Lance Armstong and The Slander of Performance Enhancing Drugs

When it comes to being a celebrity, fame and controversy tend to follow you wherever you go.  This especially applies to Lance Armstrong, one of the greatest athletes of all time, who is facing charges that he used performance-enhancing drugs in the 1999 Tour de France.  Armstrong’s accusations of EPO use depict not only the controversial nature of performance-enhancing drugs, but also show how such a scandal can forever affect the future of the athlete accused.

The Science of EPO

Among performance-enhancing drugs, one substance ranks among the most popular.  EPO is a hormone that is generally used for sports that require a lot of endurance.  Therefore, accusations of EPO use have plagued endurance athletes such as marathon runners, cyclists, and cross-country skiers.  This shows that Lance Armstrong and the world of cycling are not alone when it comes to scandals involving EPO.  This protein hormone, scientifically called erythropoietin, is naturally secreted by the kidneys when oxygen levels are low.  The hormone then tells bone marrow cells to create red blood cells, which are then transported to various tissues throughout the body.  However, in large quantities, EPO can be dangerous.  “While EPO can boost blood oxygen levels by up to 10%, the blood is thickened by the increased number of red blood cells. So, when EPO is used, the heart is forced to work harder and the risks of a heart attack or stroke is increased.  This shows that juicing up on EPO is not only illegal, it can also be life threatening.  The benefits of EPO show why it is a leading performance-enhancing drug, but the dangers involved with overuse prove it to be extremely risky.

The Armstrong Controversy

Because of the vast success of Lance Armstrong, he has always been clouded in suspicion, but it took one article to put these suspicions out into the open.  In 2005, the French sports newspaper L’Equipereported that a urine sample taken from Armstrong in 1999 contained traces of EPO.  The newspaper stated that six samples taken from Armstrong had revealed EPO use.  L’Equipe did not specify whom the other six samples were from.  Yet these allegations were blatantly denied by Lance Armstrong.  Said Armstrong, “The article is nothing short of tabloid journalism.  I will simply restate what I have said many times:  I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs.”  This shows that Armstrong is not willing to back down from L’Equipe.  (L’Equipereported that only half of Armstrong’s samples in the 1999 race were found in storage, with the other half being most likely destroyed.)  Armstrong had tested positively for drugs only once in his career: during the 1999 Tour, a urine sample of Armstrong’s showed traces of cartico-steroids, but he was cleared when his U.S. Postal team proved he was using a cream containing the substance to ease the pain of a saddle sore.  Other than that incident, Armstrong has remained clean throughout his Tour de France Career.  The L’Equipe article called Lance Armstrong’s credibility into question, and it sparked a wave of investigations into Armstrong’s race history. 

Image via Wikipedia

What it Means for Armstrong’s Future

Because of the L’Equipearticle, Armstrong will now be under intense scrutiny for the rest of his cycling career.  Lance Armstrong’s domination of Tour de France since 1998 has resulted in the French always being suspicious of him.  Armstrong once said, “The French have always hated me, and to be honest, I have never really cared for the French myself.”  This shows that because of the tension between the French and Lance Armstrong, the L’Equipearticle is not without bias.  Armstrong himself has pledged complete transparency in regards to his return to the Tour de France, and he has said that he will gladly participate in frequent drug tests throughout the Tour.  However, many French called for Armstrong to be banned from his return to the Tour in 2009, and the World Anti-Doping Agency has said that Armstrong will be under consistent investigation during his return to the race.  Therefore, the act of transparency by Armstrong proves that he is willing to give it all it takes to clear his name.  Yet many are excited and supportive of Armstrong’s comeback.  Said Rolf Anda, the Team Columbia sports director, “If he is actually going to raise $50 million for cancer, save a couple thousand lives, then you can’t criticize his comeback for one second.” This shows that many are still standing firmly behind Armstrong’s efforts.  Though he still has his supporters, the world of cycling will be probing Armstrong for any kind of suspicious activity.

Lance Armstrong’s accusations show that the controversial nature of performance-enhancing drugs can forever affect the lives of those accused.  The 2005 article from L’Equipehas enveloped Armstrong in a scandal that will be very hard for him to get out of.  However, we must hope that Armstrong will be able to put all of these accusations behind him, and that he will finish his Tour de France career with the same success that he has had in years passed.

Sources used for this article:

Pelkey, Charles. “L’Equipe Alleges Armstrong Samples Show EPO Use in ’99 Tour”. August  23, 2005. Competitor  Group, et al. 5   Feb 2009.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

“Performance Enhancing Drugs”. World of Forensic Science. Eds. K. Lerner and Brenda Lerner.  Vol. 2. Detroit:           Gale, 2005. 3pp. 2 vols. Gale Virtual Library. Gale. 22 Jan 2009                                                                                                                                                                                                   

Slot, Owen. “Armstrong’s Comeback Clouded by Controversy; The king of the road is back, but even before he                climbs into the saddle again, the American finds he has some explaining to do, Owen Slot reports”. Times     of London. 17 Jan 2009. 92. eLibrary. Proquest CSA.    29 Jan 2009.