• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

"It is time to allow doping at Tour de France"/Julian Savulescu thread

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
1
0
Visit site
Thought provoking paper written by Julian Savulescu, a Professor of Practical Ethics at the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Oxford University:

http://www.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/Media/telegraph_dopingtourdefranceJuly07.pdf

"The use of drugs to accelerate recovery and to enhance the expression of human ability and will are a part of the spirit of sport. Some drugs, such as modest use of EPO or growth hormone, can enhance the expression of physical excellence in sport. The challenge is to understand the spirit of each sport, and which drugs are consistent with this. But performanceenhancement per se is not against the spirit of sport; it is the spirit of sport. To choose to be better is to be human.

What is ruining sport is cheating. But cheating can be reduced by changing the rules.
Cheating can be better reduced by allowing drugs rather than banning them."
 
Jul 19, 2009
949
0
0
Visit site
Polish said:
Thought provoking paper written by Julian Savulescu, a Professor of Practical Ethics at the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Oxford University:

http://www.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/Media/telegraph_dopingtourdefranceJuly07.pdf

"The use of drugs to accelerate recovery and to enhance the expression of human ability and will are a part of the spirit of sport. Some drugs, such as modest use of EPO or growth hormone, can enhance the expression of physical excellence in sport. The challenge is to understand the spirit of each sport, and which drugs are consistent with this. But performanceenhancement per se is not against the spirit of sport; it is the spirit of sport. To choose to be better is to be human.

What is ruining sport is cheating. But cheating can be reduced by changing the rules.
Cheating can be better reduced by allowing drugs rather than banning them."
There is few difference with the actual system...
Why people would not use other drugs? So you need to test them too.

Whar is a modest dose? How do you measure big dose abuse? That seems more difficult that no drugs?
 
Mar 18, 2009
1,003
0
0
Visit site
So it's acceptable for 13 year olds to be doped up by ambitious parents with no idea what the effect will be on their long term health because performance enhancement through doping is the spirit of sport? I think not
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Visit site
Polish said:
Thought provoking paper written by Julian Savulescu, a Professor of Practical Ethics at the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Oxford University:

http://www.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/Media/telegraph_dopingtourdefranceJuly07.pdf

"The use of drugs to accelerate recovery and to enhance the expression of human ability and will are a part of the spirit of sport. Some drugs, such as modest use of EPO or growth hormone, can enhance the expression of physical excellence in sport. The challenge is to understand the spirit of each sport, and which drugs are consistent with this. But performanceenhancement per se is not against the spirit of sport; it is the spirit of sport. To choose to be better is to be human.

What is ruining sport is cheating. But cheating can be reduced by changing the rules.
Cheating can be better reduced by allowing drugs rather than banning them."

This guy is an idiot.
 
What a fantastic idea! We should apply this everywhere. Crime rates would be zero if we legalized murder, robbery, fraud etc. Instant success!

Seriously though, whatever the 'ethics' are that this guys teaches I hope he's not being allowed to infect children with it.
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Visit site
This stuff can and is killing people. It is a really bad idea to accept doping culturally and expect it out of professionals.
 
Aug 19, 2009
6
0
0
Visit site
Ethics and sport

I could not help but think, upon reading this thread, that what proponents of allowing doping in sport, from whatever philosophical or ethical framework are missing from their argument is this consideration (and this is not an entirely original proposition):

Allowing doping in sport essentially outlaws clean competition. Obviously not in the legal sense, but from a practical standpoint... If this 'scholar' knows anything about ethics, then he knows about equity, and there is nothing equitable about a sport in which those who hold higher ethical attachment to sport do not have a level playing field on which to participate.

Yes, we could argue semantics, and ironically this debate does rage in other social realms (the gentleman who referred to laws makes a valid point), but at the end of the day, someone will not be afforded a fair opportunity -- this is the true shame of doping in sport.

Ironically, sport can really be a microcosm of society, and in this case it is representative of some of our stronger failings. Hopefully we can all engage in a dialectic conversation (if we want to get all 'philosophical') that can elevate sport to be a representation of that which is good in society.

Thanks for the time.

Graham Slater
 
Mar 19, 2009
832
0
0
Visit site
poupou said:
There is few difference with the actual system...
Why people would not use other drugs? So you need to test them too.

Whar is a modest dose? How do you measure big dose abuse? That seems more difficult that no drugs?

You are exactly right. No matter what level you set as acceptable there has to be testing and the riders and docs are going to try to circumvent those limits.

eigenvalu2 said:
check it peoples
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hPFMDFacRA
another academic blowhard
He is ignorant to say there have been no blood doping related deaths since the UCI implemented the hematocrit limit in 1997. There have been many suspicious deaths since then and who knows how many close calls like what happened to Jesus Manzano when he received a transfusion training for the Tour of Portugal in 2003.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Modest doping!!

We have had that in Pro Cycling - with the introduction of the 50% hct rule in 1997. Did it work? No - because athletes still went over and above the agreed limit and if called for a control diluted their blood to bring it back to an acceptable range.

There is nothing modest about doping.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I think it's a pretty interesting article, and I think the guy has a point, however I don't agree with him, as I don't think taking drugs is ethical.

Question is, what is ethical? Almost every occupation in the world, people gain an edge for bending their perception of ethics, and often, these people are praised for it.

In this forum, I have read people's comments about Fausto Coppi, and let's face it, the guy was respected for saying that it's his right to put in his body whatever he wants, nobody can take that right away from him. Of course, drugs in sport were accepted back then.

But, I think this is the researcher's point, is that people should be able to do to themselves whatever they want, whatever the consequences. That said, I think the sport is better off for trying to eradicate drug use

-----


On Doc Maserati's point, even now we could say moderate doping is allowed with the blood passport. Like the 50% level, the riders can ensure their blood values don't jump up and down like crazy to ensure that they are not suspected and the UCI have said that at this stage blood doping is very hard to prove. hence, it's almost accepted.

Talk of microdosing in this forum alone suggests that the riders that do dope can use the blood passport to their advantage, and as many argue, moderate doping is already rife within the peleton
 
Mar 3, 2009
377
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
We have had that in Pro Cycling - with the introduction of the 50% hct rule in 1997.

To be fair, that wasn't done because they wanted to allow people to dope to a certain level (even if that's what resulted), but they had to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

Cheers
Greg Johnson
 
Jul 28, 2009
898
0
0
Visit site
What are "practical ethics"? Maybe the ethics you have when it's convenient and ignore when it's not? :)

To be fair I think the article does raise some interesting issues for discussion. Argueing against this kind of proposal can be a useful exercise anyway. The professor might just be playing devils' advocate although from my experience of academics in the fluffy departments there's a good chance he's a puffed up attention seeking blowfish.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Visit site
buckwheat said:
This guy is an idiot.

Seconded. He's been at it for the last 3 days. Every thread I've seen him post on another idiotic idea. Polish, you've got some serious cognitive problems dude. I hope you aren't being serious. Anyone with real world experience knows that ethicists, let alone a professor of ethics, are fantasists and their ideas have little relevance in reality. In other words that douche at Oxford is full of $h!t. Use your brain in future and don't waste our time.
 
rata de sentina said:
What are "practical ethics"? Maybe the ethics you have when it's convenient and ignore when it's not? :)

To be fair I think the article does raise some interesting issues for discussion. Argueing against this kind of proposal can be a useful exercise anyway. The professor might just be playing devils' advocate although from my experience of academics in the fluffy departments there's a good chance he's a puffed up attention seeking blowfish.

I think "practical ethics" must mean lowering the threshold of what is ethical vs what is not to the point that almost everyone is "ethical" ie. it's ok to do whatever if you think everyone else is doing it.
I think you are on the right track with the puffed up blowfish thing.
 
May 9, 2009
583
0
0
Visit site
bianchigirl said:
So it's acceptable for 13 year olds to be doped up by ambitious parents with no idea what the effect will be on their long term health because performance enhancement through doping is the spirit of sport? I think not

Going straight to the "think of the children," strawman this time, huh? Impressive play.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Greg Johnson said:
To be fair, that wasn't done because they wanted to allow people to dope to a certain level (even if that's what resulted), but they had to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

Cheers
Greg Johnson

Actually when I read your comments I initially was in agreement - but then I remembered these comments from Mr Hein Verbruggen - President UCI in an interview in 1997.

"The whole doping fight is pretty ineffective and it's also unsatisfactory. Imagine that in future there's more of a move towards health controls, concentrating not only on doping but also on the health aspect. If there are certain products that enhance performance when taken in large quantities which are also dangerous to health, why not prescribe certain limits, check the blood and the urine and say that as long as you stay within determined limits where there is no risk to health, that's fine by us?"

Mr Hein Verbrugge - President UCI in an interview 1997.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
1
0
Visit site
The Tour de France is the only Major Sporting Event that HAS allowed doping for most of its History - brutal times for sure 1903 through the 1960's...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_at_the_Tour_de_France

Coppi raced during the time when doping was allowed...
Eddy raced soon after the "crackdown", but he and the peloton still doped...
Ironically, Lance may be the turning point / catalyst that finally turned the sport of Pro Cycling clean?
No doping 10 years from now?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Polish said:
The Tour de France is the only Major Sporting Event that HAS allowed doping for most of its History - brutal times for sure 1903 through the 1960's...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_at_the_Tour_de_France

Coppi raced during the time when doping was allowed...
Eddy raced soon after the "crackdown", but he and the peloton still doped...
Ironically, Lance may be the turning point / catalyst that finally turned the sport of Pro Cycling clean?
No doping 10 years from now?

There were no doping controls in any sport until the late 1960's and cycling was one of the first sports to introduce those.
Those controls were of course completely inadequate - but they were completely inadequate for all sports.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Actually when I read your comments I initially was in agreement - but then I remembered these comments from Mr Hein Verbruggen - President UCI in an interview in 1997.

"The whole doping fight is pretty ineffective and it's also unsatisfactory. Imagine that in future there's more of a move towards health controls, concentrating not only on doping but also on the health aspect. If there are certain products that enhance performance when taken in large quantities which are also dangerous to health, why not prescribe certain limits, check the blood and the urine and say that as long as you stay within determined limits where there is no risk to health, that's fine by us?"

Mr Hein Verbrugge - President UCI in an interview 1997.

Well yes, but we all know he is a freeking moron. He is at the same level as Ferrari. Cycling has no hope as long as UCI runs it.
 
Polish said:
The Tour de France is the only Major Sporting Event that HAS allowed doping for most of its History - brutal times for sure 1903 through the 1960's...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_at_the_Tour_de_France

Coppi raced during the time when doping was allowed...
Eddy raced soon after the "crackdown", but he and the peloton still doped...
Ironically, Lance may be the turning point / catalyst that finally turned the sport of Pro Cycling clean?
No doping 10 years from now?

What sport did any, let me repeat that, any drug testing before cycling? As bad as it is in cycling still it's state of the art to every other sport. I don't know if you are trying to set a forum record for stupid posts, but you got my vote.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
1
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
There were no doping controls in any sport until the late 1960's and cycling was one of the first sports to introduce those.
Those controls were of course completely inadequate - but they were completely inadequate for all sports.

What major Sport doped as profusely as Cycling 1900 - 1960's?
Any sport even close?

What sport dopes as profusely as cycling now?

Being proud of being the "first to introduce doping controls"?
C'mon.