DOPING IS RAMPANT - JUST LEGALIZE IT

You guys are soooo short-sighted! The stuff they're taking now is so primitive. We are entering a new age, with the emergence of bio-tech, genetic enhancement, etc.

100 years from now we'll have 500 lb. behemoths throwing the shot 100m, 6 meter high jumps by 10-foot tall ectomorphs with thighs like tree trunks, sub-3:00 miles by 5 foot tall guys with 36" inseams and hearts the size of watermelons. These are the good old days, enjoy them.

Actually, if they cure aging in the next 50 years,(which many gerontologists think possible), I look forward to seeing all that. I WANT to see guys jump like Spiderman! Embrace the future, it's coming sooner than you think!

Mel, it sounds like you have gone off the deep end! Lay off the juice for a few weeks.

...the next step in our athletic evolution. We are meant to advance to new levels from a greater understanding of our body chemistry. Drugs are simply a product of this understanding, a means for which to utilize our bodies to perform its greatest. Legalizing could potentially make the market safer, but it could easily have drawbacks. Just something to think about.

The only way to ever have a level playing field is to put more emphasis financially into testing for PEDs. If we legalize them, we'll start seeing things again like the tragedies that happened to the Dutch (or was it Belgium) cycling team in the late 80s and early 90s when their team "Dr." had them experiement with a new thing called EPO. A bunch of them died because they were human test rats.

Are we going to "push the envelope" of human performance by starting to experiment on the athletes with new and improved PEDs or genetic engineering? Are we willing to risk lives because we want someone to break 3:00 in the mile or pole vault 25 ft.? To me, what you'll get if you legalize PEDs is a bunch of people scrambling to try and come up with more and more "new" things all the time. It will be complete and total chaos.

I'm the first to agree that testing now is a joke; there's absolutely no question about that. But it may at least serve as a bit of a deterrant rather than not having anything at all for the athletes to think about. I'm sure that there are a few athletes out there who don't use PEDs either because it's wrong or they're afraid they'll be caught. So while it may be ineffective as a whole, there are parts that do in fact work.

A few posters have already mentioned the financial aspect too. It would seem to me then that countries who are scientifically and technologically advanced would have a great leg up in terms of research and implementation of drugging programs.

The fact of the matter is that maybe the way we think about sports around the world needs to be reevaluated. Until then, in my opinion, all sports need to start spending more and more and more on testing. When they start coming up with intricate and effective testing combined with steep financial penalties, sports will get cleaned up. It can be done. It's sports and sports teach us that anything can be done if we put our minds to whatever it is we choose.

With any drug, including over the counter drugs you and I purchase daily, there is use, mis-use, and abuse.

Use - is proper recommended dosage, taken within guidelines established for good health.

Mis-use - is taking a drug incorrectly or to get results not indicated for the drug.

Abuse - is taking too much, too frequently, etc.

As long as athletes USE the drugs, not abuse or mis-use them, they will promote good health. When athletes abuse them, they get into trouble. Under our current system, we encourage athletes to experiment. Most are taking drugs without medical supervision. The best athletes, of course, can afford doctor supervision.

Whether people agree or disagree with the premise of drug use, it doesn't matter. Athletes are using drugs and will continue to use them. Some get caught, most don't. The general population wants to believe performances are clean so let them.

First, that is not a new idea. But I certainly agree. Just be done with it. Doping is as much a part of big time T&F as intervals and spiked shoes. Let's stop the charade.

All this reminds me of back in the 70's when the big crime was getting paid. Remember how many athletes were going to banned and such just because they wanted to be a professional? They were called cheaters and such too. This drug thing is just the next step. Besides do we really want to see guys running the 100 in 9.9 forever?

For the record, I am a "convicted" drug cheat, Ren wells is my name and this is the first time that I have felt compelled to wirte on this message board. No, I will not go into the details of trying to prove my innocence in this piece, in fact what I have to say will probable cause the universe of letsrun posters to gasp in horror. I say legalize it. why? because of innocence. Once you test Postive no matter what the outcome of your hearing, innocent or guilty, you are always guilty, in eyes of your competitors and the sporting community. Nothing changes, that is the result of the "strict liability" ruling in the doping code. If its in your body, no matter how it got there you are and were doping. No matter what the reason may be you are guilty. The law has long since reconized that at Sometime, to protect the innocent, the guilty must go free. In the World of sports it is just the reverse, to sweep away the guilty the innocent must be caught in the wave as well. More to come.

It seems like if they wanted to catch dopers it could be done with a little planning-

i.e. collect enough samples from top athletes for years, so that there will be a "blood profile". As new tests for PEDs are developed, retest the samples (if it's possible to keep them viable for that long). Perhaps the fear of being exposed in several years will deter the advanced dopers that are currently far beyond WADA controls.

Yours is a good suggestion. Furthermore, the 2 year ban should be expanded to 4 years at a minimum.

Eventually Lance Armstrong will be caught and maybe that will blow this thing up. Or maybe he'll continue to get the Flojo treatment and everyone acts like the performance is legit.

Off all the steroid stories her's is the biggest slam dunk, well maybe she's tied with the Chinese women. But still she sickend me back when she was running. She'd go on TV and say that she did 10,000 sit up a day and junk like that, and the reporters would just say "Wow. Flojo that's amazing! No wonder you run so fast!" Her stupid and rediculous statements were never challenged. Then she died and it became even more taboo to discuss. I wished she'd lived long enough to confess.

Someone mentioned though that the current drug testign system is not uniform from country to country. Look at China, you don't see their athletes even compete off of Chinese soil until the Olympics. And we have no clue what kind of testing program that is implemented there. Some of the African nations don't even have out of competition testing.

And I could continue with more examples of the system being so flawed that if an athlete truly wants to cheat they can. The testign system is ridiculous.

If track wants to get rid of the cheats then the testing system needs a ton of funding and a true commitment. Also one way to make this happen is to require ALL athletes and countries to follow the same rules if they want to compete on the international level or run in races with prize money.

We also need to make the penalties stiffer, 2 years is not enough. Also if it is proven that you were a drug cheat then your prize money should have to be returned and hopefully all of your sponsors drop you immediately so that the financial damage is great enough athletes will think twice.

Also if an athlete is convicted why not post their photos on the web and magazines etc. The public humiliation would be enough to make some think twice about the consequences of their actions.

Or since these compounds are currently illegal according to the government why not procecute these individuals and hand out jail sentences?

Tyler gets to keep his gold medal.

The legality is only put to the test when one is caught.

The testing system is flawed from the start. There are chemists and quasi-scientists out there pouring over the latest pure research looking for the next big thing, before it is even fully known to be effective ... years before an idea is even being "sold" to drug companies prior to FDA testing.

Legalize it...

One of the arguments that continues to pop up is that PEDs should not be legalized because they think legalizing it is a cope out and make the anology murder is rampant... legalize it.

This is a complete different situation. I think PEDs should be legalized because I honestly believe the way the system is set up now it is an uneven playing field. If you legalize it then you are making a conscious effort to level the playing field. Some argue well only the top athletes could afford it. Well it would be the same situation that we have now for aspiring athletes. If you show promise you join one of the running clubs such as Hansens, etc. These organizations have the infrastructure to have the access to the physicians needed to safely promote PEDs.

If the weekend warrior wants to use PEDs then it would have to come out of their own pockets. If PEDs were legalized I guarantee all promising athletes would find a way to pay for the treatments.

I also believe that this is just a natural progression of science and medicine. We have reached the point that we have developed these compunds that show they provide us with a benefit when we compete. Is it any different than an aerodynamic bike or an altitude tent? These are giving the athlete an unfair advantage. What about the aspiring cyclist who cannot afford the same bike that Lance Armstrong rides. Should Lance riders like Lance Armstrong not be allowed to ride an aerodynamic bike that his team and Trek spent thousands and thousands of dollars perfecting? Cross country skier are benefiting from better skis, better wax and better boots. Runners have better shoes and better spikes and faster tracks.

We have given athletes across the board advantages thru technology why is medicine any different?

I agree with you. Its just another progression in the sport. Why won't people accept this?

First, to "I agree with the original post":

With ANY drug there is a possible chance of using it safely, provided a doctor's prescription? No way. Just ridiculous. There is no such thing as safely taking heroin or safely smoking crack. Some drugs are more dangerous than others, plain and simple. Even carefully monitored exposure to drugs can lead to addiction. For instance, some hospitalized people on morphine (for pain) can form addictions to opiates.

Also, steroids are by no means "safe". According to the Mayo Clinic steroids may cause liver abnormalities or tumors, increased LDL cholesterol (bad form), decreased HDL colesterol (good form), rage or violence, psychiatric disorders, and addiction. I know some people will say, "All drugs have negative side effects, so what?" Typically, people driven to take drugs with drastic side effects face a life-altering malady. For these people the drastic step is the only one left.

Furthermore, given the nature of the Hippocratic Oath and other medical oaths, I do not see how a doctor could ethically prescribe steroids to a healthy athlete. Doctors are supposed to make choices to sustain the good health of patients. Therefore, a doctor who prescribes dangerous drugs to an athelte in the absense of a medical abnormality, will probably lose his license (providing he gets caught).

Second, to "Point is being missed"

The point is not being missed, its wrong. The 'leveling the playing field' argument is tired. People have different responses to drugs. Some people would have huge gains using PED's and others would not. "So what?" you say, "People have different responses to training, some benefit more than others, isn't it the same with drugs?" No. The difference between training and doping is training relies on TALENT, while doping relies on the unkown effect of a drug. Also, since doping benefits some more than others, the playing field would still not be level. It would still be unequal. Nothing will have been solved.

Lastly, what about the talented individuals who don't want to risk their bodies to drug use? Should these people be left behind by an army of doped athletes? I realize this could be the case today (clean athletes being left behind by drugged ones), but legalizing drugs makes it even more so. Its not fair to punish the naturally gifted by letting everyone cheat. Maybe I should find an artist and smash his hand with a hammer, "Sorry man, just leveling the playing field."

New (old and tired) Perspective, you make a lot of assumptions about drug use without providing any data to back them up. You seem to think that just because you say something, it is true.

Still, here's a reason to keep performance enhancing drugs banned: because currently no athlete in the world has to take performance-enhancing drugs to feel they've given their very best effort in the sport. Performance-enhancing drugs have very real side effects (non-performing enhancing drugs have very real side effects), and suggesting that widespread use wouldn't lead to equally widespread health problems is incredibly naive.

Make performance-enhancing drug use legal, and you create an environment where it will be expected. Coaches will expect it. Athletes will feel that they can't ever consider their effort "100%" if they don't use them. And the prize will (as it does now) still go to the ignorant chump who's most willing to throw away his future health for a momentary thrill or a paycheck ... or to those with lots of money (or those willing to do whatever it takes to get the money) to succeed via expensive pharmaceuticals.

No thanks.

Yes, cheaters prosper. So do lying politicians, white collar criminals, street thugs, drug dealers, and con men. But we don't make those activities legal just because there will always be people engaged in them.

Rules (like drug use in sports) are created for the benefit of those who want a rational, safe, sane sport. We don't change them for cheaters. We don't let selfish, self-serving, ignorant thugs dictate the way the rest of us go about our business.

NordicX wrote:

It seems like if they wanted to catch dopers it could be done with a little planning-

i.e. collect enough samples from top athletes for years, so that there will be a "blood profile". As new tests for PEDs are developed, retest the samples (if it's possible to keep them viable for that long). Perhaps the fear of being exposed in several years will deter the advanced dopers that are currently far beyond WADA controls.

I think the athletes should also have to post a bond/insurance policy guaranteeing that they are clean for twice the amount of whatever price money or pay they receive. The bond would be good for 10 years. The insurance company would then be conducting their own test, because they don’t want to have to pay the claim. The athlete would want more tests in order to reduce his premium. The 10-year window would install enough uncertainty in the advancement of testing to keep athletes clean. I think this should be done for all sports track, cycling , football baseball, everything.

If a claim were paid, the beneficiary would go into fund for more testing R&D and sample storage.

SoCalPete wrote:

We don't let selfish, self-serving, ignorant thugs dictate the way the rest of us go about our business.

You must not pay attention to what happens in Washington D.C.