Drug testing

[Graham Lappin]

With the London Olympics looming, a thought occurred to me.

I think that all the rules on drug use in sport should be abolished and we should allow the use of any drug the athletes wish. This will save millions in drug testing and would be a far more honest approach. When gold medals are won, instead of the athlete standing on the podium, it should be the chemist, thus boosting science education at the same time.

This is the sort of lateral thinking we should have in government in my view.

[davidrodway]

With the London Olympics looming, a thought occurred to me.

I think that all the rules on drug use in sport should be abolished and we should allow the use of any drug the athletes wish. This will save millions in drug testing and would be a far more honest approach. When gold medals are won, instead of the athlete standing on the podium, it should be the chemist, thus boosting science education at the same time.

This is the sort of lateral thinking we should have in government in my view.

never mind testing sportspeople - we should drug test public sector workers and the unemployed. if public sector employees test positive for drugs at work, sack them. if benefit claimnts are positive (they are supposed to be available for work), withdraw their benefits.

[chaggle]

never mind testing sportspeople - we should drug test public sector workers and the unemployed. if public sector employees test positive for drugs at work, sack them. if benefit claimnts are positive (they are supposed to be available for work), withdraw their benefits.

Well said. If a sportsperson's career can be wrecked by a positive drug test (or even a missed drug test), then why not a politician, public employee or benefit claimant?

[smudge]

With the London Olympics looming, a thought occurred to me.

I think that all the rules on drug use in sport should be abolished and we should allow the use of any drug the athletes wish. This will save millions in drug testing and would be a far more honest approach. When gold medals are won, instead of the athlete standing on the podium, it should be the chemist, thus boosting science education at the same time.

This is the sort of lateral thinking we should have in government in my view.

That's not lateral thinking. That's just giving in.

Well said. If a sportsperson's career can be wrecked by a positive drug test (or even a missed drug test), then why not a politician, public employee or benefit claimant?

Because there is a huge difference between taking an illegal substance for recreational use and cheating, using a drug to gain an unfair advantage in sport.

I accept that it is hard to police the use of performance enhancing drugs. It will be a sad day for me if we ever have to give up and take it as read that everyone involved in sport must use drugs to be able to compete.

[chaggle]

Because there is a huge difference between taking an illegal substance for recreational use and cheating, using a drug to gain an unfair advantage in sport.

Yes, one's illegal and the other isn't.

[Graham Lappin]

Hey everyone, you did get it that it was supposed to be a bit of comedy - right?

[davidrodway]

"Well said. If a sportsperson's career can be wrecked by a positive drug test (or even a missed drug test), then why not a politician, public employee or benefit claimant?"

"Because there is a huge difference between taking an illegal substance for recreational use and cheating, using a drug to gain an unfair advantage in sport."

Well, which is worse? Taking a drug so you can run faster than someone else - who cares? - or pretending to be doing a proper job while in reality you are as hogh as a kite, or claiming dole when you are so drugged up that if you were offered the job there is no way you could take it up? And what happens to all those drugs conficated by the police? Where do you think they all end up?

[smudge]

Hey everyone, you did get it that it was supposed to be a bit of comedy - right?

Ah! No, I didn't, Sorry Graham!

"Well said. If a sportsperson's career can be wrecked by a positive drug test (or even a missed drug test), then why not a politician, public employee or benefit claimant?"

"Because there is a huge difference between taking an illegal substance for recreational use and cheating, using a drug to gain an unfair advantage in sport."

Well, which is worse? Taking a drug so you can run faster than someone else - who cares? - or pretending to be doing a proper job while in reality you are as hogh as a kite, or claiming dole when you are so drugged up that if you were offered the job there is no way you could take it up? And what happens to all those drugs conficated by the police? Where do you think they all end up?

I have no comment on "which is worse", that's a complicated question as ( rather like alcohol use) recreational drug use can be dangerous or purely a personal choice.
My point was simply that it does matter if performance enhancing drugs are used in sport and that (though Graham may have been joking) there are people who suggest drug use should be allowed.
And "who cares"? Anyone else in the race! And (in terms of allowing performance enhancing drugs across the board), anyone who thinks physical health and fitness is important!

[davidrodway]

Ah! No, I didn't, Sorry Graham!



I have no comment on "which is worse", that's a complicated question as ( rather like alcohol use) recreational drug use can be dangerous or purely a personal choice.
My point was simply that it does matter if performance enhancing drugs are used in sport and that (though Graham may have been joking) there are people who suggest drug use should be allowed.
And "who cares"? Anyone else in the race! And (in terms of allowing performance enhancing drugs across the board), anyone who thinks physical health and fitness is important!

Why worry about a few "sportspeople" cheating at silly games when we might be paying milions to drug addled public sector workers who should rightly be sacked and claimants who shouldd have their benefits withdrawn?

[Tony Williams]

When gold medals are won, instead of the athlete standing on the podium, it should be the chemist, thus boosting science education at the same time.

Yes, I've thought before now that the chemists should sometimes join the athletes on the podium.

I know you're not serious, but to take the issue seriously for a moment, the problem with legalising performance-enhancing drugs is that some athletes will do anything to win, even if they know that the consequences for their health may be be devastating.

[Graham Lappin]

some athletes will do anything to win, even if they know that the consequences for their health may be be devastating.

Agreed - but do you see this as a bad thing?

Boxing is bad for your brain, athletics can cause damage at a young age...

(In case anyone starts to rant - I still have my tongue firmly in my cheek).

[Pebble]

Agreed - but do you see this as a bad thing?

Boxing is bad for your brain, athletics can cause damage at a young age...

(In case anyone starts to rant - I still have my tongue firmly in my cheek).

Difficult problem. We ask sports persons to pushe their body to the limit, taking enormous care to try to avoid injuries/damage that may prevent them reaching their peak, but not caring that much about the longterm.

So if we let the chemists loose what would this look like? Anabolic steroids to build up muscle bulk (long term some hypertension, possibly diabetes, and coronary problems, small risk of paranoid psychoses during training), then enough erythropoietin to render them prone to strokes and bradycardia (some anticoagulants and a pacemaker will solve these irritations), some ritalin to improve concentration and add sympathomimetics on the day of the performance (possible psychoses should be watched for).

I'm sure those in the trade could come up with a much longer list.

[smudge]

Why worry about a few "sportspeople" cheating at silly games when we might be paying milions to drug addled public sector workers who should rightly be sacked and claimants who shouldd have their benefits withdrawn?

I dont think you can compare the two. I was talking in responce to Grahams (tongue in cheek!) comment specificaly of sports related drugs.
If no longer banned it will no longer be "a few" it would tend to trickle down any and all who compete at any level.

.

I know you're not serious, but to take the issue seriously for a moment, the problem with legalising performance-enhancing drugs is that some athletes will do anything to win, even if they know that the consequences for their health may be be devastating.

Yes.
We are struggling to encorage some kids to stay in shape physicly as it is. Imagine the difficulties and conflicts if potentialy dammaging drug taking was the norm within an area that SHOULD be about staying healthy.

Agreed - but do you see this as a bad thing?

Boxing is bad for your brain, athletics can cause damage at a young age...

(In case anyone starts to rant - I still have my tongue firmly in my cheek).

Stop it Graham!

So if we let the chemists loose what would this look like? Anabolic steroids to build up muscle bulk (long term some hypertension, possibly diabetes, and coronary problems, small risk of paranoid psychoses during training), then enough erythropoietin to render them prone to strokes and bradycardia (some anticoagulants and a pacemaker will solve these irritations), some ritalin to improve concentration and add sympathomimetics on the day of the performance (possible psychoses should be watched for).

I'm sure those in the trade could come up with a much longer list.

Yes. I dread to think.....

[Tony Williams]

I recall that in the Victorian era there was a fad for very long-distance races (eg 24 hours non-stop) which were (originally) won by people just walking. To keep going they drank tonics which contained strychnine...important to get the dose right

[skbuncks]

I recall in one the the Red Dwarf novels there was a section dealing with the legalisation of drugs and genetic modifications in sport.
This led to the splitting of most sporting events into purists (no drugs etc) and modified (do what the hell you like. The purists lost.
Scotland astounded the football world cup loving nations one year by sporting a new keeper 24ft long and 8 ft high. They lost their first match 5 nil and were subsequently knocked out of the competition by a string of further loses.


skb