La Tour de Farce Continues

Lance Armstrong, cancer survivor and 7-time winner of the Tour de France, is being dogged yet again by allegations that he admitted to doping in 1986, three years before his first Tour win in 1999.

He, of course, emphatically denies the allegations.

French newspaper Le Monde says that Armstrong's former teammate Frankie Andreu and his wife Betsy testified under oath that they heard Armstrong admit to doping in response to his doctors' questions while he was in the hospital in 1986, after undergoing brain surgery to remove tumors that had spread there from his testicular cancer.

I am of two minds about this. On one hand, NO competent doctor would ever ask such a question in anything other than a confidential setting. There is nothing to suggest that Armstrong's doctors were not competent. There is nothing in his medical records confirming that the doctors ever elicited such information from him, or that he volunteered such information. If Armstrong ever had made such statements, they would have been included in his medical records because such information would be critical to the course and nature of his treatment and recovery.

Besides, the man had just undergone brain surgery. I have a suspicion that his speech may not have been totally clear or coherent given what he'd just undergone. Who knows what it may have sounded like he said?

On the other hand, testicular cancer is a known risk of using steroids and other illegal doping agents. It is also a relatively rare cancer--and, I suspect, its presence played a role in outing Jason Giambi's past steroid use in major league baseball (but that's a story for another day).

In addition, the testimony from the Andreus came as part of the defense against a suit Armstrong brought against a company which was refusing to pay Armstrong a multimillion dollar bonus for his 2004 Tour win. The company lost the suit, and had to pay Armstrong the bonus plus an additional two million dollar penalty. The arbitration panel did not believe the Andreus' testimony in light of all the other evidence to the contrary.

So why would the Andreus make such questionable allegations? Armstrong says that they all at one time were good friends, but that Betsy now hated him and Frankie felt he had to support his wife. [Who knows? Maybe the company trying not to pay Armstrong promised them a lesser, but still substantial amount of money for their testimony. This is PURE speculation on my part, but someone ought to look into it.--Ed.]

I know the French press has it in for Armstrong. I know that people are capable of lying about things to an absurd degree for whatever perceived personal justifications they may have. I know that normally, one can deduce that the person who is lying is the one who has more to lose if the truth be revealed. But I cannot get past the fact that competent doctors would never ask a patient for such information in a non-confidential setting. So for now, I remain in Armstrong's corner in the face of this latest round of vitriol.