Steroids

Originally posted by aquageek I'll take the unpopular choice and ask "who cares if an adult athlete takes steroids?" Ignoring the bad example it sets for the kids (the whole 'do it for the kids argument') and potentially the unsportsmanlike concerns it raises, I do have to admit I'd be curious to see just how well we could engineer the human body and what it's capable of. I'd pay good money, or the money of a good neighbor, to see some hopped up juice head swim a 50 free in 9 seconds. I actually don't disagree with this if the only issue is performance enhancement. Bodybuilders, e.g., have for decades used nutritional supplements that help them to build their muscles. This isn't a problem because every bodybuilder can use the same supplements. The real problem arises when you have substances that enhance performance, but have negative long term health effects. Allowing the use of such substances places athletes in the situation where they must choose between endangering their long term health or being at a competitive disadvantage. It's certainly reasonable that anyone who sets a new record in an event should have to submit to testing for harmful substances before the new record is accepted as valid. But globally testing USMS swimmers for such use is not called for, IMO, and the cost of having a review board to review all of the substances that USMS members are using for medical purposes would, I believe, be prohibitive.

Originally posted by aquageek I'll take the unpopular choice and ask "who cares if an adult athlete takes steroids?" Ignoring the bad example it sets for the kids (the whole 'do it for the kids argument') and potentially the unsportsmanlike concerns it raises, I do have to admit I'd be curious to see just how well we could engineer the human body and what it's capable of. I'd pay good money, or the money of a good neighbor, to see some hopped up juice head swim a 50 free in 9 seconds. I actually don't disagree with this if the only issue is performance enhancement. Bodybuilders, e.g., have for decades used nutritional supplements that help them to build their muscles. This isn't a problem because every bodybuilder can use the same supplements. The real problem arises when you have substances that enhance performance, but have negative long term health effects. Allowing the use of such substances places athletes in the situation where they must choose between endangering their long term health or being at a competitive disadvantage. It's certainly reasonable that anyone who sets a new record in an event should have to submit to testing for harmful substances before the new record is accepted as valid. But globally testing USMS swimmers for such use is not called for, IMO, and the cost of having a review board to review all of the substances that USMS members are using for medical purposes would, I believe, be prohibitive.