Click the Like button to get updates directly in your Facebook feed

Top Lance Armstrong Myths, Busted

What to believe—and forget—in Lance's doping saga


The Lance Armstrong doping scandal has not been one that’s easy to stay on top of. From a large cast of players to ping pong style lawsuits, “blood doping” to alleged conspiracy and coercion, “breaking news” in this saga happens almost on the daily. And given that, until very recently the pro cycling community was dominated by a Code of Silence, the world is one that we, the public, had known very little about.

x

But as of this week, it’s confirmed—Lance Armstrong, the public’s ever-fighting, ever-denying, ever-Tweeting cancer hero, used performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) throughout his cycling career. He told Oprah Winfrey, and the world will know!

This stark change in attitude came about thanks to a 1,000-plus page “Reasoned Decision” that was released by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) in October, which lays out Armstrong’s drug use—what, how, when, with whom—from his first Tour in 1998 all the way through 2010. This included sworn testimony from 26 people—including 11 of Armstrong’s former teammates—and cited documentary evidence such as emails, scientific data, laboratory test results and even financial payments as corroborating evidence. And as sponsors dropped left and right, Armstrong was, seemingly, left without much choice than to come clean.

Through all of the confusion, though, there has (unsurprisingly) been a lot of…well, misinformation flying around. Myths, if you will. Some were started by Lance or his lawyers, others by his friends and still others just by the general public, but each of them seems to lend itself to a version of Lance that benefits exactly one person—himself.

So, read for yourself. Lance Armstrong myths: busted.

Have a Lance myth you want debunked? Tell us on Facebook!

Comment on this story


0
3.153845
13 Ratings
xxxxxxx
Related Searches
Like this story? Get the Active Times Updates
Get The Active Times in your inbox


Today on The Active Times
The Active Times Video Network
Citi Bike Shapes Up NYC
How New Yorkers use Citi Bike: Roll through a hurricane, save a buck and get fit on their daily commute.

Comment on This Story

I would add that the common argument I hear when "pseudo-defending" Armstrong is that, "It's not about the PEDs per se, it's about that he attacked others who came brought allegations against him." That case may hold water with the Euro-newspaper he sued. But that's about it. There were no other accusers who just quietly went to the USADA or whatever with tips to "clean up cycling." They were all out to exploit for personal gain. Every single individual that brought accusations against him. At some point I lose sympathy when your motive is personal gain. Yes, they were right, but on some level if it was about "cleaning up sport" they would have done it without motive of gain. None of them did. As my Sunday school teacher used to say, two wrongs don't make a right. Speak up for right and I'd feel bad fo them. For personal profit? You're not exactly a martyr (especially since most of them were all in for it as well until they decided they could gain more by being a "whistle blower" than a "team player").

Don't mistake my attack on this article as excusing Lance cheating. PEDs were not allowed, he used them, he did cheat...BUT...Of course Armstrong was targeted for being the best in cycling and not "the best doper." he could have had a regime rivaling Ivan Drago but if he finished 20th every year no one would be hunting him. And yes, he may still well be the best Tour rider regardless. As the article itself points out everyone in his era who placed was busted for PEDs. He cheated. but so did everyone. I favor cleaning up sport, but he still won on an even playing field. And Livestrong does count as a credit towards him. Even if accurate that it doesn't give all the money it raises to cancer, it would have raised zero money for cancer if Lance was a run of the mill guy again finsiing 20th in the tour every year. His name towards it did do good. Armstrong cheated, and cycling should be cleaned up. But that doesnt detract from everything he did, or make the man a monster (even if he is a jerk as many reports indicate). He still won in a manner consistent with his time and raised a lot of awareness and money for cancer. Cheater? Sure. Devil incarnate? Hardly.

Wow, no real need for any actualy journalistic integrity at all huh. Here is my half truths and lies that I am calling the REAL facts and myths, debunked, because I actually spent 10 minutes doing research. Time to pile on Lance now I guess because all the other dopers got caught and told their "story". Of course never mind that cycling was barely recognized at all by most of the world before Lance. Yeah they could dope without concern at all back in the good ole days. Then along come someone who managed to win 7 times in a row, because he was such a better doper than everyone else. That even sounds stupid typing it out. Never mind the millions made for cancer, oh wait that was just his front.

Yeah and only Lance made a dime in all of this, he was the only one that profited and everyone else suffered for it. Never hear any great stories about how the New England Patriots cheated and then had the evidence destroyed before anyone got to see just how much. How many PEDs are being used in professional sports considering how often they get caught? Doesn't matter I guess since Lance was so dominate for so long, it makes his crime far worse.