Armstrong says he has NEVER taken drugs to enhance his performance but in his autobiography " Its Not About the Bike" he admits he was given EPO - an enhancing drug that buids endurance by boosting production of oxygen in red blood cells- during his chemotherapy.This is good but the rules for cycling doesn't say enhancing drugs are legal if only used for health reasons. EPO performs the same function that it is ban for.
Why isn't media focusing on him with same intensity as they did Bonds? Similar to Bonds, there is an book [ L.A. Confidential] that accuses him of using EPO ;Similar to Bonds, other bicyclers are questiioning his innonence; similar to Bonds, he is said to be arrogant [ except conservative media] ; similar to Bonds , he dominated his sport; similar to Bonds, he had change in his physique. He was thinner than 1st year he was on Tour. Unlike Bonds, the media has not given same attention. He is a neo-con and friends with Bush, who prove everyday neos are above the law.
It's because he's white, and isn't taking the "beating" in the public eye. That's what malcolm wants. He refuses to read the FULL article and see that it was during chemo, and to help with the cancer.
Some people will look anywhere, and everywhere (like the Wild Hanlons) for something that doesn't exist.... but TRY to find it anyway.
:::>^..^<::: ~*~The Journey is more important than the end or the start~*~ :::>^..^<:::
malcolm xx said this in post #1 : Armstrong says he has NEVER taken drugs to enhance his performance but in his autobiography " Its Not About the Bike" he admits he was given EPO - an enhancing drug that buids endurance by boosting production of oxygen in red blood cells- during his chemotherapy.This is good but the rules for cycling doesn't say enhancing drugs are legal if only used for health reasons. EPO performs the same function that it is ban for.
Why isn't media focusing on him with same intensity as they did Bonds? Similar to Bonds, there is an book [ L.A. Confidential] that accuses him of using EPO ;Similar to Bonds, other bicyclers are questiioning his innonence; similar to Bonds, he is said to be arrogant [ except conservative media] ; similar to Bonds , he dominated his sport; similar to Bonds, he had change in his physique. He was thinner than 1st year he was on Tour. Unlike Bonds, the media has not given same attention. He is a neo-con and friends with Bush, who prove everyday neos are above the law.
Bonds is showing obvious signs of steroid use. Pictures from 1996 to 1998 look silly. Lance looks the same. Steroids aren't rampid in cycling. They ARE rampid in baseball. Mark McGuire has gotten a lot of flak, and if he hadn't retired when he did he would have got it a lot worse. The steroid era is at it's peak and Bonds is the face of baseball, so just deal with the fact that a black man is getting the heat and racism has nothing to do with it this time.
Please pardon my pseudo-intellectuaphilisophicalismysiticality.
I think and I could be wrong but most sproting governing bodies allow steriod use if it is deemed vital to a persons health, Armstrong needed this to get through cancer treatement so it must be OK.
Malcolm also misses an importnat issue here, ok the media re not giving him heat but what about his fellow cyclists are they giving him heat? probably not because they understand that Armstrong took what he took to saty alive not to win races. They probably know that having a go at a man who did what he did to beat cancer is sick.
Yeah, I mean, after all... he shouldn't have taken the EPO and just let the cancer KILL HIM, right? He didn't do the "drug" to win anything... other than his LIFE!
:::>^..^<::: ~*~The Journey is more important than the end or the start~*~ :::>^..^<:::
lodgebo said this in post #7 : I think and I could be wrong but most sproting governing bodies allow steriod use if it is deemed vital to a persons health, Armstrong needed this to get through cancer treatement so it must be OK.
Malcolm also misses an importnat issue here, ok the media re not giving him heat but what about his fellow cyclists are they giving him heat? probably not because they understand that Armstrong took what he took to saty alive not to win races. They probably know that having a go at a man who did what he did to beat cancer is sick.
Frank Adreu - a former teammate [ and best friend] testified UNDER OATH that Armstrong admitted to using EPO and other drugs in 1996. He was teammate for his Tour wins in 1999 and 2000 and gave a similar deposition that he used ban drugs.
Is this enough for you to have questions?
Miguel Indurin- a 5 time tour champion said " That seems bizarre and I don't know who would have authorization to do it"
Greg Lemonde- 3 time Tour winner is not sure Armstrong was clean. " I don't know how he can continue to convince everbody of his innocence. ... with all these stories its difficult to stay a supporter.
The director of the Tour said it was a " proven scientific fact" that Armstrong had enhancing drugs during his 1999 win." " For the first time these are no longer rumors or insinuations, these are proven facts- someone has shown me that Armstrong had a banned substance called EPO in his body"
" The ball is now in his camp. Why, how, by whom? He owes explanations to us and everyone who follows the tour"
Lawless said this in post #5 : It's because he's white, and isn't taking the "beating" in the public eye. That's what malcolm wants. He refuses to read the FULL article and see that it was during chemo, and to help with the cancer.
I haven't mention his race. Race-Baiting is something I'm unable to do.
Some people will look anywhere, and everywhere (like the Wild Hanlons) for something that doesn't exist.... but TRY to find it anyway.
Frank Adreu - a former teammate [ and best friend] testified UNDER OATH that Armstrong admitted to using EPO and other drugs in 1996. He was teammate for his Tour wins in 1999 and 2000 and gave a similar deposition that he used ban drugs.
Is this enough for you to have questions?
Of course he was using drugs in 96 he contracted cancer in 96 remember.
Miguel Indurin- a 5 time tour champion said " That seems bizarre and I don't know who would have authorization to do it"
Greg Lemonde- 3 time Tour winner is not sure Armstrong was clean. " I don't know how he can continue to convince everbody of his innocence. ... with all these stories its difficult to stay a supporter.
You kow these gujys I belive had some of thier best results in the years that Armstrong was fighting for his life trying to beat cancer, he comes back and wipes the floor with them and suddenly they start complaining.
The director of the Tour said it was a " proven scientific fact" that Armstrong had enhancing drugs during his 1999 win." " For the first time these are no longer rumors or insinuations, these are proven facts- someone has shown me that Armstrong had a banned substance called EPO in his body"
Of course he did he got EPO for treatemnet for the cancer and like any steriod it stays in your system for a few months, but the amount that would have been in armstrongs system would not have made a huge diffrence. Now I am not a big cycling fan but I am assuming Armstrong would have got clerance to ride and the governing body/ officilas would have known about his illness and treatment and they must have cleared him to ride so why is this guy moaning now?
Malcolm what if the same story came out regarding a black man would you be so quick to judge.
Very good question there, lodgebo... and I'm sure, no matter what he says, the truth will be "NO" Why would he jusge a black man?! After all, wouldn't THAT be justified?
I find no support within myself, when a cancer victim, who's struggling for his life, needs to take something to survive.
My father, who had cancer, and suffered the treatments miserably, and would throw up, about every 10 min, for hours, after every treatment, finally started smoking some pot. Was that illegal? Yes, because it wasn't a prescription. Was it wrong? Hell no... he NEEDED to get through the treatments.
So, find something else to whine and complain about. You're getting NO sympathy, or support, on this issue, from anyone here.
:::>^..^<::: ~*~The Journey is more important than the end or the start~*~ :::>^..^<:::
Lawless said this in post #13 : Very good question there, lodgebo... and I'm sure, no matter what he says, the truth will be "NO" Why would he jusge a black man?! After all, wouldn't THAT be justified?
I find no support within myself, when a cancer victim, who's struggling for his life, needs to take something to survive.
My father, who had cancer, and suffered the treatments miserably, and would throw up, about every 10 min, for hours, after every treatment, finally started smoking some pot. Was that illegal? Yes, because it wasn't a prescription. Was it wrong? Hell no... he NEEDED to get through the treatments.
So, find something else to whine and complain about. You're getting NO sympathy, or support, on this issue, from anyone here.
What does that " good question " have to do with the post? What does your family have to do with topic? If discussing post based on facts is complaining or whining, then you never complain. [or heck1]
I hope your dad is doing well. I've never met him, but I'm sure he taught his daughter to tell the TRUTH.
lodgebo said this in post #12 : [QUOTE]malcolm xx said this in post #9 :
[B]
Frank Adreu - a former teammate [ and best friend] testified UNDER OATH that Armstrong admitted to using EPO and other drugs in 1996. He was teammate for his Tour wins in 1999 and 2000 and gave a similar deposition that he used ban drugs.
Is this enough for you to have questions?
Of course he was using drugs in 96 he contracted cancer in 96 remember.
Miguel Indurin- a 5 time tour champion said " That seems bizarre and I don't know who would have authorization to do it"
Greg Lemonde- 3 time Tour winner is not sure Armstrong was clean. " I don't know how he can continue to convince everbody of his innocence. ... with all these stories its difficult to stay a supporter.
You kow these gujys I belive had some of thier best results in the years that Armstrong was fighting for his life trying to beat cancer, he comes back and wipes the floor with them and suddenly they start complaining.
The director of the Tour said it was a " proven scientific fact" that Armstrong had enhancing drugs during his 1999 win." " For the first time these are no longer rumors or insinuations, these are proven facts- someone has shown me that Armstrong had a banned substance called EPO in his body"
Of course he did he got EPO for treatemnet for the cancer and like any steriod it stays in your system for a few months, but the amount that would have been in armstrongs system would not have made a huge diffrence. Now I am not a big cycling fan but I am assuming Armstrong would have got clerance to ride and the governing body/ officilas would have known about his illness and treatment and they must have cleared him to ride so why is this guy moaning now?
Malcolm what if the same story came out regarding a black man would you be so quick to judge.
I'm not a fan either, but I'm sure the rules doesn't allow use of banned drugs because of health reasons. This doesn't prevent someone to use them for health resons. You have proven my point but for some reason will not accept the conclusion.
Are you able to discuss topic without Race-Baiting? it helps discussion.
06-28-2006 12:54 AM
He didn't do the "drug" to win anything... other than his LIFE!
I've never met him, but I'm sure he taught his daughter to tell the TRUTH.
