Photo: Elizabeth Kreutz - www.elizabethkreutz.com
When Lance announced he would return to professional cycling in 2009, he made it clear it would not just be about winning bike races. This time, he would be racing with very different goals in mind. Most important, he will use the cycling season and the international focus on the sport to fight cancer and promote the LIVESTRONG Global Cancer Campaign. Together, Lance and his Foundation will work to support the 25 million people living with cancer around the world by challenging governments, organizations, and individuals around the world to work together to take action to fight the causes of cancer, to raise awareness and eliminate the stigma associated with the disease.
Lance also announced he would return to the sport with complete transparency to eliminate any possible question that he is competing clean. Doping has plagued the sport of cycling for years, and Lance himself has fought unfounded accusations throughout his career. It is unfortunate that whenever any athlete is successful there will be some who believe that the success is sufficient grounds for suspicion of doping. With the help of his management and cycling team, Lance worked to develop a state-of-the-art comprehensive anti-doping program, in addition to the standard testing requirements from USADA, WADA and the UCI, to show his commitment to the sport and to racing clean.
Since he announced his return to cycling, Lance has been tested 17 times all over the world, including in Austin, Texas; Nice, France; Adelaide, Australia and Santa Rosa, California as he trains and travels to encourage collaboration and spread the word about the new global cancer awareness campaign. Lance has requested detailed data on all of these tests from USADA and WADA. Over the next six months, as Lance trains and competes in the 2009 cycling season, he will be subjected to sample collection and testing an average of more than once every three days. All of the urine tests to-date have been negative and we have provided the details of seven blood tests by Dr. Damsgaard and the UCI below.
Lance will be tested ongoing by esteemed anti-doping specialist Dr. Rasmus Damsgaard.
We at LIVESTRONG.COM are pleased to host the medical data from these tests, and will be updating it as often as we receive the data from the respective agencies. By posting these results online, we hope not only to provide that element of transparency that Lance envisioned, but also help to inform and educate our community about these tests and what they mean.
To start off, here is a glossary of terms, which will explain the various elements that anti-doping authorities measure and analyze.
Hemoglobin (g/dL): Hemoglobin is a protein that carries oxygen. It is primarily found in the red blood cells. The concentration of hemoglobin in the body in a non-trained background population is set at 14.2 g/dL. The normal range of such a population is large and includes values above 17 g/dl. In comparison, professional cyclists have an average hemoglobin concentration of 14.8 g/dL (range 12-17.3). A variation in hemoglobin concentration of 7% (range 6-21%) is observed in cyclists. An upper limit is set at 17%g/dl.
Hematocrit (%): Hematocrit is the ratio between the red blood cells and the total blood volume. In males, hematocrit ranges from 40-45% with values above 52% in healthy subjects.
Reticulocytes (%): Reticulocytes are immature red blood cells and the number in % depicts the ratio between the immature and mature red blood cells. The normal range is 0.2-2%. Values below or beyond are considered suspicious. Reticulocytes are highly sensitive for blood manipulations and increase if a blood loss or EPO use is present and decrease with blood transfusions and previous EPO use.
OFF-score: The OFF-score is an equation containing hemoglobin and reticulocytes. By combining the two variables it is possible to determine whether an athlete has used EPO or even performed (autologous) blood transfusions procedures prior to the test. The upper limit set by the UCI is 133.
OFF and Hb z-score: Longitudinal monitoring of athletes' blood profiles help detect blood doping and warrant the exclusion from competition of athletes with aberrant variations in some hematological values. OFF and Hb z-scores are equations that describe the variation in OFF score and hemoglobin in each athlete by including all the measurements conducted on the athlete. If the z-scores are higher than 3.09 or less than -3.09 it indicates blood manipulations.
We encourage you to check back as we continue to post data to the site. And as always, check out On Tour with Lance for insider blogs, behind-the-scenes photos and videos as Lance makes history in 2009.
Member Comments
by SUHatter on February 11, 2009 at 5:43 PM
You Rock Lance. I always believed you were clean and a great cyclist. Verum est absolute!
by SUHatter on February 11, 2009 at 5:44 PM
You rock Lance. I always knew you were clean and a great cyclist. Verum est absolute
by flahute on February 11, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Just because his current numbers show that he is clean now does not mean that he was clean from 1999-2005, or during his pre-cancer days.
by okiecalvin on February 11, 2009 at 6:55 PM
"Just because his current numbers show that he is clean now does not mean that he was clean from 1999-2005, or during his pre-cancer days."
Is that you Greg? Loser quotes like this show that for some reason people get a boner when someone else is successful. Piss off mate!
by lswenn on February 11, 2009 at 7:05 PM
Lance is awesome. It is great that he is helping set the standard for professional and honest athletes. His work in admirable and inspiring in both cycling and his global cancer campaign.
by Donnajan on February 11, 2009 at 7:08 PM
The guy who said just because LA's clean now doesn't mean he always is---snort! If Lance tests clean for the next 5 years that guy, and ones like him, will still be saying, "Yeah, but just because..." You can't argue with someone like that. Logic and fact are not part of their processing.
by cruisergirl on February 11, 2009 at 8:03 PM
Lance is the greatest!
by cruisergirl on February 11, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Lance, don't sweat the haters.
by Raymond29b on February 11, 2009 at 8:09 PM
Lance is AMAZING! people will always find something to hate you for no matter what you do with your life! If everyone worked so hard ot make a difference in this world like this man does, then imagine how harmonious the world would be! GO LANCE!
by Thevaro on February 11, 2009 at 8:26 PM
Lance is one of the most tested athletes in the history of sport and one of the greatest. Go Lance. Do it for the kids that are fighting the fight of their lives.
by flahute on February 11, 2009 at 8:30 PM
@donnajan just like guys like you will never believe the evidence that's already out there ... such as the fact that Armstrong's stored samples from 1999 have since tested positive for EPO, and numerous witnesses (including teammates) who have indicated Armstrong's involvement.
So ... basically everybody has an axe to grind with Lance?
Look ... I hope Lance is clean, and that he can come back and do some amazing rides now. I would like to think that he was clean back in the day as well ... but nothing the numbers show now prove anything about his performances 10 years ago.
by dmatassa on February 11, 2009 at 9:09 PM
there is a lot of evidence and speculation on both sides. i would like to think lance is clean. do i believe it, no. i love lance for what he has done and for what he continues to do. but think about this for one second, almost every rider he beat up on in his 7 tours have tested positive or have been linked to investigations. lance not doping is better than 100% of the peleton on dope. okay
by dmatassa on February 11, 2009 at 9:10 PM
i do believe he is clean now
by Thevaro on February 11, 2009 at 9:28 PM
Actually there have been lots of talk of witnesses but when those witnesses have been called to testify not one single person has testified that they saw lance take anything. They all recant saying it was a rumor they were repeating. Even a witness who said she was asked to dispose of used medical injections is not interesting because injections of vitamins, fluids, and medicines are common on every team in every sport.
by wgattis on February 11, 2009 at 10:02 PM
I am a physician. It is important to know that for just about any lab value, we scientists determine at what value we believe that test to be abnormal. Traditionally, we set those values around 2 Standard deviations from the mean, for values which have a normal (gaussian) distribution. However, this, by definition, will count some people as "abnormal" whose only infraction was that they were in the top 5% of normal subjects. There is absolutely no way to set abnormal cut off values that will catch all cheats, but spare all the innocent. This is important because should an individual like Lance Armstrong naturally arrive at a value in the top 5% (a completely plausable event), he would be unfairly judged as a cheat. I believe this is one of the reasons the plans to publish ALL data has been modified. Lest I sound haughty, the non-scientifically trained public will not be able to understand the subtleties of the abnormal cut-off values of reference values.
Bill Gattis
by goinggreen74 on February 11, 2009 at 10:35 PM
We can't please everyone!
GO LANCE!!
by wgattis on February 11, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Additionally, even lab tests which are relatively impervious to errors in sensitivity and specificity, are nonetheless subject to sabotage. For instance, Floyd Landis's testosterone molecules were found to have uncontrovertable evidence of synthetic origin. Yet Floyd maintains that he is innocent. If I were to smear the same testosterone gel that I prescribe to my patients onto my hands, then push my way to the front of the throng of congratulatory fans at the end of a tour stage, and pat him on the arm or neck (thus smearing the testosterone gel which is INTENDED to be easily absorbable through the skin), he would then have such abnormal testosterone molecules in his system. And it would be in substantial amounts. But, this sabotage act of mine would not enable him to sustain a 340W output for 2 consecutive hours. Only his talent and training would do that. With stakes as high as the reputation (and sales) of senior L'equipe columnists, I find it puzzling that such plausable acts of sabotage are not more carefully considered by testers and the public.
by marco79 on February 12, 2009 at 12:07 AM
i'm happy. all people will see the lance's trasparency. go lance!
by therevokid on February 12, 2009 at 12:17 AM
Cold, hard proof of something I think we all knew
in our hearts to be true - Lance is amazing.
by woody77 on February 12, 2009 at 12:34 AM
Thank you lance for transparency, GO GO GO LANCE !!!
by scsmeat on February 12, 2009 at 1:00 AM
Why do we have to beat up on someone just because they excell at a sport. He does not cheat, he was born with the gift.
Go Lance.
by piilloo on February 12, 2009 at 1:17 AM
For me, transparency begin if he will accept to test the old blood sample. The rest is just communication...
by piilloo on February 12, 2009 at 1:17 AM
For me, transparency begin if he will accept to test the old blood sample. The rest is just communication...
by rwwalden on February 12, 2009 at 2:52 AM
Why have you only published 7 of your 17 tests? And why is there a big gap in the published tests between December 12, 2008 and February 4, 2009 -- a gap during which you rode the Tour Down Under????
by tgehr on February 12, 2009 at 4:29 AM
I am shocked at the negative comments with respects to the tests. What other cyclist posts his tests for all to see. Where are the other 10 tests or what about old samples out of control? Come on?? This guy is a training machine.. If we all were commited to our endevors like him we would be better people. For the negative ones out there why dont you get up every day and see if you can keep up the pace with him on a day to day basis. I am a very motivated person, non-drug user and in no way could I stay as focused or as motivated as him. That is where the power and strength comes from.
by JoVandebrouck on February 12, 2009 at 4:31 AM
Dear Lance,
I really don't think anyone is intrested in your testing results of the past few months.
You have made it clear enough that your comeback "is not just about winning bike races", though we would love to see the details of your testing results when the Tour de France approaches.
Even more we would like to know all the details of blood tests in the past, especially the ones that you do not want to be re-tested.
As long as your previous performances and test results remain as obscure as they are today, as long as there is no absolute clearness about your tests in the past - positive or negative - your reputation, as well as your comeback and your cancer campaign, will remain a hoax.
Jo Vandebrouck, Belgium
by mlledubarry on February 12, 2009 at 4:59 AM
Go Lance! You are the best. I believe in you even if I'm a French girl. You are amazing! Take care :)
by Supporter on February 12, 2009 at 5:13 AM
Dear JoVandebrouck,
Lance Armstrong's reputation and cancer campaign are far from a hoax. He has beaten the odds in a very tough fight. He has used his ability to race and his reputation to help in the fight against cancer. A disease that affects too many people in the world.
Lance thank you for everything you have done to assist in the fight against cancer. Your story is very motivating. It also gives those with cancer hope. Keep up the good work and good luck on all your upcoming races.
by androonguyen on February 12, 2009 at 5:21 AM
How do you know these current results are in fact valid? How would you know if a re-test that is abnl is valid? How would you know if old test results are tampered with? What would require "transparency"? Is transparency really testing old blood samples? Do we have enough faith in how the old blood samples were preserved? In order to believe testing old blood samples are accurately tested, I would need to see controls to verify that indeed the tests can make reproducible results.
Do you need to be in the lab and see the results for transparency? And how often do you need to test?
While we are at it, I think we should go test Boonen for cocaine weekly and go back to testing David Millar for drug use daily. Would that make sense? Or can we just sit around and be completely skeptical of them too.
I think we have to put some faith in cyclists. If you are critical of them, you should be critical of the whole system since what is a test if it isn't performed accurately?
by specialized61 on February 12, 2009 at 5:22 AM
Hey! Lance didnt have to post anything for anybody so be nice accept that he won the Tour 7 times follow the new test results and just enjoy that the most influential bike rider of all time has chosen to ride again. Win or lose he is the man.
Curt Jones
by JohanJo on February 12, 2009 at 5:27 AM
Lance whether you are\were clean or not is clearly not the issue. The issue is some idiots are incapable of accepting that some gifted people like yourself work really hard, turning a gift into something super and some gifted people train only just enough to silence their own conscious. The difference in results makes your task of defending your reputation an impossible hurdle. I think you should just ride your bike and let your legs do the talking like in the past. I don't see Eddy Merckx getting all caught up in explaining his way through all the rumours and I don't see why you should. The values are interesting, but should be seen in combinaton with your VO2Max, your efficiency and your determination. No one knows exactly how much it hurts you to ride like you do. In a sport where 1 or 2% can make such a huge difference as in cycling, determination alone can make up the difference.
by theswordsman on February 12, 2009 at 5:33 AM
For people questioning why only some results are posted, here's a quote from VeloNews.com: "Armstrong will continue to be tested by USADA, UCI, and WADA this season and has published detailed blood test results from seven UCI and Damsgaard out-of-competition tests on LIVESTRONG.com. Armstrong has also requested that USADA and WADA release the results of the tests that they have conducted so they can be posted as on the site well."
At some point this year, the UCI will be confident enough in the biological passport to start going after riders with questionable values. Lance won't be one of them. The Catlin testing would have been a waste of money because the haters will continue to be hateful even if the evidence proves them wrong. The rest of us will kick back and enjoy Lance's battle with Ivan Basso in the lovely mountains of Italy on the way to his first Giro d'Italia win. Gonna be a rough three weeks for the haters.
by trimande on February 12, 2009 at 6:25 AM
to JoVadebrouck,
So many europeans just cant handle the fact that a clean, drug free american completely dominated your doped up peloton. Get over it. Lance is just a more determined, genetically superior athlete. Where are Tom Boonens test results?
by jhayton on February 12, 2009 at 6:52 AM
please don't make this about europeans vs americans. Unfortunately, ""athletes"" from both sides of the pond have been caught and punished for doping in competition. Until Lance is caught doping by the most rigorous drug testing regime in all of sports, I think the doubters would be more wise to STFU.
Compliments to LA for taking the effort to do this, and for helping breath some life back into a sport that has been suffering badly for the last 3 years. Roll on the rest of the 2009 season!
by unbelievable on February 12, 2009 at 7:49 AM
If I'm understanding correctly, the doping expert is paid by Astana and is examining LA's samples. That seems like an enormous conflict of interest. Positive= job loss. Negative= job security. Guess which one will happen? So much for credibility........
by dtaffe on February 12, 2009 at 8:52 AM
I'm struck by the degree of emotion and irrationality infused in discussions of LA and his testing validity. Sometimes, outbursts only serve to demonstrate the writer's ignorance...
Having said that, several things strike me about these published values. First, Hemoglobin (Hgb), hematocrit (Hct) and reticulocyte counts are not esoteric tests with a high degree of subjectivity. They are among the most basic tests run in countless hospital labs daily; questionning a dopi ng expert's impartiality with regards to interpreting these numbers is pointless (see paragraph 1.) Lance's numbers are remarkably pedestrian (admittedly, we're not shown his numbers during his heyday); these would not account for his ability. I read a recent quote where he reported averaging 340 watts over a several-hour effort at the TdU; my Hgb is the same as his, but I can barely ride 270 watts for 30 minutes. Clearly it's not the Hgb.
On the other hand, I'm also struck by the narrow breadth of tests reported above; I had thought the passport contains more than just red blood cell indices, things like testosterone, epitestosterone, synthetic steroid levels. I too would be interested in his V02Max. I don't know if muscle biopsy is done, but it would be interesting to know his mitochondrial density, (mitochondria are responsible for intracellular energy production/usage and are a potential target of genetic doping.) He notes that "all urine tests have been negative." Does anyone here know what tests that includes? I don't and would be interested to know.
In short Mr. Armstrong, thanks for the data. I believe it is genuine and accurate, but it does not provide me enough information to judge whether or not I believe you are currently doping. I hope to see more in the coming weeks and months.
Danny
by caroline66 on February 12, 2009 at 8:55 AM
I'm fed up with all doping controls ! So many people should be controled in other sports.
When I decided to follow you, I decided to give all my trust, you don't have to justify...We're all becoming "champions"when we fight against the death...When the body is tired, the spirit is stronger. So it's possible to win 7 or 8 TDF for a sportman with this will !I'm sure of that.
by melmatt on February 12, 2009 at 9:01 AM
Dear Lance,
Thank you for all you do for the cancer community, cycling, and everyone who you have affected with our determination. Thank you also for giving it another go. I really hoped the Tour would go back through Sastreire as that is the first time I met you and when I got home that was the first time I had rode a bike in earnest and am now a tough weekend warrior... to those who dont believe say "I'm not a playa, I just crush a lot!"
Indianapolis, IN - across the street from where u were saved.
by simplvolon on February 12, 2009 at 10:26 AM
I would like to defy anyone who wrote a comment on this blog to name 10 pro riders. I would even allow you to name Lance Armstrong, Ivan Basso and Tom Boonen that were already mentioned in the blog. Only seven remains ...
Then, once you have proven that you know something about procycling, you can comment all you want!
by ATMO on February 12, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Thanks for all you have done for the cycling industry in the USA. There are many custom builders who are making it and/or that have long wait times because of the attention that you have brought to the sport.
My Pocket Book Thanks You
E-r
by donethat2 on February 12, 2009 at 11:56 AM
My very young wife, and a little peanut, started her cancer journey at 32 years old. Having cancer again at 35, I can tell you one thing from my observations of her, is that once this disease comes at you you are super paranoid about puting or doing anything to your body that my increase your chance of the disease coming back. This includes doping, food preservatives, using sunblock and eating your veggies. When Lance says he would never put anything in his body to increase his risk, I believe him. Doping and cycling are not worth that risk. That is what he has been saying for years. He is an extraordianry athlete. I watched him drop my college pal, Rob Mackel who was a super triathlete, on the bike as a teenager. Thanks Lance for putting the pandemic disease of cancer on the international stage. Bravo!
by edster928sl on February 12, 2009 at 12:00 PM
I concur on "JohanJo's" comment posted Feb 12.
It's not really rocket science to know that Lance is superior than others. He is the "Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Pele', Bjorn Dahlen, Michael Schumacher, Jesse Owens, etc. The point is if Lance was, say, the best Pool player ever lived, people would talk about his talent, not doping. Unfortunately he is in a sport which DOPING is anymore SYNONYMOUS. So that overshadowed his superior genetic trait and talent that most of us don't have. People tend to forget that the man was a pro-triathlete at 16 years of age. It takes talent and genetic advantage at that age to compete in the most grueling one-day sport known to man! The bottom line: Lance has already proven his talent many times. People just needs to accept that.
by REM828 on February 12, 2009 at 12:33 PM
Here's 10 on Astana for simplvolon: Lance, Levi, Alberto, Andreas, Yaroslav, Chechu, Haimar, Tomas, Benjamin and Daniel (and that's without the Kazakhs and some others - that's a heck of a lineup, too, wouldn't you say?). Lance was a prodigy before cancer, and would be a fool post-cancer to dope. His blood levels are all within the acceptable tolerances, and indeed seem surprisingly normal for a world class endurance athlete. What can't be measured is his pain tolerance, which is obviously off the charts. Lance's critics are just too jealous, (or, in some cases, too nationalistic?) Speaking of which - has France cleaned up the sloppy recordkeeping, test procedures, and ethical lapses at their national lab yet?
by dpcowboy on February 12, 2009 at 2:11 PM
re: simplvolon's post:
"I would like to defy anyone who wrote a comment on this blog to name 10 pro riders. I would even allow you to name Lance Armstrong, Ivan Basso and Tom Boonen that were already mentioned in the blog. Only seven remains ...
Then, once you have proven that you know something about procycling, you can comment all you want!"
You are an ass. You would "...like to defy..." What the hell is that supposed to mean? Are you being nice about 'defying' readers. I can name 10 Belgians with pro licenses in any year from 1969 to 1989...does that mean my comment here is more valid than someone who is a new fan of cycling? I also know the names of ten NFL players, NBA players; I don't know the name of 10 NHL players, but I hold a firm opinion that fighting in that sport should be banned. Does my non-knowledge of NHL names make me unworthy of having an opinion? Geez Louise!
by wsanders2008 on February 12, 2009 at 2:30 PM
Presumably the number of cyclist still doping has been reduced by the increased testing that is occuring (this assumption may well be wrong). If all, or most, cyclists are now clean, then Armstrong will still be a Tour favorite. In the past, however, when most of the contenders were doping (and we now know this to be true), there's no way Armstrong could have dominated the way he did without doping himself. In other words, it's easier to be transparent about your physiologic paramters in an era with less doping.
by cycling12 on February 12, 2009 at 5:56 PM
Wow - to comment on the above quote, " People tend to forget that the man was a pro-triathlete at 16 years of age. It takes talent and genetic advantage at that age to compete in the most grueling one-day sport known to man!" Lance was a pro triathlete when the pool of triathletes was tiny and no he never competed in the most grueling one-day event, all his tri's where 1-2hr races. Why the jump to cycling, probably because his run splits would barely qualify him to be a pro triathlete today. It's amazing how naive the age-group side of the sport can be. Why no one even questions how Lance's cancer progressed so fast in the first place or was detected at any routine physical throughout the season. 1) Steroid use and HGH will accelerate tumor growth at a very rapid rate 2) His HCG was always in line (never his urine in the test tube) until he was finally diagnosed in Oct and his HCG count was through the roof (that doesn't happen overnight). I'm a pro triathlete who races around the world in a sport with 1/10th the money of cycling. The stories I could tell you of doping from last year alone would make you drop your jaw, but then again ignorance is bliss. I'll give you one little tidbit - It's very easy to have an HCT of 50-54 and make it look like 41-43 with plasma expanders - yes, plasma expanders that will not show up on any test or fancy chart. As for HGB, If you take epo for 2-3 weeks HGB will shoot up to 20-21 range then drop back down to normal levels while you maintain a nice elevated HCT of 50+ (or 41 with the right expanders). But oh no wouldn't the epo show up in a test!!! Back in the 90's 2-3 companies produce 1st generation epo, now there's 30-40 variants (more every month) made in 3rd world countries (India / Thailand) with an altered structure that will not appear on an classic epo test. Watch the tour and be amazed, but know that the athletes are YES still one step ahead.
by Smacca16 on February 12, 2009 at 6:51 PM
Disgraceful!!! the conspiracy theories, sheltered opinions, baseless comments and mostly personal grudges shown here are pretty low and disrespectful, not toward a successful man or athlete but just to a human being. If Lance is a cheat then proove it, not with inuendo, theories or rumour but with hard 100% educated evidence that is undisputed or taken out of context, simple black and white evidence. Until then no athlete or sportsperson should be subjected to any form of guilt. There is drugs in sport and in cycling as much as any maybe, but to tar everyone is unfair and also to especially target athletes out what seems to be nothing more than jealousy is just childish. Supporters and media should grow up and actually start fighting against the users and the ones who are caught and make it fashionable to dob people in whom are known to be cheating instead of looking for the big story or the shock realisation of something that may never be there. I learnt a long time ago not judge someone on someone else's opinion, in sport this can be called the Tall Poppy Syndrome, it is unfortunate that "clean" athletes have to perform against people that cheat but it is equally disappointing for the athletes to be subjected to this banter. Be careful not to create a sporting world where clean athletes will be scared to improve of have a 100% crack in case of having their reputation dragged through the rumour mill and possibly destroyed leaving minority of the field to cheat and prosper.
A cheat is always and cheat and will always back down when genuinely challenged cleanly! There are no drugs to replace guts, determination and heart!
by deckman on February 12, 2009 at 7:01 PM
I love that Lance is back. When I heard about his comeback my next thought was, if only Jan Ullrich would give it another go. Both awesome.
by trimande on February 12, 2009 at 7:30 PM
I love that all of these conspiracy theorists, closet drug experts, cycling elitists, and all around jealous losers have decided to spread their lies on a site dedicated to Lance's foundation and his fight to make this world a better, cancer free place for all of us. Take your hatred somewhere else.
by Thevaro on February 12, 2009 at 7:49 PM
Lance Armstrong, one the most exciting athletes on the planet and he raises huge amounts of money and resources for sick kids. Go Lance Go.
by sceptic1 on February 13, 2009 at 5:09 AM
I was wondering if we can comepare todays testing results with the once we have from his past Tour the France victories.
I would think that Hemoglobin and Hematocrit would be in the same range? Or not?
by MasCyclist on February 13, 2009 at 12:34 PM
I think Lance is a great media attraction for Cycling, I am very excited about watching him in the races he is competing in this year.
One thing that I think is a shame is that a number of the riders that were riding for Lance in the Tour have since been caught for doping. These riders will have been riding in front of Lance on a number of stages etc, so to some degree he has benefitted.
Not taking anything away from the fact that Lance has shown extremely good qualities in time trialling and mountain climbing which are a testament to his arduous training regime. Overall I am looking forward to his next race.
by johnpiercy on February 14, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Lance said on Twitter that he has been tested 18 times already. What would be an average number for an athlete to be tested .
by cyclingman on February 14, 2009 at 3:57 PM
Read the article about Astana in the latest issue of Cycle Sport America.Look at the picture on either page 50 or 51 and see tired Lance looks.His retirement schedule was much too busy and he's been away from racing for at least three years.He got a 29th at the Tour Down Under so who knows about California.The goal of Astana is to help Levi get the win so Lance gets to play superdomestique.did you hear the comment that Paul Kimmage made about Lance that was mentioned at the ToC press conference held in sacramento this week where he referred to Lance going back to racing as him being "our cancer is in remission" ?It's on the videos on velonews.com if you want to watch.Prove to me 110% with verifiable medical evidence that Lance is doping and then I'll believe you.If you can't then leave the man alone.Like Lance said at the race pres conference we should support Ivan and Floyd as people,not necessarily any actions.I believe Floyd is innocent because the French drug lab purposely tampered with his samples.I think Lance has a shot at winning the 2009 Giro but feel France may be out of the question because his fitness doesn't appear to be at 2005 levels.Levi may take the Vuelta and Alberto will likely win the 2009 Tour.Keep up the good work Lance!!
by cthays on February 15, 2009 at 12:12 AM
It's great to have Lance and Floyd back. I believe in both of them. Neither have doped and never will. I hope Floyd Landis wins the Tour of California, Leipheimer 2nd, and Armstrong 3rd.
by seczii_biianca on February 15, 2009 at 3:26 PM
DAMN
by horstsack on February 17, 2009 at 12:21 PM
OK, following your arguments the clean lance armstrong was able to beat every single known doper in the last years. positive tested drivers like ullrich, basso, winokourow, rassmussen, beloki or jaksche - not to mention former team-mates like heras, landis and hamilton. the fact that old friends of lance (andreu) and former us-postal masseurs (o'reilly) testified armstrongs doping-practices plus his cooperation with widely known italian doping-doc ferrari and existing positive test from tour de france 1999 on corticosteroids (backdated exceptional permission) and epo (later discovered by l'equipe)are leaving no doupt that lance armstrong used illegal medical practices to enhance performance.
by horstsack on February 17, 2009 at 12:37 PM
he's a doper, get used to it ...
think about: positive test from the Tour de France 1999 (corticosteroid, backdated exceptional permission and EPO, later discovered)
plus
evidences of former teammates like Frankie Andreu or members of us-postal staff like Emma O'Reilly
plus
Amrstrongs cooperation with widelx known italian "Dottore-EPO" Michelle Ferrari
plus
numerous positve tested former team-mates like Floyd Landis, Tyler Hmailton, Roberto Heras
plus
the fact that Armstrong defeated known dopers like Ullrich, Beloki, Valverde, Rasmussen, Pantani, Jaksche, Winokourow like they were driving with concrete-bikes
just think about it ... maybe just for a moment ... should be enough ...
by shreddie on February 19, 2009 at 7:23 AM
It is a good job these people never trained as lawyers. What evidence, oh, nothing hard at all it is all at best circumstantial and at worst comment and back chat motivated by sour grapes, greed, jealousy and a whole host of other issue. No one says LA isn't a freek of nature, but show us the hard and reliable evidence before throwing mud.
by shreddie on February 19, 2009 at 7:23 AM
It is a good job these people never trained as lawyers. What evidence, oh, nothing hard at all it is all at best circumstantial and at worst comment and back chat motivated by sour grapes, greed, jealousy and a whole host of other issue. No one says LA isn't a freek of nature, but show us the hard and reliable evidence before throwing mud.
by chiefhiawatha on February 19, 2009 at 7:27 AM
How are we supposed to trust these figures you post? It would have been much better had you stayed with Catlin.
by fxg1 on February 19, 2009 at 7:39 AM
To horststack
The pseudoevidence you cite are all circumstancial and would in fact be easily interpreted otherwise. Think of a guy who quit the best team (USPS) and move to another team and immediately see a decrease in performance, b/c the training is not as well monitered as before. Plus, there is systematic doping in the new team. In that situation, it would be extremely tempting, if not mandatory for that guy
to dope.
Now there are published data that strongly suggest that Lance's improvment was due to increase pain tolerance after his cancer than any other factor. In Coyle, 2005 (J Appl Physiol 98: 2191--2196) there is a table showing Lance's fitness parameters at various points in time, including in the preseason 93, before his best pre-cancer season and a test conducted when he started back training after his cancer. As it would be expected, after cancer, his VO2max was down 12.5%, lactate threshold down 11%, maximum lactic acid production down 46%, BUT in the most important test, the power at 5.0 l/min oxygen, he was producing 4.4% more Watt!!! The only way to explain this is that he was able to tolerate much more pain than before. Imagine how much more he was producing once he regained and further improved his fitness. Take one of the best in world and improve his power by, lets say 10%, plus improve his pacing strategy and training habits, and you easily get the champion that we all know without the need for doping.
by Hidefinition on February 19, 2009 at 8:14 AM
Lance is just an extraordinary guy who raced and races a bike. He's won 7 Tours de France and has never tested positive for anything aside from be the most tested athlete on the planet. Give it a rest. He's clean and has always been clean.Thanks to Lance for all he has done and for all is is doing.
by realdeal007 on February 19, 2009 at 8:52 AM
oh my god - do all of you "believers" have your heads in the sand. Lance has increase his hemotocrit level by 16% in under 2months time which for those in the know increase the performance level of an elite athlete by 40%. Until all these dopers ride grand tours with hemotocrit levels in the mid to high 30's like the rest of the human population why bother watching. Let me guess, Barry Bonds broke teh HR record clean too!
Lance go home you fraud.
by realdeal007 on February 19, 2009 at 8:53 AM
oh my god - do all of you "believers" have your heads in the sand. Lance has increase his hemotocrit level by 16% in under 2months time which for those in the know increase the performance level of an elite athlete by 40%. Until all these dopers ride grand tours with hemotocrit levels in the mid to high 30's like the rest of the human population why bother watching. Let me guess, Barry Bonds broke teh HR record clean too!
Lance go home you fraud.
by ctoolhead on February 19, 2009 at 9:24 AM
should be horstshit
by ctoolhead on February 19, 2009 at 9:26 AM
should be horstshit,You need to learn how to spell and get riders names right
by dits on February 19, 2009 at 10:18 AM
A recovering Cancer Victim requires various medications to help survive Cancer, and is exempt from a conflicting doping control. Lance Armstrong is consequently doping and his disqualification from participation at any bicycle race right at the starting line is mandatory.
by dits on February 19, 2009 at 10:19 AM
A recovering Cancer Victim requires various medications to help survive Cancer, and is exempt from a conflicting doping control. Lance Armstrong is consequently doping and his disqualification from participation at any bicycle race right at the starting line is mandatory.
by Derek24 on February 19, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Surely the hematocrit increasaes during a training period and then tends to fall during long stage races. My own ranges between 39 to 43.5 after training blocks and racing periods and at different times of the year. Seems normal to me and most of the Athletes I coach show similar variations.
Good on him for providing far more info than required.
Derek... Ireland
by Derek24 on February 19, 2009 at 11:22 AM
sEEMS NORMAL TO ME. THE HEMATOCRIT LEVELS TEND TO RISE DURING TRAINING BLOCKS AND FALL DURING LONG STAGE RACES MY OWN VARIES BETWEEN 39 AND 43.5 AS DUE MANY OF THE ATHLETES I COACH.
GOOD ON HIM FOR GIVING OUT FAR MORE INFO THAN HE NEEDS TO. SINCE HE WAS A TEENAGER HE HAS ALWAYS BEEN TOP OF THE TREE AND THIS COMBINED WITH HIS MENTAL DESIRE AND PROFESSIONAL APPROACH WHICH PROBABLY EQUALS MICHEAL JORDONS MEANS HE IS AT A LEVEL MOST OF US COULD NEVER UNDERSTAND.
ENJOY YOUR COMEBACK IT IS GREAT FOR CYCLING.
DEREK....IRELAND
by jwcarlton on February 19, 2009 at 11:27 AM
realdeal007. Where do you get your info? Hematocrit levels in the mid 30's? A quick look at the hematocrit entry in wikipedia will show you (in the 2nd sentance) that "It is normally about 46% for men and 38% for women".
by Derek24 on February 19, 2009 at 11:37 AM
As a former Cancer patient and have full blood tests every quarter, thanks. Anyone can ask their Doctor for one though more than one per annum may incur a charge.
Rely on wiki at your pleasure. I prefer the experts
by peter5992 on February 19, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Lance is not a recovering cancer survivor, he is fully recovered and healthy now and not exempt from any dope testing, nor will he be during the Tour de France. Blood cell and hemoglobin level always fluctuate, that is normal and may be influenced by training. Anyone's just coming back from Everest has crazy levels due to the acclimization process.
Power to him and to his teammates at Astana (Levi especially). Saw them cross the GG Bridge here in SF in terrible weather conditions. May they win the Tour of California and the Tour de France.
by poiano on February 19, 2009 at 12:22 PM
by poiano on February 19, 2009 at 12:26 PM
"A recovering Cancer Victim requires various medications to help survive Cancer, and is exempt from a conflicting doping control. Lance Armstrong is consequently doping..."
So what follows is that if Lance weighs as much as a duck, he's made of wood, and therefore...A WITCH! I love logic.
by crankie on February 22, 2009 at 5:26 AM
dits lance fully recoverd from cancer 10 years ago,please do some reading,tim........
by crankie on February 22, 2009 at 5:29 AM
dits please lance was given the cancer all clear 10 years ago read some books about him,then post again,thanks tim..
by JohnnyColorado on February 24, 2009 at 6:45 PM
Lance's levels actually seem a little low. My crit levels are just at 50, and Lance can probably put an hour on me during a 10-mile time trial. :) Keep having fun on the bike.
by benreiter on February 27, 2009 at 2:20 PM
I wonder if the jump to 45% Hct in February is related to use of the altitude tent closer to the Tour of California
by michaellcoleman on March 1, 2009 at 8:23 PM
lance was actually fitter and fresher for the tour of california than he was for the tour down under.he will have benefitted greatly from these 2 tours.
To have a high haemog with a higher crit gives this.
Wait till he has a high haemog with a lower crit,he will be back to his best then.
Michael -Australia
by peloton on March 20, 2009 at 4:12 AM
Horstsack, you're an asshole! We all know stories about cooperating Lance with Michelle Ferrari and so on...you just can't admit he's the best and tha all his achievements are a result of dedicated and the most advanced training! Also, I really don't understand what the former team-mates that have been positive in drug tests have to do with Lance and his drug
tests?? If you're a stupid, that then means that all your friends are stupid too? Well, you should think about that...it should be enough..
by peloton on March 20, 2009 at 4:24 AM
Horstsack, I can't believe what you're saying. You simply can't except the truth and realize that Lance is the best! His achievements are a result of hard work and dedicated training, that no one of us can even imagine..and then you come up with such laim excuses, that his former team-mates were positive in drug test, and that then means that he was too?? If you're a fool, that the means that all your friends are too? You should think about that, smartass..it should be enough..
by Lance_Fan on April 9, 2009 at 6:25 AM
I'd fight to beat all the tests too if it was me. I mean, f*** it; there is no way to know what your competitors are doing unless you actually KNOW. And at this level of racing, everybody's on something. And no one outs anybody else because that's against the rules of OMERTA. It's not cool. Everybody has to play by the tacit rules, the "game within the game". Just how DID Gewiss kick the crap out of everybody back in the day? If American racers were going to have ANY chance against the Europeans in the mid- to late 90's, it's pretty clear they were going to HAVE to go on the "medical programme" (i.e., dope). The Americans simply went to Europe, learned from the Europeans, and started doing what they had been doing for quite some time. Maybe the Americans did it better. After all, if Basso and Ullrich were using a student of Conconi (Cecchini), why wouldn't Armstrong (Ferrari)? All's fair in love and war and European cycling.
Does an association with Michele Ferrari mean that you MUST have doped? I don't believe that. But Fillipo Simeoni does. And did believe that in 2004, when Lance chased him down to prevent him from winning a stage of the 2004 Tour in a breakaway. Anyone who knows ANYTHING about cycling understands why Lance did that. And the answer is that Simeoni broke OMERTA. But did Lance dope? One of the best labs in the world thinks so, and so does a top scientist, Michael Ashenden, a witness in the SCA lawsuit against Lance.
The SCA lawsuit was won by Lance, and good for him. But that lawsuit wasn't really about doping; it was about whether or not he won the Tour. He won. So SCA did not have a case in the end. But the SCA lawsuit does not explain six positive tests for EPO in Lance Armstrong's urine. Many readers here will say "French conspiracy". This is not some "French conspiracy". Conspiracy theorists who believe the samples were "spiked" have no evidence to back that up. Doctor Ashenden's views are particularly noteworthy here, and Lance knows it, although has to deny it. I'd deny it too. After all, Lance's confidentiality was breached when the l'Equipe reporter matched names with numbers from those 1999 samples. That information should have never been given to that reporter. But nonetheless, we have it. Lance Armstrong used EPO in 1999. There is no evidence to refute it. There is a lot of wishful thinking and speculation, however. Unfortunately, that does not compare to the actual hard evidence in those six samples from one of the top-rated labs in the world.
What's missing from these discussions is whether or not we should care if Lance doped. Personally, I do not. I'm a major Lance fan. It's pretty clear everyone else in the UCI pro peloton was using EPO (and other methods of doping) in the 1990's as well. The riders all have an agreement (OMERTA), so why can't we let them do what they've always done? If everyone was doped who had a shot at the Tour, then the best man still won in 1999, and we should let it go. Yes, some people respond to the drugs better than others, but that's the agreement the riders all have. They're all over 18, so I guess they can decide what drugs to put into their own bodies, like tobacco or alcohol. And the playing field is as equal as it's ever going to get.
There were no second samples to confirm the 1999 tests, so without BOTH A and B samples, Lance is off the hook. He is innocent according to the rules. Therefore, even though I believe he doped, one cannot say he "cheated" since no rules were broken. Therefore, we should let this go. Tyler Hamilton also gets to keep his 2004 Olympic gold medal despite, soon after, testing positive at the Vuelta.
I am a huge Lance fan. He injected much-needed publicity into the sport. He injected excitement. I absolutely believed he doped in 1999 (and probably before and after). But I don't care. These guys are adults. They're all at it. Lance never tested positive "officially". So, we should let it go. If he ever tests positive officially, then somebody can yell "cheater". Until then, we have to let it go. Not only did he win seven Tours, he won the "game within the game". So, let's let the past be gone.
Let's focus on beating cancer. Lance is leading the way, and we should encourage him and his foundation and support it. Even if he did dope, it still takes one hell of a lot of work, commitment and talent to be able to do what he did, especially after cancer. It's still an unbelieveable story and comeback.
More power to Lance Armstrong in his fight against this disease!
by Spiderman2 on April 11, 2009 at 10:25 AM
First of all; "Rip them all a new asshole...Lance!"
Look if all the top cyclist want to be perceived as clean, then all they have to do is hire an independent lab and have an independent set of unscheduled urine / blood / hair sample tested and the results stored in a data base and published...so that the surprise test results posted by rogue cycling committees can be compared and challenged for fair testing, if ever in doubt.
The French Cycling Committee would be doing a greater disjustice if they did not welcome Lance Armstrong back to the Tour de France...he has more to add to the promotion of the sport and its fan base, than to deny him because of their constant doping worries.
Lance is a modern day Hero for not only standing up to these clowns but putting the USA on the cycling map for all of cycling's recognition as well as all his accomplishments in our sport. Go Lance Go...we will be ready and in full force in France to cheer you up the mountain...
Spider Man
by Spiderman2 on April 11, 2009 at 10:26 AM
First of all; "Rip them all a new asshole...Lance!"
Look if all the top cyclist want to be perceived as clean, then all they have to do is hire an independent lab and have an independent set of unscheduled urine / blood / hair sample tested and the results stored in a data base and published...so that the surprise test results posted by rogue cycling committees can be compared and challenged for fair testing, if ever in doubt.
The French Cycling Committee would be doing a greater disjustice if they did not welcome Lance Armstrong back to the Tour de France...he has more to add to the promotion of the sport and its fan base, than to deny him because of their constant doping worries.
Lance is a modern day Hero for not only standing up to these clowns but putting the USA on the cycling map for all of cycling's recognition as well as all his accomplishments in our sport. Go Lance Go...we will be ready and in full force in France to cheer you up the mountain...
Spider Man
by Wilkie on May 14, 2009 at 4:44 AM
'Hematocrit ranges from 40-45% with values above 52% in healthy individuals'
I thought the legal limit is set at 50% so how can a 'healthy individual' who i'm assuming would be clean have a value above that?
From what i've read it's not naturally possible to have a crit at 50% or higher unless something dodgy is going on!.
by YOWIE on August 2, 2009 at 10:53 PM
Go Lance! Hope to see you at TdU 2010!!!
by flahute on February 11, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Just because his current numbers show that he is clean now does not mean that he was clean from 1999-2005, or during his pre-cancer days.
i suppose they faked the moon landings too...moron