Now that the furor (not the fuhrer, that’s a different article) has died down, I figured it was time to get things stirred up again. What I’m talking about is, of course, whether or not Floyd Landis has been taking performance-enhancing drugs on his way to his dramatic win in the 2006 Tour de France. I don’t want Floyd to think I’m singling him out, however, so let me say that it’s not specific to him. This could just as easily be directed at Barry Bonds or the handful of Carolina Panthers who were accused of steroid use last year. It’s not an uncommon thing in today’s world to see it happen. That’s the point.
What I’m wondering is: Who cares? If these people want to take the drugs, let them.
It is, after all, their body that they are potentially damaging. But wait, you cry, that wouldn’t be fair to those that don’t take performance-enhancing drugs. It wouldn’t be a good role-model to all the children who want to grow up and be just like all those wonderful atheletes. No, I suppose you are right on both counts.
First, parents, tell your children that there are better role models in the world than professional athletes. Why is it that we’ve even come to a point in our world that there is such a job as professonal athlete? I mean really. I don’t have a problem with people making a lot of money, but come on. It’s a bit ridiculous, especially because the next guy has to make more than the last guy, which means they have to raise ticket prices, which in turn means the cities feel like they have to build new stadiums for these teams, and in the end it’s us little people who get the shaft. I don’t mind f you make money, but quit taking it out of my pocket.
Okay, back to the point.
Obviously there are reasons people take steroids or there wouldn’t be a market. I’ve heard the argument that sponsors, at least in the cycling world, are nearing the point where they don’t want to be involved with all the drug use. Fine. Maybe it’s time we create a clean league and a, well, less-than-clean league. Surely there are sponsors who don’t care.
Set up one league where athletes are tested regularly. Monthly. Weekly. Daily. Hourly. Who cares? Just so long as it’s on a very regular basis. You want the big sponsor dollars, that means you have to undergo that scrutiny. You don’t care, you get on the other bandwagon, and you don’t have to have the same level of testing. You bulk up all you want.
In the end, I suspect the eyeballs (and the dollars) will follow the drug users, because those will be the best times, the most incredible feats – but hey, in the meantime, you give people on every side (the athletes, the fans and the sponsors) the choice. Let the free market decide how it works out. Then no one has to worry about who is doing what. You want to stay on the juice, you have your choice in which league you want to compete.
Comments
3 responses to “To Juice or not to Juice”
Mary-Jo, that stinks. When I was training those under “the influence” we knew about the chance of bone loss. One reason I stressed to individuals to keep up with their doctors if they were going to continue their endeavors.
The last I recall the ratio is 1:4 people have serious bone loss (to the point of Osteoporosis). It’s unfortunate that under those two years of treatment that bone density wasn’t being checked for.
It’s been a known thing for 60 years, unfortunately it looks like only in the last two decades have we taken it more seriously.
I think if these guys want to tear their bodies apart, go for it. They are the ones to pay in the end. I know – I could be the “poster child” for the reason not to take steroids.
It was doctors who gave me shots of anabolic steroids every 2 weeks for 2 years due to a hand and arm crushing injury I had. 8 years later I find out that the steroids gave me a bone disease. Now it is 23 years since the initial shot and I have had 27 surgeries, 26 of them believed to be caused from the steroid shots.
So, kids, take it from me – I moved a lot better before the steroids were ever introduced into my body. They maim and they kill.
Yea I love the debate these days. The one thing no one gets is the hard work is still there. Just because you take steroids or any other n2o uptake increaser doesn’t mean you can just sit on the couch. These guys that want to win are in the gym, on the court, in the field–honing their routine very tightly. Possibly even beyond their competitors normal routines. For those to seek out additional ways to get an edge they are probably very competitive to begin with.
In bodybuilding they built a natural league. It doesn’t mean you have to have been clean forever, just that you have had to been clean for the last year. Neat gray line eh?
Anyone who wants to push their limits, go beyond their capacity should be allowed as long as it is hurting no one. I think in the current leagues blatant usage gives a large hand over those who are not. Does that mean they should be excommunicated, or just put into the X-Games?
It’s a weird world we live in. If you look at our natural history we’re bigger, taller, stronger than in the past due to the amount of hormones animals have been given. Women can reroute their monthly routine by usage of synthetic and natural hormones to regulate their own bodily courses, and as they age they are given even more hormones to regulate menopause better but when a man wants to control and enhance his own body through the parallel mechanisms we are shamed or told astonishing stories of all the evils (shrinking testicles, roid rage RARRR, acne freak!).
Lots of double edges, lots of misinformation. Abuse can happen with anything, moderation can lead to some wonderful things. Too bad it’s generally relegated to a weird quasi-moral line or FUD. On this an umpteen others I wish we weren’t so knee-jerk-fear-based and actually did clear studies (that aren’t influenced by the originator) to show clear cut impact.