Doping: would you do it?

No I would not do it. Winning by cheating means nothing. You can fool the world, but you cant fool yourself.

letsrun regular wrote:

We are all so quick to point fingers and accuse elite/pro runners and cyclists of doping.

However I am curious about sub-elite and competitive runners' thoughts below this level.

Hypothetically, you are given the opportunity to follow a systematic doping program with the latest PED's available. You are supervised by a physician. There are no negative health effects. You will not be caught.

And, you will rise to levels you could otherwise never hope to, even with the best training/nutrition possible.

What do you do?

To me it is the same as saying "I can bench 400 lbs." and then letting someone else do it for you then claiming the feat. No difference!!!!

Absolutely not!

Blood dopers are a disgrace to track.

To cheat is to truly embrace defeat

Under the conditions specified, I'd predict that if actually presented with the opportunity, well over 50% of people on this board would take the PED. Several years ago, many pro athletes indicated that they would take an undetectable, proven to work drug even if they risked dying in 5 years.

Also, research on cheating basically says that across different contexts the vast majority of people are willing to cheat a little, and the percentage willing to cheat a lot increase as the chances of being caught decrease. Yet, when asked, the vast majority would say "No I would not cheat." Sadly, those quickest and loudest to proclaim morality are not more likely to be honest.

Here's a good talk on cheating (be patient - after 4 min or so it gets to the cheating research):

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_on_our_buggy_moral_code.html

Now, add that you are very talented, have devoted years of your life to training, and are just shy of being among the very elite. Plus, you have good reason to believe that all those above you are drug enhanced.

I'm afraid we already have a pretty good idea of the percentages on that one.

This thread is bullshit. You dont need drugs to win! Loads of great athletes have achieved the pinnacle of this sport by honest means. Winning by cheating means nothing. It will always be in the back of your head and you will always feel secretly ashamed of yourself. Dont ever do it!

The following are all true:

-I say No, I wouldn't. And I believe firmly that I wouldn't.

-The me-that-exists-now would absolutely despise the me-who-was-weak-enough-to-dope.

-The me-that-exists-now can't imagine not feeling ashamed for doping, if he doped.

-I have NO WAY of knowing if I actually would or not.

Why is it bullshit - we are discussing cheating as a basic human behavior. I'm not promoting drug use as your handle implies, but responding to the question in terms of how many people here would dope. My point is that the empirical evidence indicates high prevalence of cheating across different settings is quite high, and so I think a large number of people would dope under the situation described.

Consider:

The year after Congress required that children 5 or older have Social Security numbers, the number of dependent exemptions dropped by 7 million.

In a 2005 survey (McCabe; Ethics and Behavior) – 70% of HS students admitted one or more instance of cheating on a test; 60% admitted plagiarizing a paper. Another study found that 80% of the highest achievers admitted to cheating on a test.

More recently, Fellers et al. (2009, Journal of Scientific Psychology) found that 95% of students at a midwestern university reported some form of cheating behavior in the previous 2 years. Can 95% of people find a way to live with themselves after cheating? It appears that they can.

Cheating in athletics is also common. A study of junior tennis players (who call their own game – whether a ball was in or not) – found high rate of cheating (Sorry – I can’t find the reference at the moment). Go to any HS dual or small invite indoor meet where there are few officials and see how many runners run inside the first lane. And the number of athletes taking supplements continues to increase. As a previous poster indicated, the more important the goal and the more invested one becomes in reaching the goal, the greater the internal push to cheat.

And finally, let's switch gears a bit and consider the high prevalence rate of Allderall – the “brain steroid” - among college students. In fact, here is another scenario for you:

You are in taking a critical course in your major and your grade affects your chances of getting into law school (or graduating with a high GPA and landing a great job). You get a B on test one; your friend gets a C. Your friend takes Allderall while studying for and taking the second test, even though it is not supplied by her physician. You get a B-. Your friend offers to get you some for the next test. You really need a high grade in the class. Do you take Allderal? And if you get an A and get into grad school or get a great job, can you live with yourself?

good point made by "highhorse"

related link:

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2008/02/ted_zimbardo

I would take PEDs under the OP's scenario, but only for one specific reason: to find my limits. Not for glory, not for money, but only to satisfy my own curiosity.

Racing would present some interesting moral and ethical problems, though. Not accepting money is easy enough, you just refuse it, but winning, or even getting say, 20th at Boston rather than the 112th that you would have gotten without drugs, is ethically wrong. I would like to say that a person could take drugs and just time trial, but in that scenario, they're probably not getting the most out of themselves. Competition would be necessary at some point.

I know my limits using legal methods, and I've pretty much topped out. I've always been more about training and the journey rather than the destination, so a fairy tail scenario where taking drugs would do no harm and allow me to reach my limits would be very interesting to me personally.

I'm also not against research that would expose a willing group of subjects to testing using various PEDs. On a scientific basis, it would satisfy my curiosity. I think it would also make the line between who is doped and who isn't that much clearer. Using that data and statistical analysis, we would be able to identify people using undetectable substances, rather than trying to use testing, which is obviously fallible, as well as far behind doping technology.

Not if I was running. I would dope as a cyclist, though.

wqqqqqq wrote:

The following are all true:

-I say No, I wouldn't. And I believe firmly that I wouldn't.

-The me-that-exists-now would absolutely despise the me-who-was-weak-enough-to-dope.

-The me-that-exists-now can't imagine not feeling ashamed for doping, if he doped.

-I have NO WAY of knowing if I actually would or not.

This is the most honest and accurate answer possible to the question.

With no long term health consequences or financial burden... without a doubt I would. I know I don't have the ability to make it to the Olympic medal level no matter what I do (and I'm not a complete slouch 24:teens xc 8k beaten AA's and finished not to far behind others). However, I would love to see how fast this composition of carbon/Ca/hydrogen could move. Taking money from such a situation however is a diff animal

SserPrun95 wrote:

With no long term health consequences or financial burden... without a doubt I would. I know I don't have the ability to make it to the Olympic medal level no matter what I do (and I'm not a complete slouch 24:teens xc 8k beaten AA's and finished not to far behind others). However, I would love to see how fast this composition of carbon/Ca/hydrogen could move. Taking money from such a situation however is a diff animal

This would be me. Not for money. And I wouldn't be good enough for glory. But just to push the limits and go faster and farther than I ever could before. My honest answer.

i'm a runner - always have been - in my heart and soul - but i haven't been able to run due to chronic injuries for 15 years or so.

i would sell my soul to be able to run again - not competitively anymore - just 30-50 miles a week painfree.

Doping is like taking pills to make your dick big. You get the benefits as long as you continue doping, and then you return back to your normal state after a period of time.

No because true performance enhancing is likely expensive, unhealthy... and heck, you could die from EPO blood thickening for example