Chris Froome salbutamol/Tour merged threads
Comments
-
Above The Cows wrote:What about tampons?
Are those allowed in your fascist worldview?
Name calling? i thought you had at least a little something to offer.
You may have noticed that biological womenn have vaginas, it is a common feature of vaginas that they need sanitary products from time to time. using a tampon or not is no different in that respect to wiping ones bottom after going to the toilet and i fail to see how advantage would be gained.
if you think my view is wrong what is your view? and why is it better?0 -
Slim Boy Fat wrote:We should do a poll of the peloton and find out how many of them have got teeth fillings...and immediately kick them of the race if they have. Clearly performance enhancing! Would make for a smaller bunch.
I have NO fillings! Although I did have a brace and have had infected wisdom teeth removed, so I guess I fail the ubermensch test.Correlation is not causation.0 -
Vino'sGhost wrote:Above The Cows wrote:What about tampons?
Are those allowed in your fascist worldview?
Name calling? i thought you had at least a little something to offer.
You may have noticed that biological womenn have vaginas, it is a common feature of vaginas that they need sanitary products from time to time. using a tampon or not is no different in that respect to wiping ones bottom after going to the toilet and i fail to see how advantage would be gained.
if you think my view is wrong what is your view? and why is it better?
Yes like some people are born with asthma or problems with their eyesight...
Would you like to think again about your ridiculous fascist ideas about the perfect human that needs no technological assistance?Correlation is not causation.0 -
Above The Cows wrote:Vino'sGhost wrote:Above The Cows wrote:What about tampons?
Are those allowed in your fascist worldview?
Name calling? i thought you had at least a little something to offer.
You may have noticed that biological womenn have vaginas, it is a common feature of vaginas that they need sanitary products from time to time. using a tampon or not is no different in that respect to wiping ones bottom after going to the toilet and i fail to see how advantage would be gained.
if you think my view is wrong what is your view? and why is it better?
Yes like some people are born with asthma or problems with their eyesight...
Would you like to think again about your ridiculous fascist ideas about the perfect human that needs no technological assistance?
yes some people are born with asthma some are born with better genetics some are taller some are shorter. Im not looking for the perfect human, just human sporting competition that showcases human performance. Not enhanced human performance.
it wont be long till the next generation of sporting fraud ruins this for ever with gene doping but by your argument that would be fine because technology will be giving us humans without the fallabilities. Now that really will be a circus.0 -
Gareth Southgate?0
-
Above The Cows wrote:ddraver wrote:Above The Cows wrote:Slim Boy Fat wrote:
Or Sensodyne toothpaste? Does wonders for my sensitive teeth.Above The Cows wrote:What about tampons?
Are those allowed in your fascist worldview?
Amazing stuff. I'd be lost without it. Truly. Also E45 cream. My wrist braces to keep my carpal tunnel under control...
As Donna Haraway observed humans in the modern age are all cyborgs.
S'what my cortisol shot was for...
My sympathies. Was it painful? They can sometimes be very painful for 24 hours or so. I've stopped taking the injections as they made my arms puffy (my leather jacket became really tight around the upper arms and I love my leather jacket). Now I manage it with my wrist braces and a really specific work set-up that includes speaking software and a standing desk.
It's a bit hurty at the moment but settling down now.
I thought it had worked straight away but that was just the local anasthetic. I was all for claiming divine intervention. I rode the m'bike home like OMG this is what it's like to have working hands again but...no
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
the future has arrived?FocusZing wrote:Gareth Southgate?0 -
im going to bed now. No performance enhancing required here.0
-
I thought asthma was an issue with the airways and not about the lungs.
Glasses? Without mine I would not be safe riding a bike.they certainly help my performance by allowing me to see things that aren't close to n the end of my nose.
Without salbutamol inhaler I'll occasionally have issues with breathing due to my airways being restricted. Most I've ever needed has been 10 puffs or 5 double puffs (always take them in pairs). After taking them I always start breathing a lot better and my coughing fits stop too. Occasionally it makes no difference. On those occasions I just assume I've got a cold and chest infection so ease up on my activities for a while.
There does seem to be some simplistic arguments going on here. The main protagonist seems to be arguing against user of salbutamol by elite sports because he's got a problem with Froome and wants him to be done for cheating or just forced out of the sport somehow. If it's not salbutamol and asthma he'd argue on some other basis.
My advice is to go with the rules experts have agreed on and so long as Froome is competing within those rules, indeed every racer is competing under them, then enjoy the event. Arguing with a hater who can't bear that Froome was cleared isn't adding much to discussions. Unless you're all about adding the pages to this already over long thread.0 -
Tangled Metal wrote:I thought asthma was an issue with the airways and not about the lungs.
Glasses? Without mine I would not be safe riding a bike.they certainly help my performance by allowing me to see things that aren't close to n the end of my nose.
Without salbutamol inhaler I'll occasionally have issues with breathing due to my airways being restricted. Most I've ever needed has been 10 puffs or 5 double puffs (always take them in pairs). After taking them I always start breathing a lot better and my coughing fits stop too. Occasionally it makes no difference. On those occasions I just assume I've got a cold and chest infection so ease up on my activities for a while.
There does seem to be some simplistic arguments going on here. The main protagonist seems to be arguing against user of salbutamol by elite sports because he's got a problem with Froome and wants him to be done for cheating or just forced out of the sport somehow. If it's not salbutamol and asthma he'd argue on some other basis.
My advice is to go with the rules experts have agreed on and so long as Froome is competing within those rules, indeed every racer is competing under them, then enjoy the event. Arguing with a hater who can't bear that Froome was cleared isn't adding much to discussions. Unless you're all about adding the pages to this already over long thread.
putting foreplay to oneside, when this evening has this been about froome? this was about Salbutomoland other PED use generally.
My advice, dont project your own prejudice onto other people especially not when your assumptions are wrong. And as an observation, name calling such as hater is lazy and demonstrates lack of mental capacity to do better.
im off to bed now youll have to play with yourselves.0 -
Above The Cows wrote:Vino'sGhost wrote:It entirely provides a performance enhancing benifit it opens constricted airways.
So, if you believe the advertising, do Tunes*, are you suggesting people can't take a throat lozenge?
Contraceptive pills could technically 'enhance' performance in that if taken back to back can stop menstruation entirely, thus preventing period pains, are you going to say that female sportspeople can't take contraceptive pills?
*Do they still make Tunes?
The implant might be even better as apparently it can make you entirely shut up shop for 3 years. 3 years of non period pain affected competition.0 -
Vino'sGhost wrote:
the future has arrived?FocusZing wrote:Gareth Southgate?
The world be a better place. Clone him?0 -
LolMattsaw wrote:The next Paralympics is going to start to overshadow the Olympics for size once we add all of the new categories for asthmatics, diabetics, the visually impaired, epileptics, ADHD, hayfever, or anyone with general aches and pains.0 -
It already does to be fair. There's about 400 classes.Topper harley wrote:
LolMattsaw wrote:The next Paralympics is going to start to overshadow the Olympics for size once we add all of the new categories for asthmatics, diabetics, the visually impaired, epileptics, ADHD, hayfever, or anyone with general aches and pains.0 -
Presumably gene doping is ok?0
-
Meanwhile, Jeremy Whittle on the Guardian website:First there is a video highlighting the team’s Ocean Rescue campaign, which talks of “alternative packaging solutions”; thoughts turn to the Jiffy bag sent in 2011 to Bradley Wiggins.
Imagine having a mind that worked like that. I'd be getting therapy if it were me, lest I run out into the street and beat a postman to death or something. It's an obsession, Jeremy - just try and let it go, yeah?0 -
What do we want sport to be about? Should we be sending a message to asthmatic or short sighted or diabetic kids that sorry despite there be simple treatments to correct or manage these conditions that no matter how talented you are you will not be able to compete at the top level? Or do we want sport to be as inclusive as possible? Salbutamol or glasses or insulin to treat diabetes (as well as other similar treatments or conditions) simply put the athelete back to the condition they would be in if they had not been born with these conditions, and do not enhance thier ability at that sport. This is different from saying you were not born with natural talent so artificially boost that talent using Peds. There will always be an line that has to drawn somewhere between what is performance enhancing and what is not, but I think most reasonable people would not want to exclude individuals from competing to their maximum about because they have asthma or diabetes etc.0
-
Vino, it would appear that you, genuinely, believe that you are offering 'a different perspective' and 'discussion'. Please, rest assured, you are not. Your proposed arguments that led you to form 'your opinion' have been debunked and disproven again, again and again. People are upset for wasting time on someone who would not take a hint. Above the cows offers so much more to the forum than you, as do most of folks here who are losing patience with you and starting to call things as they are. 'Personal attacks', seriously?
It's nice outside, have a good ride.0 -
Kimmage on Froome‘The issue isn’t Salbutamol, the issue is that a rider with limited pedigree is about to become the greatest cyclist of all time.’
That's why Hinault got mouthy about Froome0 -
Surely the last 5 years of results are his pedigree?0
-
kleinstroker wrote:Kimmage on Froome‘The issue isn’t Salbutamol, the issue is that a rider with limited pedigree is about to become the greatest cyclist of all time.’
That's why Hinault got mouthy about Froome
If you look up "rider with limited pedigree" in the dictionary, there is a picture of Paul Kimmage.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
I wonder what pedigree he expects someone from Kenya - a country that has produced no other pro cyclists to have. Froome had good results when given a chance riding for the WCC team, was talked up as a future GC rider when he became British and was wanted by GB to lead the 2008 Olympic RR team.kleinstroker wrote:Kimmage on Froome‘The issue isn’t Salbutamol, the issue is that a rider with limited pedigree is about to become the greatest cyclist of all time.’
That's why Hinault got mouthy about Froome
I've wondered in the past what would have happened if Froome had been allowed to ride the Tour de l'Avenir for WCC, instead of having to do the Tour of Britain with Konica.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Has Kimmage not looked up Froomes palmares ?0
-
kleinstroker wrote:Kimmage on Froome‘The issue isn’t Salbutamol, the issue is that a rider with limited pedigree is about to become the greatest cyclist of all time.’
That's why Hinault got mouthy about Froome
Sounds more like the issue is to do with the Clinic, Twitter and buying into their manifesto.
If the issue isn't about Salbutemol, why try and use it as proof of doping?
The UCI issue a rather long press release on various things stemming from public questioning.
http://www.uci.ch/pressreleases/respons ... ng-froome/"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
because they are desperate and thats all they have .Blazing Saddles wrote:kleinstroker wrote:Kimmage on Froome‘The issue isn’t Salbutamol, the issue is that a rider with limited pedigree is about to become the greatest cyclist of all time.’
That's why Hinault got mouthy about Froome
Sounds more like the issue is to do with the Clinic, Twitter and buying into their manifesto.
If the issue isn't about Salbutemol, why try and use it as proof of doping?0 -
iainf72 wrote:kleinstroker wrote:Kimmage on Froome‘The issue isn’t Salbutamol, the issue is that a rider with limited pedigree is about to become the greatest cyclist of all time.’
That's why Hinault got mouthy about Froome
If you look up "rider with limited pedigree" in the dictionary, there is a picture of Paul Kimmage.
Oooof.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
I'm watching the Tour de France and they all seem to be going a lot faster than a normal person can run. Clearly they are all on something that gives them a significant advantage.0
-
So you dont agree its a different perspective or it is? In the good old days when i pointed out armstrong was cheating they wouldnt have that either.mamil314 wrote:Vino, it would appear that you, genuinely, believe that you are offering 'a different perspective' and 'discussion'. Please, rest assured, you are not. Your proposed arguments that led you to form 'your opinion' have been debunked and disproven again, again and again. People are upset for wasting time on someone who would not take a hint. Above the cows offers so much more to the forum than you, as do most of folks here who are losing patience with you and starting to call things as they are. 'Personal attacks', seriously?
It's nice outside, have a good ride.0 -
jwa581 wrote:What do we want sport to be about? Should we be sending a message to asthmatic or short sighted or diabetic kids that sorry despite there be simple treatments to correct or manage these conditions that no matter how talented you are you will not be able to compete at the top level? Or do we want sport to be as inclusive as possible? Salbutamol or glasses or insulin to treat diabetes (as well as other similar treatments or conditions) simply put the athelete back to the condition they would be in if they had not been born with these conditions, and do not enhance thier ability at that sport. This is different from saying you were not born with natural talent so artificially boost that talent using Peds. There will always be an line that has to drawn somewhere between what is performance enhancing and what is not, but I think most reasonable people would not want to exclude individuals from competing to their maximum about because they have asthma or diabetes etc.
Good points and i agree with some of it, in particular we should def encourage people to do what they can, my comments were that id like to see pure sports without chemical assistance. I acknowledge its unlikely to happen but it doesnt mean my wish is any less valid.
I do disagree with the train of thought that says putting an athlete in a position they might not have been in if they hadnt been born with an impediment is ok. Presumably many recipients of these drugs have attributes in other areas that then allow them to beat other athletes. Is there really any difference between addressing a weakness caused by asthma and addressing a weakness caused by lower tolerance to training stress?0
