Don't Try This at Home

After several books, dozens of stories, and a ton of speculation, no one yet knows if Lance Armstrong was a superhuman athlete, or was a drug-cheat.

There are very strong opinions among those who suspect he cheated, found in these posts: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7;  and yet Armstrong himself denies all accusations of doping (see above).

Endocrinologists at the University of Wisconsin have weighed in on the subject.  They examined Armstrong's metabolic performance before and after his treatment for testicular cancer.  Let me summarize point by point, in this complex argument:

• Before the cancer Armstrong was not a strong cyclist in multi-day events.  He was a world class 1-day cyclist before cancer treatment.
• The cancer treatment consisted of:

            -Unilateral orchiectomy (removal of a testicle)
            -Brain surgery (he must have had metastasis to brain)
            -Four cycles of chemotherapy

• Physiological tests apparently were unchanged following his treatment
• The researchers are suggesting that recovery between days was the key to Armstrong's success
• That the orchiectomy changed his hormonal makeup.

            - increase in gonadotrophs, including prolactin & an increase in serum lipase expression
            - increase in free fatty acids (FFA) and utilization by muscles
            - increase in ketone production  (used for nutrients)
            - increase in muscle repair and hematocrit level (red blood cells)

• These changes limit glycogen utilization, delay fatigue, and enhance recovery.

Essentially what the endocrinologists are proposing is that when surgeons removed Armstrong's testicle, they induced hormonal changes that changed him from a good one day cyclist to a Tour de France winner. 

Steroid Nation, with all due respect to Armstrong and his amazing recovery, is concerned that cyclists and athletes looking for an edge...will follow suit.

So: DO NOT ATTEMPT A UNILATERAL ORCHIECTOMY AT HOME.   This is only a theory, people.

Here is hoping thousands of cyclists and bodybuilders don't decide to take things in their own hands.

Comments

[JP]

no mention of his weight loss? the guy was a bulky, top heavy cyclist before cancer. afterward building back up from his emaciated, sick state he was a much better climber. 20 extra pounds of pecks and biceps help you look cool doing bench press at the gym but they won't help you climb mountains.

[Seitz]

Another theory that's been mentioned is that he was bigger before cancer (I don't know his pre and post chemo weights, so this is anecdotal). During his recovery, he refocused his training to better suit his body for multi-day events.

[Seitz]

Alright, JP beat me to it.

[GRG51]

(Ha, I have to sign in to comment on my own blog). There are many physicians here who cycle. They mentioned LA's weight loss yesterday too.

I will examine the paper more closely to see if the weight loss is mentioned.

There was also another paper talking about Armstrong's metabolism in relation to his treatment. I will review that paper too.

I would think weight loss was related to the neoplasm, and to the treatment. I would also think that weight would be regained.

Armstrong certainly had to rebuild/retrain his muscles. How did he change his training to retain strength, while reducing fat (or bulk).

I also don't quite follow this paper's metabolic argument. I would suspect that initially LH/FSH would increase after the procedure. However, homeostasis would occur once an 'acceptable' T level re-established.

I will look more into this and get back to you all.

[benschon]

In his auto-biography, Lance says he says he lost about 20 pounds (from 170 down to 150) from the chemotherapy. He claims he tried but could never drop that weight via diet and exercise. He and his coach credit the weight loss with giving him the competitive edge he needed.

The effect of the hormonal changes could be as significant as the weight loss, but Occam's razor applies: the simpler explanation is usually the better one.

I doubt the "Lance Armstrong Testicle, Lung, and Brain Cancer Diet" will be a best-seller for anyone. I would file it on the same shelf as the "Dysentery Diet".

[GRG51]

He lost about 12% of his body weight.

Would the loss of 20 pounds turn a very good cyclist into a multiple Tour de France winner?

Was that loss all fat? (which means he was over 12% bady fat before treatment).

I knew one fellow who was a good athlete. He was awarded a track scholarship to Kansas, where he became a distance runner.

I was shocked when he came back in one year. He was all bones and muscle. He seemed to have less acceleration, and did not jump as well as he did when he looked healthier.

Cycling must just demand a different athlete. Losing weight to excel seems so counter-intuitive in a sport which involves more than just aerobic fitness.

Sounds like an RX for clenbuterol...

[lose 10 pounds in 3 days]

i have great respect for Lance. Overcoming a cancer scare is one big achievement in itself.