Paging Jeff Jones

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by B. Lafferty, Oct 1, 2004.

  1. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    As of a few minutes ago, there was yet to be any news on CyclingNews about
    the Ferrari verdict. It's possible that I missed it or that my short term
    memory had failed again.

    The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to use
    Ferrari as a columnist. I expect that we'll get an interesting article from
    Jeff once it's posted.

    --
    Peloton Pigs--Flying Since 1991
     
    Tags:


  2. Tim Mullin

    Tim Mullin Guest

    "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to
    > use Ferrari as a columnist.


    Why shouldn't Ferrari continue his commentary on CyclingNews? Does his
    conviction in any way detract from his knowledge of the sport? I don't think
    so. A good editor would think long and hard before publishing anything
    Ferrari had to say even remotely connected to the topic of doping, but beyond
    that, what's the problem?

    I have a much greater problem with the ethics of letting Ferrari comment on
    matters involving riders and teams he has a professional relationship with.
    Still, this is sport journalism we're talking about, and the lines here are
    never drawn as sharply as they might be in other fields--and all things
    considered, Cyclingnews is no worse (and I would argue better) than most
    commercial cycling media in ethical matters.
     
  3. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "Tim Mullin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > news:[email protected]:
    >
    >> The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to
    >> use Ferrari as a columnist.

    >
    > Why shouldn't Ferrari continue his commentary on CyclingNews? Does his
    > conviction in any way detract from his knowledge of the sport? I don't
    > think
    > so. A good editor would think long and hard before publishing anything
    > Ferrari had to say even remotely connected to the topic of doping, but
    > beyond
    > that, what's the problem?
    >
    > I have a much greater problem with the ethics of letting Ferrari comment
    > on
    > matters involving riders and teams he has a professional relationship
    > with.
    > Still, this is sport journalism we're talking about, and the lines here
    > are
    > never drawn as sharply as they might be in other fields--and all things
    > considered, Cyclingnews is no worse (and I would argue better) than most
    > commercial cycling media in ethical matters.


    OK. Here are some possibilities:

    Reporter for Court TV OJ Simpson
    Crime Columnist NY Post John Gotti, Jr.
    Wall Street Journal Market Reporter Martha Stewart
    Reporter On Domestic Violence/Spouse Abuse Joel Steinberg
    Court TV Ethics Commentator Sol Watchler

    Feel free to add to the list. Every convicted criminal has marketable
    expertise under your system of ethics.
     
  4. TritonRider

    TritonRider Guest

    >From: "B. Lafferty" [email protected]

    >The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to use
    >Ferrari as a columnist. I expect that we'll get an interesting article from
    >Jeff once it's posted.
    >
    >--


    Brian I'm trying to remember the guys name, but he was a big time Roids, and
    everything else dealer to big name bodybuilder and powerlifter types and got
    nailed for a couple of years in the pen, but after he got out he did a regular
    column for Musclemag and didn't hold anything back. It definitely made for some
    real interesting reading and was a real window into how to win through
    chemicals.
    Bill C
     
  5. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > >From: "B. Lafferty" [email protected]

    >
    >>The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to use
    >>Ferrari as a columnist. I expect that we'll get an interesting article
    >>from
    >>Jeff once it's posted.
    >>
    >>--

    >
    > Brian I'm trying to remember the guys name, but he was a big time Roids,
    > and
    > everything else dealer to big name bodybuilder and powerlifter types and
    > got
    > nailed for a couple of years in the pen, but after he got out he did a
    > regular
    > column for Musclemag and didn't hold anything back. It definitely made for
    > some
    > real interesting reading and was a real window into how to win through
    > chemicals.
    > Bill C


    There you have a guy clearly acting in the role of revealer of systemic
    cheating. That's based on first hand knowledge. Drug addicts in recovery
    often make the best drug rehab counselors---knowledge and empathy make them
    effective.
    I think it sends the wrong message to employ a person convicted of fraud and
    mis-use of the authority to write prescription as a reporter on training
    issues. Some will no doubt disagree. That's life.
     
  6. Tim Mullin

    Tim Mullin Guest

    "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in news:eek:1l7d.872$Vm1.158
    @newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:

    > OK. Here are some possibilities:
    >
    > Reporter for Court TV OJ Simpson


    He has experience as a defendant, but no extensive knowledge of the law or
    court procedure.

    > Crime Columnist NY Post John Gotti, Jr.


    Crime in genral, no. But organized crime? Why not? Who has better
    knowledge of the way LCN in specific, and organized crime in general
    works? Of course, ethics would preclude him from covering anything he was
    in any way involved in--and, if you believe the government's case, that's
    just about everything on the east cost.

    > Wall Street Journal Market Reporter Martha Stewart
    > Reporter On Domestic Violence/Spouse Abuse Joel Steinberg
    > Court TV Ethics Commentator Sol Watchler


    Dumbass,

    You're argument assumes that because someone once did something,
    that makes them an expert in the field. How stupid is that? I did your old
    lady once....does that make me an expert in all things [email protected]?

    Ferrari's expertise in cycling is not limited to doping. And his
    conviction in no way invalidates any of his knowledge and experience. Now,
    if he ever used his column in CyclingNews to deny his--or any of his
    clients-- involvement in doping, then, yes, he should go. That's a
    violation of the trust between CyclingNews and their readers. Likewise, If
    CyclingNews had made an effort to ignore the case against Ferrari, or his
    controversial status within cycling, that would be problematic. But they
    haven't. So long as the editors do use the proper restraint, and there is
    full disclosure as to who Ferrari is, and what he is about, I say let the
    readers decide if they wish to benefit from what the man knows.
     
  7. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "Tim Mullin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:p[email protected]
    > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in news:eek:1l7d.872$Vm1.158
    > @newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:
    >
    >> OK. Here are some possibilities:
    >>
    >> Reporter for Court TV OJ Simpson

    >
    > He has experience as a defendant, but no extensive knowledge of the law or
    > court procedure.
    >
    >> Crime Columnist NY Post John Gotti, Jr.

    >
    > Crime in genral, no. But organized crime? Why not? Who has better
    > knowledge of the way LCN in specific, and organized crime in general
    > works? Of course, ethics would preclude him from covering anything he was
    > in any way involved in--and, if you believe the government's case, that's
    > just about everything on the east cost.
    >
    >> Wall Street Journal Market Reporter Martha Stewart
    >> Reporter On Domestic Violence/Spouse Abuse Joel Steinberg
    >> Court TV Ethics Commentator Sol Watchler

    >
    > Dumbass,
    >
    > You're argument assumes that because someone once did something,
    > that makes them an expert in the field. How stupid is that? I did your old
    > lady once....does that make me an expert in all things [email protected]?
    >
    > Ferrari's expertise in cycling is not limited to doping. And his
    > conviction in no way invalidates any of his knowledge and experience. Now,
    > if he ever used his column in CyclingNews to deny his--or any of his
    > clients-- involvement in doping, then, yes, he should go. That's a
    > violation of the trust between CyclingNews and their readers. Likewise, If
    > CyclingNews had made an effort to ignore the case against Ferrari, or his
    > controversial status within cycling, that would be problematic. But they
    > haven't. So long as the editors do use the proper restraint, and there is
    > full disclosure as to who Ferrari is, and what he is about, I say let the
    > readers decide if they wish to benefit from what the man knows.


    There was a time in this country when in most states a person convicted of a
    felony forfeited for life certain rights and privileges, some of which
    included employment. The trend has been to do away with those laws on the
    theory that once the person serves the sentence, their complete debt to
    society has been repaid.

    Simply putting a disclaimer on Jack the Ripper's expert commentary on
    aspects of knife manufacture and sharpening, doesn't do it in my ethical
    book. But we'll just have to disagree.
     
  8. Chris

    Chris Guest

    "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:eek:[email protected]
    >
    > "Tim Mullin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > > news:[email protected]:
    > >
    > >> The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to
    > >> use Ferrari as a columnist.

    > >
    > > Why shouldn't Ferrari continue his commentary on CyclingNews? Does his
    > > conviction in any way detract from his knowledge of the sport? I don't
    > > think
    > > so. A good editor would think long and hard before publishing anything
    > > Ferrari had to say even remotely connected to the topic of doping, but
    > > beyond
    > > that, what's the problem?
    > >
    > > I have a much greater problem with the ethics of letting Ferrari comment
    > > on
    > > matters involving riders and teams he has a professional relationship
    > > with.
    > > Still, this is sport journalism we're talking about, and the lines here
    > > are
    > > never drawn as sharply as they might be in other fields--and all things
    > > considered, Cyclingnews is no worse (and I would argue better) than most
    > > commercial cycling media in ethical matters.

    >
    > OK. Here are some possibilities:
    >
    > Reporter for Court TV OJ Simpson
    > Crime Columnist NY Post John Gotti, Jr.
    > Wall Street Journal Market Reporter Martha Stewart
    > Reporter On Domestic Violence/Spouse Abuse Joel Steinberg
    > Court TV Ethics Commentator Sol Watchler
    >
    > Feel free to add to the list. Every convicted criminal has marketable
    > expertise under your system of ethics.


    Hmm, ok.

    Brian, do you consider Dr. Ferarri closer to OJ Simpson than he is to say,
    your neighbor down the street that got picked up for a DUI? Should every
    person convicted of any and all crimes be removed from any position that has
    public contact? What exactly is your concern?
     
  9. On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 00:15:27 GMT, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]>
    wrote:


    >
    >There was a time in this country when in most states a person convicted of a
    >felony forfeited for life certain rights and privileges, some of which
    >included employment.


    So?


    > The trend has been to do away with those laws on the
    >theory that once the person serves the sentence, their complete debt to
    >society has been repaid.


    WTF has this got to do with anything?

    JT

    ****************************
    Remove "remove" to reply
    Visit http://www.jt10000.com
    ****************************
     
  10. Chris

    Chris Guest

    "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > "TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > >From: "B. Lafferty" [email protected]

    > >
    > >>The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to

    use
    > >>Ferrari as a columnist. I expect that we'll get an interesting article
    > >>from
    > >>Jeff once it's posted.
    > >>
    > >>--

    > >
    > > Brian I'm trying to remember the guys name, but he was a big time Roids,
    > > and
    > > everything else dealer to big name bodybuilder and powerlifter types and
    > > got
    > > nailed for a couple of years in the pen, but after he got out he did a
    > > regular
    > > column for Musclemag and didn't hold anything back. It definitely made

    for
    > > some
    > > real interesting reading and was a real window into how to win through
    > > chemicals.
    > > Bill C

    >
    > There you have a guy clearly acting in the role of revealer of systemic
    > cheating. That's based on first hand knowledge. Drug addicts in recovery
    > often make the best drug rehab counselors---knowledge and empathy make

    them
    > effective.
    > I think it sends the wrong message to employ a person convicted of fraud

    and
    > mis-use of the authority to write prescription as a reporter on training
    > issues. Some will no doubt disagree. That's life.



    Well yes I do disagree. I think that the severity of his crimes are greatly
    exaggerated by you and many others. During the time in question I am sure
    his guidance saved some lives since he was one of the few MDs qualified to
    advise these desperate athletes. No single person could have done anything
    at that time that would have prevented an athlete from using EPO.

    You have to remember that many of these MDs at that time had athletes as
    clients and were performing health checks as well as consultation on optimal
    health. Some of them like Ferrari also advised on training protocols
    including exercise intensity, duration and other protocols like altitude and
    drugs whether legal or not. Turning a patient away to some MDs is no
    acceptable because they believe they are putting their client at risk by not
    advising him or her on a substance that the patient athlete had already
    decided to take. Some MDs view it as an ethical decision to supervise the
    (relatively) healthy administration the drug in question rather than turning
    them away to fend for himself. The same kind of dilemma is also why some MDs
    do prescribe maintenance doses of addictive drugs. In the US this is against
    the law but I do not think it is against the law in many European countries.
    In any case, it was not against the law anywhere many years ago and if you
    look at that prescribing model then you see the logic that Ferrari claimed
    to following. I think our society has become extremely hypocritical about
    drugs. I know that there are many people that sling med at athletes that are
    charged with a doping offense and yet they probably are not aware that they
    are consuming many of these drugs throughout their lives. Why is it that
    only in one case has there been any kind of hand wringing over sensible
    doping laws? When Jonathon Vaughters has to choose an IM dose of an
    anti-inflammatory drug or continuing the remainder of the Tour, the poor guy
    for forced to retire by his team to avoid the risk of a positive dope test.
    Everyone saw how stupid that was, but that kind of thing happens on a very
    regular basis.
     
  11. RWM

    RWM Guest

    "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    >> There was a time in this country when in most states a person convicted
    >> of a

    > felony forfeited for life certain rights and privileges, some of which
    > included employment. The trend has been to do away with those laws on the
    > theory that once the person serves the sentence, their complete debt to
    > society has been repaid.
    >


    The State of Washington used to give money for secondary education to
    ex-cons, the trend has been to also get rid of incentives to commit crimes
     
  12. B. Lafferty <[email protected]> wrote:

    > There was a time in this country when in most states a person convicted of a
    > felony forfeited for life certain rights and privileges, some of which
    > included employment. The trend has been to do away with those laws on the
    > theory that once the person serves the sentence, their complete debt to
    > society has been repaid.


    > Simply putting a disclaimer on Jack the Ripper's expert commentary on
    > aspects of knife manufacture and sharpening, doesn't do it in my ethical
    > book. But we'll just have to disagree.


    Laffertool,

    We live in a world in which war criminal Henry Kissinger
    appears frequently on Nightline and writes Op-Ed pieces
    for major newspapers. And you're worried about this?

    If Bob Knight wasn't a demigod, he could (in principle) have
    gotten booked for assault on one of his players. As it was he
    lost his job. Should Bob Knight be allowed to be a sports
    columnist? Oh wait a minute, he can't, because he's got another
    FUCKING COACHING JOB. Say whatever you want about Ferrari, at
    least he doesn't throw chairs.
     
  13. Tim Mullin

    Tim Mullin Guest

    "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    > Simply putting a disclaimer on Jack the Ripper's expert commentary on
    > aspects of knife manufacture and sharpening, doesn't do it in my ethical
    > book. But we'll just have to disagree.


    So let me get this straight....you're equating what Ferrari did with serial
    murder? Okay....

    So here is a question for you. Eddy Merckx failed something like three drug
    tests. So I guess you've got him on your list of dopers, right? Also, his
    company is one of the sponsors of Lott-Domo. Covering a business or party you
    have a commercial interest in is considered a conflict of interest, and
    highly unethical. So I suppose you also believe he shouldn't be providing
    commentary for Belgian television race coverage, right?
     
  14. B. Lafferty wrote:
    > "Tim Mullin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >
    >>"B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in
    >>news:[email protected]:
    >>
    >>
    >>>The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to
    >>>use Ferrari as a columnist.

    >>
    >>Why shouldn't Ferrari continue his commentary on CyclingNews? Does his
    >>conviction in any way detract from his knowledge of the sport? I don't
    >>think
    >>so. A good editor would think long and hard before publishing anything
    >>Ferrari had to say even remotely connected to the topic of doping, but
    >>beyond
    >>that, what's the problem?
    >>
    >>I have a much greater problem with the ethics of letting Ferrari comment
    >>on
    >>matters involving riders and teams he has a professional relationship
    >>with.
    >>Still, this is sport journalism we're talking about, and the lines here
    >>are
    >>never drawn as sharply as they might be in other fields--and all things
    >>considered, Cyclingnews is no worse (and I would argue better) than most
    >>commercial cycling media in ethical matters.

    >
    >
    > OK. Here are some possibilities:
    >
    > Reporter for Court TV OJ Simpson
    > Crime Columnist NY Post John Gotti, Jr.
    > Wall Street Journal Market Reporter Martha Stewart
    > Reporter On Domestic Violence/Spouse Abuse Joel Steinberg
    > Court TV Ethics Commentator Sol Watchler
    >
    > Feel free to add to the list.


    How about people who just like to shit all over the place without
    worrying that they may need to clean up after themselves later:

    RBR Doping reporter B. Lafferty
     
  15. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "Chris" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:eek:[email protected]
    >>
    >> "Tim Mullin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]
    >> > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in
    >> > news:[email protected]:
    >> >
    >> >> The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to
    >> >> use Ferrari as a columnist.
    >> >
    >> > Why shouldn't Ferrari continue his commentary on CyclingNews? Does his
    >> > conviction in any way detract from his knowledge of the sport? I don't
    >> > think
    >> > so. A good editor would think long and hard before publishing anything
    >> > Ferrari had to say even remotely connected to the topic of doping, but
    >> > beyond
    >> > that, what's the problem?
    >> >
    >> > I have a much greater problem with the ethics of letting Ferrari
    >> > comment
    >> > on
    >> > matters involving riders and teams he has a professional relationship
    >> > with.
    >> > Still, this is sport journalism we're talking about, and the lines here
    >> > are
    >> > never drawn as sharply as they might be in other fields--and all things
    >> > considered, Cyclingnews is no worse (and I would argue better) than
    >> > most
    >> > commercial cycling media in ethical matters.

    >>
    >> OK. Here are some possibilities:
    >>
    >> Reporter for Court TV OJ Simpson
    >> Crime Columnist NY Post John Gotti, Jr.
    >> Wall Street Journal Market Reporter Martha Stewart
    >> Reporter On Domestic Violence/Spouse Abuse Joel Steinberg
    >> Court TV Ethics Commentator Sol Watchler
    >>
    >> Feel free to add to the list. Every convicted criminal has marketable
    >> expertise under your system of ethics.

    >
    > Hmm, ok.
    >
    > Brian, do you consider Dr. Ferarri closer to OJ Simpson than he is to say,
    > your neighbor down the street that got picked up for a DUI? Should every
    > person convicted of any and all crimes be removed from any position that
    > has
    > public contact? What exactly is your concern?


    Let me ask you this. HGH administered to healthy people has been show to
    have and immediate effect on the left ventricle of the heart greatly
    increasing the risk of heart attack and death. If the good doctor
    recommended the use of hgh, as he apparently did according to the testimony
    at the trail, then the good doctor has quite possibly helped to cause the
    death cyclists or at the very least put them at risk. Not the kind of
    person who I would want advising people as a paid columnist on training
    issues.

    This is completely different from cyclists who have tested positive whom
    many have argued are victims of a system that includes the likes of Ferrari.
     
  16. RJG

    RJG Guest

    "TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > >From: "B. Lafferty" [email protected]

    >
    > >The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue to use
    > >Ferrari as a columnist. I expect that we'll get an interesting article

    from
    > >Jeff once it's posted.
    > >
    > >--

    >
    > Brian I'm trying to remember the guys name, but he was a big time Roids,

    and
    > everything else dealer to big name bodybuilder and powerlifter types and

    got
    > nailed for a couple of years in the pen, but after he got out he did a

    regular
    > column for Musclemag and didn't hold anything back. It definitely made for

    some
    > real interesting reading and was a real window into how to win through
    > chemicals.
    > Bill C


    And now he is governor of California.
     
  17. Chris

    Chris Guest

    "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > "Chris" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > >
    > > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:eek:[email protected]
    > >>
    > >> "Tim Mullin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >> news:[email protected]
    > >> > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > >> > news:[email protected]:
    > >> >
    > >> >> The big question, IMO, is whether or not CyclingNews will continue

    to
    > >> >> use Ferrari as a columnist.
    > >> >
    > >> > Why shouldn't Ferrari continue his commentary on CyclingNews? Does

    his
    > >> > conviction in any way detract from his knowledge of the sport? I

    don't
    > >> > think
    > >> > so. A good editor would think long and hard before publishing

    anything
    > >> > Ferrari had to say even remotely connected to the topic of doping,

    but
    > >> > beyond
    > >> > that, what's the problem?
    > >> >
    > >> > I have a much greater problem with the ethics of letting Ferrari
    > >> > comment
    > >> > on
    > >> > matters involving riders and teams he has a professional relationship
    > >> > with.
    > >> > Still, this is sport journalism we're talking about, and the lines

    here
    > >> > are
    > >> > never drawn as sharply as they might be in other fields--and all

    things
    > >> > considered, Cyclingnews is no worse (and I would argue better) than
    > >> > most
    > >> > commercial cycling media in ethical matters.
    > >>
    > >> OK. Here are some possibilities:
    > >>
    > >> Reporter for Court TV OJ Simpson
    > >> Crime Columnist NY Post John Gotti, Jr.
    > >> Wall Street Journal Market Reporter Martha Stewart
    > >> Reporter On Domestic Violence/Spouse Abuse Joel Steinberg
    > >> Court TV Ethics Commentator Sol Watchler
    > >>
    > >> Feel free to add to the list. Every convicted criminal has marketable
    > >> expertise under your system of ethics.

    > >
    > > Hmm, ok.
    > >
    > > Brian, do you consider Dr. Ferarri closer to OJ Simpson than he is to

    say,
    > > your neighbor down the street that got picked up for a DUI? Should every
    > > person convicted of any and all crimes be removed from any position that
    > > has
    > > public contact? What exactly is your concern?

    >
    > Let me ask you this. HGH administered to healthy people has been show to
    > have and immediate effect on the left ventricle of the heart greatly
    > increasing the risk of heart attack and death.


    Perfect example. Show me those studies. Are you talking about so called
    "mega dosing" or are you talking about replacing the quantity that has been
    assumed to have declined with age?

    If the good doctor
    > recommended the use of hgh, as he apparently did according to the

    testimony
    > at the trail, then the good doctor has quite possibly helped to cause the
    > death cyclists or at the very least put them at risk. Not the kind of
    > person who I would want advising people as a paid columnist on training
    > issues.


    Again, I thank you for this perfect example. You see, there is no single
    unified view in most cases about drugs and many other procedures. Cosmetic
    surgery in most cases puts a patient at risk in exchange for merely "feeling
    better" about their self image. At least with HGH there are likely to be
    health benefits that outweigh the risk in (I hope) most cases. In any case,
    the MD ethically should assist the patient in deciding whether the benefits
    outweigh the risks and if it is clearly not the case then the MD should not
    offer it. Your example of HGH just does not present enough information for
    me to pass judgement. However, you seem to want to conclude that any MD that
    prescribes or recommends HGH is de facto acting against the patient's
    interest. You can't factually say that. Truly, the same can be said about
    most if not all of the doping cases we have heard about. I will say that I
    do beleive many MDs (Ferarri included) most likely did cross the line of
    acting in the best interest of the patient. I just don't know what the
    appropriate government role is. In some cases where the patient was truly
    put at risk then perhaps the goverment should prosecute him. If it is merely
    a case that the risks were not exaplained properly then that is a lessor
    form malpractice (assuming there were valid reasons for using HGH). Who do
    you suppose is best qualified to decide whether a patient could benefit from
    EPO or HGH? You? Do you suppose your judgement is superior to a medical
    doctor? Naturally self-interest is going to influence the outcome but I am
    just pointing out to you that maybe you don't really know enough about what
    has been happening to pass judgement yet.


    > This is completely different from cyclists who have tested positive whom
    > many have argued are victims of a system that includes the likes of

    Ferrari.

    I think those cases should be argued in a civil court. If evidence from
    those cases starts to show evidence of malpractice then the prosecution can
    use that evidence in future cases against him. The highly visible nature of
    these cases almost guarantees that public perception will corrupt the whole
    process of the pursuit of justice. Prosecutors tens to worry as much about
    public perception as they do about facts in evidence.

    So far I have no information whatsoever that Dr. Ferrai' conviction this
    week deserves more than a suspended sentence. If some of these rumors are
    true, well none of them that I have heard were shown to be true just because
    he was found guilty earlier this week.
     
  18. B. Lafferty

    B. Lafferty Guest

    "Chris" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    >>
    >> Let me ask you this. HGH administered to healthy people has been show to
    >> have and immediate effect on the left ventricle of the heart greatly
    >> increasing the risk of heart attack and death.

    >
    > Perfect example. Show me those studies. Are you talking about so called
    > "mega dosing" or are you talking about replacing the quantity that has
    > been
    > assumed to have declined with age?


    http://www.endocrine-society.gr/hormones/pdf/1_2004/teyx37-45.pdf Take a
    look at page 41 under 2.Side effects of GH abuse.
    >
    >
    >However, you seem to want to conclude that any MD that
    > prescribes or recommends HGH is de facto acting against the patient's
    > interest.


    If a physician prescribed hgh for a healthy individual not in medical need
    of hgh, that would be unethical, illegal and a criminal offense in all
    jurisdictions that I'm aware of. In as much as Ferrari was found guilty, I
    would assume the same under Italian law. It amounts to malpractice under
    our civil law.
     
  19. B. Lafferty wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >However, you seem to want to conclude that any MD that
    > > prescribes or recommends HGH is de facto acting against the

    patient's
    > > interest.

    >
    > If a physician prescribed hgh for a healthy individual not in medical

    need
    > of hgh, that would be unethical, illegal and a criminal offense in

    all
    > jurisdictions that I'm aware of. In as much as Ferrari was found

    guilty, I
    > would assume the same under Italian law. It amounts to malpractice

    under
    > our civil law.




    Dumbass -

    Cyclingnews.com comments on bike racing. Bike racing is entertainment.
    Therefore, cyclingnews is essentially a publication that reports on a
    specific area of the entertainment industry. So who the fuck cares
    whether he's got a mark on his record or not? It's entertainment, for
    god's sake.

    I think Ferrari's knowledge of doping makes him a *better* columnist.
    He has a good idea of what's going down.

    Paging Jeff Jones: KEEP DR. FERRARI
    Thank you very much and have a nice day.

    K. Gringioni
     
  20. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

    B. Lafferty wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Let me ask you this. HGH administered to healthy people has been
    >>> show to have and immediate effect on the left ventricle of the heart
    >>> greatly increasing the risk of heart attack and death. If the good

    doctor
    >>> recommended the use of hgh, as he apparently did according to the
    >>> testimony at the trail, then the good doctor has quite possibly helped
    >>> to cause the death cyclists or at the very least put them at risk.


    [and]

    >
    > http://www.endocrine-society.gr/hormones/pdf/1_2004/teyx37-45.pdf Take
    > a look at page 41 under 2.Side effects of GH abuse.


    > If a physician prescribed hgh for a healthy individual not in medical
    > need of hgh, that would be unethical, illegal and a criminal offense in
    > all jurisdictions that I'm aware of. In as much as Ferrari was found
    > guilty, I would assume the same under Italian law. It amounts to
    > malpractice under our civil law.


    Would it be considered malpractice under our civil law if, at the time
    that a particular therapy was administered, a physician did not know that
    it would be dangerous? Just wondering. I would have thought malpractice
    meant something different.
     
Loading...
Loading...