped but it isn't going to make THAT much difference.
Take a good look at this clip. Armstrong gets passed by Indurain like I would pass my wife! He has his world Champion Jersey on but lacks proper doping.
You don't go from THAT Armstrong to one of the best TT riders in history with just hard work and good genetics. ALSO and VERY IMPORTANTLY, not everyone responds the same to drug therapy......some guys will get over 30% tacked onto their threshold power and others will only get 15%. So it is not an even playing field in the pro tour...not in the slightest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPx5I538X6Q
ilpirata said:
In 95, after his crash, his crit was tested and published at 60%!
Take a look at the new book that is out about Marco.....he had his crit levels documented for years...this info has been recovered and has been published.
He was often above 55%, but sometimes, depending on the time of the year, he had his normal crit of about 41%.
It is what i thought TiMan. In year 2000 the full weight of black market Italian power is directed against Pantani. He had refused to admit to use of epo, and continued to claim he was a victim of a setup in his 1999 giro exclusion. An investigation into hospital records from 1995 is all they can dig up. In that hospital he was found to have broken bones and internal hemorraging. He was at risk to die. The hematocrit of a man in that condition can not be used as a proof of hi using epo, as the hospital doctors themselves gave testimony to. I invite you to read some of my other posts in this matter. And you have extrapolated this hospital result to claim he always rode at 60%. Rendalls book if that is the one you are suggesting, I have no confidence in. He did not even interview anyone close to subject of his biography.
TiMan said:
Similar threads
