More Lance Armstrong allegations
 

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=2141710

Now the Tour director is coming out against Armstrong, saying that the results definitively point to doping.

damn the French!

I can see it now, " Uhhhh Missssure Ahmstrrrung? uhhh Yooou know ahhh, how do ve say. you Survived de cansuh? You moosta beeen on de steroids yes/ no?"

Stupid french! C'mon man. Who is with me. Lets get those pansy asses

Yes! How dare the hold Lance to the same standard that the other athletes are held to! :rolleyes:

Heard on GMA today- EPO, the chemical they are looking for in the samples occurs naturally, and can occur in very high and varying levels in athletes such as Armstrong.


Bobby- you make me laugh. :)

Have they mentioned if they are going back and re-testing all the other cyclists' past samples as well, or just Armstrong's?

So . . . the French media should publish these kind of unfounded allegations about, say, Miguel Indurain or other (more popular) cyclists, and publish books that impugn his integrity without any scientific support, y'know, just in the interest of equality.

Does anyone else get the suspicion that they are doing this because they are pissed about him winning his 7th Tour De France? Come on people get over it, it was his last one?

And if they aren't going back and retesting all the cyclists urine samples, hello discrimination.

I'm right there with ya. Its just so "coincidential" that this all happens right about now.

Ditto.

You mean the standard of questionable test results, released 6 years after the fact, and someone from Canada's international research institute called the findings into question.

I'm not making a stand one way or the other - but you're a bit bold to render him guilty on this evidence.

I heard somewhere that they went back and tested a six-year-old sample of his urine. First, do they REALLY keep urine sampes for that long? And second, don't chemicals change over the years? Surely someone could have also had access to it and put something in it. I'd like to give Lance the benefit of the doubt.

That's a big reason why the results are being called into question. Would these results still be accurate?

A theory that's being put out is the suspicion among the French public and press regarding Armstrong's victories, especially the fact that he won them all after coming back from cancer. The thought seems to be that he needed chemical enhancement to win those titles.

We'll see, but I'm not sure we should be throwing anybody under the bus until more definitive results are found. Of course, some of us seem ready to convict him of cheating.

The French just need to GET OVER IT!!!!!!

What's done is done. He has won the titles for the past seven years. This was is LAST race. It is time for them to move on and think about next year.


I'm not biologist but I have to think that a urine sample from 6 years ago isn't a realiable source to check years later. Keeping a sample that long is for a witch hunt. I mean come on, they probably kept it that long on purpose so they could eventually use it against him.

And their excuse that somone who beat cancer could never have won without chemical enhancement, OMG that is a slap in the face to EVERY cancer survivor!!!!!! It's like telling them "yeah you beat cancer but you could never accomplish any monumental task (ie. Tour de France) without cheating". Come on.

Is it possible that any medication he would have been on as a result of the cancer could cause a false positive? Generally, people have to disclose any medication they're on at the time of the test. Assuming he wasn't on any medication, there's still the idea that some medications have a longer "half life" than others.

I haven't rendered him guilty... what I find annoying is the fact that there are many who veiw even calling into question his accomplishments by testing his samples (and yes they do keep thme for years) as unthinkable.

First off they have been testing more than just Lance's samples; yes Lance is the most prominent but not the only one - Two it is not a "slap in the face" to survivors of cancer or those still fighting it; if he cheated he cheated, if he didn't he didn't.

From what little I understand of the tests done so far, he has tested positive for blood doping - however they must confirm these results in three seperate labs for the results to be conclusive.

I don't think it's the calling into question that has people upset; it's the background of the whole saga. There have been several articles and at least one book written, alleging that Armstrong has been doping. In that time, scant proof has been offered. All in all, it has looked a whole lot like a witch hunt up until these test results, and even these results can be called into question.