Bribed drug test lab workers, says Kohl
--D-y
doping-labs>
Money talks. Ingenious way to subvert The System. --D-y
Susan Walker
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-confirms-manager-bribed-anti-doping-labs
> Money talks. Ingenious way to subvert The System.
Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
think even for a non-doper �150 would be good investment for having that
done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
honest.
Anton Berlin
wrote:
> --D-y wrote:
> >http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-confirms-manager-bribed-anti-dop...
> > Money talks. Ingenious way to subvert The System.
>
> Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
> official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
> done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
> honest.
Susan, you seem like a reasonable and intelligent well balanced person
---- perhaps the only one in RBR. (that's sincere)
But do you honestly believe that any of these cats are clean?
Susan Walker
> On Aug 15, 10:40 am, Susan Walker wrote:
>> Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
>> official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
>> done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
>> honest.
>
> Susan, you seem like a reasonable and intelligent well balanced person
> ---- perhaps the only one in RBR. (that's sincere)
Nonono, there's always Carl, Ben and Ryan to precede me. At least they
are balanced enough to use their real names.
> But do you honestly believe that any of these cats are clean?
Sure, some of them, maybe even up to a third of all riders.
Dolfy
> Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
> official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
> think even for a non-doper ￜ150 would be good investment for having that
> done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
> honest.
That last one is quite a good idea, if you do it more than one time or
twice. The only different thing is that Kohl used the results to keep is
his doping use hidden within the limits.
--
Dolfy
- naaisgroep : alt.dolfy.forever
- Westfrieske zaitte :
- Zￜ drok as 'n kￜp mit ien pul
z
> Susan Walker <myful...@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
>> official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
>> think even for a non-doper ￜ150 would be good investment for having that
>> done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
>> honest.
>
> That last one is quite a good idea, if you do it more than one time or
> twice. The only different thing is that Kohl used the results to keep is
> his doping use hidden within the limits.
>
That's the thing: to find out the edge where your dosing won't be
detected, you'll have to do multiple tests. In essence building up your
own personal, private biological passport.
--D-y
wrote:
> --D-y wrote:
> >http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-confirms-manager-bribed-anti-dop...
>
> Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
> official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
> done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
> honest.
Um, "bribed" was the word in the story used to describe payment to the
lab workers, along with "forbidden", "illegal" used to describe the
tests themselves. Since these tests were obviously intended to break
such laws and rules forbidding "sporting fraud" (by whatever name) and
"doping" in general, he (Matschiner) didn't exactly walk in the front
door, samples in hand, credit card at the ready.
Why the wiggle, Susan? --D-y
Bob Schwartz
Dumbasses,
Voet describes taking a course of clenbuterol and submitting
samples for testing until they came back negative. This is
old skool stuff, except in Voet's case they were able to
determine the detection window without subjecting the riders
to any risk.
Bob Schwartz
Michael Press
<4629a3fc-d016-4e37...@k6g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
--D-y <dusto...@mac.com> wrote:
I like "illegally tested samples".
Is Kohl still talking? In a sane
world there would be a contract
out on him.
--
Michael Press
MagillaGorilla
clenbuterol = asthma = cheaters
MagillaGorilla
Evidently, it didn't work.
Magilla
Bob Schwartz
Dumbass,
Sure it did. He tested positive for CERA, which riders didn't
know there was a test for. But he was also taking testosterone
which, thanks to his own testing, he knew the detection limits
of.
Please try to keep up.
Bob Schwartz
z
> On Aug 15, 10:40 am, Susan Walker <myfulln...@xs4all.nl.invalid>
> wrote:
>> --D-y wrote:
>>> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-confirms-manager-bribed-anti-dop...
>>> Money talks. Ingenious way to subvert The System.
>> Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
>> official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
>> done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
>> honest.
>
> Um, "bribed" was the word in the story used to describe payment to the
> lab workers, along with "forbidden", "illegal" used to describe the
> tests themselves. Since these tests were obviously intended to break
> such laws and rules forbidding "sporting fraud" (by whatever name) and
> "doping" in general, he (Matschiner) didn't exactly walk in the front
> door, samples in hand, credit card at the ready.
>
> Why the wiggle, Susan? --D-y
>
I wonder what state/national/Euro laws are in place that prohibit
private citizens from having their urine samples tested for their own
personal purposes. Isn't that what numerous PT teams have set up to
monitor (for upstanding or other reasons) their riders?
There could be some confusion in the translated piece or it could be a
case where people have attached the term 'illegal' to the rules of the
sport, i.e. it is 'illegal' to hold onto the DS vehicle while going up a
climb.
Matschiner very well may have walked in the front door, samples in hand,
(although probably cash at the ready). Likely under false pretenses, but
otherwise quite possibly no differently than any other customer of the lab.
Susan Walker
> On Aug 15, 10:40 am, Susan Walker wrote:
>> --D-y wrote:
>>> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-confirms-manager-bribed-anti-dop...
>>> Money talks. Ingenious way to subvert The System.
>> Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
>> official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
>> done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
>> honest.
>
> Um, "bribed" was the word in the story used to describe payment to the
> lab workers, along with "forbidden", "illegal" used to describe the
> tests themselves. Since these tests were obviously intended to break
> such laws and rules forbidding "sporting fraud" (by whatever name) and
> "doping" in general, he (Matschiner) didn't exactly walk in the front
> door, samples in hand, credit card at the ready.
>
> Why the wiggle, Susan? --D-y
Oh, no wiggle, it probably is bribery because it goes against what the
lab techs should or shouldn't do according to their contracts. Don't
know if there's anything illegal going on, tho. Well, the confession
about doped samples covers that of course; but without that and without
actual doping, would it still be illegal to pay a poor lab tech to do
some after-hours work? Seems slap-on-the-wrist material from an
employer's point of view.
Nobody
<myful...@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote:
>--D-y wrote:
>> On Aug 15, 10:40 am, Susan Walker wrote:
>>> --D-y wrote:
>>>> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-confirms-manager-bribed-anti-dop...
>>>> Money talks. Ingenious way to subvert The System.
>>> Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
>>> official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
>>> think even for a non-doper �150 would be good investment for having that
>>> done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
>>> honest.
>>
>> Um, "bribed" was the word in the story used to describe payment to the
>> lab workers, along with "forbidden", "illegal" used to describe the
>> tests themselves. Since these tests were obviously intended to break
>> such laws and rules forbidding "sporting fraud" (by whatever name) and
>> "doping" in general, he (Matschiner) didn't exactly walk in the front
>> door, samples in hand, credit card at the ready.
>>
>> Why the wiggle, Susan? --D-y
>
>Oh, no wiggle, it probably is bribery because it goes against what the
>lab techs should or shouldn't do according to their contracts. Don't
>know if there's anything illegal going on, tho. Well, the confession
>about doped samples covers that of course; but without that and without
>actual doping, would it still be illegal to pay a poor lab tech to do
>some after-hours work? Seems slap-on-the-wrist material from an
>employer's point of view.
In the 'old days', one could do a quick smac-6 or a CBC on yourself or
a fellow laboratorian. But now, things are so automated that it would
be nearly impossible. They used to get a collection of 'normals' from
other sections, like healthy people in for other blood work and put
that sample in, but now, the machines have their own caibration
samples.
Some labs in very small hospitals may be different but they are
vanishing rapidly due to farming out the work to larger centers.
Obviously, they did run them, but it's kinda puzzling. I get the sense
that the lab administration had to know about it and is just
disclaiming, but that's a guess.
MagillaGorilla
Only a loser would think there wasn't a test for CERA.
Magilla
--D-y
> --D-y wrote:
> > On Aug 15, 10:40 am, Susan Walker wrote:
> >> --D-y wrote:
> >>>http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kohl-confirms-manager-bribed-anti-dop...
> >>> Money talks. Ingenious way to subvert The System.
> >> Bribed is a big word. He didn't pay them for a negative result of an
> >> official sample, he paid to get his own samples tested privately. I
> >> done. Have some reference material to keep those damn Froggy lab techs
> >> honest.
>
> > Um, "bribed" was the word in the story used to describe payment to the
> > lab workers, along with "forbidden", "illegal" used to describe the
> > tests themselves. Since these tests were obviously intended to break
> > such laws and rules forbidding "sporting fraud" (by whatever name) and
> > "doping" in general, he (Matschiner) didn't exactly walk in the front
> > door, samples in hand, credit card at the ready.
>
> > Why the wiggle, Susan? --D-y
>
> Oh, no wiggle, it probably is bribery because it goes against what the
> lab techs should or shouldn't do according to their contracts. Don't
> know if there's anything illegal going on, tho. Well, the confession
> about doped samples covers that of course; but without that and without
> actual doping, would it still be illegal to pay a poor lab tech to do
> some after-hours work? Seems slap-on-the-wrist material from an
> employer's point of view.
It would be in the interests of the lab to not only fire those
involved but use whatever power/influence they have at their disposal
to prosecute criminally, and go after them in civil court, too.
But I still don't trust labs. Too easy to bribe workers, etc. etc.
Get it?
"Houston Drug Lab Scandal". Only one of many. --D-y
--D-y
Nobody
wrote:
>> > Why the wiggle, Susan? �--D-y
>>
>> Oh, no wiggle, it probably is bribery because it goes against what the
>> lab techs should or shouldn't do according to their contracts. Don't
>> know if there's anything illegal going on, tho. Well, the confession
>> about doped samples covers that of course; but without that and without
>> actual doping, would it still be illegal to pay a poor lab tech to do
>> some after-hours work? Seems slap-on-the-wrist material from an
>> employer's point of view.
>
>It would be in the interests of the lab to not only fire those
>involved but use whatever power/influence they have at their disposal
>to prosecute criminally, and go after them in civil court, too.
>
>But I still don't trust labs. Too easy to bribe workers, etc. etc.
>
>Get it?
>
>"Houston Drug Lab Scandal". Only one of many. --D-y
>--D-y
Just google your favorite acronym.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/17/national/main544209.shtml
It's only going to get worse. Some forensics labs have stuff piled to
the ceiling. Add staffing cuts and legal suits and long hours and poor
pay...
It's nothing like you see on TV's CSI. Plus the chicks...what chicks?
drmofe
> Why the wiggle, Susan? --D-y
Got them cheap ex-Walmart
cur...@the-md-russells.org
<myful...@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote:
>Oh, no wiggle, it probably is bribery because it goes against what the
>lab techs should or shouldn't do according to their contracts. Don't
>know if there's anything illegal going on, tho. Well, the confession
>about doped samples covers that of course; but without that and without
>actual doping, would it still be illegal to pay a poor lab tech to do
>some after-hours work? Seems slap-on-the-wrist material from an
>employer's point of view.
We would have fired them. And probably had to rescind and retest every
other sample in the testing lot at our expense. To get inappropriate
testing specimens in the lots would have required complete subversion
of the testing protocols and procedures, which start from where they
are acquired to the point they are run through the machines to how the
results are reported through the correlation process, part of which is
used to make part of the process deliberately blind to knowing whose
specimen is whose - which doesn't work when you are sneaking specific
specimens into the lots.
Either they are using ancient methods of testing and tracking, or the
lab techs went way beyond the bounds. No slap on the wrist IMO, but
fired with a major black spot on their records.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
Nobody
Does your lab(s) use the Toyota "Lean manuf." methodology? Gah, that
sucks (for the techs). No chair or stool; they make you empty your
pockets of cell phones or organizers and just crank for 60 min.
Burnout is high.
This is everyone's fav part (sarcasm):
o Remove some people (or increase quotas) and go through this work
again (the Oh No !! moment)
cur...@the-md-russells.org
>Does your lab(s) use the Toyota "Lean manuf." methodology? Gah, that
>sucks (for the techs). No chair or stool; they make you empty your
>pockets of cell phones or organizers and just crank for 60 min.
>Burnout is high.
I am no longer with the lab. I work on occasion with Lean
manufacturing techniques, but there is no reason that it necessarily
translates to something that 'sucks for the techs'. It often means
that the process is re-engineered to remove bottlenecks at the points
of inefficiency that then means more work flow at a more constant
rate, which may mean more work over time, but it also has a primary
philosophy of reducing waste by reducing error rates, and if that
means that each bench or machine has less work flow per tech, that may
be how it is implemented. The Toyota implementation of Lean has always
had as a component the ability of a workman to stop the process if an
error requires it, as an example.
The primary controllable cost of a highly automated lab is reducing
the number of retests done at lab expense. Since that is not only the
cost of the agents, but also set-up time, retest labor and
documentation, generally it does not make sense to push the process
rates up too high (meaning past the point where error rate increases)
- not if you are working under one of the more senior accreditations,
where documenting the errors and responses is a major headache.
Nobody
>generally it does not make sense to push the process
>rates up too high (meaning past the point where error rate increases)
>- not if you are working under one of the more senior accreditations,
>where documenting the errors and responses is a major headache.
>
>Curtis L. Russell
>Odenton, MD (USA)
>Just someone on two wheels...
Spoke to one of the former supes of the Hematology branch in the
parking lot of BestBuy a week ago, and he said errors are higher than
ever, so they must not be implementing it right. I think the interface
is the major problem - getting the results into the system. The main
interface and the system running the analyzers isn't always synching
up or something, from what I hear.
One of my friends ran the Sysmex analyzer and due to the high learnin
curve during troubleshooting, none of the weekend staff wanted to go
near it. To me, lab automation is not ready for prime time due to the
nearly incompatible interface software and the complexity (and poorly
documented) of the troubleshooting guidelines.
cur...@the-md-russells.org
>One of my friends ran the Sysmex analyzer and due to the high learnin
>curve during troubleshooting, none of the weekend staff wanted to go
>near it. To me, lab automation is not ready for prime time due to the
>nearly incompatible interface software and the complexity (and poorly
>documented) of the troubleshooting guidelines.
Yep, that was a three year process with more spent on the change
orders than the original software. Partly made to work because of the
'shadow programmer', who was the guy that wrote the old Unix based lab
system and kept making suggestions for the new. I left before we
ironed out the data exchange with the accounting system, but that was
sooo not the priority. Error issues pretty much put me to sleep at the
management meetings, what with the lab people talking about them so
much and me never making any...
Lean is just the latest heavily misapplied concept, with people
unwilling to understand that the concept really is, in this case, more
important the technology or incorporating some canned process. It
really does work, but it has to be a complete buy in, top to bottom.
Worse, it doesn't really fit into old models of cost accounting, so it
can actually look worse by most old accounting metrics than what it
replaces. But it does work.
Nobody
What's happened is that Management became even more tyrannical, since
one of the 'goals' is no negative input from the peasants.
Trouble is, in a robust system worked by experts (lab techs) you
-want- input and feedback.
Ordinarily, I'm an average whinger, but I feel very, very sorry for
these beleagured folks. I don't know how they do it. They keep cutting
bodies and upping workload and the errors continue, even though hey
demote or fire people making them. It seems like they're using this as
a way to trim the workforce. I'm glad I got out in '03, less than a
month before it all started.
There's something wrong, and I wonder why OSHA isn't interested in
people being made to stand up for 70 minutes, all chairs removed.
These are not youngsters and many are having foot and knee problems
but dare not complain. I fear it's going to go 'postal'.
Susan Walker
http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/2009/08/17/closing-out-this-black-swan-business/
Bob Schwartz
> Joe Lindsey perspective:
> http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/2009/08/17/closing-out-this-black-swan-business/
>
Somehow Joe got the impression that WADA runs the lab.
He further assumes that it is somehow unethical for a
lab to accept money to run a test on a sample. Comedy
ensues from there.
Bob Schwartz
Nobody
It's probably NAMAS and/or WELAC. He can be forgiven for the
misattribution - it may be that WADA is some kind of gate-keeper or
has an organizational function in the process.
But you can't forgive his analysis:
"Second, damn, the WADA guys work cheap. Kohl claimed the payoffs were
no more than 500 Euro each. You�ve got to wonder how much it costs to
flat-out rig a test."
Dumbass...
This comment was of interest:
"...large uncertainties in how individuals metabolize doping products
plus analysis that has a significant interpretive element plus
widespread low level micro-dosing makes the distribution of positive
and non-positive results functionally random and unrelated to actual
drug use. Non-random targeted testing in this context essentially
becomes self-fulfilling. If you test enough samples from riders you
suspect of doping, sooner or later you are going to turn up a positive
result for a fair number of those riders."
Tom Kunich
news:-pednVSvVOD0RBTX...@giganews.com...
What's more, he claims that the tests were run to find the highest dose that
will still test negative. Could it not have been run to detect any cheating
among his own people and then advising them that if they cheat in that
manner they'd get caught?
And Lindsey thinks that the lab COULD report incorrect findings on a sample.
While that's possible it is highly unlikely that the technician, who runs
the almost entirely automated test equipment that usually report the
findings straight into the computer system, would be capable of intercepting
one data set and replacing it with another.
I have no trouble believing that a large percentage of the peloton uses
drugs of one sort or another. After all, they've been pouring pills and
shooting crap into them for decades now and they just get used to using
stuff like that to improve their performances. Whether it's legal or not is
difficult to separate when big money is minutes away.
Henry
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:36:35 -0700 (PDT), --D-y <dustoyev...@mac.com>
my wife's been a lab rat for 20 years and chicks outnumber dicks about
5-1.
cur...@the-md-russells.org
>What's happened is that Management became even more tyrannical, since
>one of the 'goals' is no negative input from the peasants.
Kind of makes it 'not Toyota'. Oh, well, as long as they know the
buzzwords, they think they'll get it right, eventually.
Nobody
<snogfest_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> It's nothing like you see on TV's CSI. Plus the chicks...what chicks?
>
>my wife's been a lab rat for 20 years and chicks outnumber dicks about
>5-1.
I meant the CSI/Callie type chick, as in blonde movie star types. Most
lab females were rather bookish looking in my lab(s), and they were
about 70/30, so you're right empirically.
Nobody
Yeah, the typical Japanese model is the employees manage the managers
(more Theory Y), who must make them content or get replaced. Here they
use the buzz word version but with the onerous Western type of
dictatorial style (Theory X). Used to be the workers slacked off a
little, middle managers slacked off a lot and top managers were always
in meetings doing no work.
Now everyone but the top works their butt off and the Top guys are
pompous and ruthless, b/c their bosses are looking for cuts or the lab
will get outsourced.
Like I said, glad I'm out.
Michael Press
Nobody<nob...@nowhere.net> wrote:
You mentioned it several times, and I do not get the idea.
Various times I worked on my feet all day long. Different
jobs. Machine shop; house painting up and down ladders
humping ladders humping paint; installing plumbing. What
is the point? Ernest Hemingway wrote standing up.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
Susan Walker <myful...@xs4all.nl.invalid> wrote:
> Joe Lindsey perspective:
> http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/2009/08/17/closing-out-this-black-swan-business/
Here is where Lindsey shows his inexperience:
"Second, damn, the WADA guys work cheap.
Kohl claimed the payoffs were no more than 500 Euro each.
You’ve got to wonder how much it costs to flat-out rig a test."
Government workers sell out their department to foreign powers
for comparable bribes. (Treason)
Joe Lindsey is just another virgin had somebody shove his thumb
up his bum and is screaming rape. Wise up, chump.
--
Michael Press
cur...@the-md-russells.org
wrote:
>Ernest Hemingway wrote standing up.
That way, the odds were better he was sober.
Nobody
wrote:
>> These are not youngsters and many are having foot and knee problems
>> but dare not complain. I fear it's going to go 'postal'.
>
>You mentioned it several times, and I do not get the idea.
>Various times I worked on my feet all day long. Different
>jobs. Machine shop; house painting up and down ladders
>humping ladders humping paint; installing plumbing. What
>is the point? Ernest Hemingway wrote standing up.
>
>--
>Michael Press
See above. They are standing on concrete and they're all over 50,
majority of them overweight females. Climbing up and down ladders is
not the same as standing in one place, according to them, but I'd
agree, you get no leg muscle action to pump the lymph and blood.
Perhaps you'd denigrate them for being overweight and deny them simple
things like sitting, or even a tall stool to rest one foot, IDK. Also
we're not talking 'various times', or 'different jobs' we're talking
all the time, same job, same position, not moving more than to turn
around in the machine kiosk, though only for 60-90 min with 15 min
break. Personally, I believe them.
I suspect when you're late 50s early 60s you'll be more sympathetic.
The body, though robust through the 50s in many, does start to degrade
in the 60s, losing muscle tone in the late 70s. I know many ride
through that period, but they're different/lucky.
Tom Kunich
news:ln8l85d5gpr3gg7eq...@4ax.com...
>
> I suspect when you're late 50s early 60s you'll be more sympathetic.
> The body, though robust through the 50s in many, does start to degrade
> in the 60s, losing muscle tone in the late 70s. I know many ride
> through that period, but they're different/lucky.
I just got back from a tour from Eureka (actually Arcadia) to San Francisco
with a guy 77 years old and he kicked my butt until the last day.
Nobody
I realize there are phenoms. I'm just going by personal observation,
myself, my dad, a friend on another list, all of whom work(ed) hard,
train hard, and seeing more than a gradual decline when certain
milestones arrive. Thought you were near 60; no?
I'm talking more 'do it now while you can' than 'oh, someday you won't
be able to'.
I really wanted to get my Dad on a regime of hGH to combat his muscle
wasting, which was profound when he hit 80. Nonetheless, he's still
out doing carpentry around the house, digging in the garden, cutting
the neighbor's grass for free.
Tom Kunich
>
> Thought you were near 60; no?
Almost 65 and forced into retirement by lack of work.
> I'm talking more 'do it now while you can' than 'oh, someday you won't
> be able to'.
And what I'm saying is that I'm seeing more and more that you might be able
to right up to the point of collapse.
> I really wanted to get my Dad on a regime of hGH to combat his muscle
> wasting, which was profound when he hit 80. Nonetheless, he's still
> out doing carpentry around the house, digging in the garden, cutting
> the neighbor's grass for free.
We don't know what the effects of hormone "therapy" is. We do know that it
is fairly easy after about 60 to trigger cancers that your body can't
correct. Better safe than sorry?
Michael Press
Nobody<nob...@nowhere.net> wrote:
`Various times' means months on end, every day.
--
Michael Press
Nobody
Not being an endrocrinologist, I'd have to give a guarded 'no' on
that. In general, we all make neoplasms all the time and our body will
destroy them. As we age, true, the immune system becomes less robust
and protein copies are made with transcription errors. However, tumor
growth takes time, often 10 years to become a threat in many cases,
though some do grow quickly.
So, -in general- it's much "safer" in terms of mortality for someone
after age 50 to take hormonal treatment, mainly because tumor growth
in -most- (or some) cases takes longer to affect one than other
mortality and morbidity.
However, you're not wrong to be, uh, concerned. hGH, unlike things
such as Testosterone seems to have been shown to accelerate certain
types of cancers, -if- they are pre-existings.
GH is reported to carry a risk of acceleratng premalignant colonic
adenomas, but the study is also controversial. Certainly you want to
have screening tests for pituitary tumors, etc. The occurrence of new
adenomas was significantly related to both serum GH and IGF-1 levels
and patients who had IGF-1 levels above the normal range had a
4�5-fold increase, in patients with acromegaly (high GH levels due to
pituitary levels). Risk assessment is complex. We have a > five fold
chance of falling in the bathtub after age 60 also. :)
Testosterone has not been shown to -cause- any neoplasms, but will
exacerbate existing ones. (That's why prostate ca victims are given
depo-provera and chemically castrated).
We just don't know enough about the endocrine system to give a good
suggestion on old age HR. Many docs run away screaming invectives, but
some say it's a good thing. Sylvester Stallone, the poster child for
Chinese GH (Jintropin) could be used as an example (both pro and con
some say).
Random link:
<http://blogcritics.org/scitech/article/sylvester-stallone-admits-using-human-growth/>
I would say it's beneficial enough to warrant getting several informed
opinions from endocrinologists and make an informed choice.
(sorry to be long)
Nobody
wrote:
>> I suspect when you're late 50s early 60s you'll be more sympathetic.
>> The body, though robust through the 50s in many, does start to degrade
>> in the 60s, losing muscle tone in the late 70s. I know many ride
>> through that period, but they're different/lucky.
>
>`Various times' means months on end, every day.
Sorry, don't see your point. Zulu warriors run around in Africa in
barefeet and drink cow blood straight. Why don't you try that? Not
tough enough? ;)
Donald Munro
> Sorry, don't see your point. Zulu warriors run around in Africa in
> barefeet and drink cow blood straight. Why don't you try that? Not
> tough enough? ;)
Actually its the Masai who drink blood although they normally mix it with
milk. WADA would probably have tested them them but none of the vampires
returned from their mission.
Nobody
My bad, you are correct and win a prize. I should have got that
straight, especially after suffering through eps of Expedition:
Africa.
I used Zulu, to be frank, because I figured he'd confuse the Masai
with the biblical jewish tribe (Masada), and wasn't up for a religion
diatribe.
bjwe...@gmail.com
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:40:30 +0200, Donald Munro
>
Masada is a fortress at which a particular Jewish
rebellion made a doomed last stand - sort of an
Alamo, or Branch Davidian compound for zealots
(this is where the word "zealots" comes from).
Not a tribe. A potent symbol for contemporary people
who like the idea of religious warfare, valiant last
stands, and somebody else's heroic death
(you know, the Semitic equivalent of the Braveheart
or Confederate Lost Cause crowd).
The ADL will be picketing your house shortly.
They're already at mine.
Ben
--D-y
wrote:
> The ADL will be picketing your house shortly.
The Anti Destination League?
(sorry, I always liked that one, you know, when you're trying to get
somewhere and the street is blocked off or something)
--D-y
Donald Munro
> The ADL will be picketing your house shortly.
> They're already at mine.
Don't worry, in Arizona you have the legal right to carry 2 (two)
AK47's.