Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

    What the hell's the big deal? Why not let these athletes utilize our growing technological advances. How cares about the old records records are made to be broken. You think they're still not gonna have to work their asses off to be great athletes? If that is the case then how come you suck? (said in general)

  • #2
    Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

    I expressed the same opinion on this board about 6 months ago ( although a bit more diplomatically than you have ) but my opinion was not well received. People offered very impassioned reasons to differ and I certainly respect those differing opinions.

    There are very sincere opinions on both sides of this issue that have been previously expressed.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

      I don't particularly care who is the best chemist in the world. I won't watch Olympics to see who's got the best drug cocktail going. It doesn't matter to me whose body reacts best to a brew of enhancers; it's who has done the hardest work, and has the most talent. Naive, purist, yes; and do I now believe that at least some of my heroes are tainted? Yes; but taking the low road would be the end of so many people's interests. Maybe we're all in denial now, maybe it's too late, but it's too early to give it all up to give gold medals to BALCO rather than the athletes.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

        In the future all performance enhancing drugs will be legal as long as they do not hurt the athletes' bodies in any ways. If you take a performance enhancing drug and get no negative side effects, then there is no reason to ban it. Unfair advantage you may say??? Geez, look at all the Americans and their training facilitites...and their nice weather. Now that is an advantage right there.

        Chemists have been able to partly "strip off" the molecules that are harmful to the body from the testosterone mimicing steroids. If drugs only help you and even prolong your life as well as increasing your performance then they are GOOD. Thus, I will agree with anyone saying that drugs should be legalized as long as their are not harmful (which they will not be in the future).

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

          Donkey Dong:

          Thank you for that reasoned voice within this community. Drug use has ALWAYS been a part of sports within the context of history. There NEVER has been and NEVER will be what many here like to call "clean" competition. As long as there is something to be gained, people will attempt to get the advantage on their opponents, whether it be through drug use, improved training environment or conditions, selective breeding, etc. The relatively recent nazi-like opposition to drug use in sports is designed to keep the pockets lined of certain quarters of the sports hierarchy. Concern for athletes "health" on the part of the governing bodies is nothing more than a bone thrown to the public at large in an attempt to keep them entertained and the money continuing to flow in. It's as simple as that.

          Kurt Francis

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

            >I don't particularly care who is the best chemist
            >in the world. I won't watch Olympics to see
            >who's got the best drug cocktail going. It
            >doesn't matter to me whose body reacts best to a
            >brew of enhancers; it's who has done the hardest
            >work, and has the most talent.>>

            There are those who believe that virtually everybody at the top has been dirty for the last 30 years or so. What we have been seeing IS "who has done the hardest work and has the most talent" they're just doing it a higher level than they would have otherwise.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

              "Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance"

              yes, yes
              And I should be allowed to do crack cocaine. The constitution guarantees the Pursuit of Happiness. I need coke to be happy - victimless crime et al. It's for people like you that we had to invent a government that has to legislate morality, because some people are born without it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

                "Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance"

                yes, yes
                And I should be allowed to do crack cocaine. The constitution guarantees the Pursuit of Happiness. I need coke to be happy - victimless crime et al. It's for people like you that we had to invent a government that has to legislate morality, because some people are born without it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

                  Cheats abound all around. A Stanford academic 4.0 GPA seems socially impotent in Regina's case when compared to an athletic 2.0 some Joe Blow scored in 2 years at the University of Parties and Fun. Years of schooling, hard work and all-nighters seem to have no greater weight in our society than someone who spent their time beer-drinking, pot-smoking and Friday night dancing.

                  Academic fraud and scandals are a part of college life as we have discovered with some of our major universities. Yet we continue to watch college football... college basketball. We know some of those athletes can't read or write as they should at that level, but we look past that, because they entertain us.

                  We know people cheat - everyone knows someone who has done something they weren't supposed to do and got away with it - and we've generally turned the other cheek... looked the other direction if the infraction was not major. Telling would be fruitless. It's happened on Wall Street - where the stock in someone's trustworthiness should be at its highest level, and it's happened on the playing field when a referee would rather forget to throw the yellow flag on a flagrant play than be booed off the field.

                  We make a habit of turning the other way, so there's no surprise in the allogations and discoveries of late. We've seen worse. We've also pretended to see less when less was more. What's the difference this time? It's still some sick form of entertainment value we have placed in our value system.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

                    The most stupid and ignorant post so far!
                    What about talented athletes NOT using drugs? Shall they just accept average athletes steeling their medals?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

                      "There NEVER has been and NEVER will be what many here like to call "clean" competition."

                      I object to this "Charlie Francis" line of reasoning. What I find objectionable is making the leap from a fact, that there have always been SOME people seeking a chemical edge, to the non sequitur that a few bad apples automatically spoil the entire historical basket. If throwers were using drugs in Rome in 1960 but the women sprinters weren't, then the women's 100 was clean. To those who will retort that nobody knows if the women in that final were clean, I reply, "You don't know that they weren't, nor should you try to argue history into a dirty corner."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

                        Some fo you poeple should be shot. Let eveyone use drugs?? ok lets do it and lets see the results of the children in the future and how many athletes drop dead because they will use as much as they like. It will be GDR all over again with all sorts of problems for the children of the future. How could they be monitored to make sure they weren't using too much dope? Even if there was a limit, some would still try to go beyond that. Do you honestly think parents will want their kids doing a sport that lets them cheat and abuse their bodies with chemicals?? Crazy and thoughtless suggestion. Their are clean athletes winning the Olympics, too many of you are brainwashed by Mr Francis.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

                          This is actually the most important issue facing track and field -- indeed every sport -- today. It's good we talk about this, without attacking each other as dimwits.
                          To those who say we should let athletes take anything that doesn't hurt them: how would we know if a new drug/enhancer hurts them? Does this not require long-term testing to see the results? Wouldn't anything new have to be held back for years to see what the effects were?
                          Haven't most of the enhancers currently in use been found to be harmful? If so, are we not already in an enforcement regimen wherein that which is known to be harmful is outlawed; and those that want to win at all costs are ignoring the rule not to use harmful substances?
                          Haven't we always had arguments about one set of athletes having an advantage: of climate and altitude (Kenya); of wealth and leisure (developed countries); of state sponsorship vs. government neglect (USSR vs. US in the 50s and 60s)? Is there really no difference between these advantages and the advantages gained by drugs? Is this really a matter of philosophy more than anything else? Could we say that everyone has a right to pursue whatever "natural" means are at one's disposal: travel to altitude; specialty strength-training machines; full-time pursuit of training through professionalism; but draw the line at "non-natural" means? And what would non-natural be defined as? What would blood-doping be: natural or non-natural? If such a distinction couldn't be made, is it not still feasible to set some rules that everyone must play by, just as we require everyone to use the same weight shotput? Is this really more about our inability to enforce rules, rather than what the rules are?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

                            "What the hell's the big deal? Why not let these athletes utilize our growing technological advances. How cares about the old records records are made to be broken. You think they're still not gonna have to work their asses off to be great athletes?"

                            Well for starters it IS a big deal for many athletes who aren't comfortable ingesting highly questionable substances in order to be on a level playing field. Anyone saying they are completely safe is a charlatan. We don't know that and in fact there is more than enough evidence to call their safety into question. Do you like it when others respect your conscience and your autonomy? Can you perhaps imagine extending the same courtesy? No doubt some will vainly argue that non-users are disrespecting the right of users to choose, but non-users are not putting users in a situation where denying them their choice threatens their health.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Athlete's Should be Allowed to Use Performance Enhancers

                              The argument seems to come back to whether you want to see fair competition or record-setting performances. For my money, I'd like to see fair competition where a contest is decided by hard work (preparation) and determination (strategy and guts) -- and sometimes a little bit of luck. I don't believe there's such a thing as a "level playing field" because there are inherent genetic and environmental advantages, but unrestrained science would only make it worse. If you prescribe to the theory that science should create a stable of superhumans for entertainment purposes, then don't call it athletics.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X