Chris Froome cured
Comments
-
nic_77 wrote:My goodness, I knew this wouldn't be worth getting into... but in for a penny, in for a pound.whiteboytrash wrote:If you get time I suggest reading a more direct study on the impacts to blood parameters here:
http://www.slideshare.net/AlexanderDeck ... parameters
Worth reading.Very insightful.
I've read it, it is incredibly insightful.
Allow me to draw your attention to the following conclusions:
"In this study no difference in the hematocrit of both sexes when compared to the control group, while it was reversibly affected with the degree of parasitemia when the mean was compared in mild and sever infections (P. value 0.001)."
In case that isn't clear... there is no statistical difference in hematocrit between infected and uninfected individuals (however, if you compare a mildly infected individual with a severly infected individual there is a statistically significant difference).
"In the current study we found that there was no difference in the RBCs count of male patient group and male control group (P. value 0.18), while it was significantly reduced in females (P. value 0.022). RBCs was not affected with parasitemia."
So thanks for providing further conclusive evidence to support my assertions... (unless you are going to question Froome's gender next?)
I'll go on, shall I?whiteboytrash wrote:So how did Froome, Walsh, and Brailsford get it so wrong?
I presume you read my other post which clearly shows that they didn't.nic_77 wrote:
I am basing this on what I have read about the disease...Stillnox wrote:So, how come Froome/Walsh/Brailsford have stated on numerous occasions the Bilharzia feeds on the red blood cells, effectively doing the reverse of what EPO does?
and Froome/Walsh/Brailsford are factually correct - the worms do eat red blood cells.
Consider the life cycle of the disease:
1. Invasion by the parasite
2. (Day 2-10) Migration to the liver
3. (6-8 Weeks) Maturation of the worms
4. Egg laying (a pair of worms can lay several hundred eggs a day)
5. Many eggs are released by the body, others become lodged (in places like the liver)
6. Worms can remain in the body for many years presumably eating RBCs and laying eggs
NOTE: The worms themselves can not proliferate in the body - so there may not be a large number of them, yet many egg are being produced. The eggs have to leave the body to hatch and then they need to pass through a snail host before they become capable of infecting a human.
So, during the time when the worms are actively in the body they are eating the RBC... but as the study I quoted previously shows this does not appear to have an affect on the haematocrit or RBC count. Perhaps because of the numbers involved or the body's ability to cope with the depletion - this I can't answer for sure.
The presence of the eggs however is what cause the immune response from the body and therefore the pathology and symptoms.
So... there is room in this story for everyone to be telling the truth and for the cause to be genuine!
...and thenwhiteboytrash wrote:With the following symptoms he just thought it was normal for 96 months as a pro athlete? and once cured he was able to nearly win the Vuelta? :shock:
The paper you so very helpfully referenced above states:
"Symptoms and signs depend upon the number and location of eggs trapped in the tissues."
"Many individuals do not experience symptoms"
Please also google 'subclinical infection'. The body can be working hard fighting perceived infections, thus diverting resources from other things without the patient necessarily experiencing symptoms.
And for what it's worth...whiteboytrash wrote:nic_77 wrote:Please could you now indicate a reputible (sic) source for your previous statement:whiteboytrash wrote:He'd have the hematocrit of a old lady! :roll:
Or admit that you made it up. I will not be interacting with you any further until you do one of these two things.
Not sure why you're saying "admit I made it up". I was presenting the theory put forward by Walsh/Froome and Brailsford.
Who stated it was a "RBC", "munching" disease. Froome said it was the "reverse of EPO".
As did Dave Brailsford.
Sorry, where did Froome, Walsh or Brailsford say that Froome would have the Haematocrit of an old lady? You made that up, now be a good chap and admit it.
It was my pleasure 'debating' with you.
Not sure why you wish to be so aggressive? I was actually agreeing with you.
The study your provided was poor hence why I provided I much better one not just to educate you but others.
If my intention was to just win the Internet wars I would have picked on the fact your study was on Sudanese children and not adult athletes.
The study I provided does have issue with sever cases whereby RBCs do drop. There is also the obvious problems with Hemoglobin which is a parameter of the bio passport.
The point being made is how or why Froome, Walsh and Brailsford state that it was a RBC munching parasite?
My reference to heamatocrit was to the point; if Froome/Walsh/Brailsford were right then Froome's PCV would have indicated the problem way back in 2008 or whenever he supposedly contracted this disease.
Badzhilla as it's jokingly now referred is not what the three Amigos presented it nor a reasoson for his inconsistency and leap from grupetto to GT world beater.
But I believe one person on this thread plays that one away as "people don't really know much about the diesese they have".
Really?
The RBC muncher is a good story. A fairlytale if you will.
If you and I can find this stuff on the Internet in 5 minutes do you think Walsh could have taken the time also? :roll:0 -
RichN95 wrote:WBT,
What Bilharzia actually does is largely irrelevant. Particularly as it seems to have different levels of seriousness.
So here's a basic yes or no question for you:
Do you believe Froome had bilharzia?
Rich, why do you ask all of the complicated questions? How can WBT ever answer this in one word?0 -
RichN95 wrote:WBT,
What Bilharzia actually does is largely irrelevant. Particularly as it seems to have different levels of seriousness.
So here's a basic yes or no question for you:
Do you believe Froome had bilharzia?
Based on the facts alone the likelihood that Froome has or had a Badzhilla is high. Considering his country of origin and frequent visits and the commonality of the disease in Africa then yes I think he has been affected by it.
Probably in the same way and frequency a child or you or I contracts a common cold or the flu. The affliction of a modern world.
However the manner in which "Sky" including Walsh and Froome have tried to explain it has some form of miracle that once treated his true self was released I don't buy.
There are too many inconsistencies and contradictions about when and how it was discovered along with how the disease impacts the body - RBCs etc.
I don't subscribe to the theory that athletes who spend their lives being blood tested for both health tests and the passport and by teams wouldn't have seen irregularities that would have pointed to this situation sooner.
I don't subscribe that this was the one of key factors holding Froome back from being Froome at the a vuelta 11. He wasn't just a little but better he was amazingly better. It was a jump in performance like no other and just when his contract was about to expire.
I'm not citing doping here. I just find it such a stretch or a difficult to comprehend how he got so good in such a short space of time and it was this parasite holding him back.
If he really is wonder Dawg. Then we are seeing the greatest rider to grace the earth in the history of the sport. If he continues to win and the pattern of riding all time fastest times on MTFs then yes he is the greatest and clean.
If nothing slips in the next years I'll happily certify he's clean and the best there ever was.
Currently I'm holding my breath.0 -
whiteboytrash wrote:Based on the facts alone the likelihood that Froome has or had a Badzhilla is high. Considering his country of origin and frequent visits and the commonality of the disease in Africa then yes I think he has been affected by it.
So the details are largely irrelevant. He was ill. It's an illness which by and large probably doesn't really effect most sufferers, but will have an impact on an elite athlete - just as a cold will.
I don't think anyone is saying it was the only thing holding him back, just something that put the brakes on his development.whiteboytrash wrote:If he really is wonder Dawg. Then we are seeing the greatest rider to grace the earth in the history of the sport. If he continues to win and the pattern of riding all time fastest times on MTFs then yes he is the greatest and clean.
Really? The greatest rider ever? Based on what? I've yet to see a one day win or anything close. And as for the fastest times on MTFs - he has the third fastest time on one unhearlded climb, where the fastest time is by the journeyman Laiseka. If he starts matching the very best performances of Pantani and Armstrong then give me a shout and I'll convert - but at the moment he's a long way off.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:whiteboytrash wrote:Based on the facts alone the likelihood that Froome has or had a Badzhilla is high. Considering his country of origin and frequent visits and the commonality of the disease in Africa then yes I think he has been affected by it.
So the details are largely irrelevant. He was ill. It's an illness which by and large probably doesn't really effect most sufferers, but will have an impact on an elite athlete - just as a cold will.
I don't think anyone is saying it was the only thing holding him back, just something that put the brakes on his development.whiteboytrash wrote:If he really is wonder Dawg. Then we are seeing the greatest rider to grace the earth in the history of the sport. If he continues to win and the pattern of riding all time fastest times on MTFs then yes he is the greatest and clean.
Really? The greatest rider ever? Based on what? I've yet to see a one day win or anything close. And as for the fastest times on MTFs - he has the third fastest time on one unhearlded climb, where the fastest time is by the journeyman Laiseka. If he starts matching the very best performances of Pantani and Armstrong then give me a shout and I'll convert - but at the moment he's a long way off.
This post by Rich nailed it.0 -
Perfect, so we agree that Bilharzia has no effect on haematocrit (or RBC count).whiteboytrash wrote:I was actually agreeing with you.
So we can now confirm that when you said:whiteboytrash wrote:He'd have the hematocrit of a old lady! :roll:
You were making up and presenting as fact a statement to suit your position.
Something that you could have verifiedwhiteboytrash wrote:...on the Internet in 5 minutes
Do you see why this is so important yet? You are guilty of exactly the same thing you have accused Brailsford/Froome/Walsh of repeatedly.
The difference being that your fact is absolutely untrue whereas the trio are at worst guilty of presenting only half the story. (The wrong half as it happens if they are looking to provide an explanation for Froome's suppressed performance - a situation which demonstrates to me that they don't fully understand the disease rather than that they are trying to hide something.)0 -
nic_77 wrote:
If you want to know why the disease might have hampered Froome's performance between treatments I suggest you research the effects of the disease (fatigue, fever, chills, cough, muscle aches, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, dysentery and blood in the urine) and then trying going for a bike ride the next time you feel a bit run down. It's not always about the red blood cells.
By the way, neither Froome nor Walsh nor I are doctors. Although I suspect I have a greater understanding of some of these science than they do.
Diarrhoea has a tremendous effect on hemocrit as does dehydration. There's a good reason the health tests are always in the morning.
If Froome had all those Badzhilla related ailments do you think he would got himself checked out? Doctor might have seen he was from Kenya? :? Would he even finish a bike race?
Froome nor Walsh are a doctors. But they are team marginal gains. Attention to detail. Yet Internet hacks like you and I know more than them?
Nope. Not buying it.0 -
Whilst I'm on... I'l just point out that this:
is absolutely wrong. Read the paper (and the extracts I have helpfully provided for you) again.whiteboytrash wrote:The study I provided does have issue with sever cases whereby RBCs do drop. There is also the obvious problems with Hemoglobin which is a parameter of the bio passport.
You are hoisted by your own petard (again).0 -
nic_77 wrote:
Perfect, so we agree that Bilharzia has no effect on haematocrit (or RBC count).whiteboytrash wrote:I was actually agreeing with you.
So we can now confirm that when you said:whiteboytrash wrote:He'd have the hematocrit of a old lady! :roll:
You were making up a fact to suit your position.
Something that you could have verifiedwhiteboytrash wrote:...on the Internet in 5 minutes
Do you see why this is so important yet? You are guilty of exactly the same thing you have accused Brailsford/Froome/Walsh of repeatedly.
The difference being that your fact is absolutely untrue whereas the trio are at worst guilty of presenting only half the story. (The wrong half as it happens if they are looking to provide an explanation for Froome's suppressed performance - a situation which demonstrates to me that they don't fully understand the disease rather than that they are trying to hide something.)
Ever heard of the use or irony or sarcasm? That Brailsford and Walsh telling the world about RBC munching parasites attacking the great white hope.
And for the play on words his "haematocrit would be that of an old lady" because it munched up all his RBCs.
There's no need to pretend you don't see it and act so stiff or by trying to draw contention to the debate. I don't rise to such theatrics.
Not sure why you're suggesting something is being hidden? I'm merely discussing the nuances of the disease and how's it's been presented.
It's a good discussion. I'd say we've both learnt a lot from it as probably have others reading our exchange.
Keep me posted if you find further studies. I'll happily read them and comment.0 -
Who said Froome had diarrhoea? Many sufferers have no symptoms.whiteboytrash wrote:
Diarrhoea has a tremendous effect on hemocrit as does dehydration.
The illness has no effect on haematocrit - how many more studies do you need to prove this to you?0 -
nic_77 wrote:Whilst I'm on... I'l just point out that this:
is absolutely wrong. Read the paper (and the extracts I have helpfully provided for you) again.whiteboytrash wrote:The study I provided does have issue with sever cases whereby RBCs do drop. There is also the obvious problems with Hemoglobin which is a parameter of the bio passport.
You are hoisted by your own petard (again).
Suggest you read the entire paper again. Then get back to me. We'll pick this up once you've reviewed.0 -
nic_77 wrote:
Who said Froome had diarrhoea? Many sufferers have no symptoms.whiteboytrash wrote:
Diarrhoea has a tremendous effect on hemocrit as does dehydration.
The illness has no effect on haematocrit - how many more studies do you need to prove this to you?
I'm still agreeing with you. My position has not changed.
You citied that there may have been other reasons for Froome's poor form. ie the effects of Badzhilla.
Sure that's possible. But the output of those conditions may have impact on his health tests.
Are you normally this obtuse in your daily life?
For the avoidance of any doubt. I agree with you. There is no direct impact to Heamatocrit from the disease.0 -
So when Walsh uses artistic licence in his descriptions he is being manipulative and deceitful. When WBT does it that is fine.whiteboytrash wrote:Ever heard of the use or irony or sarcasm? That Brailsford and Walsh telling the world about RBC munching parasites attacking the great white hope.
And for the play on words his "haematocrit would be that of an old lady" because it munched up all his RBCs.
There's no need to pretend you don't see it and act so stiff or by trying to draw contention to the debate. I don't rise to such theatrics.
I have indeed learnt a lot today. Mainly about the futility of engaging in debates on the internet. I bid you good day.0 -
whiteboytrash wrote:nic_77 wrote:Whilst I'm on... I'l just point out that this:
is absolutely wrong. Read the paper (and the extracts I have helpfully provided for you) again.whiteboytrash wrote:The study I provided does have issue with sever cases whereby RBCs do drop. There is also the obvious problems with Hemoglobin which is a parameter of the bio passport.
You are hoisted by your own petard (again).
Suggest you read the entire paper again. Then get back to me. We'll pick this up once you've reviewed.
Do we have to?
You state:whiteboytrash wrote:The study I provided does have issue with sever cases whereby RBCs do drop.
The paper says:
"In the current study we found that there was no difference in the RBCs count of male patient group and male control group (P. value 0.18), while it was significantly reduced in females (P. value 0.022). RBCs was not affected with parasitemia."
Are you saying Froome is female?
You also state:
I'm afraid you'll need to tell me what you are referring to and why this is an 'obvious' problem.whiteboytrash wrote:There is also the obvious problems with Hemoglobin which is a parameter of the bio passport.0 -
nic_77 wrote:
So when Walsh uses artistic licence in his descriptions he is being manipulative and deceitful. When WBT does it that is fine.whiteboytrash wrote:Ever heard of the use or irony or sarcasm? That Brailsford and Walsh telling the world about RBC munching parasites attacking the great white hope.
And for the play on words his "haematocrit would be that of an old lady" because it munched up all his RBCs.
There's no need to pretend you don't see it and act so stiff or by trying to draw contention to the debate. I don't rise to such theatrics.
I have indeed learnt a lot today. Mainly about the futility of engaging in debates on the internet. I bid you good day.
Walsh is not using artistic or creative licence. The mistakes in his book are countless. Blatant errors and factual inaccuracies.
It's a Christopher Columbus styled fairly tale of pretending his voyage showed the world was really round and not flat.
I'm just a Internet guy in a informal environment who's not getting paid, with no editor or publisher who occasionally uses sarcasm and whimsical statements to get a point across.
Walsh at times does similar although he's not naturally humours. However the the book in totality is short on facts and barely accurate and leaves out pivotal and key events in the name of telling a story Walsh wants you to hear. Not what actually occurred.
If he can't get the basics facts about Froome's condition correct and you and I can what does that say about the "for profit" author?
It's a crying shame as whilst I can see you're an intelligent person but others might buy his book and believe it and take it as fact. It's not. And it's a lot like a guy who wrote a book a long time ago with Sally Jenkins.
Goodnight.0 -
whiteboytrash wrote:nic_77 wrote:
Who said Froome had diarrhoea? Many sufferers have no symptoms.whiteboytrash wrote:
Diarrhoea has a tremendous effect on hemocrit as does dehydration.
The illness has no effect on haematocrit - how many more studies do you need to prove this to you?
I'm still agreeing with you. My position has not changed.
You citied that there may have been other reasons for Froome's poor form. ie the effects of Badzhilla.
And I went on to explain the sub-clinical nature of disease. Disease is not black and white.
When things need to be accurate yes.whiteboytrash wrote:Are you normally this obtuse in your daily life?
No, there is no impact direct or not... what don't you grasp? Many of the patients in those studies would have had symptoms like diarrhoea and yet in the study population the haematocrit or RBC was statistically different from the control group.whiteboytrash wrote:For the avoidance of any doubt. I agree with you. There is no direct impact to Heamatocrit from the disease.0 -
nic_77 wrote:whiteboytrash wrote:nic_77 wrote:
Who said Froome had diarrhoea? Many sufferers have no symptoms.whiteboytrash wrote:
Diarrhoea has a tremendous effect on hemocrit as does dehydration.
The illness has no effect on haematocrit - how many more studies do you need to prove this to you?
I'm still agreeing with you. My position has not changed.
You citied that there may have been other reasons for Froome's poor form. ie the effects of Badzhilla.
And I went on to explain the sub-clinical nature of disease. Disease is not black and white.
When things need to be accurate yes.whiteboytrash wrote:Are you normally this obtuse in your daily life?
No, there is no impact direct or not... what don't you grasp? Many of the patients in those studies would have had symptoms like diarrhoea and yet in the study population the haematocrit or RBC was statistically different from the control group.whiteboytrash wrote:For the avoidance of any doubt. I agree with you. There is no direct impact to Heamatocrit from the disease.
I can see you and I are equally forensic and very similar in our thought process.0 -
whiteboytrash wrote:If he can't get the basics facts about Froome's condition correct and you and I can what does that say about the "for profit" author?
Well, I can, you can't.whiteboytrash wrote:It's a crying shame as whilst I can see you're an intelligent person but others might buy his book and believe it and take it as fact.
Likewise, I'm very concerned that others might read your posts and believe it and take it as fact. Sound familiar?whiteboytrash wrote:Goodnight.
Aye, that'll do for now
0 -
Pross wrote:Stillnox wrote:So, how come Froome/Walsh/Brailsford have stated on numerous occasions the Bilharzia feeds on the red blood cells, effectively doing the reverse of what EPO does?
So do the inaccuracies in Walsh's writing only apply when they can be used as evidence of a cover up?
Don't think anyone saying its a cover up. That would be a stretch.
What is been said that the book is poorly researched and low on facts. But Walsh appears to be selling his book as virtue.
It's disappointing from an award winning journalist but often turning a profits gets in the way of common sense and basic fact checking.0 -
whiteboytrash wrote:
If he really is wonder Dawg. Then we are seeing the greatest rider to grace the earth in the history of the sport. If he continues to win and the pattern of riding all time fastest times on MTFs then yes he is the greatest and clean.
What 'all time fastest times' :?:0 -
For those interested here's Walsh's description about Badzhilla.
Chomps your red blood cells and depriving the body of oxygen!!
(Insert Jaws theme)
How could he get it so wrong?
Eats the body!
Flesh eating parasites! The Russians are coming! War on parasites!
0 -
Nah, you've already shot your bolt on this one. You yourself have confirmed that hyperbole is acceptable when making a point - it was fine when you did it.
The worms themselves do eat red blood cells and no doubt the immune response has a pretty negative effect on other tissues. The disease also seems to be eating you up!
I'll agree that Walsh doesn't appear to understand Bilharzia fully but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Nor does it lessen any impact it may have had on Froome's cycling career.0 -
adamfo wrote:whiteboytrash wrote:
If he really is wonder Dawg. Then we are seeing the greatest rider to grace the earth in the history of the sport. If he continues to win and the pattern of riding all time fastest times on MTFs then yes he is the greatest and clean.
What 'all time fastest times' :?:
The Second Coming proudly claimed the 87th fastest time up Alpe d'Huez: only fit for glue according to Climb-Times theory.
And. I agree with Chevalier nic....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
whiteboytrash wrote:nic_77 wrote:
So when Walsh uses artistic licence in his descriptions he is being manipulative and deceitful. When WBT does it that is fine.whiteboytrash wrote:Ever heard of the use or irony or sarcasm? That Brailsford and Walsh telling the world about RBC munching parasites attacking the great white hope.
And for the play on words his "haematocrit would be that of an old lady" because it munched up all his RBCs.
There's no need to pretend you don't see it and act so stiff or by trying to draw contention to the debate. I don't rise to such theatrics.
I have indeed learnt a lot today. Mainly about the futility of engaging in debates on the internet. I bid you good day.
Walsh is not using artistic or creative licence. The mistakes in his book are countless. Blatant errors and factual inaccuracies.
You are David Walsh and I claim my prize.0 -
-
Whiteboytrash, I hope you find the truth and inner peace... personally I think any conspiracy theory and cycling history revisionism is not doing any favour to anybody... looking at what ASO and UCI have done to the Tour de France, I don't see much difference with the films of North Korean propaganda, where the executed traitor uncle was edited off, in pretty much the same fashion as Armstrong was edited off the history of the race.
Do we really need more scapegoats?
Peaceleft the forum March 20230 -
Perhaps you misread my post but I specifically stated Froome/Walsh/Brailsford.Pross wrote:Stillnox wrote:So, how come Froome/Walsh/Brailsford have stated on numerous occasions the Bilharzia feeds on the red blood cells, effectively doing the reverse of what EPO does?
So do the inaccuracies in Walsh's writing only apply when they can be used as evidence of a cover up?
Cover up? I am talking about inconsistencies. The bilharzia feeding on red blood cells and effectively doing the reverse of what epo does is a wrong assesment of the disease. The disease that hampered a young athlete to get results, become the best stage racer of his era.
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8859/ ... eason.aspx
From being able to climb in the front group quite often this season (2011) to effectively a GT winner is explained by the clearing of the parasite which according Sky/Froome and later Walsh 'de - epoed' the guy.
Why that lie?0 -
I am becoming more and more suspicious that the work of WBT is mot the work of one person. I cannot see how one person could spend so much time posting and responding to stuff on the internet. I see WBT as a group of trolls spanking their monkey across the bedroom floor in order to win the race to post the next "forensic" piece of fiction.
Just saying".........
Would also like to congrat. All those posting in defence and in reason against WBT's war. Better people than me that's for sure....0
This discussion has been closed.
