In 1988, after Carl Lewis was awarded the gold medal in the 100M dash when Ben Johnson tested positive for steroids, (I believe it was) Lewis stated that he was not really that surprised because he just didn't think that it was humanly possible to run the 100m in 9.79 (Johnson's winning time).
In the past 3 years, 2 american’s have euqaled or surpassed that time.
In today’s Houston Chronicle there is a tiny article (which is a true disappointment considering the magnitude of the accusations) that reads as follows:
According to Terry Madden, the chief executive of the US anti-doping agency: "What we have unconverted appears to be intentional doping of the worst sort (...) this is a conspiracy involving chemists, coaches and certain athletes using what they developed to be undetectable designer steroids to defraud their fellow competitors and the American and world public"
The drug in question is known as THG and though no athletes were named, it appears that several prominent athletes are a party to this.
I also know for a FACT, that some elite swimmers know of the drug, and believe it is undetectable.
*** This is in no way intimating that any specific athlete has or is using the substance.
Parents
Former Member
An athlete who obtains and uses illegal, performance enhancing drugs isn't going to give one iota about fair play, as defined by governing sports bodies, because ethics and morality mean nothing to them. This argument will only fall on deaf ears.
As for the necessity of ?institutions' looking after our own good.... I suppose that some substances have such a potential for harm that they should be regulated and that untrained individuals do not have the necessary knowledge for safe use of many other substances. However, I bristle at the thought of regulation. In their attempt to ?protect' the public from themselves, the FDA has created many unwarranted regulations resulting in a prescription drug crisis in this country. A crisis which is keeping much needed drugs out of patients hands and which gives pharmaceutical companies a ?reason' for jacking up prices so high that many, many, people can not afford them. Don't tell me that this or that substance has been banned or restricted by the FDA as their actions speak more of bureaucratic @*%$# and oligarchy than anything else.
Medical ethics? What makes doctors more ethical than the rest of the human population? As with athletes, a doctor who creates designer drugs for an athlete or prescribes ?performance enhancing' drugs isn't going to give a damn about the well being of the patients, ethics and legalities.
An athlete who obtains and uses illegal, performance enhancing drugs isn't going to give one iota about fair play, as defined by governing sports bodies, because ethics and morality mean nothing to them. This argument will only fall on deaf ears.
As for the necessity of ?institutions' looking after our own good.... I suppose that some substances have such a potential for harm that they should be regulated and that untrained individuals do not have the necessary knowledge for safe use of many other substances. However, I bristle at the thought of regulation. In their attempt to ?protect' the public from themselves, the FDA has created many unwarranted regulations resulting in a prescription drug crisis in this country. A crisis which is keeping much needed drugs out of patients hands and which gives pharmaceutical companies a ?reason' for jacking up prices so high that many, many, people can not afford them. Don't tell me that this or that substance has been banned or restricted by the FDA as their actions speak more of bureaucratic @*%$# and oligarchy than anything else.
Medical ethics? What makes doctors more ethical than the rest of the human population? As with athletes, a doctor who creates designer drugs for an athlete or prescribes ?performance enhancing' drugs isn't going to give a damn about the well being of the patients, ethics and legalities.
