USADA to strip Lance Armstrong of 7 Tour titles

[tttppp]

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/performanceenhancingdrugs/a/EPO.htm

I heard of this before. Me and my acupuncturist were once making fun of athletes who do this. There are natural ways to make more blood by taking herbs, which are completely safe, legal, and most likely undetectable.

 

[angelatc]

Exactly, EPO is a therapy for overcoming Chemo. So I'm sure he learned all about it in conjunction w/ his cancer treatments.

Except for the fact that he already had a huge bucket full of wins before the cancer, that makes total sense.

 

[RonPaulMall]

Absolutely. They followed the baseball model. The only thing that saved baseball from their latest strike was the steroid era. Clean them both up, but let's not act like there were only a few (Lance, Landis, Bonds, McGwire, Clemens) and try to make an example of them.

Your analogy is off. Baseball and Cycling are not the same. Drugs have been a part of cycling since very beginning of the sport. The Tour de France is a grueling, extreme endurance event. The human body is not built to do what the Tour de France asks. To complete the Tour de France without some "unnatural" aid is a physical impossibility. The man who created the Tour de France once said the ideal course would be one so difficult only one racer would manage to cross the finish line. For most of the history of the Tour de France, drugs were an open, official, readily acknowledged thing. In recent decades, largely as a result of Drug Nazis, it has become an unofficial but still readily acknowledged thing. Steoids, hell, just even lifting weights and keeping yourself in shape were never an ingrained part of baseball culture. What happened in the steroid decade was unusual for baseball. Conversely, it is not the drugs but rather the drug testing lobby that is the unnatural element that has crept in to the sport of cycling.

The whole "controversy" over Lance Armstrong is childish and absurd to anybody who knows anything about the sport. Every single man who has won the Tour de France since the very first race back in 1903 has been utilizing some form of "doping". Of all the thousands of racers who have lost the Tour de France, you can probably count on one hand those who didn't engage in some form of doping. All Lance Armstrong's rivals during his string of wins were utilizing the same doping methods he was. Every top racer he beat at the Tour was doping. Every top racer that beat him was doping. It is a complete non-issue.

 

[BamaAla]

Your analogy is off. Baseball and Cycling are not the same. Drugs have been a part of cycling since very beginning of the sport. The Tour de France is a grueling, extreme endurance event. The human body is not built to do what the Tour de France asks. To complete the Tour de France without some "unnatural" aid is a physical impossibility. The man who created the Tour de France once said the ideal course would be one so difficult only one racer would manage to cross the finish line. For most of the history of the Tour de France, drugs were an open, official, readily acknowledged thing. In recent decades, largely as a result of Drug Nazis, it has become an unofficial but still readily acknowledged thing. Steoids, hell, just even lifting weights and keeping yourself in shape were never an ingrained part of baseball culture. What happened in the steroid decade was unusual for baseball. Conversely, it is not the drugs but rather the drug testing lobby that is the unnatural element that has crept in to the sport of cycling.

The whole "controversy" over Lance Armstrong is childish and absurd to anybody who knows anything about the sport. Every single man who has won the Tour de France since the very first race back in 1903 has been utilizing some form of "doping". Of all the thousands of racers who have lost the Tour de France, you can probably count on one hand those who didn't engage in some form of doping. All Lance Armstrong's rivals during his string of wins were utilizing the same doping methods he was. Every top racer he beat at the Tour was doping. Every top racer that beat him was doping. It is a complete non-issue.

Sure he was doping; that entire sport was doping. Cycling is worse than baseball in that regard. With that said, he 7 times beat a field full of dopers. I'm all for cleaning up all sports (especially my favorite - baseball,) but this was nothing more than a witch hunt.

As I said ^ cycling is the dirtiest sport out there with maybe the exception of body building and professional wrestling. Lance, doping, beat a field of dopers; this was a witch hunt.

I agree, they aren't exactly comparable, but they both used juiced up athletes to grow their sport. No was watching baseball before the long ball and no one would pour tons of sponsorship dollars into the TDF if one guy crossed the finish line.

 

[RonPaulMall]

As I said ^ cycling is the dirtiest sport out there with maybe the exception of body building and professional wrestling. Lance, doping, beat a field of dopers; this was a witch hunt.

I agree, they aren't exactly comparable, but they both used juiced up athletes to grow their sport. No was watching baseball before the long ball and no one would pour tons of sponsorship dollars into the TDF if one guy crossed the finish line.

Well, you seem to be making a value judgement with the word "dirty". What makes EPO anymore "dirty" than taking oxygen on the sidelines of a football game or a basketball player drinking from a water bottle during a time out? And I don't agree with the idea that cycling has "used" drugs to increase its popularity. The cyclists themselves use drugs, and have for over a century, because it is a tool that helps them compete and win. Baseball was at its peak of popularity when few players looked like athletes at all from a modern perspective. And as drugs have been a part of cycling since its inception, you can't really cite it as the reason for the sport's popularity. Europeans just like bikes. That's why the sport became such a sensation over there, not the fact the cyclists use drugs.

 

[QuickZ06]

Do we ban people with better genetics to make the playing field more "even" or maybe not allow protein shakes, creatine ect. ect. as they "enhance" your performance and recovery times? When does the line get drawn or does one even need to be drawn? Or do you let bygones be bygones?

 

[MikeStanart]

He cheated? Who gives a flying F&*# . The US Taxpayers are the only ones who should feel cheated because they are the ones paying for the USADA funding (Via the Office of National Drug Control Policy)

 

[BucksforPaul]

He actually did fail a test....

Do you have a source?

 

[QuickZ06]

And I guess we should ban black males from competing as well since they produce higher levels of testosterone at younger ages that other races. Got to make it fair and all.

Is Marijuana considered a performance enhancing drug at the Nathan's hot dog eating contest?

Chuck Norris should be banned from this planet as well.

 

[dannno]

That much is true. Cycling has a ridiculous amount of oversight and regulations. I personally think they should just let people use steroids if they want, but that introduces a very tough dilemma for people who are concerned for their health and the side-effects of steroids. Do they care enough about winning to sacrifice their health? They would pretty much have to do it in order to win, so it's really a tough dilemma.

It should be up to the league.

If people want to watch a league that doesn't have rules and the players are allowed to voluntarily destroy their bodies to compete, then let them.

If the league wants to maintain it's dignity, it will test for substances like steroids. If I owned a league I wouldn't test for "all" "performance enhancing substances" because then technically you'd have to not allow them to eat food. But I would ban certain substances that are known to do a lot of long-term damage and significantly enhance performance, like steroids.

 

[QuickZ06]

It should be up to the league.

If people want to watch a league that doesn't have rules and the players are allowed to voluntarily destroy their bodies to compete, then let them.

If the league wants to maintain it's dignity, it will test for substances like steroids. If I owned a league I wouldn't test for "all" "performance enhancing substances" because then technically you'd have to not allow them to eat food. But I would ban certain substances that are known to do a lot of long-term damage and significantly enhance performance, like steroids.

What sites have you been to regarding Steroids?

 

[tttppp]

It should be up to the league.

If people want to watch a league that doesn't have rules and the players are allowed to voluntarily destroy their bodies to compete, then let them.

If the league wants to maintain it's dignity, it will test for substances like steroids. If I owned a league I wouldn't test for "all" "performance enhancing substances" because then technically you'd have to not allow them to eat food. But I would ban certain substances that are known to do a lot of long-term damage and significantly enhance performance, like steroids.

From my experience, steroids are not worth the risk. They can definitely boost your performance. However the risks are so bad its not worth it regardless of how much you get paid.

The answer might be to legalize steroids. That way companies can invest in ways to make safer steroids, or make alternative substances that can boost performances without major side effects. There are natural ways to boost performances, but generally nothing can compete with steroids yet.

 

[QuickZ06]

From my experience, steroids are not worth the risk. They can definitely boost your performance. However the risks are so bad its not worth it regardless of how much you get paid.

The answer might be to legalize steroids. That way companies can invest in ways to make safer steroids, or make alternative substances that can boost performances without major side effects. There are natural ways to boost performances, but generally nothing can compete with steroids yet.

Same question, I asked Dannno. Where are you getting this information about steroids? Let me take a wild guess, a government funded site that did government funded research?

 

[tttppp]

Same question, I asked Dannno. Where are you getting this information about steroids? Let me take a wild guess, a government funded site that did government funded research?

No. I tried a testosterone supplement years ago. It boosted my strength very quickly. However, the side effects were horrible. Keep in mind I only took it for a month or two. Many athletes take steroids for years.

 

[QuickZ06]

No. I tried a testosterone supplement years ago. It boosted my strength very quickly. However, the side effects were horrible. Keep in mind I only took it for a month or two. Many athletes take steroids for years.

Well first, there is a huge difference in testosterone boosters and steroids.

So all you were taking was testosterone? Which one was it? I find this really hard to believe. Everything you heard that was "bad" about steroids was put in your head by the government, the same government that tells you dried plant material will make you rape white women or die from using it I dislike when people pick and choose what "drugs" they deem bad when all they heard was propaganda from the get go.

I am sure you won't as you have apparently made up your mind on steroids but go on the bodybuilding forums and tell them steroids are very bad. They will LOL at you and call you a troll but some might educate on the truths. 99% of people don't even need to take steroids or testosterone as they have not even maxed their body out naturally with the normal GNC/Vitamin Shoppe supplements.

 

[QuickZ06]

Plus there is a lot of "snake oil" testosterone boosters out there that could potentially have bad side effects. Eat clean and lift heavy and you will get all the gains you want. Diet is key.

 

[tttppp]

Well first, there is a huge difference in testosterone boosters and steroids.

So all you were taking was testosterone? Which one was it? I find this really hard to believe. Everything you heard that was "bad" about steroids was put in your head by the government, the same government that tells you dried plant material will make you rape white women or die from using it I dislike when people pick and choose what "drugs" they deem bad when all they heard was propaganda from the get go.

I am sure you won't as you have apparently made up your mind on steroids but go on the bodybuilding forums and tell them steroids are very bad. They will LOL at you and call you a troll but some might educate on the truths. 99% of people don't even need to take steroids or testosterone as they have not even maxed their body out naturally with the normal GNC/Vitamin Shoppe supplements.

I don't know the name of the product. Obviously I didn't believe what the government says since I actually took the steroids. Just check out any of my posts on western medicine or acupuncture. I obviously could care less what the government says. Trust me, steroids can do serious damage. Granted I was already unhealthy, but I only took it a month or two. Athletes take them for years.

 

[tttppp]

Plus there is a lot of "snake oil" testosterone boosters out there that could potentially have bad side effects. Eat clean and lift heavy and you will get all the gains you want. Diet is key.

Eating healthy is good, but it will never get you the same results as steroids.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

Well first, there is a huge difference in testosterone boosters and steroids.

So all you were taking was testosterone? Which one was it? I find this really hard to believe. Everything you heard that was "bad" about steroids was put in your head by the government, the same government that tells you dried plant material will make you rape white women or die from using it I dislike when people pick and choose what "drugs" they deem bad when all they heard was propaganda from the get go.
I am sure you won't as you have apparently made up your mind on steroids but go on the bodybuilding forums and tell them steroids are very bad. They will LOL at you and call you a troll but some might educate on the truths. 99% of people don't even need to take steroids or testosterone as they have not even maxed their body out naturally with the normal GNC/Vitamin Shoppe supplements.

Small balls is pretty powerful propaganda. I'll stick to protein.

 

[QuickZ06]

I don't know the name of the product. Obviously I didn't believe what the government says since I actually took the steroids. Just check out any of my posts on western medicine or acupuncture. I obviously could care less what the government says. Trust me, steroids can do serious damage. Granted I was already unhealthy, but I only took it a month or two. Athletes take them for years.

Again steroids are different than testosterone boosters. And you do not remember the product that gave you "horrible" side effects?

Eating healthy is good, but it will never get you the same results as steroids.

Like I said, most do not even need to think about it unless they are 100% educated on steroids and have the time. You can get fantastic results just by working out harder and eating clean.