Just finished this book by former coach to Ben Johnson, Charles Francis. It
has changed my perspective on doping in sports. Francis (and others he
cites) describes an amature athletics world awash in serreptitious drug use.
Athletes who want to compete at international levels face the simple choice
of losing clean, or doping to become/remain competitive. The pressures to
dope are immense, and the potential awards are seductive. As Francis lays
it out, the choice to dope doesnt seem like a breach of ethics to the
athlete, but a practical necessity and, because doping is so common, the
only way to level (or re-level) the playing field which is already tilted by
organized, state sponsored, doping programs.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of his book is the final chapter where
he suggests doping should be essentially legalized and mananged to ensure
the athletes health. He claims that underground doping is poorly and
dangerously administered due to ignorance and because of the overriding
necessity to avoid detection. In contrast, a medically supervised doping
program can be done safely (short and long term) and generally with far
lower doses than administered in underground programs. He further stresses
that it isnt the drugs themselves, but the benefits athletes can derive from
a properly designed combination of drugs and training.
Finally he hints at (but never confronts) the philosopical question
underlying the banning of certain drugs and practices. Shoes are not
natural, spikes less so. A good diet improves performance. Coffee is a
food, but in excess it delivers an illegal does of a controlled substance.
At one time, Cyclists ate sheeps testicles to increase testoterone...food or
drug? Many performance enhancing supplements are legal...CoQ10, Creatine,
etc... What am I babbling about? The question is, what is the
philosophical basis for banning some performance enhancing substances and
not others? What is natural and what isnt? What's a drug and what is food?
Francis suggests that the test should be the effect on the health of the
athlete, not the somewhat arbitrary designation of "dope".
All in all a very interesting read that raises some difficult questions.
steve
--
"The accused will now make a bogus statement."
James Joyce