briscoelab
09-09-05, 12:28 PM
Linky (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/more/09/09/bc.cyc.armstrong.doping.ap/index.html?section=cnn_topstories)
Professional Cycling - UCI lashes out against the WADA and French Paper
Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.Chucklehead
09-09-05, 01:50 PM
they would say that, though, wouldn't they?
especially after lance gave them an as-of-yet unspecified amount of cash to "find better testing methods." and look -- it came out of his own pocket. sounds a bit like conflict of interest to me.
http://www.eurosport.com/home/pages/v4/l0/s18/e7626/sport_lng0_spo18_evt7626_sto709970.shtml
what a f'king crock of *****. like the UCI needs his money? if the UCI had any interest in cleaning up the sport, they would have said "no thanks, mr. armstrong. we'll take care of it on our own."
so the term for today is "hush money"
especially after lance gave them an as-of-yet unspecified amount of cash to "find better testing methods." and look -- it came out of his own pocket. sounds a bit like conflict of interest to me.
http://www.eurosport.com/home/pages/v4/l0/s18/e7626/sport_lng0_spo18_evt7626_sto709970.shtml
what a f'king crock of *****. like the UCI needs his money? if the UCI had any interest in cleaning up the sport, they would have said "no thanks, mr. armstrong. we'll take care of it on our own."
so the term for today is "hush money"
pseudobrit
09-09-05, 02:27 PM
UCI is a joke. How many confirmed doped riders have they missed now?
I half expect them to criticize the next police squad that uncovers a cache of dope in a cyclist's trunk because it unfairly targets a rider and provides no concrete proof that a rider was actually doping.
I half expect them to criticize the next police squad that uncovers a cache of dope in a cyclist's trunk because it unfairly targets a rider and provides no concrete proof that a rider was actually doping.
cs1
09-09-05, 03:46 PM
they would say that, though, wouldn't they?
especially after lance gave them an as-of-yet unspecified amount of cash to "find better testing methods." and look -- it came out of his own pocket. sounds a bit like conflict of interest to me.
http://www.eurosport.com/home/pages/v4/l0/s18/e7626/sport_lng0_spo18_evt7626_sto709970.shtml
what a f'king crock of *****. like the UCI needs his money? if the UCI had any interest in cleaning up the sport, they would have said "no thanks, mr. armstrong. we'll take care of it on our own."
so the term for today is "hush money"
Jealous?
especially after lance gave them an as-of-yet unspecified amount of cash to "find better testing methods." and look -- it came out of his own pocket. sounds a bit like conflict of interest to me.
http://www.eurosport.com/home/pages/v4/l0/s18/e7626/sport_lng0_spo18_evt7626_sto709970.shtml
what a f'king crock of *****. like the UCI needs his money? if the UCI had any interest in cleaning up the sport, they would have said "no thanks, mr. armstrong. we'll take care of it on our own."
so the term for today is "hush money"
Jealous?
Chucklehead
09-09-05, 04:06 PM
Jealous?
blind?
blind?
shimanopower
09-10-05, 06:53 AM
dog hair, what is your problem with armstrong? if you've explained it before can ya give me a link to the thread?
blwyn
09-10-05, 09:13 AM
For once, I think the UCI is spot on with their comments. The whole episode is a shamless manufactured story by a newspaper seeking revenge and increased sales. It violates every protocal on testing ever developed. More power to them!
CPcyclist
09-10-05, 11:30 PM
HD all that has been see in the papers is a "results" sheet no raw data. I can make a results sheet say what ever I want so could you. This is not how science is suppose to work. As for LA giving money to the UCI I think the reasons laid out in the article are legitimate. It is only damning if sing document for LA to the UCI that says it must be spent to research this test and that on but don't look at this test or all data from the research I paid for must be sent to me so I can read it and learn how to cheat better.
As for the Blind comment I hear the pot calling the kettle black. Every one who is not on the inside of this case is BLIND. We all have to get past our prejudices :beer: whether Pro or Anti Armstrong. :fight:
As for the Blind comment I hear the pot calling the kettle black. Every one who is not on the inside of this case is BLIND. We all have to get past our prejudices :beer: whether Pro or Anti Armstrong. :fight:
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 12:55 AM
funny that you think it's just armstrong. he's only the most blatant and arrogant of the cheaters. look around. do some reading about his friends - his connections. it's not hard. he's not the biggest cheater, he's just the cheater who wins the biggest race.
Daily Commute
09-11-05, 06:21 AM
For those who think these tests prove that LA doped, please point us to your links that explain:
How the samples were sealed;
Where the sealed samples were taken and when they were taken there;
Who had access to the samples;
How the samples were tested (step by step);
Who did each step;
What documentation they kept;
Who observed;
Etc.
A scientific test is only as good as the test itself, the procedures used to conduct the test, and the honesty of the scientists doing the test.
It looks like the UCI is taking the right attitude--wait until we have enough facts to judge the validity of the current tests.
How the samples were sealed;
Where the sealed samples were taken and when they were taken there;
Who had access to the samples;
How the samples were tested (step by step);
Who did each step;
What documentation they kept;
Who observed;
Etc.
A scientific test is only as good as the test itself, the procedures used to conduct the test, and the honesty of the scientists doing the test.
It looks like the UCI is taking the right attitude--wait until we have enough facts to judge the validity of the current tests.
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 12:22 PM
WE LIVE IN AN AGE WHERE TESTS CAN'T PROVE EVERYTHING.
the naivete of people just astounds me. try putting aside your media-driven man-love and use something called the common sense standard. :lol: how can you not tell that this guy is on something? it blows me away that people think this guy(and alot of others) is for real. i don't think these tests prove anything. lequipe IS on a witch hunt, but with very good reason. you don't NEED a test to tell that armstrong is a doper. he's a cheater!
the naivete of people just astounds me. try putting aside your media-driven man-love and use something called the common sense standard. :lol: how can you not tell that this guy is on something? it blows me away that people think this guy(and alot of others) is for real. i don't think these tests prove anything. lequipe IS on a witch hunt, but with very good reason. you don't NEED a test to tell that armstrong is a doper. he's a cheater!
chrisvu05
09-11-05, 12:46 PM
I don't want to comment on the doping scandal...but I would like to make a comment to Dog Hair. Lance Armstrong is probably the single most important cyclist in recent time. He has Michael Jordan status. People like you that "dog" (no pun intended) on him just give people more fuel to make people dislike cycling. If Lance hadn't come along do you really think the people of the United States would be paying attention to to cycliong at all? NOPE!! Do you think trek would be as big as they are? Do think people would be flocking to bikes shops all summer long to buy something that they will end up using for 2 months and then get tired of it? I can understand if you dislike the guy as most people who aren't winners usually dislike the guy that wins everything. The Yankees are hated, Michael Jordan was hated, Babe Ruth was hated, Ty cobb was hated, Hank Aaron was hated, get the picture. Someone always hates the winner. I believe that he might have at one point tried doping drugs when they were no illegal. But I don't care because he is competing against top athletes in an event that lasts for almost a month. He puts in his work and is known to be the best trained athlete in cycling. Look at this guys physique!! He is a specimen. He has everything physiologically perfect to be a cyclist. His resting heart rate is in the mid 30s range! I'm sorry, but you don't get a heart rate this low without doing some serious exercise. He has a ridiculous V02 max, and he has a tolerance for pain. Cancer made him realize that the minor aches and pains that he felt everyday while cycling were nothing compared to that of chemotherapy and dying. So dog hair...give him so credit...
As far as the doping scandal goes, I'd like to say that I have recently found a cure for AIDS!!! But I can't prove it and I can't show that the test were not biased.
As far as the doping scandal goes, I'd like to say that I have recently found a cure for AIDS!!! But I can't prove it and I can't show that the test were not biased.
aham23
09-11-05, 01:31 PM
WE LIVE IN AN AGE WHERE TESTS CAN'T PROVE EVERYTHING.
the naivete of people just astounds me. try putting aside your media-driven man-love and use something called the common sense standard. :lol: how can you not tell that this guy is on something? it blows me away that people think this guy(and alot of others) is for real. i don't think these tests prove anything. lequipe IS on a witch hunt, but with very good reason. you don't NEED a test to tell that armstrong is a doper. he's a cheater!
so using your dumb arse position every great athlete who has dominated a sport was cheating and/or doping? that is what i get from your post. his greatness is the evidence?? Micheal Jordan, Barry Sanders, Tiger, ect........ they were all dopers or cheaters? why is it "naivete" to believe someone is great due to great physical and mental attributes? later.
the naivete of people just astounds me. try putting aside your media-driven man-love and use something called the common sense standard. :lol: how can you not tell that this guy is on something? it blows me away that people think this guy(and alot of others) is for real. i don't think these tests prove anything. lequipe IS on a witch hunt, but with very good reason. you don't NEED a test to tell that armstrong is a doper. he's a cheater!
so using your dumb arse position every great athlete who has dominated a sport was cheating and/or doping? that is what i get from your post. his greatness is the evidence?? Micheal Jordan, Barry Sanders, Tiger, ect........ they were all dopers or cheaters? why is it "naivete" to believe someone is great due to great physical and mental attributes? later.
chrisvu05
09-11-05, 01:33 PM
i was just saying that every great athlete is hated by those who don't have his success!!
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 01:37 PM
I can understand if you dislike the guy as most people who aren't winners usually dislike the guy that wins everything. The Yankees are hated, Michael Jordan was hated
i totally love the first part of that quote. that rocks. :roflmao: congratulations, man. lance is your daddy. bend over.
of course i hate the yankees. I'M FROM SAN DIEGO! do i have to be a fan just because they win alot? maybe you do, but that's why people like you are called "FRONT RUNNERS." you'd be a fan of the clippers if they won a few games.
as for michael jordan - WRONG! i admire the guy. am i a fan? NO!!! I'M FROM SAN DIEGO!!! and guess what!! i don't even like basketball!! so screw you!
do you think anyone -- and i mean ANYONE -- gives a flying f'k about how big trek is? i mean..anyone other than trek and lance? do you think trek and lance are the owners of cycling or something?
and wtf good does it do cycling for a bunch of idiots to buy bikes and stop riding after a couple of months? HUH?! that's like saying the sales of baseball bats is a direct indication of how big the MLB farm system is! so what's your point? you have none!
i do give lance credit for what he's done with the whole cancer research thing. but are you sure that campaign was even his idea..? i also give him credit for being the most important doper to ever be so arrogant and still not be caught.
i totally love the first part of that quote. that rocks. :roflmao: congratulations, man. lance is your daddy. bend over.
of course i hate the yankees. I'M FROM SAN DIEGO! do i have to be a fan just because they win alot? maybe you do, but that's why people like you are called "FRONT RUNNERS." you'd be a fan of the clippers if they won a few games.
as for michael jordan - WRONG! i admire the guy. am i a fan? NO!!! I'M FROM SAN DIEGO!!! and guess what!! i don't even like basketball!! so screw you!
do you think anyone -- and i mean ANYONE -- gives a flying f'k about how big trek is? i mean..anyone other than trek and lance? do you think trek and lance are the owners of cycling or something?
and wtf good does it do cycling for a bunch of idiots to buy bikes and stop riding after a couple of months? HUH?! that's like saying the sales of baseball bats is a direct indication of how big the MLB farm system is! so what's your point? you have none!
i do give lance credit for what he's done with the whole cancer research thing. but are you sure that campaign was even his idea..? i also give him credit for being the most important doper to ever be so arrogant and still not be caught.
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 01:43 PM
so using your dumb arse position every great athlete who has dominated a sport was cheating and/or doping? that is what i get from your post. his greatness is the evidence?? Micheal Jordan, Barry Sanders, Tiger, ect........ they were all dopers or cheaters? why is it "naivete" to believe someone is great due to great physical and mental attributes? later.
i wish i had the words to describe how incredibly stupid it is to compare endurance athletes to stick and ball athletes. can you honestly draw a comparison? and if you really insist on doing so, then howcome you didn't mention barry bonds? are you trying to say that only baseball players can cheat?
i wish i had the words to describe how incredibly stupid it is to compare endurance athletes to stick and ball athletes. can you honestly draw a comparison? and if you really insist on doing so, then howcome you didn't mention barry bonds? are you trying to say that only baseball players can cheat?
hi565
09-11-05, 01:46 PM
"But i dont like basket ball so, screw you!" Very strong, very strong comback!
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 01:57 PM
"But i dont like basket ball so, screw you!" Very strong, very strong comback!
welcome to a joke. how seriously would you like to take it?
i won't even mention that you took that out of context. nice going.
welcome to a joke. how seriously would you like to take it?
i won't even mention that you took that out of context. nice going.
aham23
09-11-05, 02:22 PM
dog hair you are a real winner! read my the post. i am not comparing athletes or sports. you say he cant be for real. why not? why cant an athlete be great and not be a cheat. that was the point. i dont mention barry bonds because he admitted to a grand jury that he took steroids. yeah he claims he didnt know what that cream and clear substance was his trainer gave him to rub all over his body, but he admitted to it. the leaked testimony gives proof that bonds is a cheater. it is his own words. so, i didnt mention him. later.
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 02:28 PM
if i could find an emoticon that would symbolize me slapping my forehead in disbelief, i would put it right here. later.
ZappCatt
09-11-05, 03:07 PM
Just make sure you use a sledge hammer....we would all be better off...
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 03:22 PM
Just make sure you use a sledge hammer....we would all be better off...
wow.
wow.
linux_author
09-11-05, 04:43 PM
- whoa, dudes! this thread has devolved, hasn't it?
- i rate this thread NC-17 (please cover your younger children's eyes)
- i rate this thread NC-17 (please cover your younger children's eyes)
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 05:15 PM
you're right. it's not even worth it.
Dolomiti
09-11-05, 06:31 PM
HD all that has been see in the papers is a "results" sheet no raw data.
The results sheet had raw data.
I don't want to comment on the doping scandal...but I would like to make a comment to Dog Hair. Lance Armstrong is probably the single most important cyclist in recent time. He has Michael Jordan status. People like you that "dog" (no pun intended) on him just give people more fuel to make people dislike cycling. If Lance hadn't come along do you really think the people of the United States would be paying attention to to cycliong at all? NOPE!! Do you think trek would be as big as they are? Do think people would be flocking to bikes shops all summer long to buy something that they will end up using for 2 months and then get tired of it?
That is why the peloton has been, for many decades, hush hush about doping. Of course they don't want to hurt their own sport.
It's better than the truth, I guess.
For those who think these tests prove that LA doped, please point us to your links that explain:
How the samples were sealed;
Where the sealed samples were taken and when they were taken there;
Who had access to the samples;
How the samples were tested (step by step);
Who did each step;
What documentation they kept;
Who observed;
Etc.
A scientific test is only as good as the test itself, the procedures used to conduct the test, and the honesty of the scientists doing the test.
It looks like the UCI is taking the right attitude--wait until we have enough facts to judge the validity of the current tests.
Why should they have to provide all of that? It was a professional organization that did this.
Do you ask this about every other athlete that tests positive in sport? "They didn't provide all of this info so the result must not be true" :rolleyes:
The organization doing the test didn't plan on the results being released in this way, and they never had reason to publish all of the information that you ask for.
The results sheet had raw data.
I don't want to comment on the doping scandal...but I would like to make a comment to Dog Hair. Lance Armstrong is probably the single most important cyclist in recent time. He has Michael Jordan status. People like you that "dog" (no pun intended) on him just give people more fuel to make people dislike cycling. If Lance hadn't come along do you really think the people of the United States would be paying attention to to cycliong at all? NOPE!! Do you think trek would be as big as they are? Do think people would be flocking to bikes shops all summer long to buy something that they will end up using for 2 months and then get tired of it?
That is why the peloton has been, for many decades, hush hush about doping. Of course they don't want to hurt their own sport.
It's better than the truth, I guess.
For those who think these tests prove that LA doped, please point us to your links that explain:
How the samples were sealed;
Where the sealed samples were taken and when they were taken there;
Who had access to the samples;
How the samples were tested (step by step);
Who did each step;
What documentation they kept;
Who observed;
Etc.
A scientific test is only as good as the test itself, the procedures used to conduct the test, and the honesty of the scientists doing the test.
It looks like the UCI is taking the right attitude--wait until we have enough facts to judge the validity of the current tests.
Why should they have to provide all of that? It was a professional organization that did this.
Do you ask this about every other athlete that tests positive in sport? "They didn't provide all of this info so the result must not be true" :rolleyes:
The organization doing the test didn't plan on the results being released in this way, and they never had reason to publish all of the information that you ask for.
doctorSpoc
09-11-05, 06:34 PM
so using your dumb arse position every great athlete who has dominated a sport was cheating and/or doping? that is what i get from your post. his greatness is the evidence?? Micheal Jordan, Barry Sanders, Tiger, ect........ they were all dopers or cheaters? why is it "naivete" to believe someone is great due to great physical and mental attributes? later.
not every sport... not even in cycling everywhere necessarily, but at the top of the European Pro Peleton... YES!!! doping has been a part of pro cycling basically from the beginning... it's really just the incredibly naive or the unknowlegable fans that don't understand this... so yes, if you are a dominant cyclist in the pro peleton you are on drugs... the reason Armstrong has/had a witch-hunt on his hands is that unlike other pros he stood up and challenged the press to come after him... and now he asking, why are they coming after me?? Ever notice that everyone else kind keeps their mouth shut and deflects comments about drugs? not Mr. Armstrong though, he stands on the highest mountain and says come and get me... well guess what, they came to get you... and they got you basically. There will forever be an asterisks beside all of his victories now... should have just kept your big mouth shut like everyone else and changed the topic... dumb a**... he's going to be looked at in the same light as a Pantani incidentally another guy who had never failed a drug test.
not every sport... not even in cycling everywhere necessarily, but at the top of the European Pro Peleton... YES!!! doping has been a part of pro cycling basically from the beginning... it's really just the incredibly naive or the unknowlegable fans that don't understand this... so yes, if you are a dominant cyclist in the pro peleton you are on drugs... the reason Armstrong has/had a witch-hunt on his hands is that unlike other pros he stood up and challenged the press to come after him... and now he asking, why are they coming after me?? Ever notice that everyone else kind keeps their mouth shut and deflects comments about drugs? not Mr. Armstrong though, he stands on the highest mountain and says come and get me... well guess what, they came to get you... and they got you basically. There will forever be an asterisks beside all of his victories now... should have just kept your big mouth shut like everyone else and changed the topic... dumb a**... he's going to be looked at in the same light as a Pantani incidentally another guy who had never failed a drug test.
Daily Commute
09-11-05, 08:15 PM
The results sheet had raw data.
No it didn't. It had the conclusions drawn from raw data.
Why should they have to provide all of that? It was a professional organization that did this.
Do you ask this about every other athlete that tests positive in sport? "They didn't provide all of this info so the result must not be true" :rolleyes:
The organization doing the test didn't plan on the results being released in this way, and they never had reason to publish all of the information that you ask for.
If they did honest, professional tests, all this information will be easily available. It's clear that they broke at least a few rules (hence the UCI's anger), so it's important to see what, if any, other rules they broke.
Again, any respectable scientist would be happy to provide the answers to how he or she performed a test. Let's see if this drug lab is run by respectable scientists.
No it didn't. It had the conclusions drawn from raw data.
Why should they have to provide all of that? It was a professional organization that did this.
Do you ask this about every other athlete that tests positive in sport? "They didn't provide all of this info so the result must not be true" :rolleyes:
The organization doing the test didn't plan on the results being released in this way, and they never had reason to publish all of the information that you ask for.
If they did honest, professional tests, all this information will be easily available. It's clear that they broke at least a few rules (hence the UCI's anger), so it's important to see what, if any, other rules they broke.
Again, any respectable scientist would be happy to provide the answers to how he or she performed a test. Let's see if this drug lab is run by respectable scientists.
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 08:28 PM
lance is a shepherd. his sheep are many. but they are only sheep. sheepy-sheepy-sheep-sheep.
DocRay
09-11-05, 08:38 PM
Doggy, there are > 20 physiology published manuscripts that clearly demostrate that Armstrong is a genetic freak, he has the largest heart volume and lung volume ever measured for his size -this can't be done with doping.
It's funny that you have a quote from Juan Volvo Montoya in your sig, arguably the biggest F-up F1 driver of 2005, he blew it again today at Spa.
It's funny that you have a quote from Juan Volvo Montoya in your sig, arguably the biggest F-up F1 driver of 2005, he blew it again today at Spa.
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 08:50 PM
my apologies -- i had to run that through my sheep-speak translation device.
published where?
it's funny that you think a quote from anyone signifies how i view that person. i don't do the hero worship thing, sorry. not everyone is like you.
btw -- do canadian sheep have better wool? i know it can get nippy up there.
published where?
it's funny that you think a quote from anyone signifies how i view that person. i don't do the hero worship thing, sorry. not everyone is like you.
btw -- do canadian sheep have better wool? i know it can get nippy up there.
Chucklehead
09-11-05, 09:09 PM
i wonder why he was never able to get the unreal results BEFORE his miracle cancer? did the miracle cancer make his heart and lungs bigger? i wonder....
i wonder who the doctors are who discovered his super lungs and super heart. i wonder if the super doctors got super paychecks for that...like the UCI. they got a paycheck so super that no one will say just how super it was(or continues to be). i wonder if the super doctors are his "good friends" like the supreme super doctor himself, michele ferrari?
i wonder if something in the blood of super people just naturally causes them migrate to some super city in spain for several months a year...to emerge really, really super at just the right time. every year. year after year, after year, after year...
i bet you don't think the doctors or scientists who write stuff like this are very super:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/avoid_positive
i wonder who the doctors are who discovered his super lungs and super heart. i wonder if the super doctors got super paychecks for that...like the UCI. they got a paycheck so super that no one will say just how super it was(or continues to be). i wonder if the super doctors are his "good friends" like the supreme super doctor himself, michele ferrari?
i wonder if something in the blood of super people just naturally causes them migrate to some super city in spain for several months a year...to emerge really, really super at just the right time. every year. year after year, after year, after year...
i bet you don't think the doctors or scientists who write stuff like this are very super:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/avoid_positive
chrisvu05
09-11-05, 10:22 PM
published where?
here is an article dog hair....Journal of Applied Physiology 2005 (http://www.edb.utexas.edu/coyle/content/armstrong%20article%20JAP.pdf)
here is an article dog hair....Journal of Applied Physiology 2005 (http://www.edb.utexas.edu/coyle/content/armstrong%20article%20JAP.pdf)
chrisvu05
09-11-05, 10:24 PM
and another article by National Geographic
the science of lance (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0722_050722_armstrong.html)
the science of lance (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0722_050722_armstrong.html)
Nd2PdlFstr
09-11-05, 10:34 PM
i wonder why he was never able to get the unreal results BEFORE his miracle cancer? did the miracle cancer make his heart and lungs bigger? i wonder....
i wonder who the doctors are who discovered his super lungs and super heart. i wonder if the super doctors got super paychecks for that...like the UCI. they got a paycheck so super that no one will say just how super it was(or continues to be). i wonder if the super doctors are his "good friends" like the supreme super doctor himself, michele ferrari?
i wonder if something in the blood of super people just naturally causes them migrate to some super city in spain for several months a year...to emerge really, really super at just the right time. every year. year after year, after year, after year...
i bet you don't think the doctors or scientists who write stuff like this are very super:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/avoid_positive
You know... it's fine to hate Lance. But, resorting to calling people names doesn't make your points any more valid without some basis in fact.
Lance had results before. He was a terrific one-day racer. Cancer, and more importantly, the treatment for cancer, eats your body composition away. As you recover from that, your body composition changes. His changed in such a way that he became a slighter, more slender man. His racing weight now is about 15 pounds lower than it was then, while his other performance markers have remained the same. To put it in terms you might understand, Mr. Montoya... strip every unneeded (read: heavy) part out of your car and see how much the performance improves.
Who cares about Dr. Ferrari? I have good friends who use drugs too. But, I don't. Wanna guess why? I'll tell you anyway. It's because I put my career at risk if I do, just like Lance does if he gets caught using. Being friends with someone who does things "wrong" does not make you guilty by association.
Your statement about "emerging from Spain in really, really super condition" is nothing more than self-gratuitous propoganda to back your weak accusations. You've proven nothing.
We haven't even touched on the fact that Lance also gives money to WADA. How are you going to try to spin that into "hush money"???
Like I said... hate Lance if you want to. But, if it's going to be because he's a "cheat", then you're going to have to come up with some better "proof" than what you're spouting in here.
Let me guess... you're going to say something about sheep now? :rolleyes:
i wonder who the doctors are who discovered his super lungs and super heart. i wonder if the super doctors got super paychecks for that...like the UCI. they got a paycheck so super that no one will say just how super it was(or continues to be). i wonder if the super doctors are his "good friends" like the supreme super doctor himself, michele ferrari?
i wonder if something in the blood of super people just naturally causes them migrate to some super city in spain for several months a year...to emerge really, really super at just the right time. every year. year after year, after year, after year...
i bet you don't think the doctors or scientists who write stuff like this are very super:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=features/2005/avoid_positive
You know... it's fine to hate Lance. But, resorting to calling people names doesn't make your points any more valid without some basis in fact.
Lance had results before. He was a terrific one-day racer. Cancer, and more importantly, the treatment for cancer, eats your body composition away. As you recover from that, your body composition changes. His changed in such a way that he became a slighter, more slender man. His racing weight now is about 15 pounds lower than it was then, while his other performance markers have remained the same. To put it in terms you might understand, Mr. Montoya... strip every unneeded (read: heavy) part out of your car and see how much the performance improves.
Who cares about Dr. Ferrari? I have good friends who use drugs too. But, I don't. Wanna guess why? I'll tell you anyway. It's because I put my career at risk if I do, just like Lance does if he gets caught using. Being friends with someone who does things "wrong" does not make you guilty by association.
Your statement about "emerging from Spain in really, really super condition" is nothing more than self-gratuitous propoganda to back your weak accusations. You've proven nothing.
We haven't even touched on the fact that Lance also gives money to WADA. How are you going to try to spin that into "hush money"???
Like I said... hate Lance if you want to. But, if it's going to be because he's a "cheat", then you're going to have to come up with some better "proof" than what you're spouting in here.
Let me guess... you're going to say something about sheep now? :rolleyes:
doctorSpoc
09-12-05, 12:16 AM
i feel your pain dog hair... these people will fall for any BS fed them and ignor things that are just kicking them in the head...
did you notice that a Lance's muscular efficiency increase by 8-9%... did you also know that previous to this study with Lance that this was though to be impossible!! and that previously it was though to be set by genetics... hmmm how did that happen??? Coyle concludes it must be due to hard work and his training regime... what a joke!! you just can't take this guy seriously, you have to relize that this guy just HAD to be shackle by a stack of legal papers a mile high in order to get his hands on Armstrong and do this kind of analysis... you guys realize that right? tell me you understand that??
the other thing you guys don't really seem to be understanding is that everyone in the top pro ranks has those kinds of numbers... it's a part of the job description. Coyle even says in the report that his stats are among the highest of elite cyclists tested... i.e. not THE highest... he says in this article that "Lance is not a genetic freak," (http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050613/lance.html) and that his contemporaries have/had similar number to him... so honestly... i don't know where you guys are getting this that physiologically that Armstrong is any different that other pro cyclist... couch potatoes... atheletes in other non-aerobic sports yes but other ELITE PRO cyclists... show me where in Coyle's report it says that.
did you notice that a Lance's muscular efficiency increase by 8-9%... did you also know that previous to this study with Lance that this was though to be impossible!! and that previously it was though to be set by genetics... hmmm how did that happen??? Coyle concludes it must be due to hard work and his training regime... what a joke!! you just can't take this guy seriously, you have to relize that this guy just HAD to be shackle by a stack of legal papers a mile high in order to get his hands on Armstrong and do this kind of analysis... you guys realize that right? tell me you understand that??
the other thing you guys don't really seem to be understanding is that everyone in the top pro ranks has those kinds of numbers... it's a part of the job description. Coyle even says in the report that his stats are among the highest of elite cyclists tested... i.e. not THE highest... he says in this article that "Lance is not a genetic freak," (http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050613/lance.html) and that his contemporaries have/had similar number to him... so honestly... i don't know where you guys are getting this that physiologically that Armstrong is any different that other pro cyclist... couch potatoes... atheletes in other non-aerobic sports yes but other ELITE PRO cyclists... show me where in Coyle's report it says that.
Chucklehead
09-12-05, 12:25 AM
nope. nothing about sheep. you made that your own dead horse. i mean...unless you have a thing for them. that's cool, too.
blah, blah...
nothing we haven't heard or read and debunked before. if he was the freak they say he is, he'd win at will. but he only trains for one or two select events. why? because he doesn't want to be too great? that's my guess.
you can point to whatever facts you think you have, but the biggest fact is that there are simply too many coincidences surrounding who "coaches" him, where he trains, miracles of cancer, and the super-human features he boasts.
circumstantial? sure. but in sports, whether you like it or not, you must prove your innocence because some feats are beyond natural human capacity. what you're saying is that he swims in the magic fountain -- he just never drinks from it. it's obvious you know very little to nothing about this sport and its history. you just lay on your back and lick the tea bag because it's curiously pleasant and you aren't sure why :lol: but that's cool, too!
spoc -- yeah, it's pointless like i said earlier. people who don't believe in themsleves must believe in the unbelievable.
blah, blah...
nothing we haven't heard or read and debunked before. if he was the freak they say he is, he'd win at will. but he only trains for one or two select events. why? because he doesn't want to be too great? that's my guess.
you can point to whatever facts you think you have, but the biggest fact is that there are simply too many coincidences surrounding who "coaches" him, where he trains, miracles of cancer, and the super-human features he boasts.
circumstantial? sure. but in sports, whether you like it or not, you must prove your innocence because some feats are beyond natural human capacity. what you're saying is that he swims in the magic fountain -- he just never drinks from it. it's obvious you know very little to nothing about this sport and its history. you just lay on your back and lick the tea bag because it's curiously pleasant and you aren't sure why :lol: but that's cool, too!
spoc -- yeah, it's pointless like i said earlier. people who don't believe in themsleves must believe in the unbelievable.
BLISS
09-12-05, 03:44 AM
Doggy, there are > 20 physiology published manuscripts that clearly demostrate that Armstrong is a genetic freak, he has the largest heart volume and lung volume ever measured for his size -this can't be done with doping.
It's funny that you have a quote from Juan Volvo Montoya in your sig, arguably the biggest F-up F1 driver of 2005, he blew it again today at Spa.
Lance lucky escapes
Tested positive for coticosteroids statement it was used it for saddle sore
Corticosteriod thins the skin and would not be any good for saddle sores.
USP also got caught dumping empty packets of Actovegen (Calfs blood) which is a performance enhancing drug which there is no test for.
USP statement that is was used for road rash anybody who actually believes this must me really stupid.
Actovegen was also not approved for use on humans.they (Frigo also got caught with it this year)
Actovegen is mixed with insulin which was also dumped at the same time USP statement that this was for a diabetic in USP even though there was enough to empty packets to last one person for a year.
Add to this six positive tests for EPO which there as been enough said
He definitely lied that they were using Actovegen for road rash there can be no doubt about that. if he was using this stuff why not EPO
forget the EPO i would like to see you explain Actovegen
It's funny that you have a quote from Juan Volvo Montoya in your sig, arguably the biggest F-up F1 driver of 2005, he blew it again today at Spa.
Lance lucky escapes
Tested positive for coticosteroids statement it was used it for saddle sore
Corticosteriod thins the skin and would not be any good for saddle sores.
USP also got caught dumping empty packets of Actovegen (Calfs blood) which is a performance enhancing drug which there is no test for.
USP statement that is was used for road rash anybody who actually believes this must me really stupid.
Actovegen was also not approved for use on humans.they (Frigo also got caught with it this year)
Actovegen is mixed with insulin which was also dumped at the same time USP statement that this was for a diabetic in USP even though there was enough to empty packets to last one person for a year.
Add to this six positive tests for EPO which there as been enough said
He definitely lied that they were using Actovegen for road rash there can be no doubt about that. if he was using this stuff why not EPO
forget the EPO i would like to see you explain Actovegen
Daily Commute
09-12-05, 04:09 AM
It looks like the conversation is going on in two threads. The other one (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=132748&goto=lastpost) is over in the General Cycling Forum.
Naveed74
09-12-05, 07:53 AM
I think this quote is appropriate: "Never Argue with an idiot, they will just bring you down to their level and beat you with experience!"
Honestly guys, this is getting really tired on the forums here - the love/hate Lance addicts.
Honestly guys, this is getting really tired on the forums here - the love/hate Lance addicts.
dahvaio
09-12-05, 09:12 AM
lance is a shepherd. his sheep are many. but they are only sheep. sheepy-sheepy-sheep-sheep.
Better a sheep than plain old "DOG HAIR"
Better a sheep than plain old "DOG HAIR"
Chucklehead
09-12-05, 12:27 PM
Better a sheep than plain old "DOG HAIR"
well...geez.
:rolleyes:
well...geez.
:rolleyes:
chrisvu05
09-12-05, 01:26 PM
Lance lucky escapes
Tested positive for coticosteroids statement it was used it for saddle sore
Corticosteriod thins the skin and would not be any good for saddle sores.
USP also got caught dumping empty packets of Actovegen (Calfs blood) which is a performance enhancing drug which there is no test for.
USP statement that is was used for road rash anybody who actually believes this must me really stupid.
Actovegen was also not approved for use on humans.they (Frigo also got caught with it this year)
Actovegen is mixed with insulin which was also dumped at the same time USP statement that this was for a diabetic in USP even though there was enough to empty packets to last one person for a year.
Add to this six positive tests for EPO which there as been enough said
He definitely lied that they were using Actovegen for road rash there can be no doubt about that. if he was using this stuff why not EPO
forget the EPO i would like to see you explain Actovegen
so i googled actovegen (also actovigen) and all I get is cycling forums talking about this substance. So i decided to take my search to a more scholarly route and I looked it up on my University's online journal catalog (Proquest). I received no matches for this word at all. Wouldn't you think there would be atleast one article about it somewhere? Listen I'll be pissed if it turns out Lance has lied this whole time but it is very feasible that this could be a witch hunt. Innocent until proven guilty. Corticosteriods not good for saddle sores? I don't know, but I do know that steriods stop the inflammation response which is basically what a saddle sore is, an inflammation response. Actovigen? until I see one scholarly article saying what it is, I will think of it as a substance made up by the press. You can find anything on google, why can't I find a thing on actovigen unless it is some cycling forum discussing it's use?
Tested positive for coticosteroids statement it was used it for saddle sore
Corticosteriod thins the skin and would not be any good for saddle sores.
USP also got caught dumping empty packets of Actovegen (Calfs blood) which is a performance enhancing drug which there is no test for.
USP statement that is was used for road rash anybody who actually believes this must me really stupid.
Actovegen was also not approved for use on humans.they (Frigo also got caught with it this year)
Actovegen is mixed with insulin which was also dumped at the same time USP statement that this was for a diabetic in USP even though there was enough to empty packets to last one person for a year.
Add to this six positive tests for EPO which there as been enough said
He definitely lied that they were using Actovegen for road rash there can be no doubt about that. if he was using this stuff why not EPO
forget the EPO i would like to see you explain Actovegen
so i googled actovegen (also actovigen) and all I get is cycling forums talking about this substance. So i decided to take my search to a more scholarly route and I looked it up on my University's online journal catalog (Proquest). I received no matches for this word at all. Wouldn't you think there would be atleast one article about it somewhere? Listen I'll be pissed if it turns out Lance has lied this whole time but it is very feasible that this could be a witch hunt. Innocent until proven guilty. Corticosteriods not good for saddle sores? I don't know, but I do know that steriods stop the inflammation response which is basically what a saddle sore is, an inflammation response. Actovigen? until I see one scholarly article saying what it is, I will think of it as a substance made up by the press. You can find anything on google, why can't I find a thing on actovigen unless it is some cycling forum discussing it's use?
Nd2PdlFstr
09-12-05, 02:04 PM
I can see that doghair has run out of valid responses, so I'll reply to this one instead.
Lance lucky escapes
Tested positive for coticosteroids statement it was used it for saddle sore
Corticosteriod thins the skin and would not be any good for saddle sores.
USP also got caught dumping empty packets of Actovegen (Calfs blood) which is a performance enhancing drug which there is no test for.
USP statement that is was used for road rash anybody who actually believes this must me really stupid.
Actovegen was also not approved for use on humans.they (Frigo also got caught with it this year)
Actovegen is mixed with insulin which was also dumped at the same time USP statement that this was for a diabetic in USP even though there was enough to empty packets to last one person for a year.
Add to this six positive tests for EPO which there as been enough said
He definitely lied that they were using Actovegen for road rash there can be no doubt about that. if he was using this stuff why not EPO
forget the EPO i would like to see you explain Actovegen
Corticosteroids are the prescribed treatment for saddle sores. If you believe differently, you are simply wrong.
Another fact about Actovegin is that it was not a prohibited substance when that alleged event occured. So... even if Lance used it every single day of the Tour, he did not cheat.
That's like saying that if creatine becomes a banned substance next year, that I should be harrassed for using it for the last four years. Using one legal substance to enhance your performance does not mean that you also used other, illegal substances.
Give me a break. What's next??? "Oooooh... Lance used Gatorade to enhance his performance. He's a lousy cheater!"
Lance lucky escapes
Tested positive for coticosteroids statement it was used it for saddle sore
Corticosteriod thins the skin and would not be any good for saddle sores.
USP also got caught dumping empty packets of Actovegen (Calfs blood) which is a performance enhancing drug which there is no test for.
USP statement that is was used for road rash anybody who actually believes this must me really stupid.
Actovegen was also not approved for use on humans.they (Frigo also got caught with it this year)
Actovegen is mixed with insulin which was also dumped at the same time USP statement that this was for a diabetic in USP even though there was enough to empty packets to last one person for a year.
Add to this six positive tests for EPO which there as been enough said
He definitely lied that they were using Actovegen for road rash there can be no doubt about that. if he was using this stuff why not EPO
forget the EPO i would like to see you explain Actovegen
Corticosteroids are the prescribed treatment for saddle sores. If you believe differently, you are simply wrong.
Another fact about Actovegin is that it was not a prohibited substance when that alleged event occured. So... even if Lance used it every single day of the Tour, he did not cheat.
That's like saying that if creatine becomes a banned substance next year, that I should be harrassed for using it for the last four years. Using one legal substance to enhance your performance does not mean that you also used other, illegal substances.
Give me a break. What's next??? "Oooooh... Lance used Gatorade to enhance his performance. He's a lousy cheater!"
doctorSpoc
09-12-05, 02:42 PM
so i googled actovegen (also actovigen) and all I get is cycling forums talking about this substance. So i decided to take my search to a more scholarly route and I looked it up on my University's online journal catalog (Proquest). I received no matches for this word at all. Wouldn't you think there would be atleast one article about it somewhere? Listen I'll be pissed if it turns out Lance has lied this whole time but it is very feasible that this could be a witch hunt. Innocent until proven guilty. Corticosteriods not good for saddle sores? I don't know, but I do know that steriods stop the inflammation response which is basically what a saddle sore is, an inflammation response. Actovigen? until I see one scholarly article saying what it is, I will think of it as a substance made up by the press. You can find anything on google, why can't I find a thing on actovigen unless it is some cycling forum discussing it's use?
hmmmm... i Google it and got 57,000 hits with a few discussion groups but the vast majority not... you must be some other Google??? lots of Russian and German links but you can use Google to do the translation for you.
here are some links since your google doesn't seem to be working too well... how about from the manufacturer Nycomed, they seem to think it works pretty good...
http://www.nycomed.com.cn/english/wmdcp/awz/biaoti.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=437665&dopt=Abstract
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/news/2001/02/14/ioc_actovegin_ap/
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/em_swift/news/2000/12/14/swift_viewpoint/
i'm not going to go thought the 57,000 for you but maybe you need to get you computer checked out... and maybe change schools... 'cause it sounds like that library must suck...REALLY badly!!
hmmmm... i Google it and got 57,000 hits with a few discussion groups but the vast majority not... you must be some other Google??? lots of Russian and German links but you can use Google to do the translation for you.
here are some links since your google doesn't seem to be working too well... how about from the manufacturer Nycomed, they seem to think it works pretty good...
http://www.nycomed.com.cn/english/wmdcp/awz/biaoti.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=437665&dopt=Abstract
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/news/2001/02/14/ioc_actovegin_ap/
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/em_swift/news/2000/12/14/swift_viewpoint/
i'm not going to go thought the 57,000 for you but maybe you need to get you computer checked out... and maybe change schools... 'cause it sounds like that library must suck...REALLY badly!!
doctorSpoc
09-12-05, 03:11 PM
I can see that doghair has run out of valid responses, so I'll reply to this one instead.
Corticosteroids are the prescribed treatment for saddle sores. If you believe differently, you are simply wrong.
Another fact about Actovegin is that it was not a prohibited substance when that alleged event occured. So... even if Lance used it every single day of the Tour, he did not cheat.
That's like saying that if creatine becomes a banned substance next year, that I should be harrassed for using it for the last four years. Using one legal substance to enhance your performance does not mean that you also used other, illegal substances.
Give me a break. What's next??? "Oooooh... Lance used Gatorade to enhance his performance. He's a lousy cheater!"
a common misconception... the UCI, WADA and IOC ban classes of substances and methods outright (i.e. Anabolic Steroids, or blood doping methods) some substances explcitly yes, but if you get caught using some new designer steriod you will be found guilty... Actovegin was explicitly banned because it was decided it fell into the blood doping category that already existed in the list of banned methods (and substances)... so you are wrong, Lance COULD have been sanctioned if he admitted that he had used it for anything other than the bogus reasons US Postal gave because he would have been seen to be employing a blood doping method...
Actovegin, or any substance for that matter doesn't need to be explicitly on the list for it to be banned as long as it falls into one of the categories already there. the thing that helps cheats is that usually if it's not on the list it's not being looked for so usually you are safe to use it.
Corticosteroids are the prescribed treatment for saddle sores. If you believe differently, you are simply wrong.
Another fact about Actovegin is that it was not a prohibited substance when that alleged event occured. So... even if Lance used it every single day of the Tour, he did not cheat.
That's like saying that if creatine becomes a banned substance next year, that I should be harrassed for using it for the last four years. Using one legal substance to enhance your performance does not mean that you also used other, illegal substances.
Give me a break. What's next??? "Oooooh... Lance used Gatorade to enhance his performance. He's a lousy cheater!"
a common misconception... the UCI, WADA and IOC ban classes of substances and methods outright (i.e. Anabolic Steroids, or blood doping methods) some substances explcitly yes, but if you get caught using some new designer steriod you will be found guilty... Actovegin was explicitly banned because it was decided it fell into the blood doping category that already existed in the list of banned methods (and substances)... so you are wrong, Lance COULD have been sanctioned if he admitted that he had used it for anything other than the bogus reasons US Postal gave because he would have been seen to be employing a blood doping method...
Actovegin, or any substance for that matter doesn't need to be explicitly on the list for it to be banned as long as it falls into one of the categories already there. the thing that helps cheats is that usually if it's not on the list it's not being looked for so usually you are safe to use it.
doctorSpoc
09-12-05, 03:34 PM
a clip from a cyclingnew.com article of the time... http://au.cyclingnews.com/results/2000/dec00/dec14news.shtml
IOC: Actovegin covered by blood doping ban
No word yet from UCI
The IOC has confirmed that Actovegin, is covered by its rules against blood-boosting products and techniques. In a statement on Tuesday the head of the IOC medical commission Alexandre de Merode said, "I think we need to be very precise that the position of the medical commission is that this is a banned substance. There may have been a bit of hesitation a few months ago. This hesitation no longer exists today.''
Cyclingnews.com has requested clarification from the UCI on the cycling body's position on Actovegin, but no response has been received as yet.
Actovegin is made from calves' blood and has been demonstrated in some studies to improve oxygen delivery to the brain. "It's advertised as enhancing the flow of oxygen to the brain,'' IOC medical director Patrick Schamasch said. "And if it brings oxygen to the brain, it can also bring oxygen to the other parts of the body."
De Merode added that some teams brought Actovegin to the Sydney Olympics with the approval of Australian customs which did not consider the product illegal. It was not specifically banned at the time.
IOC: Actovegin covered by blood doping ban
No word yet from UCI
The IOC has confirmed that Actovegin, is covered by its rules against blood-boosting products and techniques. In a statement on Tuesday the head of the IOC medical commission Alexandre de Merode said, "I think we need to be very precise that the position of the medical commission is that this is a banned substance. There may have been a bit of hesitation a few months ago. This hesitation no longer exists today.''
Cyclingnews.com has requested clarification from the UCI on the cycling body's position on Actovegin, but no response has been received as yet.
Actovegin is made from calves' blood and has been demonstrated in some studies to improve oxygen delivery to the brain. "It's advertised as enhancing the flow of oxygen to the brain,'' IOC medical director Patrick Schamasch said. "And if it brings oxygen to the brain, it can also bring oxygen to the other parts of the body."
De Merode added that some teams brought Actovegin to the Sydney Olympics with the approval of Australian customs which did not consider the product illegal. It was not specifically banned at the time.
DocRay
09-12-05, 03:40 PM
btw -- do canadian sheep have better wool? i know it can get nippy up there.
I wasn't aware sheep had passports.
Forget the journal links (you'll need a university ISP), but it sounds like facts don't get in the way of your opinions anyway.
I wasn't aware sheep had passports.
Forget the journal links (you'll need a university ISP), but it sounds like facts don't get in the way of your opinions anyway.
chrisvu05
09-12-05, 04:09 PM
hmmmm... i Google it and got 57,000 hits with a few discussion groups but the vast majority not... you must be some other Google??? lots of Russian and German links but you can use Google to do the translation for you.
here are some links since your google doesn't seem to be working too well... how about from the manufacturer Nycomed, they seem to think it works pretty good...
http://www.nycomed.com.cn/english/wmdcp/awz/biaoti.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=437665&dopt=Abstract
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/news/2001/02/14/ioc_actovegin_ap/
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/em_swift/news/2000/12/14/swift_viewpoint/
i'm not going to go thought the 57,000 for you but maybe you need to get you computer checked out... and maybe change schools... 'cause it sounds like that library must suck...REALLY badly!!
no need to be an a$$, the spelling of actovegin was listed in the original post that I read as (actovegen). Try typing that into google, tell me what you get? like 15 results. just simply a case of misspelling. chill out. as far as my school library sucking, I did the search through proquest which is a well known database used to search articles nationwide. look up actovegin there and click the tab for "scholary journals" only to take out newspapers and most magazines (which are not considered good resources), and you get one article that discusses foot ulcers in diabetes.
here are some links since your google doesn't seem to be working too well... how about from the manufacturer Nycomed, they seem to think it works pretty good...
http://www.nycomed.com.cn/english/wmdcp/awz/biaoti.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=437665&dopt=Abstract
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/news/2001/02/14/ioc_actovegin_ap/
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/em_swift/news/2000/12/14/swift_viewpoint/
i'm not going to go thought the 57,000 for you but maybe you need to get you computer checked out... and maybe change schools... 'cause it sounds like that library must suck...REALLY badly!!
no need to be an a$$, the spelling of actovegin was listed in the original post that I read as (actovegen). Try typing that into google, tell me what you get? like 15 results. just simply a case of misspelling. chill out. as far as my school library sucking, I did the search through proquest which is a well known database used to search articles nationwide. look up actovegin there and click the tab for "scholary journals" only to take out newspapers and most magazines (which are not considered good resources), and you get one article that discusses foot ulcers in diabetes.
doctorSpoc
09-12-05, 04:22 PM
no need to be an a$$, the spelling of actovegin was listed in the original post that I read as (actovegen). Try typing that into google, tell me what you get? like 15 results. just simply a case of misspelling. chill out.
an honest mistake but, 'cmon if you do Google "Actovegen" (wrong spelling) the first thing on the page is a link that says... "Did you mean: actovigen"... press that link and you get 57,000 hits... so what, you didn't think to press that link?? i don't mean to bust your ba**s, but 'cmon you've got to try a little harder than that.
an honest mistake but, 'cmon if you do Google "Actovegen" (wrong spelling) the first thing on the page is a link that says... "Did you mean: actovigen"... press that link and you get 57,000 hits... so what, you didn't think to press that link?? i don't mean to bust your ba**s, but 'cmon you've got to try a little harder than that.
chrisvu05
09-12-05, 04:31 PM
an honest mistake but, 'cmon if you do Google "Actovegen" (wrong spelling) the first thing on the page is a link that says... "Did you mean: actovigen"... press that link and you get 57,000 hits... so what, you didn't think to press that link?? i don't mean to bust your ba**s, but 'cmon you've got to try a little harder than that.
no...i did click that link if you look at my original post, google gave actovigen as the correct spelling and that returns 29 results, the way you spelled it to get 57,000 results was actovegin so the i and the e were rearranged. It was an honest mistake as I had no idea how to spell it.
no...i did click that link if you look at my original post, google gave actovigen as the correct spelling and that returns 29 results, the way you spelled it to get 57,000 results was actovegin so the i and the e were rearranged. It was an honest mistake as I had no idea how to spell it.