3 ms·
I'd be curious myself, but the argument against this type of competition is that it creates enormous pressure on competitors to do things that could have seriou
by RodgerTheGreat 10y ago
I'd be curious myself, but the argument against this type of competition is that it creates enormous pressure on competitors to do things that could have serious negative impacts on their long-term health for the sake of winning. Even if participants are adults of sound mind, it seems unethical to create a situation where people are encouraged to risk crippling or killing themselves in pursuit of fame, no?
- jrockway 10y ago> it seems unethical to create a situation where people are encouraged to risk crippling or killing themselves in pursuit of fame, no? But think of the millions you could make! Donald Trump could be the host! Make sports great again!
- thrownblown 10y agoNBA, NFL, MBA, UFC.... all make loot while only paying lip service to doping controls. UFC has only recently brought in WADA, and NBA, NFL and MBA all have strong enough players unions that actually protect the athletes desire to use PEDs. There is some testing in the major US professional sporting leagues, but IMHO it is only there to constrain the guys from going buck wild with the steroids. Most high level athletes in sports that fall under IOC umbrella are enrolled in the biological passport program and have many, many, annoying, out of competition doping controls where they take urine, blood and hair samples. Think of being woken up at 5 am for a blood test while on vacation. They have to supply there exact whereabouts for months in advance and if they can't be found they will suffer a suspension equal to a failed doping control. Vastly different than Roger Clemens or Barry Bonds.
- DefaultUserHN 10y ago>But think of the millions you could make! Donald Trump could be the host! Make sports great again! Well, if athletes are going to cheat with steroids, I say we let Hillary host. Make sports crooked again. Imagine the amount of money that can made at the crippling expense of other people.
- venomsnake 10y agoThat is exactly what they are doing now. So what is the point. With free for all doping I think it could be at least as safe for them as the current situation. If you think that weightlifting leaves your joints intact ...
- thrownblown 10y agoweightlifting is one of the safest sports with 0.0017 injuries per 100,000 hours of participation. Track and field had 0.570. http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/1994/02000/Relative_Safety_of_Weightlifting_and_Weight.8.aspx http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/1994/02000/Relati...
- goldenkey 10y agoThis "enormous pressure...crippling or killing themselves".. guess what? It already happens normally. More than a couple athletes are seriously injured or die while training for the olympics. Usually in the more dangerous sports like gymnastics. Anyhow, I think it would be great because science thru support by capitalism and prestige would actually apply positive pressure to discovery of safer and more effective anabolic steroids and other muscle growth agents. Instead of just dumb grunt sport, we would have a scientific aspect that actively is pushing humanity forward and upward onto a new plateau. The everyday person would benefit. Disabled and physically/mentally handicapped children and adults could get huge gains in their treatment efficacy because many of the agents that enhance mental acuity or muscle strength also repair or cure deficiencies.