US Anti-Doping Agency charges Armstrong

[FrantzM]

Hi

The most unfortunate aspect of this debacle is the impact on Livestrong. LA inspired countless of cancer victims. He thoroughly beat this dreaded disease to the extent of regaining his ability to participate in one of the most grueling even in all sports. The USDA large body of damning testimonies and his rumred admissions of admission of use of banned substances is a letdown for many.
OTOH his recovery and subsequent participation in the TdF should always be seen as inspiring. It is not even easy to come back more or less functional from Chemotherapy, here is a man, an exceptional athlete who with sheer will to live regained everything from Cancer. This should never be forgotten; moreover even his use of PED should be looked in the light of The Fight against Cancer, I am serious here. Medical Orthodoxy is about treating the symptoms of a disease, helping the body cope with aggressors, is IMO a very valid alternative or supplementary therapeutic protocol.
No fan of LA personally but let's not forget all the positives here because there are some and they are more important than Lance and his victories in the TdF.

 

[edorr]

Hi

The most unfortunate aspect of this debacle is the impact on Livestrong. LA inspired countless of cancer victims. He thoroughly beat this dreaded disease to the extent of regaining his ability to participate in one of the most grueling even in all sports. The USDA large body of damning testimonies and his rumred admissions of admission of use of banned substances is a letdown for many.
OTOH his recovery and subsequent participation in the TdF should always be seen as inspiring. It is not even easy to come back more or less functional from Chemotherapy, here is a man, an exceptional athlete who with sheer will to live regained everything from Cancer. This should never be forgotten; moreover even his use of PED should be looked in the light of The Fight against Cancer, I am serious here. Medical Orthodoxy is about treating the symptoms of a disease, helping the body cope with aggressors, is IMO a very valid alternative or supplementary therapeutic protocol.
No fan of LA personally but let's not forget all the positives here because there are some and they are more important than Lance and his victories in the TdF.

Not wanting to sound cynical here, but without the doping and the 7 tdf wins, Livestrong would not have achieved a fraction of what I ended up achieving. If anything Livestrong is the big winner in this whole episode. Given America's love of stories of redemption, I think the foundation will be OK longer term as well.

 

[NorthStar]

IIRC, in their 20's. Like most athletes, probably near that bodily peak of 25-30. I'd have to ask the person who regaled me with that one.

Scratch that one up to the blindness of people immersed in their position until the blinkered mental state results in such a narrow view that is it like drowning and the only way up is to win at any cost.

I'd say that on the psychological front, it is just another aspect, another angle of viewing/seeing the given people being 'driven' by the wiring and psychosis in lets say, a tribal religion that is taken too far.

For example, that if a real answer, that functioned...to the question of 'ending of human warfare' was presented to an individual of conscience -but with a price... most would take a guaranteed death in an effort to bring that to humanity. I mean, there would not even be question or hesitation about it. The ending of violent death is a form of life, and most would pay dearly for that.

One might think that the opposite expression of the above..in the form of the very egocentric aspect of competitive sports, would be to sacrifice life itself, in it's continuance, in the form of acceptance of death, as a result of 'perfection and best' being granted to the in-situ mental orientation. Possibly to be seen as a manifestation of the same mechanism, turned back in on its self.

If folks think that I'm calling competitive sports as harboring or making a space in it's expression for selfish and violent ego manifestations, you might be right.

Comparatively, that there are good people in the military but you can't make a perfect nest/landing-space for psychotics, and narcissistic low empathy genetic anomalies.....and expect that they'll never appear in your midst. The same goes for tribal religions. The military, like competitive sports, is full of people who might be termed as self affected psychotics, but most of them have a good cover story. And yes, there are good people in both areas. But that it is a terminal mistake (projection) to identify one's own psychology and wiring as being intrinsic in that of other.

---- I enjoyed reading that post of yours.

 

[FrantzM]

Not wanting to sound cynical here, but without the doping and the 7 tdf wins, Livestrong would not have achieved a fraction of what I ended up achieving. If anything Livestrong is the big winner in this whole episode. Given America's love of stories of redemption, I think the foundation will be OK longer term as well.

A quandary. It is undeniable that Livestrong has nonetheless positively impacted the lives of many Cancer victims. Its foundations are based on suspicious personal undertakings, many a great foundation helping worthy causes was founded on the fortune of despicable and even outright criminal individuals... Redemption? Atonement? Maybe...

 

[NorthStar]

View attachment 7670

Good one Bruce.

 

[edorr]

A quandary. It is undeniable that Livestrong has nonetheless positively impacted the lives of many Cancer victims. Its foundations are based on suspicious personal undertakings, many a great foundation helping worthy causes was founded on the fortune of despicable and even outright criminal individuals... Redemption? Atonement? Maybe...

I personally don't loose to much sleep over some guy that rides a bicyle to entertaine the general public for a living, deciding to dope and lie about it. We seem to need our heroes and entertainers, pay them insane amounts of money, and people respond to incentives. In the scheme of things this is a total non-issue. In fact, the whole hooply about it is all media / money / entertainment driven. Oprah is laughing all the way to the bank. Look for headlines in people magazine. Just entertainment and a big circus.

 

[Gregadd]

hH did beat cancer and returned to his former way of life. That should remain an inspiration for all cancer victims. I woulld think a collage of some of the cancer victims could replace the face of Lance Armstrong at Livestrong. Last year my close friend lost his wife to Melenoma. It could possibly have been treated. She was slow to seek treatment possibly because of health insurance issues. She had earlier lost her sister to ovarian cancer. All my friend wanted out of life was to grow old with her and their grandchildren.
As you might expect this is not the first time I have gone to the wall for some one who turned out to be liable. I was never that big a Lance fan. I always thought Merckx is and was the worlds greatest cyclist. I did admire Lances strategy and work effort. I remember the first time I rode a bike up a mountain. A humbling experience. There are no winners here.

Lance will get his. Let's leave Livestrong alone.

 

[NorthStar]

-- That Oprah's interview with Lance will air on Thursday (after tomorrow).

________________

Me, I don't have any more comments on this entire saga.
...Everything that I wanted and had to say I already said it in the past.

________________

I still have hope for a better future .... :b

 

[GaryProtein]

Whether or not one gets "bulked" has little to do with the individual. It's much more complicated than the simplistic assumption you're making

Myles, you concentrated on my first statement, but what it really boils down to for me was my last statement, which has been my premise from my first post in this thread, that is: "There should be no rules in training protocols. Do whatever you want to build your body to be the winner."


That way there are no rules to break and anything goes to create the strongest contender. The person with the best numbers in the contest, wins.

 

[KBK]

The UFC, as a biking contest?

Glorified?

Centerstage in the mainstream of society?

Kids buying and wearing the lookalike steroid injection ass scar outfit from the local toys-r-us?

Then, what next? Gladiator biking?

Sidearms to shoot one another? maybe limit it to kicks and punches? (It's not like it fails to happen in biking anyway.. )

 

[MylesBAstor]

Myles, you concentrated on my first statement, but what it really boils down to for me was my last statement, which has been my premise from my first post in this thread, that is: "There should be no rules in training protocols. Do whatever you want to build your body to be the winner."


That way there are no rules to break and anything goes to create the strongest contender. The person with the best numbers in the contest, wins.

Actually I thought the whole argument hung from the first sentence.

 

[NorthStar]

-- "The fatal attraction of the money trap affects most human's perceptions and true life values". - Bob (me)

...And in sports, and in race cycling ....

* In the name of money we'll destroy the true supporters (the fans), by not playing the sport anymore, or in its true value (just look at the NHL for one example).

And let's not forget Football, with ....

 

[asindc]

Regarding the entire subject, I was regaled by a tale, from a friend. it involved a survey done with world class athletes. Olympic material and such.

One of the questions in the survey, was (I paraphrase).."If you where given the opportunity to win the gold, to be at the top of the sport, but that the solution would kill you in 5 years, would you 'do it'?"

The answer in over 70% of the people in the survey was a resounding YES.

For the sake of accuracy, the question asked about taking five years off your life, not ending it in five years.

 

[steve williams]

With His Admission of Doping, Lance Armstrong Could Also Take Down Some Very Powerful People and Companies

By Monte Burke | Forbes

It’s funny that Lance Armstrong finally admitted that he doped because he wanted to compete again, in running events and triathlons. The urge to compete—and not the urge to seek atonement, redemption or forgiveness—seems to be at the heart of his decision to come clean, so to speak, to Oprah Winfrey, in an interview done yesterday in Austin, Texas, that will air on Thursday night on Winfrey’s network.
Oprah will see a boon from this. Others close to Armstrong, including Armstrong himself, won’t be so lucky. In order to be able to compete again, Armstrong has apparently agreed to testify and whistle-blow against “several powerful people in the sport of cycling,” The New York Times reports, which may include the International Cycling Union and the owners of his old cycling team which was sponsored by the United States Postal Service.


Armstrong will take the first hit. You cannot erase decades of cheating and lying about it. In his meeting with Travis Tygart of the US Anti-Doping Agency, Armstrong apparently whined about being singled out, pointing to the fact that sports in general—football, baseball—are rife with drug cheaters. He’s right. He was singled out. And he deserved to be, not only for the cheating and the lies, but for the attempts to intimidate and destroy those who were seeking the truth about him.
We don’t know how much Armstrong is worth, financially. We know that his sponsors—Nike, Oakley, Dasani, Bristol Myers, the Discovery Channel, Michelob and Subaru—have fled. His moneymaking streams may now be dry. In 2005, Forbes estimates Armstrong was making $28 million a year from these deals. In 2009, he was making $20 million a year. The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that last fall, Armstrong “took out a $1.85 million line of credit, secured by his home in Austin, which is valued at more than $3 million,” a sign that he may be preparing for the worst.


Perhaps a book deal and some future “don’t be like me” speaking tours could help him recoup some of his losses somewhere down the line. But possible criminal and civil lawsuits could very well drain him now.
But Armstrong, with his admission, could very well take down a lot of other folks with him. The New York Times today wrote about Thomas Weisel, the financier and Silicon Valley investor behind Yahoo’s public offering. He was the co-owner of the United States Postal Service Pro Cycling Team, and is most likely sweating and lawyering up at this very moment. The Times reports that he could be subject to lawsuits from former sponsors looking to recoup some money.
But those sponsors may not escape scot-free, either. Indeed, Nike may be part of the collateral damage. A few months ago, the New York Daily News reported that Kathy LeMond, wife of American cyclist Greg LeMond, “testified under oath during a 2006 deposition that Nike paid former UCI president Hein Verbuggen $500,000 to cover up a positive drug test.”
The UCI (Union Cycliste International) is the cycling world’s governing body that oversees international events and metes out penalties for positive drug tests. Verbuggen was the group’s president from 1991-2005.


To be sure, the Daily News story reports that Kathy LeMond was not a firsthand witness to this alleged payment. She testified that a mechanic for Armstrong’s team told her of payment, which was supposedly made to cover up a 1999 positive test for corticosteroids.
To state the obvious, this would be a public relations disaster for Nike, one from which they might have a hard time recovering. Verbuggen could be in big trouble. So could Pat McQuaid, the current head of the cycling union.
And these folks and companies may just be the tip of the Armstrong iceberg.

 

[KBK]

For the sake of accuracy, the question asked about taking five years off your life, not ending it in five years.

Ah, so you read the study. I was working from second hand memory.

That is an important point. thank you.

 

[GaryProtein]

Instead of making all these rules which really don't affect the play of sports [although some rules may affect who wins] they should just make doping part of the game. The players make sacrifices in training, deciding how many hours a day to train, whether they can or want to spend that much time away from their family and friends and now they should just decide whether or not they want to dope as one of those choices and/or sacrifices they want to make in order to be a winner.

Doping is here. It IS part of training for the game. It builds stronger more capable bodies. Like it or not, just accept it as how the game is played, because that IS how it is played. It's all a matter of choice for the players. Do they want to do whatever it takes to be a winner?

 

[FrantzM]

For the sake of accuracy, the question asked about taking five years off your life, not ending it in five years.

It does make a HUGE difference... Thanks ... Emphasis

 

[FrantzM]

Instead of making all these rules which really don't affect the play of sports [although some rules may affect who wins] they should just make doping part of the game. The players make sacrifices in training, deciding how many hours a day to train, whether they can or want to spend that much time away from their family and friends and now they should just decide whether or not they want to dope as one of those choices and/or sacrifices they want to make in order to be a winner.

Doping is here. It IS part of training for the game. It builds stronger more capable bodies. Like it or not, just accept it as how the game is played, because that IS how it is played. It's all a matter of choice for the players. Do they want to do whatever it takes to be a winner?

A valid argument until one look at the side-effects of doping. Granted sports takes a toll on athletes, adding doping on top of it all opens another Pandora box: To level the field, some forms of doping will be deemed unacceptable... Thus the athletes will cheat or to be nice try to circumvent the rules to gain an edge ... etc. Competition is not possible without rules, If someone is caught violating the rules he/she usually pays the consequence on top of those less visible of competing at such high levels anyway.

While athletes go to extreme in term of mortgaging their health and lives, many of us do it at a level or another.

 

[NorthStar]

-- Lance Armstrong is all over the news; very 'strong' presence with all the various medias of the entire world.

His 'drive' to compete again will probably cost him his own life, down the road ....
I'm not sure how strong the 'suicide option' is in his own DNA .... Only him knows that for sure.

 

[NorthStar]

For the sake of accuracy, the question asked about taking five years off your life, not ending it in five years.

Yes indeed, thx for that!