Icycling

I tend to agree with most of what you are saying - just bringing your attention to this post! http://www.thehubsa....-cyclist-clash/ I think motorist are just quite a lot of the time just not aware as to the rules of the roads - maybe should not be writing this in this post. Yesterday going up Chapman's Peak quite a few of us doing about 23 km/h at the slowest point but just before we past this sign below a motorist had hooted at us but not overtaken, at the time we were doing about 30km/h - I point at the sign and gave a hard look at the motorist behind us - guess what no problem the guy basically drove behind s the whole way - we rode single except for when passing slower cyclist. Education and awareness is very necessary and by point at signage / solid white line plays a part in making motorist aware. So when a motorist hoot at you and then proceed to try and over take on a solid white line instead of giving the finger - point the finger to the solid white line - maybe it will make the motorist think a little the next time! http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/21179_10151300309190310_1644690418_n.jpg I sure this sign cannot be too far from where the accident happened today!

If he was overtaking he did not do it safely - his fault no questions - if you have a license obey the rules you learn when you got your license or don't drive! It is pointless us cyclist point fingers at cyclist - cannot recall when a cyclist killed / injured a motorist by hitting their car - we as cyclist need to stand together and insist that motorist obey the rules they learn when getting their licenses which cyclist don't need to cycle on roads!

And if motorist played by the rules they meant to have learn't in getting their license - something cyclist don't need and and considering cyclist me even be younger than 10 years of age. Overtaking check list Remember, to overtake safely you must: • Have a clear uninterrupted view of the road ahead. • Check rear-view mirrors and clear blind spots. • Signal your intentions before and after overtaking. • Not exceed the posted speed limit. Cyclist are traffic and road users and classified as vehicles on Sa road - so why do motorist not accept they need to do the same when over taking a cyclist or many cyclist even possibly riding 2 or 3 abreast?

I think motorist are just quite a lot of the time just not aware as to the rules of the roads - maybe should not be writing this in this post. Today going up Chapman's Peak quite a few of us doing about 23 km/h at the slowest point but just before we past this sign below a motorist had hooted at us but not overtaken, at the time we were doing about 30km/h - I point at the sign and gave a hard look at the motorist behind us - guess what no problem the guy basically drove behind s the whole way - we rode single except for when passing slower cyclist. Education and awareness is very necessary and by point at signage / solid white line plays a part in making motorist aware. So when a motorist hoot at you and then proceed to try and over take on a solid white line instead of giving the finger - point the finger to the solid white line - maybe it will make the motorist think a little the next time! http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/21179_10151300309190310_1644690418_n.jpg

I am alway one to give a little bit of credit when credit is due! On Spaanschemacht river road yesterday - yet where the forest use to be - at least they trying to enforce the speed limit - maybe too little too late but something. Hope the person is ok from todays incident. http://sphotos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/417005_10151300301845310_1944179588_n.jpg

http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/21179_10151300309190310_1644690418_n.jpg

http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/21179_10151300309190310_1644690418_n.jpg

40km/h wishfull thinking! 20km/h from Noordhook to top 2.2km/h mark underneath. http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/p206x206/400345_10151289144960310_758831098_n.jpg But was quite nice to see this in Tokai forest today! http://sphotos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s480x480/417005_10151300301845310_1944179588_n.jpg

This may seem like a strange comment - but you have to make it easy for people not to dope. So an example if you buy flue medicine at your local Pick 'n Pay because you have flue then you tested and it turned out to be a banned substance - currently you would be supsended. To many complicated rules for products which have little on no effect on your cycling. So raise these level to a far higher level so been sick and using items like flue medicine will not test you positive! Try and keep this drug list down to say 10 items - not sure if 10 is a good number just the suggestion. You have to have test for what you testing - so if you want to ban somebody for blood doping design a test for it - don't give a guy a 2 year suspension for Clenbuterol 40 times lower than what should be tested for - as you suspect he did blood doping. Test for blood doping simple. As I have started a post on HGH - should drugs that improve your avg Joe's life and possible even make you live longer be on the banned list?

Thanks Matt for correcting the heading

I know about the proper test - but can put it off for 5 more years!

After doing all the test you meant to do at 40 (opted for the blood PSA test) and a few more like X rays for my back so we can see how that develops over the next 20 years - the doctor said I was in "too" good condition - my body is better than that of a 30 year old's - so racing is no problem - just ultimately living leads to death but by human nature we want to live as long as possible - we sub conscientiously programed to do that. So what is wrong with going further on a conscience level and if their are drugs available (I am not saying they safe yet or proven yet but with time no doubt they will be) for this why should their be a problem?

I tried that - editing the 1st post - cannot get to header!

For some reason I cannot get into the header and change us to use! I will send a mail to Matt.

As time has passed humans are already living longer - so I would answer yes to you question. Why not just let people die who have disease - why are animals treated with more dignity than humans - when it comes to need to be put down as they are too old? Only in I think 2 countries in the world you legally allowed to perform euthanasia on humans!

Let me put the question different way and that would be not mentioning specific drugs like HGH. If in due course a drug is made available which show properties of extending your life and quality of life as mentioned of Carte Blanche but it is banned in sports for performance reasons then surely for an age when you no long competing for "real money" or as a pro you should be allowed to use this drug for longevity while still competing at your local or age cat level even at world champs? It should not then be construed as an advantage because I certainly would hope everyone would be on the stuff as we all want to live for as long as possible and have a good life - health wise while doing it - right?

Turning the tables - why should I not be able to invite WADA / SA drug free sport to my house right now / ASAP to do a complete test which I will quite happily even pay for (all they will find is the what I have had to drink tonight). Then tell them I want to use drugs for longevity reasons as I am hitting the age of 40 - yup I did those test too - and I want to live comfortably for as long as possible - so please remove these drug from MY banned substance list? Some may argue well you can afford these drug - I would argue - like anti retro's for HIV+ patients - the state should provide! Yup I am 1 of those suckers who pays tax for Zuma's house up grade of how much!!!???

Read my earlier post of been 100% healthy - yup if you have cancer cell you not 100% healthy and HGH will possibly speed up the grow of these cell - I am not at all suggesting HGH is the drug of choice for all 40+ people. Each person would have to do their own research / tests! As I have not done all the test it is possible that this is not the drug for me to cheat death - but if it is.... I want it!!!!!!

A msg who I sent to Facebook friend (elite cyclist) who beat me a killarney tonight (before coming onto the hub) - ended in me stating I am past my sell by date, this is truly what I feel as a competitive cyclist - but that does not mean I do not want to live forever!

Got this pvt msg from a fellow in a hubber and now I am really not sure where to go! Did not really want to post in a open forum. My opinion on HGH is that it is great stuff for anti aging. I have done plenty of reading on it and from what I have read it is safe to use as long as you don't overdose over a long period. It does unfortunately improve your athletic performance. I am 53 and feel like I am 30. This was my answer - I have had a few to drink after coming 5th a Killarney tonight (Cape town racers will understand ) even in this wind - we the break avg was 43km/h! Thank for the private msg - this confirms what my friends tell me, problem is I still want to race and live forever!!!! How do I get the best of both world - and I don't think WADA or SA drug free sport accommodate guys who are moving on who want the best of both world. If I were to take drugs health and longevity would be the only reason - sport would be way secondary to that - yup I want to cheat death and death alone! But I am also a proud honest sports person and here lies a cross roads! Do I give up competitive sport to have longevity and a more comfortable life - or put sport something I also live for ahead of life itself? It is a serious cross roads - possibly the worst with the most serious of consequences (death or having reputation tarnished) in my life I have had to face! But should it be - life is more important to me than reputation! But I don't find any comfort in this answer.

How stupid {Audi driver(s) - quite a few motorist actually}- cannot wait just a few seconds for the cyclist but has ample time to have a debate on the side of the road!!!

While I was on the PPA committee earlier this year we had CSA and and a representatives of SASCOC meet with us at 1 of our monthly meeting - this was about PPA falling out of bed with CSA. But 1 thing which the SASCOC representative repeated on more than 1 occasion was when you put on your National kit you are representing 50 million South Africans. This statement made me think - well what amount of SARS revenue ends up at CSA for argument sake - the answer was nothing. Considering anybody - even the kid buying a toy - pays VAT i.e. revenue collection for SARS / national treasury, then all consumers are tax payers and from day 1 be it nap-pies you are a consumer and thus SARS gets some benefit - if SARS then were funding South African sports people - then you would be representing 50 million - correct? But it does not - Lotto funding does and thus you are representing those who play Lotto - right? Recently as a RSA tax payer I was selected to ride at world champs in the 39 to 44 cat and even won some races. For this honor (no I am not having a dig at CSA) I got to BUY even my own skin suit (by the way had the Lotto branding on it), along with paying for my own air ticket, hotel and car hire (and they wonder why cycling is an elitist sport)! Not to mention the time spent training to compete at the highest level. Really should I not get a tax refund for this? SARS has more or less covered every loop hole in the system so sports expenses cannot be tax deductible - yet for argument sake when the Rugby team win the world cup the whole moral of the country improves and no doubt as a by product people work better and spend more all contributing to SARS revenue collection. So as an (tax paying) individual who has been selected represent your country in your national kit and then even go and win some events why should that individual have to carry "all" ( I got an international CSA license for free and for most of the riders CSA paid their insurance in case of an accident at the event) the costs/risk? Surely SARS should offer individual representing their country in sport a tax concession and possibly a full refund on their personnel tax for the years they compete for their country i.e. just not taking money from that individual - what ever the amount may be! Even in the most Capitalist country like the USA you will received 1 million dollars for winning a medal at the Olympics - I been told! I a not sure what RSA is socialist or capitalist - but surely SARS should come to the party for sports people representing their country?

I am not saying HGH is the wonder drug yet - but drug are / have been designed already which may well be if Carte Blanche has any substance behind their documentaries. My suspicion is from a sports perspective is these drugs will be banned!

Problem is I am still highly competitive - even at world level! So yup too afraid to use anything. But why should I have to make a choice for sport between an "easier (less pain worse eye sight worse hearing)" and shorter life when for people not doing sport could quite happily use these drug and governments ( like they do with AID's drugs) should possibly even hand them out for free for 100% healthy people! More and more drugs are currently been designed for longevity - so no doubt if it is not HGH it will be something different quite soon! I not looking to cheat in sport - the stakes are higher - I want to cheat my own natural death and prolong my own life! http://sphotos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/548875_10151297017145310_1076057554_n.jpg http://sphotos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/604153_10151297017550310_606560354_n.jpg

Carte Blanche - did a documentary not so long ago on drugs which would possibly be able to extend our live to 1000 years of age - now why if WADA or SA drug free sport put these drugs on their banned list WHY should sports people be denied the possibility of living longer? HGH is probably just the starting point of what is available / already been designed!