You believe in the drugs, you use them, and on the other sides of your mouths you talk about how good they are and so they need to be banned.
The fact is that they don't do anything uniquely beneficial for athletics; you only think that they do.
You believe in the drugs, you use them, and on the other sides of your mouths you talk about how good they are and so they need to be banned.
The fact is that they don't do anything uniquely beneficial for athletics; you only think that they do.
props to doug logan for speaking his mind.
it's a difficult issue for sure. on the one hand, you want to let adults make their own choices. on the other, you don't want women to feel like they have to turn their bodies into that of a man's to be able to compete.
i certainly don't have the answers. but i do think a lot of you people who hate dopers and doping are in fact going to be made into total hypocrites when you start doping yourselves when genetic enhancement becomes viable, cheap and safe.
there will be a point where you either get on board or are left behind, and ultimately, nobody wants to be left behind. it's not going to be about just getting stronger so much as it's going to be about getting drastically smarter and more connected in a sort of psychic way as we currently understand that word.
we aren't there yet, but science is progressing exponentially fast.
A Duck wrote:
No, No, No, No, No.
Logan is being idiotic.
Making the penalties STRONGER is what the sport needs. The penalties need to be So Prohibitive that to even think of cheating would be pointless.
Penalties do not work when you can get Therapeutic Use Exceptions for PEDs and use them without fear.
The problem with this is I don't want to destroy my long-term health and go through great lengths to find the best PEDs. I want to just compete. I, my kids, etc. should have the opportunity to compete without the pressure to ingest costly and foreign elememts.
THAT is the problem with the legalizing PED's argument.
A Duck wrote:
No, No, No, No, No.
Logan is being idiotic.
Making the penalties STRONGER is what the sport needs. The penalties need to be So Prohibitive that to even think of cheating would be pointless.
Right on, Ducky. I mean Gatlin and the like are mutiple offenders, but can come back from non-career-ending suspensions and still profit. Sure everyone makes mistakes, but make it "one strike and you're out" and I think you'd see a different ethos from athletes.
Regrettably, I now conclude that Logan is bananas and Stephanie Hightower was correct in getting rid of him.
I agree with A Duck too.
We are also counting on the BroJos too, to continue to hammer the cheaters, as they have done from the beginning, and to ostracize the cheaters.
I don't know who the "99%" of people who use drugs are. But the issue here is not about medicines that do nothing for athletic performance. The athletes all know what the performance-enhancing drugs (as opposed to medicines) are.
It's about knowing who the best man, or woman, is on a given day, and not about which drug works best.
Approving PEDs would cause a major breakdown in Track, all competitive distance running in general, as well as many other sports (XC skiing, cycling, etc).
Gamera wrote:
I think making athletics into a PED free-for-all would be a death-knell for the sport
Completely agree. As a society we've become more lazy and want the quick route to a goal, whether that means losing weight or running really fast - pop a pill, take a magic potion, etc.
Current system is broken, and the crooks will almost always be a little ahead of the drug police, but if I understand things correctly, this whole passport thing (which I haven't taken time to fully read about) is a step in the right direction. There should be zero tolerance with certain PEDs or levels of PEDs in the blood or urine, that couldn't possibly be found in your system (at least at certain levels) unless purposefully placed there. You test positive the first time, you're gone for good from the sport.
I'm an old-timer, but "by fair means" should always be the standard as opposed to "by any means necessary". As a fellow Jasper, I'm very disappointed in Doug Logan's position on this issue.
wejo wrote:
I agree. You've got a son who is a good athlete and wants to go to the next level? You start having to worry about which doctor to go see.
People want sports to be about who is the best athlete, not who has the best doctor.
But it's already about so much more than who has the best talent and work ethic. Who has the best coach, the best strength program, the best (legal) recovery aids like altitude tents, protein shakes, electrolyte replacements, underwater treadmills, training camps, trips to altitude, sponsors, agents, etc.
It's SPORTS. It's ENTERTAINMENT. We are paying for companies to create a product that we want to watch. Sports lost any chance of being about the competition only the day we professionalized it and allowed it to be bought and sold and marketed.
That quote is horrible.
There should be lifetime bans.
People who are acting like it would be just like sports today -- you're wrong. Even if people are doping today, they have to limit what they're doing. They can't use much EPO, or much testosterone, etc. They have to be very careful.
If the bans were lifted, we'd be back to the days of guys competing at 60% hematocrits (and subsequently dying in their sleep) and women using so much testosterone they turn into men. More is better, so it wouldn't be like today only faster. It would turn sports into a freak show like pro bodybuilding, where there are no limits on PED use. Most athletes would be lucky to make it past their fifties.
I think some people aren't seeing the full implications of legalizing PEDs. They seem to think not much would change, because presumably a lot of people are already doping, and now they just wouldn't get busted for it.
It wouldn't be like that at all. Dopers today are doing "restrained" doping. They take PEDs but still have to pass drug tests from time to time, which limits when they can take drugs and how much they can ingest. Even the most successful doper ever, Lance Armstrong, had to furtively receive his blood transfusion on a team bus that pulled over to the side of the road while faking mechanical problems. Sure, he and his team could "beat the system", but the point is, there was a system to beat, which set some some kind of limits as to how much PED use they could get away with. Athletes microdose nowadays, and monitor their "glow time", which implies that their doping is limited at least.
That would all go out the window. Unrestrained doping would take over. It wouldn't be pretty. It goes without saying that an arms race would develop. Think about it, even with the current state of PEDs, top endurance athletes would immediately start taking as much EPO, HGH, steroids, blood tranfusions, and who knows what else, as they wanted. They wouldn't have to worry about ending their cycle 2 weeks before competition so that their system would be clear in time for testing. They could dope right up until they reached the starting line. Who knows - maybe runners of the future will be popping stimulants mid-race to give themselves a boost? Imagine an Olympic 10,000m final, say, 20 years after PEDs are legalized and the new breed of athlete had been established. Strange-looking, highly muscular but skinny people with no body fat walk up to the line puffing on various inhalers, fresh blood marks on their arms where the IV lines have just been removed, popping various pills into their mouths to jack them up for the race. No poor countries are represented, because they can't afford to waste valuable resources investing in a good medical program for their athletes.
Thing of East Germany and other Eastern bloc countries. They had something akin to unrestrained doping for a while. The drugs back then were nothing compared to today - mostly just steroids. But still, how many women since then have run 47 for the 400 or 1:53 for the 800? None. With better drugs and better athletes, even those times would look tame in a hurry.
themanontherun wrote:
But it's already about so much more than who has the best talent and work ethic. Who has the best coach, the best strength program, the best (legal) recovery aids like altitude tents, protein shakes, electrolyte replacements, underwater treadmills, training camps, trips to altitude, sponsors, agents, etc.
None of that is even necessary to be successful. Seriously, you think protein shakes and electrolyte replacements are some of what it's about? And very few people even have access to altitude tents and underwater treadmills.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I dont see anywhere in that article where Logan says PEDs should be legalized. He says that USADA and WADA should leave it up to the government. Steroids are still illegal. Screw a lifetime ban they should go to jail for breaking the law. If I smoke crack or shoot up dope and get busted by the cops, I would go to jail. If I take anabolic steroids and get busted, I should be arrested by the gov't not serve some stupid doping ban. That is more threatning then the anti doping agencies giving a year ban or whatnot. Let me see... get a slap on the wrist by WADA and USADA or face time in jail with hard criminals? Idk, just what I think.
Gamera wrote:
I think some people aren't seeing the full implications of legalizing PEDs. They seem to think not much would change, because presumably a lot of people are already doping, and now they just wouldn't get busted for it.
It wouldn't be like that at all. Dopers today are doing "restrained" doping. They take PEDs but still have to pass drug tests from time to time, which limits when they can take drugs and how much they can ingest. Even the most successful doper ever, Lance Armstrong, had to furtively receive his blood transfusion on a team bus that pulled over to the side of the road while faking mechanical problems. Sure, he and his team could "beat the system", but the point is, there was a system to beat, which set some some kind of limits as to how much PED use they could get away with. Athletes microdose nowadays, and monitor their "glow time", which implies that their doping is limited at least.
That would all go out the window. Unrestrained doping would take over. It wouldn't be pretty. It goes without saying that an arms race would develop. Think about it, even with the current state of PEDs, top endurance athletes would immediately start taking as much EPO, HGH, steroids, blood tranfusions, and who knows what else, as they wanted. They wouldn't have to worry about ending their cycle 2 weeks before competition so that their system would be clear in time for testing. They could dope right up until they reached the starting line. Who knows - maybe runners of the future will be popping stimulants mid-race to give themselves a boost? Imagine an Olympic 10,000m final, say, 20 years after PEDs are legalized and the new breed of athlete had been established. Strange-looking, highly muscular but skinny people with no body fat walk up to the line puffing on various inhalers, fresh blood marks on their arms where the IV lines have just been removed, popping various pills into their mouths to jack them up for the race. No poor countries are represented, because they can't afford to waste valuable resources investing in a good medical program for their athletes.
Thing of East Germany and other Eastern bloc countries. They had something akin to unrestrained doping for a while. The drugs back then were nothing compared to today - mostly just steroids. But still, how many women since then have run 47 for the 400 or 1:53 for the 800? None. With better drugs and better athletes, even those times would look tame in a hurry.
POD.
high time wrote:
If you think your description doesn't apply to the present state of athletics, I think you are naive.
If you're this cynical in your life, then I feel sorry for you.
The real issue is when gene manipulation becomes a reality, this will be a virtually undetectable way of improving athletic ability. This is when the fight is over, not now.
Logan presupposes that if doping was allowed it would be at the same level it is at now. It wouldn't be. Unrestricted doping would result in much more extreme doping, especially of women, who have the most to gain through doping.
You would have the most successful women effectively turning themselves into men through extreme doping. You would have people in endurance sports dying because they turned their blood into sludge, and the most successful would be those most willing to risk their health. That kind of freak show would destroy track and field as it now exists. I know I would have no interest in watching or supporting it.
The current system is not perfect and there will probably always be an arms race between the dopers and the regulators, but the system at least prevents more extreme doping. That's better than letting the sport be destroyed through unrestricted doping.
ummmm wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but I dont see anywhere in that article where Logan says PEDs should be legalized. He says that USADA and WADA should leave it up to the government. Steroids are still illegal. Screw a lifetime ban they should go to jail for breaking the law. If I smoke crack or shoot up dope and get busted by the cops, I would go to jail. If I take anabolic steroids and get busted, I should be arrested by the gov't not serve some stupid doping ban. That is more threatning then the anti doping agencies giving a year ban or whatnot. Let me see... get a slap on the wrist by WADA and USADA or face time in jail with hard criminals? Idk, just what I think.
That's just not correct. Steroids and many other banned PEDs like EPO are legal to prescribe for many purposes. In the US, it is not illegal to take steroids or some other PEDs if a doctor prescribes it.
Track and field is also an international sport, and local laws about prescription drugs vary widely. It would make no sense to say, for example, that US athletes who are subject to a fairly restrictive regime for prescribing steroids and EPO, could compete against athletes from other countries where anyone can buy EPO over the counter.
We shouldn't legalize PEDs in sports, but he's right when he says we should leave the regulations to law enforcement. Athletes who use PEDs are committing fraud. This is a crime, these people are criminals, and they should be persecuted by the police. We throw white collar criminals in jail, so why shouldn't athletes who cheat others out of prize money face the same consequences? If drug users were threatened with jail time and financial restitution, a lot more would hesitate to use PEDs.
Does anyone have a problem with how he said just let the government handle the drug problem? Why should we just default everything to the government? When will citizens actually start taking an active role in things that they want fixed. People always want government aid and in this case government drugs in sports regulations but will complain when they pay taxes. Get real.