Unrestricted warfare should be declared in athletics

Interested--

Answer 1: Clean athletes are to decide for themselves whether or not to continue competing cleanly.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS NOW, AND THEREFORE NOTHING WOULD CHANGE.

Answer 2: It is incredibly easy for a "disease state" or "injury state" to be claimed with sufficient legal and ethical basis that it supports a "therapeutic" administration of PED's. Ageing is now routinely classified as a disease state, for which therapeutic testosterone is lawfully (and in the minds of many, ethically) prescribed and administered. Results of very intense training, even of overtraining, are similarly easily categorized as an "injury state", and therapeutic PED's lawfully (and ethically) prescribed and administered.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS NOW, AND THEREFORE NOTHING WOULD CHANGE.

In your apparent innocence, just where do you think people are getting this stuff right now?

Explain how their getting around the biological passports:

Sprintgeezer wrote:

In your apparent innocence, just where do you think people are getting this stuff right now?

In the US, I think dopers like Hecht are getting stuff from Mexico or from people like the guy in Florida currently in the news, groups like Balco, or unethical doctors who face losing their licenses if caught. There are also people who get testosterone through lying to their doctors, etc. but no ethical US doctor would prescribe EPO or other PEDs to a healthy person just to help them compete. Other dopers are using things that are not legally prescribed to anyone.

What you are proposing is a system where to be competitive currently clean athletes would be expected to break the law or lie to doctors to obtain PEDs. I can't see how that's a reasonable or workable proposal.

do not agree--

It doesn't really matter if you, personally, or I, personally, or Dick Pound, personally, keep fighting the battle.

Culturally, the battle is lost. You either deny it and keep wasting resources fighting, or find a new theater in which to fight and compete.

People rejoice when a sacrificial lamb is offered to appease the gods, while entirely ignoring the filth and murk from which that lamb was plucked.

If you truly believe that people like Bolt, Blake, Jeter, Merritt, Makhloufi, etc. are clean, then there is nothing that I can say that will convince you otherwise. If you truly believe that the 4 fastest men in history just happen to exist at the same time, so be it. If you truly believe that 3 of the 4 fastest men ever, and the top 2, exist not only at the same time but from the same country, and from the same program, then whatever. Do you actually believe in Aries Merritt?

There are SO MANY people doing it right under your nose, that it is incredible. How much more evidence do you need?

You can choose to keep your head in the sand. I would choose the pragmatic route and spend limited social resources on something else entirely.

I can, and will, explain how they get around passports--later, because I've run out of time.

"no ethical US doctor would prescribe EPO or other PEDs to a healthy person just to help them compete"

You are totally incorrect. Ethics is in the first instance in the judgment of the individual physician, and then if a complaint is lodged, in the judgment of a review board. Plenty of MD's do just this, and are fine with it.

I am not at all proposing clean athletes break the law. Like I said, therapeutic use on an overtrained/injured athlete is easily justified as an expedient back to normal health and activity.

And also, you are conveniently ignoring all those countries in the world where the legal and ethical rules of medical practice are entirely different, and entirely differently regulated, if at all.

If what you are saying is that the doping in the known cases of doping (Armstrong, Bonds, etc.) could all be done legally and in accordance with medical standards in the US, you are simply wrong.

The fact that other countries have no legal or medical ethical standards in these areas, or don't enforce them, doesn't help your case. It really means that countries where loading a healthy athlete up with EPO, steroids, and experimental drugs is illegal couldn't compete with countries where that is legal, just like the US vs. the Eastern Bloc countries in the 70's and 80's.

if you're suggesting open season on peds

then it's the stupidest thing i ever heard

the athletes will kill themselves-it will be battle of the peds

really wrote:

if you're suggesting open season on peds

then it's the stupidest thing i ever heard

the athletes will kill themselves-it will be battle of the peds

If you are responding to me, I'm not advocating anything of the kind. I'm saying that open season on PEDs would, in most cases, involve violations of US law or medical ethics. We would be expecting athletes either to give up athletics or become criminals, lie to doctors, or rely on unethical doctors.

I also agree that many athletes would do long term harm to themselves if PED use were allowed, and you would end up with the top athletes being the ones most willing to do long term harm to themselves in return for short term gains.

sprintgeezer

can you let us all know what time you'll be back to finish your broadcast

i love comedy

Geezer

Sometimes you say the most ridiculous things.

The idea that just because Lance looks fine -> ergo EPO didn't cause any long term ill effects -> ergo all drug use is OK .. is the kind of thinking that gives the world FOX News commentators.

One only has to look at the East European women to see where drug use might take people .. and if you think Jarmila Kratochvilova is a healthy woman, you're an idiot.

Flo Jo.

Lance had testicular cancer.

And these are people who were never busted. A free for all on PED use would be a free for all on PED development - and science is an incredibly powerful tool; we'd have folks running on 4 legs before long.

Maybe some people are OK with that. I don't think it's a good idea.

i'm referring to sprintgeezer and his pompous proclamations

they introduced a 50% hct rule in cycling 20yrs ago to save them from harming themselves

unrestricted peds would kill athletics stone dead

wtfunny wrote:

Geezer

Sometimes you say the most ridiculous things.

The idea that just because Lance looks fine -> ergo EPO didn't cause any long term ill effects -> ergo all drug use is OK .. is the kind of thinking that gives the world FOX News commentators.

One only has to look at the East European women to see where drug use might take people .. and if you think Jarmila Kratochvilova is a healthy woman, you're an idiot.

Flo Jo.

Lance had testicular cancer.

And these are people who were never busted. A free for all on PED use would be a free for all on PED development - and science is an incredibly powerful tool; we'd have folks running on 4 legs before long.

Maybe some people are OK with that. I don't think it's a good idea.

Any examples besides Flo Jo and Eastern European women?

Negative health effects are overstated. Many ex-professional athletes have no health problems after PED use. And many continue to take PEDs when their careers are over.

ruben sierra wrote:

Any examples besides Flo Jo and Eastern European women?

Negative health effects are overstated. Many ex-professional athletes have no health problems after PED use. And many continue to take PEDs when their careers are over.

Well, I listed already some examples (and mentioned Lance had testicular cancer - and we don't know whether or not that was a function of drugs use); what examples do you have to support your position? I've not seen any real documentation that suggests "Negative health effects [from PED use] are overstated" .. source?

What if there were a way to test everyone, every day?

At what age should a child start doping in order to gain maximum future benefits?

I'm going to go with 7.

ruben sierra wrote:

Any examples besides Flo Jo and Eastern European women?

Yeah, because these examples don't support my point of view....

Your examples were FEMALES using massive amounts of AAS. That's not exactly indicative of most PED using athletes.

ruben sierra wrote:

Any examples besides Flo Jo and Eastern European women?

Here's what women would have to do to compete if it was open season on PEDs:

She endured a humiliating trial in 2008 that included testimony and photographic evidence that she had beard growth, male pattern baldness and other masculine side effects associated with heavy steroid abuse.

Essentially, women would have to use drugs to turn themselves into men to be competitive.