Why Don't They Just Allow Drugs And Level The Playing Field?

For the record:

Breathe Right® nasal strips ARE banned in some sports.

The USATT does not allow them during competition.

USATT = US Association for Table Tennis?

Questionable wrote:

No offense, but this is the worst argument. Here is what I say about drug use. People say why don't they just let them all take drugs, what do I care? Well people don't care until it hits home. Say everyone knows Barry Bonds takes drugs (not saying either way, but it is pretty obvious). So then we let him talk about his drug use and we accept it right. Well then your son, nephew, brother whatever wants to be a great baseball player. What do they need to do? Well following the best professional baseball player's example, they need to shoot themselves full of steroids and thus shorten the lives of your loved one. That's why we need to all step up and stop the drug cheats because of the example they set.

In a perfect world, I would agree 100% with you. However, based on my reading on this board, it seems that testing is not and will never be full-proof, which means that the cheats are going to continue winning the races, and the honest athletes are going to continue losing. That seems unfair to me.

It seems to me that the best admittedly IMPERFECT solution MIGHT be to allow athletes to take at least some drugs (those that have been proven relatively safe). Then at least the honest athletes who are willing to do anything (short of cheating) to win these races would be able to compete on a level playing field with the people who are already willing to cheat. In other words, if we do not allow drugs of some type or another, then the cheats will just keep winning and we can keep bitching on message boards, which will do little to change the reality that the cheats will still be winning. The honest athletes are hurting right now and I don't think that is fair. They are losing millions to people who are willing to cheat. Once athletes reach that level, I think they should be able to decide for themselves, at least within relatively safe limits. (And even this solution would not completely level the playing field because some athletes would take drugs that were not permitted, but at least the other athletes would be closer to them on the track due to the permitted drugs.)

I must say, however, that I know NOTHING about these drugs or drug testing. Perhaps it is more full-proof than I realize or perhaps there aren't very many safe alternatives. If that is the case, then obviously they just need to clamp down as much as possible and try to get the cheats out of the game. It just doesn't seem like that method has been working very well.

They are allowed to take the ones that are safe (ie ibuprofen, asprin, creatine, etc).

The solution to the problem is not to cave to those that are breaking the rules, but rather to continue to work to get them out of the sport.

There are a lot of child molestors in the world, should we allow everyone to do it that way we don't have any rule breakers.

Questionable wrote:

They are allowed to take the ones that are safe (ie ibuprofen, asprin, creatine, etc).

The solution to the problem is not to cave to those that are breaking the rules, but rather to continue to work to get them out of the sport.

There are a lot of child molestors in the world, should we allow everyone to do it that way we don't have any rule breakers.

Okay, I believe that adderall is relatively safe (based on experience of a family member) and I've heard that other banned drugs are also.

With all due respect, your first argument regarding my family members being faced with this scenario (i.e., being forced to take drugs) was much stronger. The child molestation argument just isn't persuasive--obviously that hurts someone OTHER than the person doing the bad deed.

These athletes are adults. They can learn the risks for themselves. The great majority of them apparently would take drugs if permitted. The point is that we have NOT been able to stop the drug cheats. If I believe everything I read on these boards, they are continuing to take drugs and win. Shouldn't the person in second place at least be given a CHOICE? These are adults ingesting materials into their own bodies--I say let them decide.

We obviously aren't going to agree. Everyone's thoughts on this subject have been interesting to me. Unless I heard something different, I have nothing more to say on the debate.

I just hope for the clean athletes that the controlling powers are able to put a real stop to the drugs in this sport. I think their dilemma is terribly unfair and unfortunate.

[quote]Someone Special wrote:

I'm not a complete idiot.

_______

Well, actually you are a complete idiot. I'm a physician with expertise in dementia, retardation, and encephalopathy. Let me remove any ambiguity: you are a complete idiot. My best advice is to have yourself institutionalized soon. Perhaps a quite place near a farm with a caring staff.

I'm not sure everyone taking drugs would even level the playing field, even if it was the same one and the same amount for everyone. Isn't it possible that different people would react differently to the drug?

>>The playing field will never be perfectly level, but that's no reason to allow drugs. If they ever create a free-for-all any-drug-you-want system, then I'd start pushing for the allowance of rollerskates and rocket backpacks.

What if drug control makes things LESS even?

We already allow lots of enhancers so why not see if we can allow more if they are safe?

>>They are allowed to take the ones that are safe (ie ibuprofen, asprin, creatine, etc).

Are these safe esp ibruprofen??

We allow unsafe but ban safe!!!

It's a good point to note that worst health harms are suffered by people emulating the pros, not necessarily the pros themselves. Absolutely true. The pros typically will have, ahem, "trained" (albeit very unscrupulous) physicians guiding the administration of drugs. High schoolers have the sophomore at the end of the locker room whose uncle is a vet. Not safe.

BUT, that doesn't really support doping bans much at all; in fact, it is somewhat pursuasive that the opposite should happen. If performance enhancers are as easy to obtain as I understand them to be (see last week's Senate hearings), and they are as prevalent as they are, then the thing that is really hurting kids is a lack of information. We don't talk about how much of a certain performance enhancer will do what to you. Or that boldione is really bad, while erythropoetin is so so. We just say all this stuff is really bad, hands off. That is like telling a teenager that sex is really bad, but not mentioning anything about condoms. Sure, your doing right by the kids that abstain, but are really making things dangerous for those that don't.

By legitimizing it to some degree (which I don't support, however), kids presumably will be able to have trained, qualified people assisting in performance enhancement, not a guy who heard from a guy who read in an article...

>>Message:

[quote]Someone Special wrote:

I'm not a complete idiot.

_______

Well, actually you are a complete idiot. I'm a physician with expertise in dementia, retardation, and encephalopathy. Let me remove any ambiguity: you are a complete idiot. My best advice is to have yourself institutionalized soon. Perhaps a quite place near a farm with a caring staff.

Can people deal with the discussion and not atteck the poster.

I have found Mr SS has raised some points of value.

The Daily Express asked the same questions and vox pop seems to see merit in the less drug control view.

This may be the big Q after the Olympics.Even Sammeranch(sp)

said the same sort of thing.

thinittru wrote:

>>Message:

This may be the big Q after the Olympics.Even Sammeranch(sp)

said the same sort of thing.

I highly doubt that, no matter which way an academic argument about the moral/pragmatic/ethical legitimacy of doping control comes out, it will ever become a topic of real debate amongst the powers-that-be, at least for the far foreseeable future. For decades on decades, the institutions that will call the shots on steroids (IOC, national governments) have been dogmatically maintaining that "doping is bad". At every turn, they say, "steroids will kill you." Honestly, can you imagine any one of these groups ever saying, "hey, sorry, we had it completely wrong for the past 50 years. Dope up!" For better or worse, the practical truth of the matter is that we are married to doping control for a good while.

>>I highly doubt that, no matter which way an academic argument about the moral/pragmatic/ethical legitimacy of doping control comes out, it will ever become a topic of real debate amongst the powers-that-be, at least for the far foreseeable future. For decades on decades, the institutions that will call the shots on steroids (IOC, national governments) have been dogmatically maintaining that "doping is bad". At every turn, they say, "steroids will kill you." Honestly, can you imagine any one of these groups ever saying, "hey, sorry, we had it completely wrong for the past 50 years. Dope up!" For better or worse, the practical truth of the matter is that we are married to doping control for a good while.

I agree that they have dug themselves a position that seems non retractable.

But there is a whole generation of drug users now in power and perhaps they all look at each other and say that they all look in wonderful condition and health and then start rethinking.

Perhaps we may have Berlin Wall type rethink and overnight change.Or as you feel,perhaps not.

One of the things that was said earlier on struck me. How many of you guys think you're really health conscious people? I am health conscious, but sometimes its just so i can run faster. The amount of fat on my body is lower than it needs to be for me to be considered "fit", because i know it helps me run fast. I might not take my daily multivitamin if i weren't running so much. I certainly wouldn't stretch every day -- i hate stretching, but i know i'll get injured if i don't. I probably wouldn't have ever started getting a full night of sleep if i hadn't started running.

On the other hand, i started running to be a healthier person, and i will continue to run when i get old because i want to remain healthy, but i think there some things i do that might look like i'm trying to be healthy that really aren't simply for the purpose of being healthy.

Take it a step further, I bet there are elite runners who aren't healthy people at all. After a decade or two of running i could imagine the line getting blury -- what things do they do for the purposes of general health, and what things do they do for the purposes of faster times?

Just something to think about.

Jim what do you for a living? Do you stand on your feet 8 hrs per day?

>>I bet there are elite runners who aren't healthy people at all.

Judging by the replacement joints due to sport you are correct.

Top women runners have their periods stoping for years.Is this part of a defintion of health.

Sport could be unhealthy,drugs are for health.Conventional wisdom inverted!

If all performance enhancing drugs were legalised what would be the next step? Genetically modified athletes?

The rich countries of the world would leave the rest of the world trailing way behind. Sporting success is very important to national prestige and I think some countries would use any means at their disposal to achieve it. We've already seen this with the eastern bloc countries.

Time to scrap the Olympics perhaps as the original ideals are long gone. They are all about money now, for the host city/country/tv and the winners. Athletes and nations will resort to any means to achieve their goals.

lamond once said what we do in the tour is not about health & fitness. dude do you think running 25 laps as hard as you can is healthy? hahaha

>>If all performance enhancing drugs were legalised what would be the next step? Genetically modified athletes?

I dont say allow all drugs.

GM athletes will be here earlier than we think.

The more we allow the less chance of it happening.

HGH only used cos of the test for testo.

>>Time to scrap the Olympics perhaps as the original ideals are long gone.

You could be right.One big bomb in Athens and that would be it.