World cycling is broken - It's time to lift the ban on dopin

[mrhender]

Lets get some up to date clinic numbers on this..

I know it's been discussed and largely dismissed but in light of recent events it could be interesting to air the opportunity again and hear what folks has to say..

I'am using this article as inspiration only. Dimeo is known to be liberal in this matter but the point is not to discuss the source but the proposal and it's different versions.

http://theconversation.com/world-cycling-is-broken-its-time-to-lift-the-ban-on-doping-38609

I'am not asking if it is realistic, only what your opinion is.

Multiple option enabled in poll...

 

[Netserk]

Why can you vote for multiple options?

 

[mrhender]

Why can you vote for multiple options?

Yes... Some of them can go together...

 

[simo1733]

Cycling isn't broken.Lot's of people ride bikes,lots race and lots go to races.
'

 

[sniper]

the problem with a list of banned substances is pretty clear.
E.g. in 2009 Aicar wasn't on the list yet, so people using it back then theoretically weren't doping. Now AICAR is on the list, but comparable products that still aren't on the list come out on a daily basis. Same story with EPO.

Therefore, i'd say instead of a list with banned substances, make a list with allowed substances.
everything you take that is not on the list, counts as doping.
in case you do wish to take something not on the list of allowed substances, there should be an independent committee of experts ready to decide whether you can take the product (and perhaps whether the product can be added to the list of allowed substances permanently), basically like a much improved TUE system.

And of course testing must finally become independent.
Before we try all that, no need to legalize doping me thinks. It undermines everything sport should stand for.

 

[mrhender]

the problem with a list of banned substances is pretty clear.
E.g. in 2009 Aicar wasn't on the list yet, so people using it back then theoretically weren't doping. Now AICAR is on the list, but comparable products that still aren't on the list come out on a daily basis. Same story with EPO.

Therefore, i'd say instead of a list with banned substances, make a list with allowed substances.
everything you take that is not on the list, counts as doping.
in case you do wish to take something not on the list, there should be an independent committee of experts ready to decide whether the product can be added to the list, basically like a much improved TUE system.

And of course testing must finally become independent.
Before we try all that, no need to legalize doping me thinks. It undermines everything sport should stand for.

Yes, that is what I mean by "some substances"...
It could be an option to legalize some PED's that are not endangering your health... But then again some/ a lot would continue to seek the extra advantage of non-legalized ped's...

 

[jens_attacks]

Legal. Under medical supervision

 

[sniper]

Yes, that is what I mean by "some substances"...
It could be an option to legalize some PED's that are not endangering your health... But then again some/ a lot would continue to seek the extra advantage of non-legalized ped's...

yes.

i guess my point is: the grey area of what is illegal and what is legal could become less grey by having a list of allowed substances.
it would illegalize all experimenting with new products.
it could be a tool to level the playing field, even create financial fair play.

look at the discussion about OZOn therapy. Very vague.
In a new system, such things should be illegal, period, until they get approved by an independent committee.

 

[ebandit]

cool

lift doping ban for cycling..........make us as cool as triathletes/body builders

.......who cares? about the olympics

Mark L

 

[sniper]

Legal. Under medical supervision

why? you'd get massive financial unfairplay (if that's a word).

 

[mrhender]

yes.

i guess my point is: the grey area of what is illegal and what is legal could become less grey by having a list of allowed substances.
it would illegalize all experimenting with new products.

look at the discussion about OZOn therapy. Very vague.
In a new system, such things should be illegal, period, until they get approved by an independent committee.

I see your point... in theory it might better to understand and abide by rules if they are set up as what you CAN do rather then what you CAN'T...

I wonder how many would do altitude training, oxygen tents, micro-dose, etc if some efficient performance-enhancing drugs were legalized...

 

[Netserk]

why? you'd get massive financial unfairplay (if that's a word).

Actually, I don't think so compared to the situation now. I guess what you really pay for with an expensive program is not getting caught. EPO alone to 55% should be very cheap.

 

[mrhender]

why? you'd get massive financial unfairplay (if that's a word).

We have that today...

 

[sniper]

Actually, I don't think so compared to the situation now. I guess what you really pay for with an expensive program is not getting caught. EPO alone to 55% should be very cheap.

We have that today...

yes, but isn't this thread about how we want it to be?

The list of allowed substances/treatments could be designed such that it only includes affordable substances/treatments.
crazily expensive stuff (including designer drugs) will not be on there.

of course, will function only if combined with state of the art, independent, well-financed, antidoping efforts.

 

[mrhender]

yes, but isn't this thread about how we want it to be?

The list of allowed substances/treatments could be designed such that it only includes affordable substances/treatments.
crazily expensive stuff (including designer drugs) will not be on there.

of course, will function only if combined with state of the art, independent, well-financed, antidoping efforts.

Either way we want it to be. Financial fairplay is an issue...

Unless of course Doping is financed by UCI

But then again some would probably get favoured..

I do see your point about legalizing affordable products only..
But that would only increase incentive to seek the extra advantage of costly methods...

So hypothetically if doping is to be legalized it wont enhance level playing field if it is too restricted..

But then again you could argue that those with greater financial means will always have an advantage no matter what you do...

So that leaves us with option 1. (no) but then we are back at square one...

 

[sniper]

Either way we want it to be. Financial fairplay is an issue...

Unless of course Doping is financed by UCI

But then again some would probably get favoured..

I do see your point about legalizing affordable products only..
But that would only increase incentive to seek the extra advantage of costly methods...

So hypothetically if doping is to be legalized it wont enhance level playing field if it is too restricted..

But then again you could argue that those with finacial means will always have an advantage no matter what you do...

So that leaves us with option 1. (no) but then we are back at square one...

true.
to be sure, i didn't mean to suggest the idea of a list of allowed substances is going to solve the problem of doping.
but i'd see it as a small step towards a better system to the extent that it c/would reduce (or even eliminate) the grey area of what is allowed and what not.
so no more discussions about OZON therapy, or about new versions of AICAR that may not yet be on the list of banned substances, etc.
all that would simply be illegal.

 

[rick james]

Maybe to the clinic cycling is broken. But it's not.

 

[mrhender]

true.
to be sure, i didn't mean to suggest the idea of a list of allowed substances is going to solve the problem of doping.
but i'd see it as a small step towards a better system to the extent that it c/would reduce (or even eliminate) the grey area of what is allowed and what not.
so no more discussions about OZON therapy, or about new versions of AICAR that may not yet be on the list of banned substances, etc.
all that would simply be illegal.

And no more marginal gains

On a serious note -Yes if you do not "fully" legalize the problem of doping is still rampant. And if you only do it half-way it's still going to favorise the rich kids...
But then again if you fully legalize the same monetary issue arises..

I mean if the point is equal opportunity for all then it's an impossible task..
Sport's or soceity for that matter doesn't work that way.

So in conclusion it's all about the money....

The question is rather of moral character then..

-Would cyclist's benefeit psychologically from not having to lie all the time?
-Would the fans be better off not being fed with marginal gains BS?
-Could we easier accept that people are not equal and that those with means are probably going to win the most?

Would the level playing field be more level with any option other than no.1?

 

[sniper]

And no more marginal gains

On a serious note -Yes if you do not "fully" legalize the problem of doping is still rampant. And if you only do it half-way it's still going to favorise the rich kids...
But then again if you fully legalize the same monetary issue arises..

I mean if the point is equal opportunity for all then it's an impossible task..
Sport's or soceity for that matter doesn't work that way.

So in conclusion it's all about the money....

The question is rather of moral character then..

-Would cyclist's benefeit psychologically from not having to lie all the time?
-Would the fans be better off not being fed with marginal gains BS?
-Could we easier accept that people are not equal and that those with means are probably going to win the most?

Would the level playing field me more level with any option other than no.1?

interesting points.
still on a more general note:
In the wake of the USADA file on Lance, we've spoken plentifully (and mostly in agreement with one another) about how the only thing that could help cycling to recover was to give it a branch-root surgery and start from scratch, with fully independent testing.
Before we've seriously tried that, I wouldn't support the legalization of PEDs.
Regardless of whether Cookson has been an improvement or not, the fact is that he's a continuation of the old system.

 

[mrhender]

In the wake of the USADA file on Lance, we've spoken plentifully (and mostly in agreement with one another) about how the only thing that could help cycling to recover was to give it a branch-root surgery and start from scratch, with fully independent testing.
Before we've seriously tried that, I wouldn't support the legalization of PEDs.
Regardless of whether Cookson has been an improvement or not, the fact is that he's a continuation of the old system.

Good post...

And I have to agree...

Only revolution to the anti-doping cause is to seperate it's efforts efforts from the promoters of the sport...

That is the most important first step.

And actually that is also a suggestion from the CIRC report..
But as usual the outcome has been mud-slinging, pointing fingers to previous administrations as well as media only focused on individuals and scandals...

Instead there should be pressure to do the only right thing...

Let go of anti-doping authority UCI....

Sigh......

 

[sniper]

Good post...

And I have to agree...

Only revolution to the anti-doping cause is to seperate it's efforts efforts from the promoters of the sport...

That is the most important first step.

And actually that is also a suggestion from the CIRC report..
But as usual the outcome has been mud-slinging, pointing fingers to previous administrations as well as media only focused on individuals and scandals...

Instead there should be pressure to do the only right thing...

Let go of anti-doping authority UCI....

Sigh......

hehe.
on second thought, perhaps I mistook your OP (what does OP stand for anyway? "opening post" or something?).

Perhaps you meant to raise the issue of what, assuming the UCI won't change, we could best do with (anti)doping.

You know what, in that case I might line up with Jens Attack.

a UCI root/branch surgery is utopic in any case.

 

[doperhopper]

I vote for the Vino option (actually, it's rather Uniballer/Riis/etc one): Ask best EPO responders and let them decide. Long live 64%! To infinity (EPO) and beyond (genetic doping)!

 

[scholar]

Legal. Under medical supervision

Don't we more or less have that already? 'Take what you like as long as you've got a TUE for it'?

 

[King Boonen]

Creating a list of allowed substances would be completely unworkable and would make no difference, it would basically be the opposite of the list we have today but with the added hassle of trying to take into account everything that occurs naturally in foods across the whole world.

 

[skippythepinhead]

World cycling is not broken
UCI is broken