# Lance's ball..



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

I'm not a follower of all things doping so excuse me if this subject has been talked over before...

Lance's testicular cancer...Is there any evidence that it may have been caused by his doping? Does it seem logical that he may have started doping as a very young rider, given his obsessive behavior as we're aware of it, now? Cancer has been linked to Testosterone, if I am not mistaken, and some of the other PEDs are questionable. So if Young Lance was juicing it consistently to win all those early triathlons in his career and it gave him cancer...that makes his "All American Hero" narrative even more ironic... Big come back for a problem caused by himself...

Also, I wonder how many times Lance gets his ass kicked now? I mean when he goes out in public? He's had a lot of face-time when he was the Wonder-bike racer and even Joe General Public probably recognizes him...I can see him getting confronted and reacting to taunts as he goes about his life now...He is not a big guy, I bet the Colorado 'neck cowboys get in his face a lot, and I can't see that little rooster not responding with agro-behavior...

gone but not forgotten, Lance you jerk.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Yes, he started doping early. 

As I understand it, there is no proven link between doping and testicular cancer. 

I've read varying opinions on if what Armstrong took - EPO, HGH, etc... could maybe cause a tumor to grow more aggressively. 

I've read varying opinions on if doping may have covered up some of his symptoms, leading to his cancer being caught later. 

I don't think there is a clear 'yes it did' or 'no it didn't' answer. But various PEDs are linked to serious health problems, so PED use is not a good idea.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

The coaches of the US National team doped several riders with Cortisone, an immunosuppressant. 4 of the riders got very sick with issues strongly linked with the HPV virus. Ernie Lachuga and lance Armstrong both came down with the same thing, Testicular cancer. Greg Strok, Gerrik Latta and Erich Ketter all had similar health issues.

While the causes of Armstrong's cancer may be debatable there is little debate that several of the drugs Armstrong has admitted using, EPO, HGH, Testosterone, increase cancer risk and increase the spread of cancer. Dr. Ferrari even said he thought that Lance's doping may have caused his cancer and caused it to spread more rapidly


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> The coaches of the US National team doped several riders with Cortisone, an immunosuppressant. 4 of the riders got very sick with issues strongly linked with the HPV virus. Ernie Lachuga and lance Armstrong both came down with the same thing, Testicular cancer. Greg Strok, Gerrik Latta and Erich Ketter all had similar health issues.
> 
> While the causes of Armstrong's cancer may be debatable there is little debate that several of the drugs Armstrong has admitted using, EPO, HGH, Testosterone, increase cancer risk and increase the spread of cancer. Dr. Ferrari even said he thought that Lance's doping may have caused his cancer and caused it to spread more rapidly


The tough part is 'increased risk' does not mean 'difinitively caused.' Someone can eat a fatty diet, putting them at 'increased risk' for premature heart attack, but never actually have a heart attack. 

To me, there are too many unknowns to form an opinion. 

Maybe 20 years down the road JAMA will publish a big study quantifying the risks. 

I do think PED use is becoming more prevelant, even among amature athletes looking to 'get pumped,' or 'feel younger.' So I think 10 to 20 years from now we'll be talking about -what to do with all these people who've been on steroids, HGH, T, etc... for years now?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Dr. Ferrari even said he thought that Lance's doping may have caused his cancer and caused it to spread more rapidly


Did Ferrari say that or was it that Ferrari was worried that the drugs would bring back the cancer?

And are you going by what Landis said that Armstrong said that Ferrari said?


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Local Hero said:


> Did Ferrari say that or was it that Ferrari was worried that the drugs would bring back the cancer?
> 
> And are you going by what Landis said that Armstrong said that Ferrari said?


Why not offer your position, instead of just attacking someone else's opinion without offering one of your own?

Do you think Armstrong's PED use played a role in his cancer?
If so, what role (caused it, made it more aggressive, etc...)

Arguing 'did Ferrari say that, or did Floyd say Armstrong said Ferrari said,' seems like an archane detailed thing - exciting to Armstrong scholars who've read every book and obsess over all the details.

But not really relevant to the OP's question 'is there evidence...'

Afterall Ferarri supposedly said 'PEDs *may*' have played a role - not 'PEDs *certainly*' played a role. Arguing about who is a source of a quote - of a quote - of a maybe, seems rather like splitting a hair, then trying to spilt the bits again.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Floyd may have said something but Tyler also wrote about it in his book. His source was Ferrari, not Lance. Armstrong has also said they were more conservative after his cancer

Regardless, there is a clear link between EPO, HGH, IGF-1,Testosterone, and the growth of cancer. Armstrong's doctors were shocked to see how rapidly it spread......pouring gasoline on the fire can have that effect


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Bluenote said:


> Why not offer your position, instead of just attacking someone else's opinion without offering one of your own?
> 
> Do you think Armstrong's PED use played a role in his cancer?
> If so, what role (caused it, made it more aggressive, etc...)
> ...


lol

That's quite the overreaction you've got going there. 


Doctor Falsetti said:


> Floyd may have said something but Tyler also wrote about it in his book. His source was Ferrari, not Lance. Armstrong has also said they were more conservative after his cancer


OK, I don't have the book in front of me. But I recall Hamilton saying that Ferrari was worried drugs would bring back Armstrong's cancer, not that the drugs caused the cancer in the first place.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Local Hero said:


> OK, I don't have the book in front of me. But I recall Hamilton saying...


You've devoted all this stuff to memory? 

Seriously?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

I think the fact that Armstrong beat the cancer is remarkable. Not a lot of people with that advanced cancer stage can pull it out like Armstrong did. How he beat cancer is a combination of the treatment and his strong immune system (if given the chance to work by not using PEDs). You can't pull thru this sort of sickness without a strong immune system.

But then the question is, if his immune system was so strong, then how did he get cancer in the first place? This is where PEDs come into the picture. It could mean that the young Lance was experimenting with PEDs so much that they overwhelmed the immune system.


----------



## kiwisimon (Oct 30, 2002)

aclinjury said:


> But then the question is, if his immune system was so strong, then how did he get cancer in the first place? This is where PEDs come into the picture. It could mean that the young Lance was experimenting with PEDs so much that they overwhelmed the immune system.


I'm not a doctor or anything but it's not your immune system that fights cancer, it's not giving the cancer the chance to grow. We all have the potential to get cancer, the more risk factors we have in our lives the greater the chance of getting it. LA's drug regime would have rapidly increased his risk. There is no way in hell you can say definitively that A rather than B caused the cancer. There is still folk who think the connection between smoking and cancer is not fully proven. Oh and yes he is still a jerk pre or post cancer.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Bluenote said:


> You've devoted all this stuff to memory?
> 
> Seriously?


What is your endgame? 



aclinjury said:


> I think the fact that Armstrong beat the cancer is remarkable. Not a lot of people with that advanced cancer stage can pull it out like Armstrong did. How he beat cancer is a combination of the treatment and his strong immune system (if given the chance to work by not using PEDs). You can't pull thru this sort of sickness without a strong immune system.
> 
> But then the question is, if his immune system was so strong, then how did he get cancer in the first place? This is where PEDs come into the picture. It could mean that the young Lance was experimenting with PEDs so much that they overwhelmed the immune system.


Lance admitted to using drugs to beat cancer, just as he used drugs to beat his opponents. He's a cheater any way you slice it. Real heroes get cancer without drugs. Then they beat cancer without drugs!


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

Bluenote said:


> I do think PED use is becoming more prevalent, even among amature athletes looking to 'get pumped,' or 'feel younger.'


Definitely agree... every time I go see my doc, who is also an active local rider, he offers me various flavors of juice and mentions that "lots of guys you know are using it"

Then there's the general acceptance of juice in the weightlifting / mma world.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Creakyknees said:


> Definitely agree... every time I go see my doc, who is also an active local rider, he offers me various flavors of juice and mentions that "lots of guys you know are using it"
> 
> Then there's the general acceptance of juice in the weightlifting / mma world.


Yeah, I've read some opinion pieces in Medical Publications about this issue. The debate is - are things like testosterone and HGH "anti-aging" medicine? Or is their use overperscribing potentially dangerous drugs to cash in on a "feel good" culture? 

I know there are a bunch of ongoing studies about testosterone - does it help depression, does it help back pain, does it aid in weight loss? But drug studies don't last that long - months usually. It'll be awhile before we see, what happens to these people in 10 years?


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

Gnarly 928 said:


> I'm not a follower of all things doping so excuse me if this subject has been talked over before...
> 
> Lance's testicular cancer...Is there any evidence that it may have been caused by his doping? Does it seem logical that he may have started doping as a very young rider, given his obsessive behavior as we're aware of it, now? Cancer has been linked to Testosterone, if I am not mistaken, and some of the other PEDs are questionable. So if Young Lance was juicing it consistently to win all those early triathlons in his career and it gave him cancer...that makes his "All American Hero" narrative even more ironic... Big come back for a problem caused by himself...
> 
> ...



OK, so you don't like Lance, so what? Is there a point to this thread?
You start off asking a fairly straight forward/relevent question and then fall into the ole "I hate lance" routine.. Maybe you and a few others here need some professional help to move on and to purge those resentments!! O-ya,please feel free to give me some more bad rep points if you dont like the response!!


----------



## UpHillCrawler (Jul 14, 2004)

Local Hero said:


> What is your endgame?
> 
> Lance admitted to using drugs to beat cancer, just as he used drugs to beat his opponents. He's a cheater any way you slice it. Real heroes get cancer without drugs. Then they beat cancer without drugs!


I'm assuming this is just a poor attempt at humor??? As the saying goes, don't quit your day job. (I'm not a Lance fan, just a guy that has had several friends and family members get their butts kicked by cancer)


----------



## UpHillCrawler (Jul 14, 2004)

Gnarly 928 said:


> Also, I wonder how many times Lance gets his ass kicked now? I mean when he goes out in public? He's had a lot of face-time when he was the Wonder-bike racer and even Joe General Public probably recognizes him...I can see him getting confronted and reacting to taunts as he goes about his life now...He is not a big guy, I bet the Colorado 'neck cowboys get in his face a lot, and I can't see that little rooster not responding with agro-behavior...
> 
> gone but not forgotten, Lance you jerk.


Oh, and once again I'm not a Lance fan, but my personal opinion is that he'd still kick the living crap out of anyone in this forum and most people wouldn't harass him in public. Most people are MMA tough guys behind their keyboards, not so much in real life...


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

UpHillCrawler said:


> I'm assuming this is just a poor attempt at humor??? As the saying goes, don't quit your day job. (I'm not a Lance fan, just a guy that has had several friends and family members get their butts kicked by cancer)


Really just following the logic of this thread. 

Lots of people hate Armstrong to the point of blaming him for even getting cancer in the first place. We've been told several times that his foundation is a money pit that just wastes donations on parties. It's as though some believe Armstrong has zero redeeming value as a human being. 

I don't believe that. I think Armstrong is just a guy, imperfect as anyone. So I make fun of the idea that he "gave himself cancer" -- who really cares how that all started? What is the point of even discussing it, if not to continue to tarnish his already soiled reputation?


----------



## UpHillCrawler (Jul 14, 2004)

Local Hero said:


> Really just following the logic of this thread.
> 
> Lots of people hate Armstrong to the point of blaming him for even getting cancer in the first place. We've been told several times that his foundation is a money pit that just wastes donations on parties. It's as though some believe Armstrong has zero redeeming value as a human being.
> 
> I don't believe that. I think Armstrong is just a guy, imperfect as anyone. So I make fun of the idea that he "gave himself cancer" -- who really cares how that all started? What is the point of even discussing it, if not to continue to tarnish his already soiled reputation?


Got it and I have to agree. Still think that Lance was made an example out of, not that he didn't deserve it, but that probably wasn't fair considering the punishment everyone else received.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Local Hero said:


> Really just following the logic of this thread.
> 
> Lots of people hate Armstrong to the point of blaming him for even getting cancer in the first place. We've been told several times that his foundation is a money pit that just wastes donations on parties. It's as though some believe Armstrong has zero redeeming value as a human being.
> 
> I don't believe that. I think Armstrong is just a guy, imperfect as anyone. So I make fun of the idea that he "gave himself cancer" -- who really cares how that all started? What is the point of even discussing it, if not to continue to tarnish his already soiled reputation?


Just trying to follow your logic. 

Livestrong can spend $6 million on one party but we should just ignore this and pretend it is a good investment of donor funds? Nobody should say anything about using donor funds to lobby against USADA? Shhhh. 

We should ignore the real risks that EPO and HGH have? 

If you don't see any point in discussing it then why do you spend so much time posting here?

Oh, that's right, you are not into discussion


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

n2deep said:


> O-ya,please feel free to give me some more bad rep points if you dont like the response!!


We're too busy fasting, as directed by Greg from Reno. After that we will unleash "Lemond Jihad," which consists of lots of neg rep, drinking of the holy hater-aid and a 40 virgin reward. Or is it 70?


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Just trying to follow your logic.
> 
> Livestrong can spend $6 million on one party but we should just ignore this and pretend it is a good investment of donor funds? Nobody should say anything about using donor funds to lobby against USADA? Shhhh.
> 
> Oh, that's right, you are not into discussion


Doc

Your a smart guy. This discussion is not about drug/EPO/ETC use; it's about how much you hate lance, we get that.. By the way,, how were you personally involved? Were you a coach, a rider, a domestique perhaps.. You seem to know a lot of details. 

Best Regards N2deep


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Local Hero said:


> Really just following the logic of this thread.
> 
> Lots of people hate Armstrong to the point of blaming him for even getting cancer in the first place.


Really, who are "these people?" I don't see anyone on this thread saying "Armstrong 100% for sure caused his own cancer!" 

Rather, I see people opening it up to a broader discussion - do PEDs have a cancer risk? 



Local Hero said:


> So I make fun of the idea that he "gave himself cancer" -- who really cares how that all started? What is the point of even discussing it, if not to continue to tarnish his already soiled reputation?


Maybe the point of discussing it all is - to talk about the possible risks associated with PEDs. As you know, local racers, amateurs, heck - tons of people are using PEDs. 
But we can all make the decision to dope or not, to look the other way when a friend dopes, etc... Talking - honestly - about the health risks might keep people from doping. 

Are we not supposed to talk about Armstrong's cancer, A-Rod breaking down, Ricco nearly dying - because it might hurt their little feelings? Or Tammy Thomas totally wrecking her health and turning into a she-male because it might make her sad?

Are we supposed to crank up the omerta on talking about possible health risks, because it might damage Armstrong's reputation? 



Local Hero said:


> We've been told several times that his foundation is a money pit that just wastes donations on parties.


When this came up on the last thread, you backed out of the conversation, admitting that you were far too busy to really research and understand Livestrong's finances.

But here you are again, slamming other's opinions of Livestrong, without offering any y'know - evidence - to support your position. 

My opinion is undecided - Livestrong is not transparent enough about it's finances for me to say one way or another with certainty. 



Local Hero said:


> It's as though some believe Armstrong has zero redeeming value as a human being.
> 
> I don't believe that. I think Armstrong is just a guy, imperfect as anyone.


So every Armstrong related discussion - what are the health risks, what do people think of Livestrong, should he keep his titles - _must_ turn into a reflection of him as a person? 

All lines of reasoning must be bent to support the narrative 'people just hate him, but he's not that bad?'


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

n2deep said:


> Doc
> 
> Your a smart guy. This discussion is not about drug/EPO/ETC use; it's about how much you hate lance, we get that.. By the way,, how were you personally involved? Were you a coach, a rider, a domestique perhaps.. You seem to know a lot of details.
> 
> Best Regards N2deep


Haters made of the myth that PEDs have risks, just to make Armstrong look bad. 

It's one of the tools of 'Lemond Jihad.'


----------



## n2deep (Mar 23, 2014)

Bluenote said:


> Haters made of the myth that PEDs have risks, just to make Armstrong look bad.
> 
> It's one of the tools of 'Lemond Jihad.'



BlueNote, your a gifted writer,, Now,, that's funny!!! I don't Care Who Ya Are?


----------



## BacDoc (Aug 1, 2011)

The main cancer concerns of those doping testosterone and HGH are prostate and liver involvement.

The largest percentage of anti aging doping (Testosterone and HGH) blood chemistry analysis flags are high PSA an or liver enzymes. This doesn't equate to organ cancer but does indicate stress on those organs. Patients on this regimen can also end up with high estrogen levels so they are put on a breast cancer drug like Tamoxifen (aromatase inhibitor reduces estrogen). Clinically this is what I see in patients in the typical "Anti Aging" medical program.

So medically speaking your biggest cancer concern statistically is prostate and liver. For many whether you call it doping, juicing or anti aging medicine, there are some very heavy consequences. Consistent blood testing may avert some problems but often the sequela that develops is a downward spiral.

Sorry for the hijack but this is some of my observations. If you're doping, testicular cancer is the least of your worries.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

UpHillCrawler said:


> Got it and I have to agree. Still think that Lance was made an example out of, not that he didn't deserve it, but that probably wasn't fair considering the punishment everyone else received.


That kind of thinking is not allowed here. Prepare for rage to flow.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Bluenote said:


> Really, who are "these people?" I don't see anyone on this thread saying "Armstrong 100% for sure caused his own cancer!"
> 
> Rather, I see people opening it up to a broader discussion - do PEDs have a cancer risk?
> 
> ...


Sorry, I made it through the first two sentences and then lost interest. Did you say anything worthwhile?


Doctor Falsetti said:


> Just trying to follow your logic.
> 
> Livestrong can spend $6 million on one party but we should just ignore this and pretend it is a good investment of donor funds? Nobody should say anything about using donor funds to lobby against USADA? Shhhh.
> 
> ...


During the past month I have averaged under 1 post per day in this subforum. (But each of my posts gets 2+ responses.) I must be doing something right.


----------



## Bluenote (Oct 28, 2012)

Local Hero said:


> Sorry, I made it through the first two sentences and then lost interest. Did you say anything worthwhile?


Translation - I can't refute the arguments, so I'm going to hide behind snark. 

But hey, when you can clarify who all the people are on this thread saying Armstrong gave himself cancer, just let us know. 

I won't hold my breath.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

*Moderators Note*

It would be nice if we had one Armstrong thread that didn't devolve to personal attacks, or if everyone would at least try a bit harder to hide them within on point relevant post.


----------

