My blog has moved!

You will be automatically redirected to the new address. If that does not occur, visit
and update your bookmarks.

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Turn on, tune in, ... or drop out

You know, I usually do not like Washington Post Writer Sally Jenkins all that much but her latest article is really, really good.

Not everything's clear when it comes to HGH, PRP

Here is the premise...

What is the point of sport? What do we believe competitive excellence in sport is about? Do we want games to be public entertainments with ever higher and more thrilling thresholds of performance?

Athletes are under enormous pressures to perform, whether from the public, their sizable contracts, or a culture of pride, and ... They are rewarded unfairly, but they are punished in equal measure by the cruelties of their professions. They start out believing in their own invincibility and slam into reality far more violently than the rest of us. Aging is harsher for them than for you or me. Their careers are over just when most of us are beginning ours, and they experience degrees of physical pain and repetitive injuries the rest of us will never know.

Here is the central truth that no one really likes to talk about: Some kinds of banned substances are extremely dangerous, some are relatively harmless, and some are actually beneficial.

When we crack down on "performance-enhancers," are we trying to preserve the integrity of the competition or the health of the athlete? Is it safer and ethically more acceptable to use HGH to heal from an injury than to use it as a muscle-builder? If so, why isn't the difference reflected in doping regulations? Rather than work all of this out, we've allowed the anti-doping authorities to lump all substances and all athletes who sample them, regardless of their motives, into one equally guilty party. That way we don't have to do any hard thinking.

Here is an outside the box thought...

Why don't we regulate it?

Professional sports currently supplies and regulates the type of equipment, training facilities and even some of the techniques involved with that particular sport; even what kind of plays a team can and cannot do.

Why not regulate and administer which enhancement products to administer, when, how and by whom?

The current system I believe allows athletes to cheat. Just don't get caught by our superficial testing programs.

You can go get what ever treatment you want, from whomever you want, when ever you want, "just don't get caught"! Then you will be unfairly labeled and cast out.

Is the current system and our views of the players, coaches, leagues and even ourselves as fans, as ethical and honest as we pretend it is or are there better ways to go about this?

BTW: I am a believer is rules regardless of the implications and loop holes so, whomever does get caught (they were fully aware of what they were doing and the consequences involved) should get punished appropriately.


It looks like Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas's fantasy values just got a little better...


Gimpdiggity May 20, 2010 at 11:44 PM  

The problem with trying to regulate it, in my opinion, would be the fact that team doctors are just that...TEAM doctors.

I can imagine that there would be some incentive to claiming that an athlete was "hurt" and needed some HGH in order to get better, even if that athlete wasn't in fact hurt.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Top Commentators

Widget by Blogger Tutorials

Fan Blogs


Stocks Blog Directory Google Reader or Homepage Add to My Yahoo! Subscribe with Bloglines Subscribe in NewsGator Online BittyBrowser Add to My AOL Convert RSS to PDF Add to Technorati Favorites! Add to netvibes My Zimbio
Top Stories

First and Ten

Popular Posts Widget





My photo
It's all about two of my three favorite things! Sports and Stocks!


My Blog Rankings !

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by 2008

Back to TOP