I’ve just read the Thomas Murray article and WOW, what a great article. So much of what we read these days is badly researched, commercial opinion rather than fact based investigation and reporting. It was like a breath of fresh air in my day.
As far as I’m concerned, he has so much credibility. I don’t just mean his accolades, or position or whatever, I mean, his researched, considered and well written article buys heaps of cred with me.
The one thing that really made me stand up and pay attention was his initial emphasis on research on the issue at hand. That was excellent.
Next was his apparent lack of bias and his obvious depth of knowledge in the field.
The only thing I would like to have seen would be a bit more emphasis on recommendations.
For example, therapeutic use of various drugs that also have a performance enhancing effect. With testosterone, I understand that normal levels range between 200-800 (forget the units). In an allegedly low level patient/athlete, what level should you be able to dose up to? I think a blanket statement like, no drug can be administered to more that the average of the range (500) or some other suitable number and the initial low count (say 100) must be demonstrated. This would limit (but never eliminate) abuse of the drug for performance, or at least be a very good start.
At first I thought an ethicist was just an overpaid guy with an opinion. However, after reading the article, I think he certainly qualifies as a true professional ethicist. This is one of the very rare times that I’ve been impressed by someone in a very long time.