If Lance Armstrong had not used performance enhancing drugs, would he have - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

jimmy.lemongrass · 12-21-2007, 04:16 PM

gotten Cancer in the 1st place? I know that there are some naive cycling (or more specifically Lance) fans who think he's innocent. He's not.

My question is, would Lance have gotten cancer had he not used so many performance enhancing drugs?

Not only do performance enhancing drugs make people stronger, but they also make the tumors that grow inside of people stronger. The drugs also enable people to push their bodies well beyond their healthy limitations, thus exposing their immune systems to infection and disease. What do you think?

McG · 12-21-2007, 04:17 PM

This is the most defaming, arrogant, idiotic and uninformed question I have ever seen here.

You have absolutely no clue what so ever as to what you are talking about.

This is all innuendo and if in the hands of Lance's attorneys, probably a law suit against you.

As M R stated much more elegantly than I could -- get over it.

M R · 12-21-2007, 04:17 PM

Lance called me again today, and again, he wanted to say that he has retired from cycling well over 2 years ago, it's time to move on both for him and you. He said many people have told him he has put cycling on the map in the USA like no one before him. He is both amazed and honored at the same time. Yet Lance went on to say, he feels sorry for many of the current pro riders. He knows what it was like breaking into the pro Euro scene, very tough indeed. Lance feels the preoccupation with so many of the cycling pseudo fans over him isn't fair to the current top riders as well as the up-and-comers of tomorrow.

Please move on with your life, Lance has...

Carl_the_Truth · 12-22-2007, 09:14 AM

I think you don't have a ****ing clue what you're talking about.

Zarathustra · 12-22-2007, 09:14 AM

Coreykeizer: I as well had heard that L'Equipe was partial owner of the ASO lab that did the testing for Lance (and Landis). I also believe this was one the points of Landis' conflict of interest defense. But I could never confirm this with any official documentation (and I did a LOT of Googling to try and find it). Do you have a link that shows this? Not that I'm calling BS on you, but it would be nice to see some proof of the L'Equipe/ASO link for my own satisfaction. Got anything you can share?

christian_cyclist · 12-22-2007, 09:14 AM

I'm no doctor so I can't even begin to claim any expertise in any illness. This is just my opinion. I think cancer has more to do with genes than anything else although certain factors can influence or encourage certain states to come forward. Look at the people in their 80s who smoked nearly their entire lives and never develop cancer (although their lungs are a mess). I knew such a man. He died from natural causes. Had he not smoked he could have lived to be 100 years old. As gruesome as this may sound, Lance probably would have gotten cancer no matter what.

I think his superior fitness and sheer strength (mental and physical) helped him pull through the disease and conquer it like so few have. If drugs and cycling brought on his cancer then drugs and cycling also helped him beat it.

coreykeizer · 12-22-2007, 09:15 AM

First of all, What proof do you have that the rest of the world hasn't seen proving unconditionally that Lance doped? Tell me where your smoking bullet is and I'll believe it. Trust but verify right? Let's not forget that Lance was tested on a very regular basis, during the on and off season and never once popped a positive. And let's not forget who his main accuser is: L'equipe, the French magazine that happens to own a steak in the testing lab that ASO uses during the Tour de France.

It is true that some types of performance enhancing supplements like steroids can increase the rate of tumors, but anabolic steroids are NOT something that Lance was accused of using. EPO, (the drug he was accused of using in 1999) thickens the blood, increasing hemocrit to dangerous levels causing problems with heart function, that is why it's unsafe. From what I have read it's other side affects are not "tumor causing" or "tumor enhancing".

Edit:
No, the testing lab is made of cow meat. they own a steak!

sorry. yea, stake.