Banned For Life

Hell if you drink 5-6 Pepsi's a day you will fail a drug test.

You are correct; I made the leap that when the USADA report says "fully consistent" with blood doping, combined with the statements of Peter Flax (Bicycling Magazine) that there was difinitive evidence of Armstrong injecting EPO, a banned substance.....and multiple team eye witness reports, ...a reasonable leap that the USADA has sufficient proof.. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Whirly, USADA has, as far as I have seen, never said what they were seeing in those "fully consistent" tests. If they'd had ANYTHING that was positive proof of exogenous erythropoeitin (and the injected EPO drugs CAN be distinguished from the body's naturally produced EPO: there are small but detectable chemical differences), they'd have said so, loudly and repeatedly.

Peter Flax stated in an interview that he based his belief SOLELY on the USADA claims of having witnesses. That means that, having NO independent knowledge, his statements are worthless.

The only eyewitness I have heard named to date is Floyd Landis. After claiming for four solid years that he'd never doped in his life, Landis admitted he'd been doping the whole time. His veracity must be regarded as questionable at best.

I was listening to a reporter talk about Lance's situation today.

His argument was that Lance has now become bigger than the Tour De France event and he can count on endorsements without a need for their support.

. . . Is that even possible?

Something else needs be added.

The first indication of EPO doping would be elevated red blood cell counts. "Normal" range is 150,000 to 450,000 cells per cubic millimeter of blood. An elevated red blood cell count would stick out like a sore thumb on any routine blood test, like the ones doctors order ALL THE TIME to check on any of a number of things.

If Lance Armstrong had shown up with a significantly-elevated red blood cell count, doping or not, the team doctors, as well as his own doctors, would have been all over him to make certain nothing else was wrong. Remember, he's a cancer survivor, and he no longer has a spare ball.

I would question any bodily fluid sample that would be several years old.

Where did this USADA come from anyway? Never heard of them until about 18 months ago. Now they singularly have the power to strip titles? Let's hope they do not examine Babe Ruth's DNA and rule that due to their results 200 home runs and 423 RBIs are stripped and the Yankees did not actually win several World Series. Originally Posted by pyramider

USADA, from what I can tell, do not have the ability to strip all titles from Armstrong.

Only this organisation, ICI, can do this. they have handled Armstrongs blood tests over the years and have found the testing to be negative inspite a number of efforts to prove positive.

They appear to be reticent about USADA's claim of failed tests, they are questoning their results which is very different from theirs.

Livestrong had a huge increase in donations yesterday,and sponsors are sticking with him. One report said only the race officials have the power to strip his titles.rest of the news acts like it is a done deal...

Livestrong had a huge increase in donations yesterday,and sponsors are sticking with him. One report said only the race officials have the power to strip his titles.rest of the news acts like it is a done deal... Originally Posted by ekim008

that would be the ICI.

Not quite true....the USADA is being reasonable, seeking an explaination from Armstrong how the test results are consistent with banned substances.. short of a reasonable explaination, and Armstrong's failure to participate in the process that he agreed to, what else could the USADA do ?

Armstrong's decision to not answer the charges is both telling and a shame. He owes an explainattion and IMO his decision is an indication of guilt.

A more interesting question is how clean are the runner ups who will alledgedly be awarded Armstrong's wins?


Everyone agrees the sport has been dirty from the top down; Armstrong is no angel and IMO guilty of cheating.

Obviously, there will be the Armstrong supporters. It would admirable if they did the right thing and demaned Armstrong go to the USADA hearing and in full public testimony confront the accusations.....that would be great ESPN programming.

Whirly, USADA has, as far as I have seen, never said what they were seeing in those "fully consistent" tests. If they'd had ANYTHING that was positive proof of exogenous erythropoeitin (and the injected EPO drugs CAN be distinguished from the body's naturally produced EPO: there are small but detectable chemical differences), they'd have said so, loudly and repeatedly.

Peter Flax stated in an interview that he based his belief SOLELY on the USADA claims of having witnesses. That means that, having NO independent knowledge, his statements are worthless.

The only eyewitness I have heard named to date is Floyd Landis. After claiming for four solid years that he'd never doped in his life, Landis admitted he'd been doping the whole time. His veracity must be regarded as questionable at best. Originally Posted by Sidewinder

@Sidewinder...I am not a cyclist, so I do not follow this story with keen eyes......

If you know, I thought I heard that Armstrong was required under his cycling agreements to fully participate in the USADA investigation and he was required to participate in it's arbitration process.....if so, his failure to participate , as he agreed, is also an indication of guilt IMO.

accusations of doping have followed him throughout his winning.He has been tested before during and after the races,especially by the French,and has passed,now a johnny come lately organization jumps in after his retirement to stir up this shit.I can see very easily how he would tire of defending over and over on this subject.What happened of innocent until proven guilty whirrly? How many times does he have to prove himself innocent?

I suppose it is quite easy for you to pontificate on what is "reasonable" there in your easy chair drinking beer.

However, I suspect that you would have quite a different definition of "reasonable" if you were the one who had already undergone countless tests and interrogation.

. . . After a certain time anyone's patience would be exhausted and choose to no longer cooperate with the endless inquiry, but that does make it ipso facto, an "admission of guilt" except to those whose minds were already made up.

Not quite true....the USADA is being reasonable, seeking an explaination from Armstrong how the test results are consistent with banned substances.. short of a reasonable explaination, and Armstrong's failure to participate in the process that he agreed to, what else could the USADA do ?

Armstrong's decision to not answer the charges is both telling and a shame. He owes an explainattion and IMO his decision is an indication of guilt.

A more interesting question is how clean are the runner ups who will alledgedly be awarded Armstrong's wins?


Everyone agrees the sport has been dirty from the top down; Armstrong is no angel and IMO guilty of cheating.

Obviously, there will be the Armstrong supporters. It would admirable if they did the right thing and demaned Armstrong go to the USADA hearing and in full public testimony confront the accusations.....that would be great ESPN programming. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I don't really care what the USADA says....Lance Armstrong is a real athlete that has overcome such hurdles as CANCER, and excelled in being a great role model for untold numbers of kids and adults.

He has my vote to keep the titles that he and his teams have won!

He rides a bicycle. Yes, he rides it very well, but he rides a bicycle.

So what is your point?

He rides a bicycle.