Floyd says...you've got to legalise doping

[rhubroma]

Legalizing doping is ****ed-up from the perspective of simply having to tell one's kids - or kid brothers - who compete with Wheeties, orange juice and egg whites in the tank, and not rocket fuel, that, Yes, in order to one day ride the Tour de France you will have to inject yourself with chemicals that, if used incorrectly, can lead to death. Gosh, what signaling is that for the generation to come...abandon all hope ye who enter here - for there is no chance of success without massive farmoconsumption! Leave your dreams at the door as 12 year old's, boys, and work on emulating every facet of your hero's prep.! Down to the black nylon kit bag.

While I would agree with this on premise, there is a wide degree of variation between how "innocent" kids are treated around the world and then, of course, what any adult with free-will chooses to do given the circumstances.

Certainly educating kids to dope would seem to be a universal malus. Does that mean it is just as ****ed-up when those kids become adults?

Or, to put it baldly, is teaching the youth the myth of sport on Wheeties and and egg whites at all preparing them to handle properly, if talented enough to be faced with the proposal, of existing in a chemicals injecting world of pro sports in the future? Is the one just more hypocritical than the other?

I'm merely playing the moral relativist here to be the devil's advocate.

 

[Benotti69]

Legalizing doping is ****ed-up from the perspective of simply having to tell one's kids - or kid brothers - who compete with Wheeties, orange juice and egg whites in the tank, and not rocket fuel, that, Yes, in order to one day ride the Tour de France you will have to inject yourself with chemicals that, if used incorrectly, can lead to death. Gosh, what signaling is that for the generation to come...abandon all hope ye who enter here - for there is no chance of success without massive farmoconsumption! Leave your dreams at the door as 12 year old's, boys, and work on emulating every facet of your hero's prep.! Down to the black nylon kit bag.

worse, think about a$$hole fathers who will put the sh!t in their kids wheeties and orange juice to start them early, that's the real stupidity of legalising this stuff.

if an adult wants to take PEDs they know the consequences but kids are gonna get this stuff as stupid competitive parents seek to gain an advantage for their kids, i imagine some are doing it already for teens in sport as they hope they will get a contract for whatever star team etc..

the chinese are definitely gonna start. look how young they start training their gymnasts

 

[Sanitiser]

Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why couldn't you legalise blood transfusions but not EPO, steriods etc.

The problem is that doping within cycling has been a cultural issue since the 1920s to get rid of it you need a new system and get a lot of the old players out.

 

[Benotti69]

Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why couldn't you legalise blood transfusions but not EPO, steriods etc.

The problem is that doping within cycling has been a cultural issue since the 1920s to get rid of it you need a new system and get a lot of the old players out.

better a new system to catch dopers and a new regime dedicated to it with harder sanctions.

yeah its a hard struggle but if everyone gave up doing something becasue it was difficult nothing gets done. the internet is proving to be a popular way of sharing information.

imagine how many of cycling's loyal fans would still believe the miracle of TdF winners without the clinic and its valuable contributions from other fans, ex riders, ex mechanics, ex PED providers etc....i bet someone in Novitsky's team has been reading through here on occassion. I bet Walsh has used the search facilitiy, kimmage too.

the pressure from fans here has an effect on what is happening, not yet in great numbers but it is having and effect. why the blood passport? it was designed to appease fans, how? to try and allow riders to dope but only to a low level. it also had the negative side in allowing the uci to pick on riders as it so chose, but as we can see it is failing to do that so the fight to stop doping is being won, how do i figure that, public opinion and pressure from fans like here and other sites.

is doping being won? i think so. a fed investigation into the biggest doping cheat of the sport is winning the battle. the doping war will never end, but that is life, got to keep fighting.

 

[Sanitiser]

I think if Lance does get caught, doping will be implicitly accepted by the anglophone audience. I mean a 'clean sport' will always be openly strived for but people will accept the sport as it is. The same way Europeans look past their national sportsmen's indirections.
I mean the 'look what he's done for cancer sufferers' sound bite is already working in overdrive.

 

[Benotti69]

I think if Lance does get caught, doping will be implicitly accepted by the anglophone audience. I mean a 'clean sport' will always be openly strived for but people will accept the sport as it is. The same way Europeans look past their national sportsmen's indirections.
I mean the 'look what he's done for cancer sufferers' sound bite is already working in overdrive.

you know i have yet to see or hear what he has done for cancer sufferers.

apart from telling everyone that he beat it, not the medicine and doctors looking after him but he did it.

cancer is supposed to affect 1 in 3, so we all know about it. what has he done? apart from enrich himself telling people he as gonna find the cure, now he's telling everyone about what we know. snake oil is what he's doing

the fan boys on here remind me of Aunt Polly.

 

[Sanitiser]

I'm not a fan boy. But to most people Livestrong is a valid charity and the 'hope' he has given people is real and many people are already looking past his alleged doping.

 

[FKLance]

I think legalisation is just stupid and childish. You have to stop sports then alltogether.

A level playing field then? Impossible, no way all riders can have access to the best doping whenever they wanted!

Most sports fans do actually care. I believe most competitors would walk away disgusted. Juniors? Good luck explaining to them what is ahead if they become PRO..

 

[rhubroma]

I think legalisation is just stupid and childish. You have to stop sports then alltogether.

A level playing field then? Impossible, no way all riders can have access to the best doping whenever they wanted!

Most sports fans do actually care. I believe most competitors would walk away disgusted. Juniors? Good luck explaining to them what is ahead if they become PRO..

I think that given the injustices that are currently being done, for example, with the bio-passport, then one has to consider at least the possibility of some form of legalization.

Based on the current mainstream thought regarding ethics, sports should have been banned long ago. But of course for economic and popularity reasons, such a proposal is what really becomes stupid and childish, or so it would seem.

What bothers me about the current set-up, is that the inherent human flaws and hypocritical situations have an all too evident weight to anyone with a critical eye. Within this dialectic about right vs. wrong, idealism vs. pragmatism and effectiveness vs. ineffectiveness should the honest assessment of what needs, or should, be done be played out.

I'm not saying that fighting doping is bad, nor that fathers (or mothers) who would dope their kids are being good parents; but between this and waging an un-winnable war at all costs based on ideology, I'm confident in stating that at least how that war is to be fought and what its objectives should be needs to be modeled upon a realistic and non-ideological basis. Not the absolutist premise and Utopian ideals upon which the current corrupt system operates. And I have been a staunch opponent of the fraud, the omertà, etc. I still despise it. But the sickening parody of the UCI and its "anti-doping" agenda has simply made me take a second look.

I'm also convinced, sorry to say, that because of this the doping war is far from won. To the contrary, in having the impossible goal of ridding the sport form the scourge of doping altogether the problem is only made worse. Floyd's exasperation is merely a reactionary response to this reality.

Ultimately, I suppose, the issue isn't over what is ethical practice and what isn't (even if arguments range differently on this matter), but that of how can the ideals of creating an ethical environment and seeing justice done be curtained enough so that achieving the possible becomes within reach. Because we aren't nearly obtaining even the possible with this system, precisely because it attempts to achieve the impossible. Thus optimizing not "winning" would seem to be the most desirable route in a world, once again, that is without justice. For this to happen, therefore, it would seem that everyone's dogmatic beliefs need to be reconsidered to the point of doubt and objectivity.

 

[Benotti69]

I'm not a fan boy. But to most people Livestrong is a valid charity and the 'hope' he has given people is real and many people are already looking past his alleged doping.

what 'reality' is he giving. to beat cancer is a lottery, you get lucky. he got lucky. you dont need to give the guy your money so he can swan around the world in his own private jet telling people how lucky he was...

his doping is not alleged. you dont open federal investigations on people that allegedly dope, you open them because they doped and you try damn hard to bring the evidence to light.

 

[Fester]

Legalizing doping is ****ed-up from the perspective of simply having to tell one's kids - or kid brothers - who compete with Wheeties, orange juice and egg whites in the tank, and not rocket fuel, that, Yes, in order to one day ride the Tour de France you will have to inject yourself with chemicals that, if used incorrectly, can lead to death. Gosh, what signaling is that for the generation to come...abandon all hope ye who enter here - for there is no chance of success without massive farmoconsumption! Leave your dreams at the door as 12 year old's, boys, and work on emulating every facet of your hero's prep.! Down to the black nylon kit bag.

I understand you view: However, all kids "grow up" some day. What ever course in life you take, you'll see behavior akin to doping in sport, just in other areas of life sh@fting someone else to get ahead earn you a congratulations and a pat on the back.

There is nothing saying that juniors, U-23 cannot have a dope control, while pro's can have a bio passport which tolerates some level of "tuning". I happen to think that efforts would be better focused in this way. Rather than spending 7m$ on a HGH test which caught all of two people, spend it on monitoring them. Monitor them closely enough and you need not chase a picogram of a substance, but rather it's abuse; this would also allow the more ethically minded to do something other than carry water, as it would narrow the amount people can boost by.

You have to take ethics out of the argument and focus on something (more) tangible; health. The more they push doping doping the more dangerous and ineffective "treatments" must become!

I wonder, knowing of the whole sale acceptance of doping in the various American professional sports leagues, how many kids still want to be in the NFL or MLB?

It's like sex: I went to a religious school and was surrounded by people f*cked up by nothing more than some "ethical" conundrums posed by other people! Simply put; right and wrong should take a logical perspective.

 

[rhubroma]

I understand you view: However, all kids "grow up" some day. What ever course in life you take, you'll see behavior akin to doping in sport, just in other areas of life sh@fting someone else to get ahead earn you a congratulations and a pat on the back.

There is nothing saying that juniors, U-23 cannot have a dope control, while pro's can have a bio passport which tolerates some level of "tuning". I happen to think that efforts would be better focused in this way. Rather than spending 7m$ on a HGH test which caught all of two people, spend it on monitoring them. Monitor them closely enough and you need not chase a picogram of a substance, but rather it's abuse; this would also allow the more ethically minded to do something other than carry water, as it would narrow the amount people can boost by.

You have to take ethics out of the argument and focus on something (more) tangible; health. The more they push doping doping the more dangerous and ineffective "treatments" must become!

I wonder, knowing of the whole sale acceptance of doping in the various American professional sports leagues, how many kids still want to be in the NFL or MLB?

It's like sex: I went to a religious school and was surrounded by people f*cked up by nothing more than some "ethical" conundrums posed by other people! Simply put; right and wrong should take a logical perspective.

Which just goes to show you, ethics is man made. Certainly it has its purpose, in at least checking our otherwise natural inclination toward barbarism and chaos. A world without it would be undoubtedly most uncivilized. Though because of this very reason, the human fabricating forces that underscore ethics, is where its limitations are to be found. Given that when ethics is dogmatically used as merely an instrument of ideology or faith, it often results in something equally barbarous and chaotic and no better or worse than in a situation where their absence prevails.

Therefore yours would seem a very reasoned and honest response, against that of the usual invectives and anathemas we normally get from the sanctimonious. I would only be curious to know what such a "logical perspective" of right and wrong might contain. I would start with flexibility.

 

[flicker]

Legalizing doping is ****ed-up from the perspective of simply having to tell one's kids - or kid brothers - who compete with Wheeties, orange juice and egg whites in the tank, and not rocket fuel, that, Yes, in order to one day ride the Tour de France you will have to inject yourself with chemicals that, if used incorrectly, can lead to death. Gosh, what signaling is that for the generation to come...abandon all hope ye who enter here - for there is no chance of success without massive farmoconsumption! Leave your dreams at the door as 12 year old's, boys, and work on emulating every facet of your hero's prep.! Down to the black nylon kit bag.

When I watched TV there were advertised pharmacueticals and over the counter meds being promoted for every little sneeze, backache and sexual disfunction.
We live in a drug culture, when Mexican and Colombian Narco terrorists become bigger than their respective governments.
In cycling part of the lure is to be bad, and use drugs on the sly, just like scoring blow, crack, meth, smack weed etc.
Or every mothers little helper thera flu, sudafed cough syrup etc.
It is every persons choice to chose their poison or do it clean.
All European pros that I know of have doped, including Americans, part of the alure in a doping sport. Floyd, the man with nothing to lose is honest and dead on in his diatribe about doping. His Tour de France title was stolen.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

While I would agree with this on premise, there is a wide degree of variation between how "innocent" kids are treated around the world and then, of course, what any adult with free-will chooses to do given the circumstances.

Certainly educating kids to dope would seem to be a universal malus. Does that mean it is just as ****ed-up when those kids become adults?

Or, to put it baldly, is teaching the youth the myth of sport on Wheeties and and egg whites at all preparing them to handle properly, if talented enough to be faced with the proposal, of existing in a chemicals injecting world of pro sports in the future? Is the one just more hypocritical than the other?

I'm merely playing the moral relativist here to be the devil's advocate.

When we are discussing PEDs in sport the 'choice' is not about personal 'free will' though- when someone takes PEDs they gain an (unfair) advantage, this then means that many others have to choose to do the same.

The 'moral' argument is not accurate either - to take PEDs would normally be a simple yes or no, black or white decision, but when PED abuse is tolerated by those in charge and it has an effect on your livelihood it introduces a lot of grey.

 

[kurtinsc]

Legalizing doping is ****ed-up from the perspective of simply having to tell one's kids - or kid brothers - who compete with Wheeties, orange juice and egg whites in the tank, and not rocket fuel, that, Yes, in order to one day ride the Tour de France you will have to inject yourself with chemicals that, if used incorrectly, can lead to death. Gosh, what signaling is that for the generation to come...abandon all hope ye who enter here - for there is no chance of success without massive farmoconsumption! Leave your dreams at the door as 12 year old's, boys, and work on emulating every facet of your hero's prep.! Down to the black nylon kit bag.

Reality sucks sometimes.

If your kid wants to be a supermodel, at some point they're going to have to learn about the anorexia, bulemia and weight control drugs needed to achieve the weight necessary to have that career at the top level. And if they aren't tall enough, they won't be able to succeed regardless.

If your kid wants to be president, at some point they're going to have to learn about the muckraking, attack advertisments and complete lack of privacy that entails.

And if they want to be a professional athelete, at some point they're going to have to learn about how PED's are going to be apart of what they deal with... either by using them personally or by trying to compete against others who have when they have not.


People were using minor doping products in my AGE GROUP SWIM MEETS 20 years ago. 12-14 year olds with false athsma diagnoses getting a boost from inhalers prior to races. And there's no testing at that level of course.

Sooner or later... kids will learn about reality. Unless we can actually CHANGE that reality and eliminate doping (which I believe is impossible), it may make more sense to just acknowledge it and try to keep it at a healthy level rather then pretend to ignore the elephant in the room.

 

[dbrower]

Legalizing doping is ****ed-up from the perspective of simply having to tell one's kids - or kid brothers - who compete with Wheeties, orange juice and egg whites in the tank, and not rocket fuel, that, Yes, in order to one day ride the Tour de France you will have to inject yourself with chemicals that, if used incorrectly, can lead to death. Gosh, what signaling is that for the generation to come...abandon all hope ye who enter here - for there is no chance of success without massive farmoconsumption! Leave your dreams at the door as 12 year old's, boys, and work on emulating every facet of your hero's prep.! Down to the black nylon kit bag.

Don't forget the issues of pulling exposure of 20,000 miles on the road a year, orthopedic surgeries, and the risks of riding down hills at 50 mph with little protection beyond your courage. How many competitive road cyclists die each year in training accidents? At the peak of the EPO experimental phase, how many dropped dead in their beds?

There is nothing safe about the sport, and an argument about PED use needs to be realistic about the total and incremental risks.

-dB

 

[rhubroma]

When we are discussing PEDs in sport the 'choice' is not about personal 'free will' though- when someone takes PEDs they gain an (unfair) advantage, this then means that many others have to choose to do the same.

The 'moral' argument is not accurate either - to take PEDs would normally be a simple yes or no, black or white decision, but when PED abuse is tolerated by those in charge and it has an effect on your livelihood it introduces a lot of grey.

Well I was simply refering to the unalterable and un controlable facet of free-will as such. No laws or rules can contain it. If I want to kill myself, nobody can prevent me from doing so, etc.

There have been many excellent points raised in this thread. Such discussion is good in my book.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well I was simply refering to the unalterable and un controlable facet of free-will as such. No laws or rules can contain it. If I want to kill myself, nobody can prevent me from doing so, etc.

There have been many excellent points raised in this thread. Such discussion is good in my book.

I agree that there have been some great points raised here - and much like yourself I am trying to tease out the respective arguements.

But the use of PEDs are against the rules - which people sign up to once they sign their licence.
There will always be those who break rules and they should all be punished accordingly - however we have seen that the system tolerates a certain amount of doping.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Reality sucks sometimes.

If your kid wants to be a supermodel, at some point they're going to have to learn about the anorexia, bulemia and weight control drugs needed to achieve the weight necessary to have that career at the top level....

Your analogy is a fail. I happen to be acquainted with a couple of 'super models.' yes, really they did covers, world travel, the whole show. What you will find is they won the genetic lottery. They are human with some unusual world views given their wealth and general beauty, but not anorexic, bulemic, etc. They know it's out there, but they don't do it. Why? They know it's sick.

Paulina Porizkova nails it right on the head: http://www.modelinia.com/blog/paying-to-go-from-the-a-list-to-the-c-list/20678

At some point, you get as far as genetics will take you and that's the end. You are approving of doping athletes to force the body to do something it otherwise can't. Why is that okay? It will start early and kill a bunch of kids along the way. It already has.

Your way of thinking is how Armstrong and Tailwind are likely looking at felony charges. Another way to say it is with a rhetorical question, what cheating is okay? Speeding in a car? Misdemeanors? Felonies? Because you are allowing any of the categories mentioned, as long as you can get away with it.

This is why holding samples for 10 years and retested as new PED's are introduced and testing protocols improve. Get a positive and your placing is wiped away as if you never raced.

 

[flicker]

Your analogy is a fail. I happen to be acquainted with a couple of 'super models.' yes, really they did covers, world travel, the whole show. What you will find is they won the genetic lottery. They are human with some unusual world views given their wealth and general beauty, but not anorexic, bulemic, etc. They know it's out there, but they don't do it. Why? They know it's sick.

Paulina Porizkova nails it right on the head: http://www.modelinia.com/blog/paying-to-go-from-the-a-list-to-the-c-list/20678

At some point, you get as far as genetics will take you and that's the end. Just because dope is everywhere doesn't mean it has to be condoned.

This is why holding samples for 10 years and retested as new PED's are introduced and testing protocols improve. Get a positive and your placing is wiped away as if you never raced.

Oh thanks for the update, I feel so much better now! I know why Greg LeMond dropped me like an unwanted stepson and my resume to model Versace was sent back with a giant rubber stamp declaring REFUSED.

 

[VeloFidelis]

Your analogy is a fail. I happen to be acquainted with a couple of 'super models.' yes, really they did covers, world travel, the whole show. What you will find is they won the genetic lottery. They are human with some unusual world views given their wealth and general beauty, but not anorexic, bulemic, etc. They know it's out there, but they don't do it. Why? They know it's sick.

At some point, you get as far as genetics will take you and that's the end. Just because dope is everywhere doesn't mean it has to be condoned.

This is why holding samples for 10 years and retested as new PED's are introduced and testing protocols improve. Get a positive and your placing is wiped away as if you never raced.

Are you going to write a check to WADA or the UCI or what ever agency might end up being responsible for holding thousands of samples for decades and then retesting them just to remove your ten year old third place at Classica San Sebastian off the books? Who the hell do you thing is going to fund this sh!t? Doping costs a fraction of what it costs to catch someone doping. The sheer economics of 90% of the harebrained ideas I read here for "cleaning up" cycling would end up putting it, or any other sport I can think of out of business.

At some point we all have to realize that doping for athletic performance is a fact of life. It has been around in one form or another since the caveman. Clean sport is an impossibility. There has never been such a thing. Set a limit that safe guards the future health of the athlete and punish those who exceed it. Put the fantasy of clean sport back up there on the shelf with the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus.

 

[flicker]

Set a limit that safe guards the future health of the athlete and punish those who exceed it.

This is the only reality I have seen.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Reality sucks sometimes.

If your kid wants to be a supermodel, at some point they're going to have to learn about the anorexia, bulemia and weight control drugs needed to achieve the weight necessary to have that career at the top level. And if they aren't tall enough, they won't be able to succeed regardless.

If your kid wants to be president, at some point they're going to have to learn about the muckraking, attack advertisments and complete lack of privacy that entails.

And if they want to be a professional athelete, at some point they're going to have to learn about how PED's are going to be apart of what they deal with... either by using them personally or by trying to compete against others who have when they have not.


People were using minor doping products in my AGE GROUP SWIM MEETS 20 years ago. 12-14 year olds with false athsma diagnoses getting a boost from inhalers prior to races. And there's no testing at that level of course.

Sooner or later... kids will learn about reality. Unless we can actually CHANGE that reality and eliminate doping (which I believe is impossible), it may make more sense to just acknowledge it and try to keep it at a healthy level rather then pretend to ignore the elephant in the room.

I do agree that it is the 'change of the reality' is the issue -
I believe the "think of the kiddies" argument is almost hypocritical (as I believe Rhubroma was alluding to earlier) - PEDs do not become 'right or wrong' or harmful at a certain age.

But - I don't agree that doping has to be acknowledged (I presume you mean monitored?) as that is merely changing the goalposts and can be circumvented.

I don't believe any has said that the use of PEDs can be eliminated - however if proper procedures are applied it would frustrate and curtail its use, meaning that the risk/reward is in favor of clean athletes.
So just because PEDs cannot be 'eliminated' does not mean that anti-doping should be abandoned.

 

[hektoren]

Reality sucks sometimes.

If your kid wants to be a supermodel, at some point they're going to have to learn about the anorexia, bulemia and weight control drugs needed to achieve the weight necessary to have that career at the top level. And if they aren't tall enough, they won't be able to succeed regardless.

If your kid wants to be president, at some point they're going to have to learn about the muckraking, attack advertisments and complete lack of privacy that entails.

And if they want to be a professional athelete, at some point they're going to have to learn about how PED's are going to be apart of what they deal with... either by using them personally or by trying to compete against others who have when they have not.


People were using minor doping products in my AGE GROUP SWIM MEETS 20 years ago. 12-14 year olds with false athsma diagnoses getting a boost from inhalers prior to races. And there's no testing at that level of course.

Sooner or later... kids will learn about reality. Unless we can actually CHANGE that reality and eliminate doping (which I believe is impossible), it may make more sense to just acknowledge it and try to keep it at a healthy level rather then pretend to ignore the elephant in the room.

That's the apologists' view. I beg to differ.
PEDs are trafficked through much of the same channels as "recreational" drugs, feeding a black economy and organized crime. Russian mafia, the Ndrangheta, you name it!
Doping in the pro peloton is but one tip of the iceberg, nothing is ever said in here about the frightening use of doping among body builders and regular gymgoers or about the innumerable pathologies and deaths that ensue. There's been approx. 20 deaths ascribed to PED use in the pro peloton since the seventies. Among athletes that were under closer medical surveillance than the average Joe. What are the numbers among the general populace doping "in the dark"?

Both anabolic steroids and testosterone are highly addictive and, what is more, induce the use of other drugs and pharmaceutical substances. Growth hormones can be synthesized, but to keep costs down for the end-user GH's are often extracted from cadavers, leading to documented cases of Creutzfeld-Jacobs. Impurities in black-market drugs lead to unforseen consequences. Shelf-life for EPO is quite short, and cynical relabelling occurs for max profit. In short, PED's represents a significant health hazard, and if its use was "inevitable" I'd never allow my children to participate in organized sports, robbing them of all the joys I've experienced.

Accepting drugs will be a giant leap into the dark, and I see absolutely no valid reason to go there.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Are you going to write a check to WADA or the UCI or what ever agency might end up being responsible for holding thousands of samples for decades and then retesting them just to remove your ten year old third place at Classica San Sebastian off the books? Who the hell do you thing is going to fund this sh!t? Doping costs a fraction of what it costs to catch someone doping. The sheer economics of 90% of the harebrained ideas I read here for "cleaning up" cycling would end up putting it, or any other sport I can think of out of business.

At some point we all have to realize that doping for athletic performance is a fact of life. It has been around in one form or another since the caveman. Clean sport is an impossibility. There has never been such a thing. Set a limit that safe guards the future health of the athlete and punish those who exceed it. Put the fantasy of clean sport back up there on the shelf with the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus.

You are much smarter than introducing the strawman that those in favor of anti-doping believe it is going to result in a 'clean' sport.
It isn't - but just because doping cannot be eliminated why is it that the alternative has to be 'monitoring' (which wouldn't work) or legalization.


What is a 'safe limit' and how can it be monitored and not circumvented as is the case now? All that does is move the goalposts and encourages doping.

Also - the Statute of Limitations is 8 years, and no-one is suggesting that held samples be constantly retro tested.