Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Professional Cycling For the Fans
Reload this Page >

How do you feel about the Alberto Contador decision?

Notices
Professional Cycling For the Fans Follow the Tour de France,the Giro de Italia, the Spring Classics, or other professional cycling races? Here's your home...
View Poll Results: Contador...guilty or innocent?
He's innocent
14
8.97%
He could be innocent but HE hasn't proven it
17
10.90%
He's probably guilty but WADA/UCI/whoever has't proven it
35
22.44%
He's guilty as sin
83
53.21%
Spaniards have no balls but Dubbayoo is one cool dude
7
4.49%
Voters: 156. You may not vote on this poll

How do you feel about the Alberto Contador decision?

Old 02-15-11, 08:23 PM
  #1  
Dubbayoo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Dubbayoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 7,681

Bikes: Pedal Force QS3

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
How do you feel about the Alberto Contador decision?

There should be an answer for everyone. Is an innocent man being persecuted or is a guilty man going free?
Dubbayoo is offline  
Old 02-15-11, 09:23 PM
  #2  
surgeonstone
Senior Member
 
surgeonstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: South Bend IN
Posts: 11,212

Bikes: 1976 FRESCHI, 2004 Crumpton.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 918 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
I think it's great, I really worried that maybe he doped. The Spanish Federation has now removed that doubt,I feel so much better knowing that there are really clean atheletes at the top. It's a good thing .
surgeonstone is offline  
Old 02-15-11, 09:25 PM
  #3  
johnny99
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,877
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
I do not know if he is guilty or not. I have not seen enough evidence to prove that he is guilty, so I say innocent until proven guilty.

I read a poll in one of the English cycling magazines saying that the vast majority of English-speaking cycling fans though he was guilty. But the vast majority of non-English-speaking cycling fans thought he was being persecuted by the English press. I wonder what that means.
johnny99 is offline  
Old 02-15-11, 10:30 PM
  #4  
Talldog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 463

Bikes: Several

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by johnny99 View Post
I do not know if he is guilty or not. I have not seen enough evidence to prove that he is guilty, so I say innocent until proven guilty.

I
Uhh ... the evidence would be testing positive for a zero tolerance substance. He was not able to to show it came from contaminated Spanish steak (surprise, surprise) so the escape clause cannot apply. Therefore, under current rules that apply to everyone, he is guilty.
Talldog is offline  
Old 02-15-11, 10:31 PM
  #5  
EdmontonIrish
Member
 
EdmontonIrish's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sherwood Park, AB, Canada
Posts: 25

Bikes: Kona Dew FS 2007

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
From what I've read, the Spanish just want him to ride and will make up procedures and rules to make sure that happens.
EdmontonIrish is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 12:08 AM
  #6  
Dubbayoo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Dubbayoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 7,681

Bikes: Pedal Force QS3

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I love this one:

This is cycling's version of the OJ Simpson verdict. Everyone expected a conviction, suddenly Contador’s in the clear.
The Inner Ring blog https://inrng.com/
Dubbayoo is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 01:44 AM
  #7  
rogwilco
snob
 
rogwilco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,178
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by johnny99 View Post
I read a poll in one of the English cycling magazines saying that the vast majority of English-speaking cycling fans though he was guilty. But the vast majority of non-English-speaking cycling fans thought he was being persecuted by the English press. I wonder what that means.
Nonsense. There's no way a majority of Germans and French believe he's innocent, and I really doubt Italians do either.
rogwilco is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 07:53 AM
  #8  
gear
Senior Member
 
gear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North shore of Mass.
Posts: 2,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
I personally think he cheated, I don't think he gained anything (except ridicule) by how he went about cheating (if the test showed higher levels of a drug, I would feel he had gained an advantage). I am OK with whatever the UCI decides to do in this case.
gear is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 08:28 AM
  #9  
infinitemass
Member
 
infinitemass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 37

Bikes: Trek 2100, Gavin Acele

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Since doping is ok as long as you eat it instead of inject it, Powerbar should come out with one for the Pro`s. They can call it "Clenbuter-bars" They`d make a fortune.
infinitemass is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 10:03 AM
  #10  
DXchulo
Upgrading my engine
 
DXchulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Alamogordo
Posts: 6,208
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Nobody wins in this whole mess and everybody comes away looking bad.

He could be innocent, but he hasn't proven it. When you look at the rules, this is all that really matters. There is no threshold for clenbuterol, so having even a tiny spec in his system is against the rules and grounds for suspension. The only way out of that suspension is to show that he actually did eat tainted meat. That has been done before, but it requires a lot of evidence (a hair sample, positive teammates, a known problem of tainted meat in the area, etc.). Given the history of the sport and how little evidence he has, I don't think tainted meat is the most likely explanation, but it is possible.

Those are the rules. The problem is, if you take away your hatred for Contador, they don't seem entirely fair. In theory, a guy could eat tainted meat, test positive for a tiny amount of clenbuterol that probably did nothing to improve his performance, and have no way to prove his innocence. How many of us can track down the origins of every piece of meat we eat? What if a lot of time passes between when we are notified of our positive, giving us little to no chance of testing our teammates? What if we shave all of our body hair and can't provide a hair sample? Basically we could be innocent, get busted, and have no way to prove our innocence. It makes you think that maybe there should be a threshold for clenbuterol. Or at least there should be some other evidence to go along with a clenbuterol positive, be that an irregular plasticizer finding when that test is ready for prime time, irregular blood values, etc. Perhaps this makes it easier for guys to cheat the system, but when a guy gets busted there should be an airtight case against him so these stupid excuses don't continue to fly.

Imagine if they had kept the plasticizer test quiet, ironed out all the kinks, and then busted a whole bunch of guys all at once. Wouldn't that have done more to deter doping than this whole mess has done?
DXchulo is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 10:09 AM
  #11  
seymourson
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29

Bikes: 2k Schwinn Peloton, Curtlo Adv. Mountaineer

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I honestly haven't been following this all that closely so maybe this has been done...Here in the US there are controls in place that allow the USDA to trace food back to the source. In this case, they could trace this beef right back to the cow and even what parcel of land, or pen, it was raised. They could find out exactly what the diet of the animal was and could test other animals that were raised at the same farm. It's not going to be that only one cow that was tainted. If anything, the whole slaughter would have tested positive. So, forgive me for not following more closely, but how closely was this investigated? Were any actions taken to trace the contaminated beef back to it's origin? And if so what was the finding. That right there would be enough for me, whatever the finding was.
seymourson is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 02:34 PM
  #12  
Sea Green Sky
Senior Member
 
Sea Green Sky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: At the foot of Angeles National
Posts: 337

Bikes: PedalForce CG1 (the race/century bike), PedalForce RS (the trainer), Eighth Inch SS (the fixie), Flyte SRS-3 (the beater), Caloi Strada Pro (the commuter), Oddball Alu MTB (the tank), Trek 850 (the MTB SS)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Talldog View Post
Uhh ... the evidence would be testing positive for a zero tolerance substance. He was not able to to show it came from contaminated Spanish steak (surprise, surprise) so the escape clause cannot apply. Therefore, under current rules that apply to everyone, he is guilty.
And just how exactly is someone supposed to prove or disprove contamination of food they ate days ago? How do you propose he "show it came from contaminated Spanish steak"?

Think about the last time you had food poisoning. Assume all of the items during a meal were consumed completely. You have no practical way to positively determine several days later that it was the spare ribs and not the chicken.
Sea Green Sky is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 02:38 PM
  #13  
JoelS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Near Sacramento
Posts: 4,886
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
It's not over yet. I'm expecting there will be an appeal. At least, I'm hoping there will.
__________________
-------

Some sort of pithy irrelevant one-liner should go here.
JoelS is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 02:39 PM
  #14  
JoelS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Near Sacramento
Posts: 4,886
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sea Green Sky View Post
And just how exactly is someone supposed to prove or disprove contamination of food they ate days ago? How do you propose he "show it came from contaminated Spanish steak"?

Think about the last time you had food poisoning. Assume all of the items during a meal were consumed completely. You have no practical way to positively determine several days later that it was the spare ribs and not the chicken.
Hope that the butcher still has steaks from the same cow, and if so, buy them for testing. Otherwise, SOL.
__________________
-------

Some sort of pithy irrelevant one-liner should go here.
JoelS is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 03:10 PM
  #15  
Dubbayoo
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Dubbayoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 7,681

Bikes: Pedal Force QS3

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sea Green Sky View Post
And just how exactly is someone supposed to prove or disprove contamination of food they ate days ago? How do you propose he "show it came from contaminated Spanish steak"?

Think about the last time you had food poisoning. Assume all of the items during a meal were consumed completely. You have no practical way to positively determine several days later that it was the spare ribs and not the chicken.
He's the one to claim it came from beef...the onus is on him to prove that's the case. He even came up with a receipt for the steak itself so he knows where it came from. Otherwise why not say aliens took him away to schmeplicate (insert some clenbuterol) in exchange for Bud Light.
Dubbayoo is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 04:27 PM
  #16  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 29,799

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 336 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12924 Post(s)
Liked 2,427 Times in 1,287 Posts
Originally Posted by Sea Green Sky View Post
And just how exactly is someone supposed to prove or disprove contamination of food they ate days ago? How do you propose he "show it came from contaminated Spanish steak"?

Think about the last time you had food poisoning. Assume all of the items during a meal were consumed completely. You have no practical way to positively determine several days later that it was the spare ribs and not the chicken.
He claims that it came from tainted meat - why was the meat tainted? Under this scenario, it would be so that the cows would be big and provide more meat, of course. Did the farmer only juice up one cow? No, that's implausible, so where are the rest of the cows? At either end of the farming spectrum, there's a trail back from the restaurant, whether the meat was sourced from an industrial farmer or from a boutique ranch. Claiming that it was the meat, while not being able to source similarly contaminated meat through the supply chain, is so unlikely that it smacks of dishonesty.
WhyFi is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 06:20 PM
  #17  
Waxbytes
Senior Member
 
Waxbytes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I don't think the plasticizer test will ever be a "smoking gun" type of test like a positive dope test is. If you are dehydrated and you get saline drip you will show plasticziers from the IV. Salt water is not a banned substance.

The beef excuse is just speculation at most.
Waxbytes is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 07:18 PM
  #18  
DXchulo
Upgrading my engine
 
DXchulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Alamogordo
Posts: 6,208
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 122 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Waxbytes View Post
I don't think the plasticizer test will ever be a "smoking gun" type of test like a positive dope test is. If you are dehydrated and you get saline drip you will show plasticziers from the IV. Salt water is not a banned substance.
IVs aren't legal.

Intravenous infusions are prohibited except for those legitimately received in the course of hospital admissions or clinical investigations.
https://www.uci.ch/includes/asp/getTa...ILE&id=MzQxNzA (PDF file)
DXchulo is offline  
Old 02-16-11, 11:39 PM
  #19  
Talldog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 463

Bikes: Several

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sea Green Sky View Post
And just how exactly is someone supposed to prove or disprove contamination of food they ate days ago? How do you propose he "show it came from contaminated Spanish steak"?

Think about the last time you had food poisoning. Assume all of the items during a meal were consumed completely. You have no practical way to positively determine several days later that it was the spare ribs and not the chicken.
Let me see .... he could show systemic contamination of Spanish beef by citing tests within the industry. Oops, problem with that is that there isn't any systemic contamination as shown by tests. Or he could demonstrate that others in his group tested positive after eating the same beef. Oops, no one else allegedly ate any of the phantom steak. Or, he could provide a hair sample to be tested. A clean test would rule out systematic long term doping. Oops, he didn't want to do that either. In other words, he did not offer up any defense or proof (other than whining "I didn't do it") as required under the applicable WADA exemption clause. Therefore a guilty verdict should have been inevitable, and very necessary. The plasticiser test results, along with his dubious feats of superhuman climbing feats in the past, while not direct evidence, could certainly be viewed as corroboratory. He also chose not to address either of those issues whenever questioned about them.
Talldog is offline  
Old 02-17-11, 12:11 AM
  #20  
Sea Green Sky
Senior Member
 
Sea Green Sky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: At the foot of Angeles National
Posts: 337

Bikes: PedalForce CG1 (the race/century bike), PedalForce RS (the trainer), Eighth Inch SS (the fixie), Flyte SRS-3 (the beater), Caloi Strada Pro (the commuter), Oddball Alu MTB (the tank), Trek 850 (the MTB SS)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Talldog View Post
Let me see .... he could show systemic contamination of Spanish beef by citing tests within the industry. Oops, problem with that is that there isn't any systemic contamination as shown by tests. Or he could demonstrate that others in his group tested positive after eating the same beef. Oops, no one else allegedly ate any of the phantom steak. Or, he could provide a hair sample to be tested. A clean test would rule out systematic long term doping. Oops, he didn't want to do that either. In other words, he did not offer up any defense or proof (other than whining "I didn't do it") as required under the applicable WADA exemption clause. Therefore a guilty verdict should have been inevitable, and very necessary. The plasticiser test results, along with his dubious feats of superhuman climbing feats in the past, while not direct evidence, could certainly be viewed as corroboratory. He also chose not to address either of those issues whenever questioned about them.
1. Spain, like many EU countries, also imports beef from South America (primarily Argentina and Brazil) as well as Ireland. The steaks that were consumed by the team were not necessarily from a domestic heard.

2. Proportionately a very small number of cattle are tested for clenbuterol in most EU countries including Spain.

3. Low levels of clenbuterol in beef would likely go undetected. This is per several reports (google it).

4. To my knowledge no one else on his team was tested at the same time.

I've worked in the medical and medical research industries for almost 20 years. I have a very difficult time believing that the extremely small amount found in his system could likely be anything other than incidental contact.

Seems to me quite a few here simply want him to be guilty despite any sort of rational analysis.

Last edited by Sea Green Sky; 02-17-11 at 12:15 AM. Reason: clarification and spelling
Sea Green Sky is offline  
Old 02-17-11, 01:28 AM
  #21  
rogwilco
snob
 
rogwilco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,178
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Sea Green Sky View Post
And just how exactly is someone supposed to prove or disprove contamination of food they ate days ago? How do you propose he "show it came from contaminated Spanish steak"?

Think about the last time you had food poisoning. Assume all of the items during a meal were consumed completely. You have no practical way to positively determine several days later that it was the spare ribs and not the chicken.
So what? To quote Lance Armstrong, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". Contador is the one making the claim. And while it may be difficult for someone in his position to prove the Clenbuterol came from a steak, it's an impossibility for the prosecutors to prove it didn't.

To me that sounds like an "my evil twin did it" defense.

Originally Posted by Sea Green Sky View Post
2. Proportionately a very small number of cattle are tested for clenbuterol in most EU countries including Spain.
That argument is incorrect imo. Yes, only a small percentage of beef that gets into circulation is tested, but a lot of cows are slaughtered every day in the EU, so statistically if there is a problem with contamination of a certain substance or disease it would show up in the tests anyway.
rogwilco is offline  
Old 02-17-11, 06:26 AM
  #22  
jarhead#42
Senior Member
 
jarhead#42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 830
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
There are lots of hateful posts.Posts against a persons country of origin.One thing that is a fact.That he has been the best cyclist for three years now.That the bovine industry is tested less then cyclists.And if he did boost his red blood cell count.They would have been able to test him for that as well.There are as well lots of educational posts.To understand the entire picture.One needs to study the Bovine industry.A industry so full of lack of testing.That I stopped eating beef over a decade ago.I can always tell a person who eats beef.They look older then they are and usually have many vascular issues.
I know for a fact.That after mad cow was discovered.That the bovine industry found ways to let infected cows into the food chain.It is my belief that I would trust a pro cyclist any day over the bovine industry.That is one topic that has been absent in these discussions.Despite its involvement is this issue.
jarhead#42 is offline  
Old 02-17-11, 07:14 AM
  #23  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 29,799

Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo

Mentioned: 336 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12924 Post(s)
Liked 2,427 Times in 1,287 Posts
Originally Posted by jarhead#42 View Post
There are lots of hateful posts.Posts against a persons country of origin.One thing that is a fact.That he has been the best cyclist for three years now.That the bovine industry is tested less then cyclists.And if he did boost his red blood cell count.They would have been able to test him for that as well.There are as well lots of educational posts.To understand the entire picture.One needs to study the Bovine industry.A industry so full of lack of testing.That I stopped eating beef over a decade ago.I can always tell a person who eats beef.They look older then they are and usually have many vascular issues.
I know for a fact.That after mad cow was discovered.That the bovine industry found ways to let infected cows into the food chain.It is my belief that I would trust a pro cyclist any day over the bovine industry.That is one topic that has been absent in these discussions.Despite its involvement is this issue.
No, to understand what's pertinent, one needs to understand two things: 1) a banned substance was detected during a screening. 2) sufficient evidence supporting unintentional ingestion has not been provided.

(PS - is there something wrong with putting a space between sentences?)
WhyFi is offline  
Old 02-17-11, 08:09 AM
  #24  
islandboy
touring roadie
 
islandboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Posts: 146

Bikes: road & mtn

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Even Armstrong NEVER tested positive for doping.
islandboy is offline  
Old 02-17-11, 08:10 AM
  #25  
Talldog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 463

Bikes: Several

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sea Green Sky View Post
1. Spain, like many EU countries, also imports beef from South America (primarily Argentina and Brazil) as well as Ireland. The steaks that were consumed by the team were not necessarily from a domestic heard.

2. Proportionately a very small number of cattle are tested for clenbuterol in most EU countries including Spain.

3. Low levels of clenbuterol in beef would likely go undetected. This is per several reports (google it).

4. To my knowledge no one else on his team was tested at the same time.

I've worked in the medical and medical research industries for almost 20 years. I have a very difficult time believing that the extremely small amount found in his system could likely be anything other than incidental contact.

Seems to me quite a few here simply want him to be guilty despite any sort of rational analysis.
LOL, yes it is quite irrational for people to think he should be sanctioned for breaking the doping rules. Give me a break. It is your arguments that lack rationality. His tainted beef claim was all inuendo and based on the power of suggestion, with no empirical evidence attached to it whatsover. But according to your logic, everyone should just say, "gee, sorry Alberto, we believe you." Hell, who even needs drug labs. Just ask the athlete if they think it came from beef (substitute whatever you want here). If they reply in the affirmative then all is well.

Hey, why would farmers want such low levels of clenbuterol in their cows. The extremely small amount wouldn't have any effect, right. Maybe the cows were eating each other too, LOL.
Talldog is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.