David Walsh doping book nips at Lance Armstrong again

Sports Illustrated gives us a preview of a new book by David Walsh, about (guess what) Lance Armstrong.

Already battered by doping allegations, cycling stands to absorb another big blow next week with the publication of the latest book by Irish investigative journalist David Walsh. Two weeks before the start of the 2007 Tour de France, Random House will release From Lance To Landis, a follow-up of Walsh's 2004 book L.A. Confidentiel: Les Secrets de Lance Armstrong, which contained allegations that the seven-time Tour winner doped, but was never published in English. This latest book will be widely released in the U.S., and could further undermine Armstrong's contention that he was a clean champion.

What does Armstrong say?

In an exclusive interview with Sports Illustrated last week, Armstrong once again vehemently denied that he ever used performance-enhancing drugs.

For the trillionth time Armstrong denied use of PEDs.   Here lies the line of evidence of Armstrong's PED story:
1.  Armstrong's masseuse Emma O'Reilly reportedly says Armstrong juiced.  Source: Walsh's earlier book.  She was even flown to Paris for an investigation interview.  O'Reilly also claims Armstrong backdated the prescription he obtained for corticosteroids in his urine during the Tour.

2.  Armstrong's personal assistant and mechanic Mike Anderson from December 2002 until Armstrong fired him on November 16, 2004 says he found a box of (what he thought was) steroids in Armstrong's possession.

3. An article from L'Equipe ( Velo News)that retro-testing of urine samples showed evidence of EPO in Armstrong's sample.  The story traveled a winding paper trail to infer that old samples from 1999, one of which they claim was Armstrong's sample, showed the evidence.

4. And the currently most interesting evidence from the Andreu's who say they were in a room when Armstrong admitted to using a pharmacopia of PEDs:

Their most explosive claim involves an incident in a hospital conference room 11 years ago. In their respective depositions, both Betsy and Frankie testified (and later explained in detail to SI) that they witnessed Armstrong admit to doctors that he used five performance-enhancing drugs before he underwent cancer treatment in 1996.

On Oct. 27, 1996, the Andreus were among a half dozen of Armstrong's closest friends in a conference room at the Indiana University Hospital as doctors entered to ask important questions about the 25-year-old Armstrong's medical history. Betsy's inclination was to leave.

"Honestly, for me," she told SI, "it was more of a privacy thing, like talking to your doctor about hemorrhoids or something. I said, 'Frankie, let's go.' But Lance said, 'That's okay.'"

Everyone in the room stayed and, according to the Andreus, it was only after that exchange that the doctors began their inquires, leading up to the question: Have you ever taken performance-enhancing drugs?

"He was sitting down, holding onto his IV [stand] with his left hand," says Betsy Andreu, "and they asked him the question."

She says Armstrong looked straight down while ticking off five drugs: EPO, growth hormone, cortisone, steroids and testosterone.

"Once they asked that question and he came out with that answer, I was like, Oh, s---," says Frankie Andreu. "Because I knew what [Betsy] was hearing. I was thinking, Oh my God, the s------ going to hit the fan." (Armstrong's response after the jump)

5. A confirmed association between Armstrong and the notorious cycling doping doctor Michelle Ferrari:

Betsy Andreu testified that Armstrong asked her husband to pull off the highway outside Milano in March 1999, so he could spend an hour in a van with Michelle Ferrari, the notorious Italian doctor who once said, "EPO is not dangerous, it's the abuse that is. It's also dangerous to drink 10 liters of orange juice." (Armstrong says without apology that he consulted with Ferrari for years for advice on training, cadence and nutrition.)

When asked about doping Armstrong replies:

When asked point-blank whether he was clean when he won all of his Tours, Armstrong told SI: "Absolutely. I won the Tour de France once, twice, seven times, because I was the most talented person in the field."

On the even of the Tour de France, on more book by a fellow who appears obsessed with Armstrong.   Same old charges.  Same old stories.  Perhaps energy could better spent in preventing a new generation of cyclists from doping.

 

The Armstrong reply to the Andreus:

When asked about the story, Armstrong says that the Andreu's recollections are "one hundred percent" fabricated. (No one else in the room has confirmed the Andreu's account.)

Frankie and Lance had been good friends since the early 1990s, when they were teammates on Motorola. After Armstrong's recovery, he and then-wife Kristin often dined with the Andreus...

  Asked what Andreu had to gain from lying, Armstrong claims that Betsy is motivated by "bitterness, jealousy and hatred." Members of Armstrong's inner circle point to a section of Betsy's testimony in the SCA case where, they contend, she expressed her "hatred" for him. Armstrong's attorney Tim Herman noted, in his cross examination of Betsy, that "one of the notes you provided to us had a notation on it by you, 'Why do I hate Lance?' Correct?"  

Andreu explained that she was "going through some of the questions I believe you're going to ask me, and one of them is: 'Why do I hate Lance?' That's what it is. It's not me asking myself out loud 'Why do I hate Lance?' That's not what it is."

"Well," Herman replied, "there's a difference between 'Why do I hate Lance?' and 'Do I hate Lance?' You obviously hate Lance."

And so Team Armstrong has contended, ever since.

"That's the reason to fabricate the hospital visit," Armstrong told SI. "I don't hate anybody. That's not the way I roll."

What about Frankie? "He would lie, because he has to support her in some way," Armstrong said.

 

Comments

[Angela]

He does not *hate* anybody? The guy thrives on hate.

[Michele Capaccioli]

From www.wemustact.org

Dear Lance Armstrong,

I have only recently read your statement regarding the Walsh book and what you have defined as “another unobjective book… Trying to jump on the bandwagon of current publicity surrounding cycling, Walsh now issues a recycled version of two earlier French books that were likewise founded upon a demonstrably false string of sensational, untrue and fabricated allegations”.

Personally, I have to say that you are right when you say “I am sick and tired of those who try to profit off the tactics of smear and guilt by innuendo or association”. I am sick as well when I meet people who try to manufacture the reality and accuse “you” of something that you did not do. Sometimes they use a sort of minestrone in which every single part or member owns his/her role: first, they associate themselves towards something that they see dangerous for their own interests; second, they construct their “truth” by simply thinking and promoting that today’s reality is what the others tell about you and the rest does not count; third, they go “outside” their living rooms and use defamation and innuendo to defend their own interests. They even attack the people who think different by them. The acquire trust and especially the can send the message that if “you” think different by us, you will be “attacked” or isolated. By this behaviour they can send other people not to act, otherwise they could “suffer” the same consequences of those who do not think as them. In addition, they use the other people like they would be cards.

I do not like doping practices, because I want to see the sport free from drugs and illegal substances. I would not like to see in the reality people who instigate the others to think that “If he does it, I can do It as well, because today’s society it’s like this”. In a nutshell, the impunity. It seems to me that this is not a strong behaviour, it is a weak behaviour. Today’s reality is composed by several truths and not by an absolute one. In fact, It’s for four years I have learnt to be realistic, by simply recognising that today’s reality can be composed by the cynics, the sceptics, people who do not believe in miracles and by those who manufacture the reality to defend their interests.

Every time you, Lance, are accused of doping practices I ask myself “What the heck is that?”. This is a fine irony of course. I honestly believe in you, dear MELLOW JOHNNY and I am not afraid to publicly say that Walsh book is a demonstration of slimy journalism.

Many years ago I received a card from you and the Lance Armstrong Foundation in which there was a precious advice f yours: “I must encourage you to always keep the faith. The faith in your doctors, the faith in the medicine, the faith in your family and most importantly the faith in yourself. This, my friend, is absolutely the best thing you can do for yourself. Your strength gives so many others hope and inspiration, including myself”. So, I would like to “inspire” you by giving you two very important and precious advices taught to me by my father before his death:

a) go ahead, go on, continue to commit your life, your words, your action to words the loneliness. To me it’s a lifetime commitment. Every time you have to face, directly or indirectly, the “tornados” of cynicism and scepticism, those behaviour who want to manufacture the reality, find a genuine and correct solution. It happens sometimes to receive false accuses of smear and guilt by innuendo and/or association. The best answer to “respond” to them is to find the interior force to go on, being surrounded by genuine and correct people. This is the real force of the person and not the law of the group by which “you” can use the others against something or somebody as they would be cards. These others cards when they realise that they have been used for cynical purposes if they are not respectful people could be aloof with the person who “suffered” the actions of false accuses of smear and guilt by innuendo and/or association. This is the target of every person who made a mistake and has decided not to recognise it or to collaborate only to demonstrate to the others the opposite of what himself made;

b) I would be sick and tired of those who try to profit off - even socially - the tactics of smear and guilt by innuendo and/or association. Unfortunately, in the life you cannot meet all sincere, honest and loyal people. It happens to meet “someone” disonest, who continues not to admit his mistake/s, or he does it partially, but at the same time he tries to portrait himself as an individual who completely admitted his mistake/s. Try to be optimistic and please do not forget that outside your house the life can be with no rules, cynical, with cynics and sceptics, with people who manufacture the reality to defend their personal interests by using others as they would be cards and by feeling to them the interest to continue not to act, because they have to achieve the goal for which they study, they behave, they act et cetera.

LIVESTRONG Lance, LIVESTRONG.


Yours faithfully,


Michele “Mic” Capaccioli.

[David Moskovitz]

Have you read the book yet?

One clarification, in point (3), six of Armstrong's samples from the 1999 Tour tested positive for r-EPO. The full story complicated, but quite damning.

From the Nation: I have not completed the book, but I have looked at the pictures. :-)

[john s bicondova]

Michele are you kidding me? The facts are there, it isn't just lance it is all of them. I don't know if you compete in endurance sports but it is a real problem.
Michele you need to read something other than the typical high profile magazines.
jb

[neil]

Although Mr Armstrong is linked to a number of noble causes (which Walsh openly admires), it is extremely hard to believe someone could win seven tours when so many of the competition were clearly (and have since admitted to being) 'juiced' - is he superhuman?

Based on all the information it is incredible that people are still blinkered by simple denials and other good deeds.