The Armstrong world
By glazou on Friday 26 August 2005, 11:40 - Bushisms - Permalink
That guy has balls the size of watermelons (well, he hasn't any more but that's another story). Seriously:
- The French National Labs test six of his 1999 blood and urine samples taken during the Tour de France with a protocol that did not exist at that time, with positive results to erythropoiethine six times.
- a sports newspaper belonging to the group organizing the Tour publishes those results
- everyone, including the Tour organizers who deeply supported Armstrong in front of all past accusations, carefully studies the documents and concludes that these are not rumors or allegations but clear proven facts
- then on CNN Armstrong dares to say - I heard him myself - that French attacks him as a revenge against Americans they don't like (that's a well known fact, we kidnap tourist american babies, drown them into red wine, and eat them with snails, garlic and stinking cheese) and that french press is slimy.
His arguments are lame, really lame. And speaking of the local press, I guess he never reads his own local press, the one I saw last time I visited Texas...
In the "Armstrong" world, Louis and Neil are gods. Lance will be forgotten.
Comments
I'm interested to know how one can have kids without balls !
When a doctor is going to cut your balls, he's smart enough to think about the fact you certainly would like to be able to have children... So it's simple, extract sperm before the operation, then freeze it until you need it...
If even other antidoping agencies seriously question the way the french lab conducted their research i think Armstrong may seriously be right about the stinky thing. It's not the first this particular french laboratory "spills" confidential information on the doorstep of journalists, something they aren't allowed to ofcourse. That aside, all tests conducted by the laboratories are anonymously. They shouldn't be able to connect their sample to a particular sportsman. The dutch centre for dopingquestions calls the allegations of L'Equipe even questionable (www.necedo.nl/ANPnieuws?i... dutch)
Joost, I don't speak dutch, but I speak enough german to understand what the dutch center for dopping questions really said on your link :
Het door u gevraagde artikel bestaat (niet) meer of is op dit moment niet actief.
Honestly sounds like a bit of "after the fact" sour grapes from this group which is affiliated with the folks who run the tour. Who as we know, have never been huge fans of Armstrong.
While 6 were positive, the other 11 were not. That's 6 out of 16 being positive for EPO, 11 being clean. That's roughly one third positive, two thirds clean. And they take multiple samples due to the rate of false positives. So the preponderance of evidence is clean. If you watched all the Larry King interview, you also saw that he was spot checked again in 2000 with the test despite it still being formally unapproved until 2001, and was clean then too. The vast majority of his tests were clean. He's never been caught with the drugs, there's never been enough positive test results beyond the rate of false positives. Also, the test itself is under scrutiny, not to mention that there is no data on the reliability of 6 year old frozen samples with this test. The evidence it spotty at best, and far from conclusive.
And everyone knows you eat babies with WHITE wine, you heathens.
Jmfayard, if you remove the ',' at the end of the URL Joost provided, then you'll get the article.
Maybe you will find the suggestion in the last two paragraphes interesting ...
Gray Hodge -> open your eyes. how can you believe that modern sportsmen don't take drugs ? They all do it. Simply because the laboratory tests are never enought accurate. In all sports cyclism, athletism, football, etc. During the tour de france policemen found many time drugs in dusts, including Armstrong's garbages. But of course there were no evidence that cyclists took it.
I can also add that there were not 16 sample tested by 6. An on 6 tests, 6 were positive.
What's all this arguing about? Everybody involved in cycling knows that every cyclist who wants to finish the Tour in Paris has to dope - if he likes it or not. If you do not dope you're not gonna make it within the time limit. If you doubt what I say, study cycling, use google, find out who has been caught and how cyclists make sure that they do not test positive.
So Lance did just what everybody else did and had to do. But after his career is finished he should at least have the gusts to tell the truth.
So, when the first French fellow wins the Tour, we should expect that he'll be immediately outed as a "doper" since "everyone does it" correct?
How many Frenchman have been subjected to the same attacks we now see levelled at Armstrong? Since some seem to think "all bicyclists dope", we should expect that this has happened to a lot of non American contestants in the past correct?
No double standards here?
Richard Virenque and all the Festina team several years ago...
The Cofidis team was also involved in doping (Millar, etc.).
Rumsas (Lituanian) who was third in 2002, he has since disappeared.
And at least one cyclist was convicted of doping this year.
Were any of those cyclists smeared with those allegations literally years after the events in question were held?
Just wondering...
Ce sport est complètement pourri à la base, alors jouer les vierges offensées, s'acharner sur Armstrong seulement alors que toute l'élite du cyclisme carbure à l'EPO et autres drogues... j'ai bien peur qu'il s'agisse encore d'une démonstration de chauvinisme et d'anti-américanisme primaires comme seuls les Français en sont capables.
Et puis le timing de cette histoire... qui sort après la retraite d'Armstrong, comme s'il n'y avait plus de "deal" entre l'organisation du tour de France et les jaunes (pardon du jeu de mot) qui veulent la peau d'Armstrong...