Author Topic: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either  (Read 8439 times)

Slik

  • Competitors
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3593
Re: Lance prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #25 on: December 24, 2012, 03:45:54 PM »
Was about to say, it resembles The Onion.
was wondering. But often satire is not far from truth.  I am wondering if he either exaggerated how bad his cancer was or he never had it.  Gonna say it again, late stage cancer that metastasized to his brain?

WOOO

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18158
  • Fuck the mods
Re: Lance prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #26 on: December 24, 2012, 03:50:47 PM »
Was about to say, it resembles The Onion.

i like it

NO ABSENCE OF MUSCLE

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 205
Re: Lance prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #27 on: December 24, 2012, 05:14:00 PM »
was wondering. But often satire is not far from truth.  I am wondering if he either exaggerated how bad his cancer was or he never had it.  Gonna say it again, late stage cancer that metastasized to his brain?

no doubt, lance, the lying piece of shit, fully exaggerated the extent of his cancer.  he built his whole warrior reputation and metality around his ability to overcome it.  He traded on it. 

I hear that this dog Lance is now being prescribed anti depressents to deal with the fall out.  a person like him who has lost his reputation and credibility is a fate worse than death....i hope this sack of shit rots in his lies and deceit.

The Abdominal Snoman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 23503
  • DON'T BE A TRAITOR TO YOUR TRIBE
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #28 on: December 24, 2012, 06:06:21 PM »
If Lance went into hiding and became some sort of scientific experiment, I'm not so sure we would all call him "impressive" if that was his truth. Whats next? Robots made to look human who beat all the records in every sport known to man? Lance Armstrong may just be Steve Austin the 6 million dollar man. Or Jay Cutler the man who won the Mr. Olympia with a body full of PMMA.

jwb

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5804
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #29 on: December 24, 2012, 06:12:23 PM »
He wasn't famous or even all that good back in 1995/6.

Plus there are plenty of pics of the scars on his head and him looking like every other chemo patient.

The Abdominal Snoman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 23503
  • DON'T BE A TRAITOR TO YOUR TRIBE
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #30 on: December 24, 2012, 06:15:39 PM »
Lance Armstrong is supposedly a Jewish man. Whats interesting is he is sooooo guilty that almost all Jews went against him. That's almost unheard of. In fact, Lance is basically in Madoff country.


NO ABSENCE OF MUSCLE

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 205
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #31 on: December 24, 2012, 06:16:38 PM »
He wasn't famous or even all that good back in 1995/6.

Plus there are plenty of pics of the scars on his head and him looking like every other chemo patient.

very true...many riders over that period commented on Lance being quite a mediocre cyclist....so glad this lying dog has got what he deserves...now living the life of a chemically addicted clinical depression patient...got what he deserved.

Marty Champions

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 36438
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #32 on: December 24, 2012, 06:17:50 PM »
young people having cancer = just sitting around getting small dieting losing hair from chemo, beleiving they have a problems becuase they dont want to eat, and eat good ole lima beans an pintos would make them not say they have cancer cause theyd be able to shit and feel beter
A

axestream

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1854
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #33 on: December 24, 2012, 06:22:59 PM »
If Lance went into hiding and became some sort of scientific experiment, I'm not so sure we would all call him "impressive" if that was his truth. Whats next? Robots made to look human who beat all the records in every sport known to man? Lance Armstrong may just be Steve Austin the 6 million dollar man. Or Jay Cutler the man who won the Mr. Olympia with a body full of PMMA.

I have no problem with athletes using drugs. All these discussions about doping should have taken place 50 years ago. There's no going back now. IMO not getting caught is part of the game.

Power

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 342
  • Move along
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #34 on: December 24, 2012, 07:15:35 PM »
Lol, so he faked the scars on his head too? That bastard! 

avxo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5605
  • Iron Pumping University Math Professor
Re: Lance prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #35 on: December 24, 2012, 08:01:27 PM »
http://dailycurrant.com/2012/10/18/investigation-reveals-lance-armstrong-cancer/

I was skeptical at first, but since it's in "The Daily Currant" a respected publication which describes itself in no uncertain terms as the "Global Satirical Newspaper of Record" then it must be true... What a story!


P.S.: Oh and for those of you who might contemplate your own "at-home-orchidectomy" (you know who you are!) keep in mind that your testicles receive blood from not one, not two but three separate arteries. Make sure to clamp them all before suturing your sliced-open scrotum or else you might get a wee bit lightheaded doing those heavy squats!

basil

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1180
Re: Lance prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #36 on: December 24, 2012, 08:37:09 PM »
K. U guys r gonna think I'm full of shit but late stage testicular cancer that metastasized to his lungs abdomen and brain n he survived that has always been a hard pill for me to swallow.  It's bugged me for a long time. So I got up  posted this never before having heard anyone say this.  So then I just googled it n saw this.  Is this legit?


http://dailycurrant.com/2012/10/18/investigation-reveals-lance-armstrong-cancer/

Not a hard pill to swallow at all.  If you've actually read any science-based info on nut cancer and treatment, you would have read that this type of cancer responds very well (or poor, I guess, in terms of cancer cells continuing to duplicate) to chemo treatment.  The only reason it spread as much as it did with Armstrong is b/c it was unchecked.  With nut cancer treatment(s), it tends to be all or nothing.  If a patient responds at all to treatment(s), they will respond very well.

tommywishbone

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20500
  • Biscuit
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #37 on: December 24, 2012, 09:05:49 PM »
Not only that, he didn't even ride in those Tours. It was all done with a green screen on a sound stage in Burbank.
True story.
a

Slik

  • Competitors
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3593
Re: Lance prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #38 on: December 24, 2012, 09:19:59 PM »
Not a hard pill to swallow at all.  If you've actually read any science-based info on nut cancer and treatment, you would have read that this type of cancer responds very well (or poor, I guess, in terms of cancer cells continuing to duplicate) to chemo treatment.  The only reason it spread as much as it did with Armstrong is b/c it was unchecked.  With nut cancer treatment(s), it tends to be all or nothing.  If a patient responds at all to treatment(s), they will respond very well.
maybe in the year 3012, where u teleported to in your bicep time machine, but any cancer that metastasizes to the brain is a very poor prognosis. I think what u mean to say at least in my primitive time, is that if caught early enough prognosis is good.  And next time your on the battlestar gallactica say hello to Lorne Green for me.

Slik

  • Competitors
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3593
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #39 on: December 24, 2012, 09:42:24 PM »
Stage II, III and IV Non-seminoma
Chemotherapy is standard treatment for non-seminoma that has spread beyond the testes. Most regimes are based on 4 cycles of Bleomycin, Etoposide and Cisplatin. The results of chemotherapy depend on the nature and extent of disease.

Patients with disease confined to the lymph glands and lungs and with only moderately elevated tumour markers are regarded as a good prognostic group. They comprise 84% of all cases of metastatic non-seminoma. The overall survival following chemotherapy is 75 – 90%. The remaining 16% are those patients with spread beyond the lymph glands and the lungs and marked elevation of tumour markers.

The prognosis of this subgroup is poor with a 5 year survival of 40 – 50%.


LATS

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1190
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #40 on: December 24, 2012, 09:44:56 PM »
Lord.. The Daily Currant site Ida spoof ite.. It's mean to be funny.. Some probably believe that lance actually cut his own nuts off.. Lol

MikMaq

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #41 on: December 24, 2012, 10:02:02 PM »
So they're all a disgrace to the sport?

It's not his fault the public are a bunch of dumbshits.
Seriously though the dude overcame cancer and is an olympian, dude does not give a fuck what a bunch of overfed side liners think.

NO ABSENCE OF MUSCLE

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 205
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #42 on: December 24, 2012, 10:54:24 PM »
Seriously though the dude overcame cancer and is an olympian, dude does not give a fuck what a bunch of overfed side liners think.

you stupid retard...lance is a cheat and a liar.  his reputation is in shatters.  he is despised across the planet for the long ongoing lies he has perpetrated.

all his achievements now amount to zero,

now, get out of this thread you ignorant cum stain....you have nothing to offer and are an incredibly boring poster.

RadOncDoc

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Lance prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #43 on: December 24, 2012, 11:02:34 PM »
K. U guys r gonna think I'm full of shit but late stage testicular cancer that metastasized to his lungs abdomen and brain n he survived that has always been a hard pill for me to swallow.  It's bugged me for a long time. So I got up  posted this never before having heard anyone say this.  So then I just googled it n saw this.  Is this legit?


http://dailycurrant.com/2012/10/18/investigation-reveals-lance-armstrong-cancer/

I didn't read all the responses but it's not totally improbable that he beat widely metastatic testicular cancer. testicular cancer is one of the most treatable cancers...super sensitive to chemotherapy and radiation. It's one of the few cancers that even when metastatic can be cured at a reasonable frequency. I've never really doubted this part of his story.

NO ABSENCE OF MUSCLE

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 205
Re: Lance prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #44 on: December 24, 2012, 11:09:01 PM »
I didn't read all the responses but it's not totally improbable that he beat widely metastatic testicular cancer. testicular cancer is one of the most treatable cancers...super sensitive to chemotherapy and radiation. It's one of the few cancers that even when metastatic can be cured at a reasonable frequency. I've never really doubted this part of his story.

not this shit again!  he beat it, big fucken shit....if this lying piece of shit got cancer of the asshole he would have been dead in a year.

epic_alien

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #45 on: December 25, 2012, 12:40:14 AM »
you stupid retard...lance is a cheat and a liar.  his reputation is in shatters.  he is despised across the planet for the long ongoing lies he has perpetrated.

all his achievements now amount to zero,

now, get out of this thread you ignorant cum stain....you have nothing to offer and are an incredibly boring poster.

he won those races, that can never be changed

other riders in next top positions were also on drugs, that  aslo cannot be changed.

who would you give the titles too? 13th place?

who has been cheated?

do you feel cheated somehow by lance?
how? and why? did he rob you of you being great?


NO ABSENCE OF MUSCLE

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 205
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #46 on: December 25, 2012, 12:54:32 AM »
he won those races, that can never be changed

other riders in next top positions were also on drugs, that  aslo cannot be changed.

who would you give the titles too? 13th place?

who has been cheated?

do you feel cheated somehow by lance?
how? and why? did he rob you of you being great?

jesus fucking christ...you are beyond ignorant..

cheating is cheating...lying is lying....lying and cheating to win by deception is NOT winning...furthermore, it is not relevant to this discussion what others were doing...that being said, they were cheating as well - doesn't make it right.

the tour de france is a joke.  there are no winners...just all liars and drug cheats...fucking ugly and appalling situation...so is all professional sport for that matter....it has to said -money and big end sponsorship are the root of all evil when it comes to so called professional/elite athletes



NO ABSENCE OF MUSCLE

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 205
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #47 on: December 25, 2012, 01:00:36 AM »


jesus fucking christ...you are beyond ignorant..

cheating is cheating...lying is lying....lying and cheating to win by deception is NOT winning...furthermore, it is not relevant to this discussion what others were doing...that being said, they were cheating as well - doesn't make it right.

the tour de france is a joke.  there are no winners...just all liars and drug cheats...fucking ugly and appalling situation...so is all professional sport for that matter....it has to said -money and big end sponsorship are the root of all evil when it comes to so called professional/elite athletes


epic_alien

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #48 on: December 25, 2012, 01:10:23 AM »
you must not have ever played sports beyond jr high and junior varsity,

sports arent about words,  they are about action. so your worrying about what a athlete says is your own emotional issue

your emotionally hurt by what they say or claim. why?

if i recall, when you turn on a game on tv or are in a stadium watching,  you watch men run, jump, throw, dunk, cycle ect,

you dont watch them be interviewed or care what they say or think.

but somehow you  get all wrapped up in their words?

also let me let you in on a little secret, sport records dont regress, because some  men want to be the best at what they do,  and they dont care what you think or your feelings,

NO ABSENCE OF MUSCLE

  • Time Out
  • Getbig II
  • *
  • Posts: 205
Re: Lance Armstrong prolly didn't even have cancer either
« Reply #49 on: December 25, 2012, 01:11:41 AM »
you must not have ever played sports beyond jr high and junior varsity,

sports arent about words,  they are about action. so your worrying about what a athlete says is your own emotional issue

your emotionally hurt by what they say or claim. why?

if i recall, when you turn on a game on tv or are in a stadium watching,  you watch men run, jump, throw, dunk, cycle ect,

you dont watch them be interviewed or care what they say or think.




good post

but somehow you  get all wrapped up in their words?

also let me let you in on a little secret, sport records dont regress, because some  men want to be the best at what they do,  and they dont care what you think or your feelings,