L'équipe, a prominent French sports newspaper, published an article about the Tour de France of 99 in wich they say they have prove of Lance Armstrong having used epo. You can find an article about this on the webpage of L'équipe. www.lequipe.fr

I'm sorry that i haven't found an English source but you try to do a search for that with the key words 'Lance Armstrong' and 'epo' or 'doping'. It's almost impossible to get a good source but it was all over the news over here so i think it's safe to assume it was all over the news about everywhere.

So did he or did he not ?

As to what i think. I think he did use some form of doping but on the other hand i also think that most, if not all, of the cyclist in the peloton use something so it equals out.

<font color = lightgreen> [img]graemlins/laugh3.gif[/img] France is simply jealous because they don't have any cyclists who can equal Lance's performance.

There was a show on Discovery Health about Lance and his training. They have him sleep in a room with a nitrogen-rich atmosphere to increase the production of red blood cells; this has resulted in a dramatic increase in the effiency of his breathing--Lance gets more oxygen and muscular performance from a normal breath than we do. Strength training and muscle toning exercises don't hurt, either.

This is so typical of many people who aren't number one/the best. Rather than training harder or trying harder (or being satisfied with doing the best they can already do) they try to destroy the person who outperforms them. :rolleyes: </font>

Granted Azred. Allthough they did find epo in his urine sample and a human body just doesn't make exogenic epo by itself no matter what form of training you use.

On the other hand. Last month, a Belgian triathleet was equited from doping use because he could proof that the test isn't waterproof. In 4 of the 10 test samples that he produced, he was diagnosed as being false positive. In other words, the test said he was positive when he in actuality wasn't so there goes the validity of the acusation towards Lance. Allthough i still stick by my earlier statement.

[ 08-23-2005, 08:03 PM: Message edited by: the new JR Jansen ]

<font color = lightgreen>Oh, I agree completely--that compound doesn't just magically appear. [img]graemlins/beigesmilewinkgrin.gif[/img]

</font>

Man, Amstrong is like Ivan Drago, minus the steroids and homocidal, anti-US tendancies.

The only difference between Armstrong and 90% of all other atheletes is that Lance got caught.

Whether he did or not, he's still a damn good athelete and deserves his accolades.

Personally, I think it's all hogwash.

Top lab official questions L'Equipe conclusions
The director of Canada's top anti-doping laboratory on Tuesday said she had "serious concerns" over doping allegations raised in a four-page story in the French sports daily L'Equipe.

Doctor Christiane Ayotte, director of the Doping Control Laboratory at Montreal's Institut National de la Recherché Scientifique, said that the L'Equipe story, outlining charges that seven-time Tour de France winner had used EPO at the 1999 edition of the race, raised several important scientific and ethical questions, beginning with the assertion that France's anti-doping lab had tested frozen urine samples five years after the fact.

"We are extremely surprised that urine samples could have been tested in 2004 and have revealed the presence of EPO," Ayotte said in an interview with VeloNews on Tuesday. "EPO - in its natural state or the synthesized version - is not stable in urine, even if stored at minus 20 degrees."

Scientists at the French national doping laboratory at Châtenay-Malabry developed the urine test in 2000 as a means of combating EPO use among endurance athletes. The test measures the electrical charge of isoforms released by the body. Isoforms resulting from naturally occurring erythropoietin have a distinctly different pattern of electrical charges than do those that result from the use of artificially produced erythropoietin.

Ayotte, director of the World Anti-Doping Agency-certified lab closest to WADA headquarters in Montreal, questioned the assertion of Doctor Jacques de Ceaurriz, director of the Châtenay-Malabry lab, who said that his method for detection of EPO is "absolutely reliable," even if the sample is five years old.

"One of two things happens," De Ceaurriz said. "Either EPO, which is a protein, degrades as time passes and becomes undetectable. In that case we have a negative test result or, as in this case, the EPO persists as it is. We have therefore no doubt about the validity of our results."

Ayotte, who has not had the opportunity to speak with De Ceaurriz since publication of the L'Equipe story, said that there would have been no logical reason for the lab to have held on to the samples without testing them for as long as it has.

"The lab in Paris, which originally developed the test, would have - should have - retested these samples in 2000 or 2001, in order to develop and validate their methods at the time," she said. "My interpretation is that retesting itself must have been conducted in 2000 or in 2001, but the results were reviewed using the new mathematical model that is now being developed in Paris."

Ayotte explained that as part of WADA's efforts to "harmonize" testing protocols among anti-doping laboratories worldwide, the Paris lab had created the model to allow the application of "qualitative rather than quantitative" standards when interpreting test results.

"That has to be the only explanation, because otherwise, I've been a liar all these years," Ayotte said. "I have been instructing everyone at all of the organizations not to expect to reproduce an EPO adverse finding if more that two or three months has elapsed since the sample was originally taken."

Ayotte noted that earlier standards had called for the application of a "hard-number" interpretation of results, meaning that if a certain percentage of isoforms were positively or negatively charged, a result would be deemed to be an indication of EPO use. Ayotte said research subsequent to the development of the test has suggested that testers understand the reasons behind the formation of positive and negative isoforms and "recognize the presence of distinct populations in a sample."

The development of that model, said Ayotte, may have prompted researchers at Châtenay-Malabry to go back and review existing data - which should include data from the retesting of '99 Tour samples - and apply them to the new model. Suggesting a more recent test, she said, "really makes me wonder."

"EPO is a protein hormone and it is not stable in urine, even when kept frozen," she said. "This has long had implications for any plan we've had to keep samples and specimens for long periods of time with the hope that we might, some day, retest those samples for a new substance."

Ayotte said that procedure aside, the Armstrong story in L'Equipe also raises a critical ethical question raised by the release of such data, without the possibility of follow-up tests.

"I am very worried about the circumstances about the way such information might have been leaked," Ayotte said. "We are fully allowed - and it is our duty - to investigate samples to make sure that if there is an adverse finding, it is properly reported. In this case, however, the director of the laboratory acknowledges that it cannot be deemed a doping offense because 1) the athlete has retired and 2) he is placed in a situation where there is now way to have the sample re-tested or verified."

"It seems to me," Ayotte continued, "that this whole thing is breach of the WADA code. We are supposed to work confidentially until such time that we can confirm a result. By no means does this mean that we sweep a result under the carpet, but it has to meet a certain set of requirements."

Ayotte said that the lab itself isn't facing questions in the matter.

"It isn't the lab that has the critical bit of information - the link between the code on the sample and the name of the athlete," she noted. "We only get a code at these WADA labs. Someone else must have supplied the paper with the names and their respective codes. So, to me, this whole thing raises a number of questions. I'm worried, because I have a great deal of respect for my colleagues in Paris. I am concerned that they did not cover their backs before being dragged into a very public issue of this kind."
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8746.0.html

He dominates one race of a sport notorious for its widespread use of doping. Of course he does.

Does that mean that you suspect foul play ? That someone, purposely, aded epo in his sample ?

I don't know that a difinative answer is possible.
On October 2, 1996, Armstrong was diagnosed with testicular cancer that had metastasized, spreading to his lungs and brain.Clinical conditions that give rise to tissue hypoxia including anemia, lung disease, or cyanotic heart disease, lead to increased levels of serum EPO.A primary elevation of EPO levels can also occur in association with renal diseases such as hydronephrosis or cysts, or certain tumors, resulting in erthrocytosis.EPO (rhu-EPO). Rhu-EPO has been used successfully in a variety of clinical situations to increase production of red blood cells. Currently, this agent is licensed for use in the treatment of the anemia of renal failure, the anemia associated with HIV infection in zidovudine (AZT) treated patients, and anemia associated with cancer chemotherapy.(source)

http://path.upmc.edu/consult/rla/july1995.html

So if it was there,which still seems questionable from the artical provided by Grojlach,There seem to be some factors from the cancer or possibly it's treatment that could have resulted in a positive test from the sample.