Giro 2007 doping ? Not enough testosterone for Di Luca, etc...

On Jun 26, 12:15 am, Keith wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:17:20 -0700, wrote:
On Jun 25, 1:31 pm, Jason Spaceman
wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:46:17 +0200, Keith wrote:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...jun25news&from...

Fromhttp://www.cyclingpost.com/giro/article_004940.shtml

Where in either story does it say that the hormone in question is
testosterone?

there you go smartass : "decreased levels of testosterone"

Smartass, perhaps, but at least I can read. This is about the 2007
Giro, and "decreased levels of testosterone" refers to "a study of
riders in the 1999 Vuelta a España"

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 16:00:34 -0700, wrote:

On Jun 26, 12:15 am, Keith wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:17:20 -0700, wrote:
On Jun 25, 1:31 pm, Jason Spaceman
wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:46:17 +0200, Keith wrote:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...jun25news&from...

Fromhttp://www.cyclingpost.com/giro/article_004940.shtml

Where in either story does it say that the hormone in question is
testosterone?

there you go smartass : "decreased levels of testosterone"

Smartass, perhaps, but at least I can read. This is about the 2007
Giro, and "decreased levels of testosterone" refers to "a study of
riders in the 1999 Vuelta a España"

ouch...so you think the guy who wrote that is a total idiot and wrote
a random comment at the end of his article...Besides can you fill us
in on other male hormones you know of ? I would suggest you get off
the dope yourself.

In article
,
Jason Spaceman
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:46:17 +0200, Keith wrote:

...for Danilo Di Luca, Eddy Mazzoleni, Gilberto Simoni and Riccardo
Riccò...not enough testosterone apparently, looks like they learnt the
Landis lesson well, or maybe too well...my guess is that the carbon
isotope is coming their way ! They should really do it systematically,
that would make the use of masking agents useless, a waste of time for
all involved !

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...5news&from=rss


From http://www.cyclingpost.com/giro/article_004940.shtml

----------------------------
The test results showed extremely low natural hormone values - similar
to those of children. This indicates that the riders may have used
products to lower their hormone level and thereby mask the possible
use of doping.
-----------------------------





Maybe they haven't hit puberty yet? ;-)

That answers the question `Who is behind all the aliases here?'

--
Michael Press

In article
,
Keith wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 16:00:34 -0700, wrote:

On Jun 26, 12:15 am, Keith wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:17:20 -0700, wrote:
On Jun 25, 1:31 pm, Jason Spaceman
wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:46:17 +0200, Keith wrote:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...jun25news&from...

Fromhttp://www.cyclingpost.com/giro/article_004940.shtml

Where in either story does it say that the hormone in question is
testosterone?

there you go smartass : "decreased levels of testosterone"

Smartass, perhaps, but at least I can read. This is about the 2007
Giro, and "decreased levels of testosterone" refers to "a study of
riders in the 1999 Vuelta a España"

ouch...so you think the guy who wrote that is a total idiot and wrote
a random comment at the end of his article...Besides can you fill us
in on other male hormones you know of ? I would suggest you get off
the dope yourself.

I think people who write popular journal articles are
masters of misleading the reader. Apparently, you do
not need any supplemental dope.

--
Michael Press

Seven years ago (18 july 1999) one of us wrote:
"... riders who never use doping are very rare, and they cannot be found
among the top riders. I'm convinced the estimate of 90 % is on the rather
conservative side. That's of course the reason why there are so much
innuendo's about Armstrong right now. Riders simply don't believe that one
of them can be the best without the use of performance enhancing drugs. In
their view it might have been possible in the times of amphitamine,
cortisone, etc., but not in the times of EPO, PFC, growth hormones, etc.
In
the pro cycling world everybody is assumed to be guilty, until he he is
proved to be innocent. Which is a very realistic view."
I hope he's burning with shame!

Benjo


The problem with that is how do you prove that you are innocent? How many
times have we heard the statement "I have never failed a test" ?

I never took any performance enhancing substances while competing as a Cat2.
I cannot prove it, except by average results.

On Jun 26, 1:55 am, Keith wrote:

ouch...so you think the guy who wrote that is a total idiot and wrote
a random comment at the end of his article...Besides can you fill us
in on other male hormones you know of ? I would suggest you get off
the dope yourself.

Hmmm. How about epitestosterone? Perhaps you can think of a recent
case where someone's epitestosterone was abnormally low after a key
stage, and this triggered a "B" test.

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:10:12 -0700, wrote:

On Jun 26, 1:55 am, Keith wrote:

ouch...so you think the guy who wrote that is a total idiot and wrote
a random comment at the end of his article...Besides can you fill us
in on other male hormones you know of ? I would suggest you get off
the dope yourself.

Hmmm. How about epitestosterone? Perhaps you can think of a recent
case where someone's epitestosterone was abnormally low after a key
stage, and this triggered a "B" test.

No, what triggered the B test, was the abnormal ratio 4 of
testo/epitesto

On Jun 26, 11:54 am, Keith wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:10:12 -0700, wrote:
On Jun 26, 1:55 am, Keith wrote:

ouch...so you think the guy who wrote that is a total idiot and wrote
a random comment at the end of his article...Besides can you fill us
in on other male hormones you know of ? I would suggest you get off
the dope yourself.

Hmmm. How about epitestosterone? Perhaps you can think of a recent
case where someone's epitestosterone was abnormally low after a key
stage, and this triggered a "B" test.

No, what triggered the B test, was the abnormal ratio 4 of
testo/epitesto

Dumbass (and this isn't just the rbr-compliant salutation -- I really
mean it in your case),

So, you now agree that epitestosterone is another hormone. I repeat my
original question: where in either story does it say that the hormone
in question is testosterone?

On Jun 26, 6:08 am, wrote:
On Jun 26, 11:54 am, Keith wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:10:12 -0700, wrote:
On Jun 26, 1:55 am, Keith wrote:

ouch...so you think the guy who wrote that is a total idiot and wrote
a random comment at the end of his article...Besides can you fill us
in on other male hormones you know of ? I would suggest you get off
the dope yourself.

Hmmm. How about epitestosterone? Perhaps you can think of a recent
case where someone's epitestosterone was abnormally low after a key
stage, and this triggered a "B" test.

No, what triggered the B test, was the abnormal ratio 4 of
testo/epitesto

Dumbass (and this isn't just the rbr-compliant salutation -- I really
mean it in your case),

So, you now agree that epitestosterone is another hormone. I repeat my
original question: where in either story does it say that the hormone
in question is testosterone?

It's implied. Implied hormone leading to implied doping leading to
implied sanctions leading to implied clean riders leading to implied
increased sponsorship leading to implied Dick Pound worldwide rule (if
Cheney doesn't get there first with the implied terror/secrecy route).

I hope you understand the implications.

R

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 03:08:26 -0700, wrote:

On Jun 26, 11:54 am, Keith wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:10:12 -0700, wrote:
On Jun 26, 1:55 am, Keith wrote:

ouch...so you think the guy who wrote that is a total idiot and wrote
a random comment at the end of his article...Besides can you fill us
in on other male hormones you know of ? I would suggest you get off
the dope yourself.

Hmmm. How about epitestosterone? Perhaps you can think of a recent
case where someone's epitestosterone was abnormally low after a key
stage, and this triggered a "B" test.

No, what triggered the B test, was the abnormal ratio 4 of
testo/epitesto

Dumbass (and this isn't just the rbr-compliant salutation -- I really
mean it in your case),

So, you now agree that epitestosterone is another hormone. I repeat my
original question: where in either story does it say that the hormone
in question is testosterone?

You're an idiot and have wasted enough of my time, get lost.