# lance outed by his former teammate



## cocoboots (Apr 13, 2006)

In 1996 when Lance Armstrong was diagnosed with cancer he was in a hospital room with at least 5 witnesses. His then girlfriend, Chris Carmichael, Frankie Andreau, Frankie Andreau's wife, and a top Oakley representative Stefanie. Oakley was to pay for all of Lance Armstrong's cancer treatments.

The doctors asked Armstrong if he had ever used performance enhancing drugs. Lance had this to comment, "I used EPO, HGH, steroids, corticoid steroids, and testosterone." Everyone in the room heard Lance Armstrong make these statements.

These comments would stay classified for some time until last Novemeber in a lawsuit against by SCA Promotions, a Dallas-based company that provides risk coverage for promotional contests. The suit was brought to compel arbitration over SCA's failure to pay Armstrong a $5 million bonus for winning a record sixth Tour de France in 2004. According to John Bandy, SCA's house counsel, the company has so far declined to pay because president Bob Hamman said he wanted to investigate the claims made in L.A. Confidentiel.Lance Armstrong by a company that deals with sports betting. Lance bet on himself to win the tour and when the company heard about the doping aligations they didn't want to pay him his five million dollar bonus.

http://outside.away.com/outside/features/200512/lance-armstrong-2.html

Well SCA did their homework and had Frankie Andreau testify under oath that he heard Lance Armstrong state that he used the five drugs. Once the quote were made in court they can be made in the public. They have been leaked but the only question is when will they be released to the public if ever.

Who still stood by Lance Armstrong? Stefanie from Oakley pressured by the high powered corrupt owners of Oakley to lie and say she didn't hear Lance say he used the five drugs. The one little unknown detail was that Stefanie also close friends with Greg Lemond called Greg and he secretly recorded her phone call. On the call she admitted that she had actually heard Lance say he used the drugs. 

The defense produced this evidence in court, however it being illegal to record someone without their knowledge the judge allowed the evidence.


----------



## Bocephus Jones II (Oct 7, 2004)

cocoboots said:


> In 1996 when Lance Armstrong was diagnosed with cancer he was in a hospital room with at least 5 witnesses. His then girlfriend, Chris Carmichael, Frankie Andreau, Frankie Andreau's wife, and a top Oakley representative Stefanie. Oakley was to pay for all of Lance Armstrong's cancer treatments.
> 
> The doctors asked Armstrong if he had ever used performance enhancing drugs. Lance had this to comment, "I used EPO, HGH, steroids, corticoid steroids, and testosterone." Everyone in the room heard Lance Armstrong make these statements.
> 
> ...


The guy isn't racing anymore. Can't we just let the witch hunt go? I'm sure Lance used some things during his career. That's not really a surprise. I'm sure most of the others did as well at some point.


----------



## moneyman (Jan 30, 2004)

*Funny thing*



cocoboots said:


> In 1996 when Lance Armstrong was diagnosed with cancer he was in a hospital room with at least 5 witnesses. His then girlfriend, Chris Carmichael, Frankie Andreau, Frankie Andreau's wife, and a top Oakley representative Stefanie. Oakley was to pay for all of Lance Armstrong's cancer treatments.
> 
> The doctors asked Armstrong if he had ever used performance enhancing drugs. Lance had this to comment, "I used EPO, HGH, steroids, corticoid steroids, and testosterone." Everyone in the room heard Lance Armstrong make these statements.
> 
> ...


About rules of evidence. They're just so darned inconvenient.

When a verified transcript of Frankie Andreu's testimony is made public, perhaps we open up a new discussion. Until then, this kind of claptrap belongs to conspiracies r us.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

cocoboots said:


> In 1996


So? Guilty or not of using drugs then-what does this have to do with winning Le Tour 8 years later?

...never mind I don't care enough to listen.


----------



## bahueh (May 11, 2004)

*well, I have to admit..*

....blah, blah, blah blah blah, blah....


----------



## Laurent Fignewton (Nov 11, 2005)

>The one little unknown detail was that Stefanie also close friends with Greg Lemond called Greg and he secretly recorded her phone call. On the call she admitted that she had actually heard Lance say he used the drugs. 

So Greg just happens to have a handy "record" button on his phone, huh? Unlike 99.9% of the rest of us...


----------



## cocoboots (Apr 13, 2006)

Room 1201 said:


> So? Guilty or not of using drugs then-what does this have to do with winning Le Tour 8 years later?
> 
> ...never mind I don't care enough to listen.



i guess the physiological changes/adaptations from PEDS are cumulative year after year....anyway, if it's true then it proves him a liar.

just putting the info out there....feel free to discuss and flame each other


----------



## Guest (Jun 20, 2006)

1. Wrong forum.
2. The info is useless unless it is released to the public.
3. All of this is hearsay unless unless it is corroborated.
4. What BC II said.
5. What bahueh said...


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

cocoboots said:


> i guess the physiological changes/adaptations from PEDS are cumulative year after year....anyway, if it's true then it proves him a liar.
> 
> just putting the info out there....feel free to discuss and flame each other


Of course he lied. It's like when Clinton lied. You always lie in these situations until irrefutable evidence makes your claims of innocence ridiculous. Big deal, you didn't win in the pro peloton without doping in the mid to late 90's, it might still not be possible. It's hard to believe a hardass like Armstrong got to Europe, saw the way the game was played and all of a sudden became this holier than Jesus figure who didn't "cheat". Of course he "cheated" because when everyone is doing it it might be against the rules, but it's not cheating. I wish he would man up and just lay it on the table. Same with Museeuw, that was pathetic when he tried to deny his doping.


----------



## giovanni sartori (Feb 5, 2004)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Of course he lied. It's like when Clinton lied. You always lie in these situations until irrefutable evidence makes your claims of innocence ridiculous. Big deal, you didn't win in the pro peloton without doping in the mid to late 90's, it might still not be possible. It's hard to believe a hardass like Armstrong got to Europe, saw the way the game was played and all of a sudden became this holier than Jesus figure who didn't "cheat". Of course he "cheated" because when everyone is doing it it might be against the rules, but it's not cheating. I wish he would man up and just lay it on the table. Same with Museeuw, that was pathetic when he tried to deny his doping.


Well that clears up a lot - success=cheating. That's actually very convenient, wasn't the Festina affair a couple weeks after the French won the World Cup in 98? This certainly does explain their 1 goal in the 5 post 98 World Cup matches. I knew there was a reason England hasn't won the World Cup since 66!


----------



## Einstruzende (Jun 1, 2004)

No big surprise. After reading his first book my impression was that he was doping at that time.

I actually got to meet Frankie Andreu and heard him speak in October 2004. Someone actually asked about what he tought about the accusations against Armstrong and Hamilton, and he completely blew it off (neither supporting or accusing those two).


----------



## Guest (Jun 21, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> I wish he would man up and just lay it on the table.


No way he would do that now. Too many $$s at stake for both him and his cancer foundation.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Einstruzende said:


> I actually got to meet Frankie Andreu and heard him speak in October 2004. Someone actually asked about what he tought about the accusations against Armstrong and Hamilton, and he completely blew it off (neither supporting or accusing those two).


I find it amusing that pretty much everyone that I've spoken to or read accounts about racing in Europe at the elite level talks about the rampant drug use especially in Italy and Spain. How many talented guys drop out saying they weren't willing to take the drugs to go from being a great prospect to a "real pro". IIRC, David Millar was one of many who said taking the drugs is seen as being serious about one's profession. How many times do you need to hear someone say "its up to a rider to look after his recovery"? Spinelli admitted to using EPO at Saeco, you've got Gaumont, Millar, Manzono, Voet, etc. talking about it. I thought it was funny when Jo Planckert got busted and said, "if they're going to give me 2 years for this (I think it was EPO), I should have just taken everything under the sun like Museeuw and tried to win Flanders!".

Then you have some guys who are really at the top and came up thru the ranks and then pretend like it's all snow white, and they never saw anything suspicious let alone took drugs themselves.


----------



## Guest (Jun 21, 2006)

I can see now what probably caused Pound to go 'postal' trying to get LA (and possibly putting himself out of a job). It's so clear that cycling, like many sports, is a cesspool of drugs. Dick pound must be frustrated to the point of insanity from trying to 'out' all the bad seeds.

Pound's efforts to bag LA are like a policeman pulling over a Ferrari for speeding, no one would notice if a Chevy Nova was pulled over - _everyone_ will notice the Ferrari.

I guess the peloton is really two speeds - those who don't have the money for the high tech, hard to detect tests, and those with less money, who risk using easier to detect drugs or passing on the drugs and being a nobody in the peleton with a 50k euro max salary cap.

Sometimes ignorance is bliss


----------



## HOOKEM (Apr 4, 2004)

Sometimes I wonder if his cancer was a result of doping in the first place. Didn't Lyle Alzado die of brain cancer because he used steroids? I believe in Innocent until *proven* guilty, but if proven gulity I won't be surprised, just disappointed. Just my own personal theory and $.02


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*from my perspective*

I've never doubted any pro's drug usage in the mid 90's. Dope in this era was all too common,I've said that here a zillion times. I've also wondered if (at least in his head, if he did use dope then, I'm saying if because I don't know) like the other poster that did he connect usage to his cancer? If so it would make an argument that he was anti dope after his recovery. Again this is all speculation.


----------



## Laurent Fignewton (Nov 11, 2005)

Laurent Fignewton said:


> >
> 
> So Greg just happens to have a handy "record" button on his phone, huh? Unlike 99.9% of the rest of us...



Looks like I was wrong -- he DOES have a record button. Even submitted the recording as testimony:

http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto912175.shtml


----------



## The Tedinator (Mar 12, 2004)

If the Andreaus testified to this as reported, I wonder why the court sided with LA and against SCA? I would like to see the court transcripts. Surely they will be/are public domain?


----------



## surftel (Apr 18, 2005)

I have a friend who rode on Postal years back, he told me he had heard this same story about 6 years ago and it has been floating around for a while.....too bad it took a court case to bring it out in the open.


----------



## surftel (Apr 18, 2005)

the reason SCA settled is that there is nothing in the contract about using performance enhancing drugs.....basicly Lance could do whatever he wants and if he won he gets the money.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

The Tedinator said:


> If the Andreaus testified to this as reported, I wonder why the court sided with LA and against SCA? I would like to see the court transcripts. Surely they will be/are public domain?


Because it's still hearsay.


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

The ruling was that, since no sporting body had challenged the veracity of Armstrong's wins, they stand and SCA had to pay up.

But this is now in the public domain and the promised IOC investigation should be extremely interesting.


----------



## ChilliConCarnage (Jun 1, 2006)

I worked with a professional sports recruiting service a few years back. I can tell you that in the mid to late 90s in football and baseball, in order to advance from an amateur to the pro ranks, it was quite simply impossible without steroids. In fact, there were times when it was the parents of collegiate level athletes who were asking about how their child could get a medical "edge". We didn't deal with pro cycling, so I have no firsthand knowledge of that sport, but I don't believe there's any reason to think that it was any different.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

ChilliConCarnage said:


> but I don't believe there's any reason to think that it was any different.


Just the opposite, every indication is that it is just the same.


----------



## ChilliConCarnage (Jun 1, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Just the opposite, every indication is that it is just the same.


Having said that, I still enjoy watching the sport of cycling. It's the one sport where I have a good frame of reference.

Besides, how can it be cheating if everybody else is on the same stuff? That just makes for a level playing field!

I do wish athletes wouldn't lie about it, but then most professional athletes are not the kind of people I would have as friends regardless of their choice on doping. So I enjoy watching the sport for the vicarious thrill, and don't fall in love with any of the personalities.


----------



## cocoboots (Apr 13, 2006)

*credible source*

msn picks up the story from reuters


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13499281/


http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto912175.shtml

looks like lance has some explaining to do...oh wait, like he would ever do that. he's lied for so long.


----------



## ChilliConCarnage (Jun 1, 2006)

While I'm not sure the fact that it is on MSNBC makes it "credible" - it's all over every major sporting news source.


----------



## cocoboots (Apr 13, 2006)

ChilliConCarnage said:


> While I'm not sure the fact that it is on MSNBC makes it "credible" - it's all over every major sporting news source.


...reuters being the source i'd say it probably has some validity.

it is all over the news, i wonder if he'll make any open statements about it.

"i continue to deny...."


----------



## giovanni sartori (Feb 5, 2004)

This isn't new is it? Wasn't this in LA Confidential?

This reads like a movie script though with Lemond recording a phone conversation, death bed confessions, etc, etc. Lemond, what a freak, recording conversations.

BTW, my mobile has a record button, very useful if someone is giving you driving directions.


----------



## blackhat (Jan 2, 2003)

*lance. the perpetual victim.*

<i>In his own defense, Armstrong said in a November deposition to the court that no doctor had asked him whether he had used doping products, according to the newspaper. It said <u>Armstrong also told the court that Betsy Andreu hated him and that Frankie Andreu had gone along with her account to offer her support</u>.

</i>

nothing to see here, just a couple members of the cadre of formerly upstanding people that are out to get lance...







Tour winner to paranoid drama queen in less than 12 months. nicely done. sort of explains his rambling diatribe after last years tour. he's going to be on the daily show next week, at least he's scheduled, maybe he'll "clear this up" then.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

What we need is some low down reporter to get a hold of Armstrong's medical records. There's every possibility an MD if told about previous PED use could have written it down as part of Armstron'gs medical history. Let's not forget when Armstrong got cancer he was pretty much a nobody in the US sport scene. That would really be a hard one for Armstrong to explain away.


----------



## Trek_envy (Jun 15, 2004)

*Do you people...*

ever give up?

He NEVER TESTED POSITIVE WHILE RACING!

Never!

Shall I say it again?

*NEVER!!
*
Leave the dead horse alone!​


----------



## giovanni sartori (Feb 5, 2004)

Dwayne Barry said:


> What we need is some low down reporter to get a hold of Armstrong's medical records. There's every possibility an MD if told about previous PED use could have written it down as part of Armstron'gs medical history. Let's not forget when Armstrong got cancer he was pretty much a nobody in the US sport scene. That would really be a hard one for Armstrong to explain away.


Yes, if it was pertinent enough for a Doctor to ask then the answer would surely be on his chart.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

Trek_envy said:


> ever give up?
> 
> He NEVER TESTED POSITIVE WHILE RACING!
> 
> ...


What about the 6 positives in the 1999 Tour?


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

giovanni sartori said:


> Yes, if it was pertinent enough for a Doctor to ask then the answer would surely be on his chart.


Well I don't know about that. It sounds like this alleged conversation may have been an informal one with a large number of people in the room. I don't know if absence would prove he never admitted to PED use, but if it were in MDs records who treated him for his cancer it would be pretty hard to explain why such information would be there other than Armstrong told the doc.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Trek_envy said:


> ever give up?
> 
> He NEVER TESTED POSITIVE WHILE RACING!
> 
> ...


That's what I say when people want to rag on Virenque, Museeuw, Pantani, Millar, etc.


----------



## BuenosAires (Apr 3, 2004)

This story seems to paint a different picture. The doctors say there was never any admission by Lance.

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=2497768


----------



## zyzbot (Feb 3, 2004)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Well I don't know about that. It sounds like this alleged conversation may have been an informal one with a large number of people in the room. I don't know if absence would prove he never admitted to PED use, but if it were in MDs records who treated him for his cancer it would be pretty hard to explain why such information would be there other than Armstrong told the doc.


“In a sworn affidavit, Dr. Craig Nichols said he and other medical personnel visited with Armstrong that day about his medical history before he started chemotherapy.
Nichols was one of doctors treating Armstrong at Indiana University Medical Center. He is now the chair of hematology-oncology at Oregon Health and Sciences University.
"Lance Armstrong never admitted, suggested or indicated that he has ever taken performance-enhancing drugs. Had this been disclosed to me, I would have recorded it, or been aware of it, as a pertinent aspect of Lance Armstrong's past medical history as I always do," Nichols said.
"Had I been present at any such 'confession,' I would most certainly have vividly recalled the fact," Nichols said. "I would have recorded such a confession as a matter of form, as indeed, would have my colleagues. None was recorded."


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2006)

il sogno said:


> What about the 6 positives in the 1999 Tour?


Talk about beating a dead horse


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

What I don't get is why he sues all and sundry over allegations in books & magazines, yet there isn't so much as the threat of legal action over 99 and L'Equipe. Doesn't that puzzle anyone else?


----------



## txzen (Apr 6, 2005)

So this testimony was used against him by the company who wanted to get out of paying him $5million. What was the result of the trial? Oh, they had to pay, plus a $2.5million penalty. Why? Does this story sound more credible or not? (LA's statement on VeloNews):



> The event reported in France never happened and the evidence presented to the panel proved it never happened. The two persons relied upon by the French newspaper had a different story than the other 8 people in the room. Mr. and Mrs. Andreu stated that they left the room right after the statement, could remember no other questions asked before or after, no details of who I was allegedly talking to, whether men or women, whether doctors or residents, *or why I would have been asked this information in front of 10 people, including my mother, in a TV room watching the Dallas Cowboys play football on a Sunday afternoon. By that Sunday, I had been in the hospital 11 days, had given numerous medical histories, previously undergone a regimen of intensive chemotherapy, and undergone extensive brain surgery on the prior Thursday.* Ms. Andreu confirmed her ignorance of steroids prescribed as part of my post-operative treatment and of EPO also included in my required post-operative regimen, subjects which could conceivable arisen under the circumstances.
> 
> In addition to sworn testimony to the contrary by others present, the panel (and the insurance company) were provided certified copies of all medical records by the Indiana cancer hospital. *While any suggestion that medical professionals did not take my medical history until three days after conducting extensive brain surgery is, on its face, preposterous, it is inconceivable that the records, which contain a description of every interaction with me, would not reflect such a critical response.* There is no suggestion of either such a question or response in over 20 medical histories recorded among the 280 pages of records compiled during my hospital stay. My doctor, one of the premier cancer specialists in the country, also testified no such statement was made by me to him and a statement made to another would have to appear in the records.* It's not there because it never happened. *


By the way, who leaked this to the press?



> I respected the panel's unconditional prohibition against providing any documents or testimony to others, and made no mention of this complete victory. Others did not, as selected items have apparently been recently released to the press. *We have instituted proceedings to determine who did so; ironically, but predictably, our investigation to date has revealed that the only person to whom documents have been provided by any trial participant is Richard Pound of WADA.* It is indeed coincidental that the documents provided to the press surfaced shortly after the independent investigator from the UCI released his report which exonerated me and was sharply critical of Mr. Pound's conduct.


----------



## Fignon's Barber (Mar 2, 2004)

The ones who come out looking pathetic in this latest witch hunt are Lemond and Andreau. Frankie was a mediocre professional domestique who seems blessed with below average intelligence. To see him in the middle of something like this doesn't surprise me. Lemond? Well, all I'll say is, aahh, if you're in the habit of recording phone calls, you've got issues.


----------



## cyclesoflife (May 8, 2005)

*You left out one Very crucial bit of info...*

I am not sure where you got that quote from, but the Velonews article on this subject very clearly states that the doctor in question is affiliated with the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/10088.0.html



> "And in a sworn affidavit, Dr. Craig Nichols - one of the doctors treating Armstrong at Indiana University Medical Center - said he and other medical personnel visited with Armstrong that day about his medical history before he started chemotherapy, and no such admission was ever made in his presence.
> 
> Now the chair of hematology-oncology at Oregon Health and Sciences University, Nichols said that Armstrong "never admitted, suggested or indicated that he has ever taken performance-enhancing drugs. Had this been disclosed to me, I would have recorded it, or been aware of it, as a pertinent aspect of Lance Armstrong's past medical history as I always do."
> 
> "Had I been present at any such 'confession,' I would most certainly have vividly recalled the fact," *Nichols, a member of the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Lance Armstrong Foundation, continued*. "I would have recorded such a confession as a matter of form, as indeed, would have my colleagues. None was recorded."


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

il sogno said:


> What about the 6 positives in the 1999 Tour?


Really IL, no disrespect but come on, that one has gone to bed.


----------



## BikinCO (Feb 17, 2004)

*Wasn't Frankie Fired*

Frankie was shitcanned by Postal and Lance? Axe to grind maybe?


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

cyclesoflife said:


> I am not sure where you got that quote from, but the Velonews article on this subject very clearly states that the doctor in question is affiliated with the Lance Armstrong Foundation.
> 
> http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/10088.0.html


Why in the hell would a doctor treating a patient who was relatively unfamous (as in not having won the TdF) not record such information? This is perposterous. Do you think he went back and altered the records?


----------



## BikinCO (Feb 17, 2004)

*Don't forget*

Lance was whipping some serious professional triathlete butt when he was in his mid teens. I don't think some poor kid from Plano was able to afford PED's and masking agents. Some people are just freaks of nature.


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

Fignon's Barber said:


> The ones who come out looking pathetic in this latest witch hunt are Lemond and Andreau. Frankie was a mediocre professional domestique who seems blessed with below average intelligence. To see him in the middle of something like this doesn't surprise me. Lemond? Well, all I'll say is, aahh, if you're in the habit of recording phone calls, you've got issues.



That's what I was going to say about Lemond. 

"But a September 21, 2004 phone conversation with three-time Tour winner Greg LeMond is open to interpretation. LeMond recorded the conversation and submitted it as testimony. McIlvain says "if I'm asked to take the stand, I'll do it (...) Because I won't lie. You know I was in that room. I heard."

What kind of guy records these sort of conversations? Bitter? Axe to grind? His goal is to back up his earlier public statements which where entirely baseless. He knows he made a huge mistake asserting Armstrong took drugs a few years ago because these unsubstantianted charges put him in a bad light. Now I think he's doing everything in his power to save some face. 

I think Greg truly believes these allegations and let his wife get involved by proxy due to his relationship with Trek which really tests my take on him as a person. Greg was a true blue champion and his comeback was every bit as remarkable as Armstrong's and that is forgotten as he has been and IT SHOULDN"T BE THAT WAY. 

Fantasy time:


I am very sorry if you ever happen to read this Greg Lemond because you will are one of the greatest cyclists that ever lived and there would be no "Lance Armstrong" had it not been for your pioneering efforts and truly unique abilities as a super one-of-a-kind athelete. Many of us will never forget this BUT if you don't have anything provable in a court of law, then keep you and your wife's mouth shut because absolutely nothing good is coming of this for anyone. You've done too much good to wind up a footnote in the Lance Armstrong saga.


----------



## BikinCO (Feb 17, 2004)

At 13, Lance Armstrong won the Kids Iron Triathlon, an event combining swimming, biking, and running. He later began entering triathlons for money, winning $20,000 when he was 15. 

As a high school senior Armstrong qualified to train with the U.S. Olympic team.

*HE WAS AND IS A PHENOM!!!!!!!!!!!! *

phe·nom (fĭ-nŏm') 
n. Slang.
A phenomenon, especially a remarkable or outstanding person.


----------



## MikeBiker (Mar 9, 2003)

This may explain why some people seem to remember things that others don't.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-06/ucl-ogo062306.php

*Our grip on reality is slim, says UCL scientist*

The neurological basis for poor witness statements and hallucinations has been found by scientists at UCL (University College London). In over a fifth of cases, people wrongly remembered whether they actually witnessed an event or just imagined it, according to a paper published in NeuroImage this week. Dr Jon Simons and Dr Paul Burgess led the study at the UCL Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience. Dr Burgess said: "In our tests volunteers either thought they had imagined words which they had actually been shown or said they had seen words which in fact they had just imagined - in over 20 per cent of cases. That is quite a lot of mistakes to be making, and shows how fallible our memory is - or perhaps, how slim our grip on reality is! 
"Our work has implications for the validity of witness statements and agrees with other studies that show that our mind sometimes fills in memory gaps for us, and we confuse what we imagined occurred in a situation - which is related to what we expect to happen or what usually happens - with what actually happened. 
"Most of us, though, have a critical reality monitoring function so that we are able to distinguish well enough between what is real and what is imagined and our imagination does not have too great an impact on our lives - unless the reality check system breaks down such as after stroke or in cases of schizophrenia." 
The study found that the areas that were activated while remembering whether an event really happened or was imagined in healthy subjects are the very same areas that are dysfunctional in people who experience hallucinations. 
Dr Burgess said: "We believe that hallucinations are caused by a difficulty in discriminating information present in the outside world from information that is imagined. In schizophrenia the difficulty you have in separating reality from imagined events becomes exaggerated so some people have hallucinations and hear voices that simply aren't there." These results indicate a link between the brain areas implicated in schizophrenia and the regions that support the ability to discriminate between perceived and imagined information. 
In the tests, healthy subjects were shown 96 well-known word pairs from pop culture such as 'Laurel and Hardy', 'bacon and eggs', and 'rock and roll'. The participants were asked to count the number of letters in the second word of the pair. Often the second word wasn't actually shown and the subject had to imagine the word – such as 'Laurel and ?'. 
Participants were then asked which of the second words they had actually seen on screen and which ones they had only imagined. The subjects' brain activity was observed using fMRI scans while they remembered whether words had been imagined or seen on screen. 
When people accurately remembered whether they had actually seen a word or just imagined it brain activity in the key areas increased – many of which are found in brain area 10, which is involved in imagination and reality checking, develops last in the brain and is twice as big in humans as in other animals. In the people who did not remember correctly, activation in brain area 10 was reduced.


----------



## BigT (Jun 24, 2006)

Lance was, is and always will be a


a Liar, a cheat, and a doper

writting in big letters makes it real


----------



## cocoboots (Apr 13, 2006)

retracted comment.

enjoy your ride....


----------



## BikinCO (Feb 17, 2004)

cocoboots said:


> ....he's still a doping phenom.
> 
> how many people linked to him have been busted, how many close calls has he had...how many dirty doctors has he worked with....at some point during his TDF run he doped. open your eyes, all your cycling heros dope.


How many linked to him have not doped?

I don't know, do you? 

1, that was found not guilty. 

Doubt it.

My heros are not professional athletes.


----------



## Sintesi (Nov 13, 2001)

BigT said:


> Lance was, is and always will be a
> 
> 
> a Liar, a cheat, and a doper
> ...


You are one emphasizing SOB. Yes you are!

Sing a song. I bet you can do wonders with a happenin' tune.


----------

