The question I pose is: At what point does a performance enhancement become unethical?
We know they weigh the rider’s bikes in the tour before the start of each stage but do they weigh the extra bikes on top of team cars too? I have seen in races on TV where a rider in a break would stop his bike at the bottom of a long ascent and switch bikes to a lighter one for the climb. Are those extra bikes weighed too?
Another is at what point does something become doping? Does it have to have a harmful affect on the body or simply have a positive effect on performance? I have heard and read that doping regulations are so strict that a rider can not even take many regular over the counter medications for everyday ailments. For instance if you(presumably not a pro or elite enough to be tested) or I had a cold we could take some cough syrup to help us feel better while a cyclist in the same boat would be committing fraud. Where is the line drawn? For instance there are many muscle recovery drinks out there that as far as I know are legal and help your body recover faster than it naturally would or drinks like Cytomax that claim your athletic performance is increased. Other examples include living at altitude or altitude tents, creatine, salt tablets all giving your body higher levels of a natural substance than it would naturally be able to produce or store.
I read somewhere and I’m not sure if this is true or not that Landis’s supposed positive test for testosterone was still under what the NFL allows, again I don’t know if that is true or not but something to think about.
If it was simply seeing who was the best out there why not put all the riders on the same bike setup and let them only drink water?
If it is about seeing who is the fastest why not allow lighter bikes, relax the doping regulations to allow safe levels of substances and other innovations? Just put an * by the results or create a new section in the record books. If anything it would put an end to much controversy and scandals.
“Just put an * by the results or create a new section in the record books.”
Two problems with this:
(1) At what age would it be okay for kids to start doping? Judging by the way young football and hockey players are treated, it seems that overzealous parents would want their primary-school aged kids to start doping to ensure they got on the correct path towards the NFL/NHL. Would you want your seven year old using drugs?
(2) Drugs affect different people in different ways. Legalizing PEDs would not create a level playing field, even if every single rider were on them. Those who already are good climbers by virtue of their body type (i.e. the Columbians) and those with already high hemocrit would not see as much of a boost in performance. The guys who would win the “natural” race would not win the “PED” race. Personally, I want to see a race where the guy with the best combination of hard work, talent and genetics wins.
Are they testing at the youth level yet? If thats the case nothing would probably change much in those sports. Seems like most of the testing doesnt begin until college and even there you can still take cough syrup or get a cortisone shot.
What about how much time they can afford to stay in the wind tunnel or how much they can afford to spend on R&D of the equipment?
Here’s my .02 I think if it involves sticking a needle in, transfusing blood, or asking for a prescription that you otherwise wouldn’t have, you is probably cheatin"…Cytomax, altitude training, naps, it’s all good. OTC meds, why not ? I drink lots of coffee, helps my workouts.
What crosses the line and is it a moving line - changing with technology?
How about additional muscle transplants or something we would judge more exteme in today’s world, two hearts?
Or heart bypass surgery to improve oxygenation for athletic contests…
Which begs the question … what would be the most cost effective surgery for athletics today … and what would it be in 10 years?
Are any of the athletes competing in the 2008 Olympics hybrids?
Next … what about gene therapy or stem cells to improve specificity for a particular performance gain? … How about detachable or plug in muscles that could be stored (like blood) to be attached when needed?
It just comes down to what people find dangerous or unappealing really. Sometimes it has no basis in reality. Like creatine for example, it had a LOT of hype because a few studies actually showed some benefit. This led to it being called a steroid (factually untrue) and many people called for it to be banned. Which is ridiculous, the stuff is in tuna, and steak, and really doesn’t do that much.
I personally find performance enhancing drugs and surgeries fascinating. I hope that in the future sports will work this out be having ‘natural’ and ‘enhanced’ categories, so that we are free to explore both limits.
IMHO, as long as it is not a prescription drug, sure. In the US, the junk is regulated (thankfully !). If you are begging your doc for a little testosterone, stanozol or albuterol, then I think you are over that line. I do know that in Mexico, you can waltz in off the street and get all kinds of PED’s without a scrip. If that floats someones boat, so be it. I would never do it, myself.
You do raise some good points. I know in bodybuilding, lots of folks routinely juice and the community is OK with that. There is a “natural” division for those folks who want not to juice. In baseball, some young kids are asking for “the Tommy John surgery”, which amounts to elective changes in ones elbow anatomy to provide more durability and perhaps speed.
Kind of like hydro racing: We could have an “unlimited” division, and a carefully regulated division.
At what point does it become unethical to wake someone up in the middle of the night, when they’re in bed with their spouse to take blood or make them piss in a cup? At what point does it become unethical to follow someone around and track their every move and activity? At what point does it become unethical to tell someone what to do with their own body?
Yes, the future is coming - “Sir, your genetic profile tells us that you should not place higher than 11th. You are cheating.”
This thread may be more interesting if the word “unethical” is replaced with the word “immoral”.
Maybe they should take all the athletes and make them register and wear armbands at all times and put them in large camps with all the other athletes. Basically “concentrate” all of them in one area. Sound familiar?