Armstrong blood values at Tour
Comments
-
After a test for Epo was developed medically-managed autologous blood doping became the 'state of the art' method of doping.Moomin23 wrote:And the rest of his wins??
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/indepth/landis ... ssage.html
The answer to your question is to be found in the second half of your sentence...Moomin23 wrote:Can anyone tell me the benefit of covering up for Armstrong, surely having the most high profile name in the sport proven to be cheating would be disastrous for the UCI..
I see that you have bought into the whole 'The French hate Armstrong' myth, so successfully encouraged and exploited by his holiness himself. (In reality most French people couldn’t give a monkeys about the Tour, let alone Armstrong’s participation in it). However, the ASO have clearly decided, along with the UCI, that avoiding drug busts is 'good for business', hence the disgraceful sacking of Patrice Clerc.Moomin23 wrote:Armstrong is not popular with the authorites (particularly French) so I can't understand why they would want to protect him as so many doubters here seem to think they have.0 -
Here is some confirmation of that 'Motorcycle with refrigerated compartments' claim...BikingBernie wrote:
After a test for Epo was developed medically-managed autologous blood doping became the 'state of the art' method of doping.Moomin23 wrote:And the rest of his wins??
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/indepth/landis ... ssage.html
L'EQUIPE
October 6, 2005, page 12.
English translation of "Ce qui s'est passe sur le Tour 2005".
Photo
Prentice Steffen, USA, 44 years old
-Specialist in both Emergency Medicine, in San Francisco (USA), and Sports Medicine
-Worked successively for the cycling teams Subaru-Montgomery (1993-1995), US Postal (1996), Mercury (1998-2002), Prime Alliance (2003), Health Net (2004), then TIAA-CREF (2005)
Prentice Steffen, the ex-doctor for US Postal let go at the end of 1996 for not wanting to respond to the doping trend, reveals the new practices of the peloton.
"What happened during the 2005 Tour (de France)"
Dr. Prentice Steffen, his diplomas attest to the fact, is a model doctor. Specialist in both Emergency Medicine and Sports Medicine, he worked for four years, from 1993-1996, with the American cyclists of the teams Subaru-Montgomery then US Postal. In 1996, "during the height of the reign of EPO", his riders were totally destroyed during the Tour of Switzerland and two among them, Marty Jemison and Tyler Hamilton, asked him in veiled words to help them dope. He refused and alerted the team directors. At the end of the year, his contract was not renewed and one morning the mailman delivered him a registered letter with the intimidation order to not talk about his experience in the heart of US Postal. "A few months later," he remembers, "the nine riders of the team rode the Champs-Elysees of the finish of the 1997 Tour de France. I realized they'd move on to EPO...". Today, despite threats from Lance Armstrong (1), Dr. Steffen is still in the milieu (of cycling). He takes care of a team of young American professionals (TIAA-CREF) which disputed the latest edition of the Tour de l'Avenir.
L'EQUIPE:
With all that you know about doping and the practices of a part of the peloton, why are you involved with young cyclists"
STEFFEN:
The pressure to dope for riders under the age of 25 is not so strong. Big teams don't want to see young guys arrive in their ranks with an already bad reputation. There's also the fact of being able to race in France. It's easier. If we come to race in France, with our team of young riders, it's not because our sponsor loves Avignon and Provence, but rather because we know we have a better chance to do well, even win. Thanks to the fear of the police, thanks to the journalists, and thanks to the fight against doping in place in your country. French riders, maybe due to these forces, have tried to change. We only race in your country and in the United States.
L'EQUIPE:
Your young riders are knowledgeable about doping?
STEFFEN:
They have a very clear understanding about things and about the environment they're in. To be among the best, one has to dope. For them, it's certain. I don't think they doubt it for an instant. But there are people fighting to change this situation. Jonathon Vaughters, the director of our team, is working to make it so that there is another path. But if things don't change, riders who are 20 years old today, in five years will have to make a choice: stop racing or dope.
L'EQUIPE:
Is it possible today to recognize those who'll take that step?
STEFFEN:
Even if we had a team psychologist who knew each rider intimately, who fully understood the problem of doping, I'm not sure he could know. If someone had asked me this question about Tyler Hamilton 10 or 11 years ago, I would've said: "He'll never do it. He's too honest, too well raised, too hard working... ". But that's not how it works. Unpleasant people like Lance Armstrong dope and nice people like Tyler Hamilton also dope. There's a moment when they waver. As if they don't have a choice. The only other solution would be to stop cycling. But they see themselves with a future, without a job. I think a rider with a college degree or from a family with money will be less likely to get involved in doping. But that's just a theory; Tyler Hamilton has a degree... he probably had other options. That proves that at a certain point there's something stronger that anything else that pushes a rider in (to doping). Maybe glory, maybe money.
L'EQUIPE:
Why, after all the difficulties you've endured, do you continue to work in this milieu (cycling)?
STEFFEN:
I love cycling. I've been in cycling for 26 years, since I was in college. But I promised myself something, and my wife can serve as witness: if Hamilton is declared innocent and nothing happens to Lance, I'll quit, I'll quit cycling once and for all. I'll believe there's no longer any hope. For now though, I'm optimistic. I'm a believer in using everything in the judicial arsenal to combat doping: increase the number of out-of-competition tests and better target the times they're done, freeze specimens and authorize their analysis and retrospective sanctions. And callon, when it's necessary, the police and the border controls. Above all, the UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) should be completely out of this fight against doping because their is corruption there. That's my opinion, I don't have any proof, just doubts and a few rumors...
L'EQUIPE:
Aren't you a bit radical?
STEFFEN:
It's this way and only this way that we will really be able to combat doping. I'll explain something I've been told relating to certain teams in the 2005 Tour and you'll understand where this sport has gone...
L'EQUIPE:
Who told you?
STEFFEN:
Someone in the heart of a team that I can't name. Before going to the start of the Tour, the riders of certain teams, during their training camps, took EPO (which disappears from the urine within three days, even 12 hours when small doses are used) and took their hematocrits up to around 60. Then a doctor withdraws their blood, saving it in special containers, to lower their blood parameters into the accepted range (50) so that they pass without difficulty the medical controls before the Tour. Then, as the teams well know, during the race the vampires (2) can arrive any day but always between 7 and 8 in the morning. After that time, there is no more testing and the riders were able to reinject their own blood. They were racing the stage with an enormous advantage- their hemotrocrit in the 55 to 58 range during the race- then in the evening at the hotel, someone again withdraws their blood so that they sleep without risk (3) and, especially, they escape the possible tests the next morning.
L'EQUIPE:
This practice was used every evening during the three weeks of the Tour?
STEFFEN:
No, just for important stages in the mountains or maybe for a time trial. It's so simple to do and there's no risk of being caught unless the police intervene. The blood was shuttled by motorcycle in a refrigerated compartment...
L'EQUIPE:
Autotransfusions (where one injects his own blood) are indetectable. Can nothing be done to stop it?
STEFFEN:
Yes. The vampires should come take the blood samples just before the start near the start line. It's the only solution. Or otherwise, once again we must call on the police...
DOMINIQUE and JEAN ISSARTEL
(1) After the publication of his testimony about Jemison and Hamilton in an article in the Sunday Times of London in 2001 when he expressed his certainty that US Postal had begun doping, Dr. Steffen received a phone call from Armstrong in which he threatened him in the following terms (the same that he used against Greg LeMond and Mike Anderson, his former personal assistant): "I have a lot of money, good lawyers, and if you continue to talk, I'll destroy you."
(2) The UCI antidoping control officers are thus nicknamed in cycling.
(3) When certain blood parameters (hemoglobin, hematocrit) are too high, there is a real risk of blood clots due to thickening of the blood.
(4) UCI antidoping rules sayin article 135 that "a test can be carried out in competion or out-of-competition at any time and at any place without warning". In this particular case, no rider can be declared positive because autotransfusions are indetectable. But if the blood parameters are abnormal, the authorities can forbid the rider to continue the race and can impose a rest period of 15 days.0 -
"I don't have any proof, just doubts and a few rumors"
Bit like Michael Jackson being a kiddy fiddler!
I supose if you've worked a pretty unremarkable profession all your life and all of a sudden a big paper like L- Equipe comes along and makes you the focus of the TDF coverage, you have tell them something.
A lot like MJ, I suppose Armstrong threatening with his lawyers, is a way of not having to scrifice his privacy and that of his closest friends and family for people to stick their noses into his private life only to find nothing.
If you've got the evidence and conviction, one rider and his legal team surely shouldn't be enough to put you off your crusade, unless of course you're just spouting any rubbish to show your colleagues at work the next day.
Michael Jackson was innocent and proved it time and again without being convicted, doesn't mean he wasn't a weirdo. We all know Lance is a conceited A-hole sometimes, but it doesn't make him a cheat.I want to come back as Niki Gudex's seat0 -
Moomin23 wrote:"I don't have any proof, just doubts and a few rumors"
Bit like Michael Jackson being a kiddy fiddler!
I supose if you've worked a pretty unremarkable profession all your life and all of a sudden a big paper like L- Equipe comes along and makes you the focus of the TDF coverage, you have tell them something.
A lot like MJ, I suppose Armstrong threatening with his lawyers, is a way of not having to scrifice his privacy and that of his closest friends and family for people to stick their noses into his private life only to find nothing.
If you've got the evidence and conviction, one rider and his legal team surely shouldn't be enough to put you off your crusade, unless of course you're just spouting any rubbish to show your colleagues at work the next day.
Michael Jackson was innocent and proved it time and again without being convicted, doesn't mean he wasn't a weirdo. We all know Lance is a conceited A-hole sometimes, but it doesn't make him a cheat.
+10 -
No it was the doping that did that....Moomin23 wrote:We all know Lance is a conceited A-hole sometimes, but it doesn't make him a cheat.
http://www.filefactory.com/file/af44003/n/gregstef_mp3
http://www.competitorradio.com/details.php?show=150
http://www.competitorradio.com/details.php?show=1510 -
So let's discuss the numbers instead of personality. Bringing up Jackson doesn't add much to the analysis of haematological data.Moomin23 wrote:Michael Jackson was innocent and proved it time and again without being convicted, doesn't mean he wasn't a weirdo. We all know Lance is a conceited A-hole sometimes, but it doesn't make him a cheat.0 -
So bring up the numbers! I'm sure if the UCi or any independent organisation had the opportunity to show how they are beating the cheats, surely catching the biggest fish of all woudl be the ideal way to do it!!
Nothing presented so far has given any more indication he's a cheat than Contador, Indurain, Hinault or Mercx. But then again he is the only American, and he is a bit cocky, and he does have a nasty habit of turning up in France and pi**ing their premier sporting showcase beofre jetting back to Hollywood and his big pile of money.
I'm quite sure Greg LeMond doesn't like Lance, and neither do a lot of people, but it has nothing to do with the fact they KNOW he's doping, perhaps losing your place as Le Grand Fromage of US cycling might have more to do with it.
Professional jealousy stinks, if Lance wants to defend his legacy and invite all comers to challenge it, good luck to him. Personally if I'd worked hard enough to earn 7 yellow jerseys, several million dollars and beaten cancer, I'd jump all over anyone trying to take that away, not to mention his kids, who know their Dad is the greatest tour rider of all time, but have to put up with their Dad having to qualify it at every opportunity, which he has time and again. Isn't it time to say fairs fair, we've tried really hard to prove it, but it turns out the guy is just awesome at riding a bike.I want to come back as Niki Gudex's seat0 -
Ooh it started off so well, never mind.Saracen Tenet 3 - 2015 - Dead - Replaced with a Hack Frame
Voodoo Bizango - 2014 - Dead - Hit by a car
Vitus Sentier VRS - 20170 -
Moomin23 wrote:So bring up the numbers! I'm sure if the UCi or any independent organisation had the opportunity to show how they are beating the cheats, surely catching the biggest fish of all woudl be the ideal way to do it!!
So when I started this thread it was because an expert in blood doping had said Armstrong's blood results are suspicious.
Would you care to discuss that without playing the a) jealousy b) it's coz he's American card c) never tested positive card.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Moomin23 wrote:So bring up the numbers! I'm sure if the UCi or any independent organisation had the opportunity to show how they are beating the cheats, surely catching the biggest fish of all woudl be the ideal way to do it!!
Nothing presented so far has given any more indication he's a cheat than Contador, Indurain, Hinault or Mercx. But then again he is the only American, and he is a bit cocky, and he does have a nasty habit of turning up in France and pi**ing their premier sporting showcase beofre jetting back to Hollywood and his big pile of money.
I'm quite sure Greg LeMond doesn't like Lance, and neither do a lot of people, but it has nothing to do with the fact they KNOW he's doping, perhaps losing your place as Le Grand Fromage of US cycling might have more to do with it.
Professional jealousy stinks, if Lance wants to defend his legacy and invite all comers to challenge it, good luck to him. Personally if I'd worked hard enough to earn 7 yellow jerseys, several million dollars and beaten cancer, I'd jump all over anyone trying to take that away, not to mention his kids, who know their Dad is the greatest tour rider of all time, but have to put up with their Dad having to qualify it at every opportunity, which he has time and again. Isn't it time to say fairs fair, we've tried really hard to prove it, but it turns out the guy is just awesome at riding a bike.
Well put and hard to argue with, but I'm sure someone will be along soon to call you a fanboy. Thereby "proving" you wrong.0 -
I'm sure if they where suspicious enough, there would have been action taken. As previously mentioned, I'm sure for every expert sayting they're suspicous, there's one saying they're fine.
I'm all for people questioning fishy looking results in an effort to weed out cheats, but surely it's not beyond the realms to suggest one of these experts might see an oportunity to get his name in the paper and sensationalise something wholly innocuous.
But at what point do we stop this and give the man the benefit of the doubt, even retiring never stopped it!!I want to come back as Niki Gudex's seat0 -
FACT his tour blood readings show no normal responses to three weeks arduous activity
FACT in the preceding Giro his numbers showed a normal response to three weeks arduous activity
So he doped in the Tour but not the Giro?I'm left handed, if that matters.0 -
Moomin23 wrote:I'm sure if they where suspicious enough, there would have been action taken. As previously mentioned, I'm sure for every expert sayting they're suspicous, there's one saying they're fine.
The place the article was linked from were trying to get some more experts to comment. The UCI are in a position where they can't really comment.
Perhaps there has been action taken (increased volume of testing for example)Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Indeed. Someone has raised concerns and as the numbers only indicate the possibility of blood manipulation, the likes of the UCI can't bring action. After all, the data could occur because of diarrhoea, even the numbers could be wrong. That's worth discussing, talk of angry Frenchmen or heroic fundraisers surely has little to do with it?iainf72 wrote:Would you care to discuss that without playing the a) jealousy b) it's coz he's American card c) never tested positive card.
I'd like to know the precision of these numbers, for example how accurate is the off-score test and with what precision can haematocrit numbers be taken. Also, is there not a way of doing the 'crit count along with a test of hydration levels so that tests can be comparable?0 -
I might have missed it somewhere - but where did these numbers come from? Were they posted by Armstrong himself on his website?0
-
Moomin23 wrote:I'm sure if they where suspicious enough, there would have been action taken. As previously mentioned, I'm sure for every expert sayting they're suspicous, there's one saying they're fine.
I'm all for people questioning fishy looking results in an effort to weed out cheats, but surely it's not beyond the realms to suggest one of these experts might see an oportunity to get his name in the paper and sensationalise something wholly innocuous.
But at what point do we stop this and give the man the benefit of the doubt, even retiring never stopped it!!
That's the price of fame and fortune. There are people out there who, for whatever reason, just have to know more about these people. Be they movie stars, athletes, politicians, or whatever. Marilyn Monroe has been dead for years and still the new books, good or bad, about her just seem to keep coming. Some people can't get enough of celebrities. Actually the hint of scandal helps keep these people in the limelight.0 -
Just checked and the results ARE posted on the Livestrong website. So - they are genuine.
Makes you wonder why he would post 'suspicious' results....0 -
Strictly speaking no. But then again the most 'superhuman' thing about Indurain was, or so it has been claimed, the amount of Epo and other drugs he could take without keeling over stone dead!Moomin23 wrote:Nothing presented so far has given any more indication he's a cheat than Contador, Indurain, Hinault or Mercx.0 -
Pokerface wrote:Just checked and the results ARE posted on the Livestrong website. So - they are genuine.
Makes you wonder why he would post 'suspicious' results....
They fall within all the parameters. So if you looked at an OFF score in isolation, it's fine. What the good doctor is saying is when you look at the trends they raise his eyebrows.
This is not evidence of doping. But at the same time, it's not evidence of no doping. The blood results are abnormal considering the load he was under.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
This was posted at the CN forum - an interesting, and very graphic, representation:
0 -
This is a fabulous article and helps explain a lot of what you're looking at
http://www.localcyclist.com/2009/09/a-t ... -cyclists/
Damsgaard has waded in with an interestingly non-commital response.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
iainf72 wrote:Damsgaard has waded in with an interestingly non-commital response.http://www.velonews.com/article/97468/damsgaard-responds-to-speculation-about-lance-armstrong-s wrote:Damsgaard went on to repeat the oft-mentioned assertion that Armstrong "is one of the world's most tested athletes - if not the most tested athlete," having been tested more than 40 times this year out of competition.
i thought this guy was supposed to be a doping expert? :roll:0 -
Wow....it reads like a good thriller. You think it's talking about one thing....then there's that twist in the tail. (or tale)
Pretty much explains things for the novice, or those of low IQ.
Same sort of in depth stuff Matt Rendell did on Pantani and just as damning."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
-
iainf72 wrote:
Interesting comments about Wiggins too, no mention of that a few weeks ago.Saracen Tenet 3 - 2015 - Dead - Replaced with a Hack Frame
Voodoo Bizango - 2014 - Dead - Hit by a car
Vitus Sentier VRS - 20170 -
Given that dehydration can skew these values quite significantly, is it really surprising that blood values taken in May are different from those taken in July?0
-
So, despite being aware of the importance of proper hydration, Armstrong spends the whole of July in a dehydrated state? .....Yeah, right!slojo wrote:Given that dehydration can skew these values quite significantly, is it really surprising that blood values taken in May are different from those taken in July?0
