Science and Society
The Latest Developments in Science and Technology
Ned Potter is the science correspondent for ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson." He has reported on such topics as space exploration, the human genome and climate change.
RECENT POSTS
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Olympics: The Race Goes Not to the Swift....
August 13, 2008 3:02 PM
The Olympics have been going since Friday and the closest thing they've had to a scandal is that the little girl at the opening ceremonies was lip-syncing.
Nobody's been caught blood-doping or taking growth hormone. Everyone marvels how gangly Michael Phelps is, but, hey, that's the way he's built -- and it certainly is a thrill to watch him win.
A couple of commentaries wonder if there's a point in pulling athletes aside for a drug test if they do well. One was an editorial in Nature -- read it HERE -- complaining that the tests are unscientific, easy for a smart cheater to pass.
"...by not publishing and opening to broader scientific scrutiny the methods by which testing labs engage in study, it is Nature's view that the anti-doping authorities have fostered a sporting culture of suspicion, secrecy and fear," write the editors.
"Detecting cheats is meant to promote fairness, but drug testing should not be exempt from the scientific principles and standards that apply to other biomedical sciences."
John Tierney, in his New York Times column, read the editorial and takes it another step: "What if we let athletes do whatever they wanted to excel?"
"The system punishes some innocent athletes and rewards others with the savvy and the connections not to get caught. The more that the authorities crack down on known forms of enhancement, the more incentive athletes have to experiment with new ones -- and to get their advice from black-market dealers instead of doctors."
He concludes, "We all know the body can be improved. We all know Olympic athletes have the highest-functioning bodies in the world. They can call themselves natural, just as they used to call themselves amateurs, but at some point that claim may seem the most unnatural thing of all."
Give these two arguments a read. They certainly go against the pure ideal of sport. Do they have a point?
August 13, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (9)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/32328100
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Olympics: The Race Goes Not to the Swift....:
Really, what is the fuss about?
Pavarotte lip-sang in last Olympics too.
China's eagerness to please the world made them to the unnecessary, even what tthey have done is not wrong. If one little girl can sing and the other is cuter, let the cute one shows herself and present the voice of the other, is clever, as long as it was the voice of a little girl.
China is keenly aware that the world watches her like a jealous mother-in-law watches a daughter-in-law. As most can find bones in Chinese eggs, China took the special step to be more prefect than necessary.
In view of the events leading up to the Olympic, I don't blame China for doing the unnecessary.
By the way, the little girl who can sing is mighty cute to me.
Posted by: nobigdeal | Aug 13, 2008 5:00:52 PM
Has anyone heard Fergerson's tirade against the Olympics and China couple nights ago?. He said that you see one Chinese rower, you see them all, and Olymics is Crap. Guess he won't say that if Olympics is held in UK.
I was totally awed by the opening ceremony. When the little girl was hoisted high up and flew around for a long time, I remember the same thing happened in Sydny when an Australian little girl was hoisted up and flew around. Wow, the media went into such high gear in reporting and prasing the bravery of the little Australian girl. Now the Chinese little girl has shown the same kind of courage, and yet where is the praise and report about her?
Just this one little comparision, we can see the almost DNA determined anti-Chinese attitudes in the Western media.
Posted by: dnabias | Aug 13, 2008 5:09:04 PM
My take is that sporting events should be about the person, not the medications they take. Are they strong enough, fast enough, smart enough, focused enough to be the best in the world without some medical miracle adding to them.
To me, the argument that they'll just find more incentive to cheat is the same as giving money away at the banks, because the more secure you make it, the harder criminals will try to get it. From a pragmatic point of view, the Olympics is nothing more than an athletic event to promote rampant nationalism painted up with a high-minded ideal toward which no one really strives. It's civilized warfare, with the only blood being from an inadvertent injury or, perhaps, a boxer's broken nose. No one dies, but nations 'win'.
And many will cheat and have cheated to do that. It's not really the athletes that I worry about cheating so much as the nations they represent. China was so caught up in the 'image' they wanted to project, much of the idealistic reason for the Olympics seems to have been lost.
If it's truly about the athletic prowess of the competitors, why do they even bother representing nations?
In the end, and idealistically, the Olympian athletes should be competing every time in the same place head to head and not pharmacy to pharmacy with no one knowing what nation they represent until it's all over. That lets the athletes shine and keeps nationalism more or less out of it.
Posted by: Fatesrider | Aug 13, 2008 9:07:52 PM
I been watching the games there very well. I hope they are doing blood test on every one or al least randomly.
Posted by: gg | Aug 13, 2008 9:12:24 PM
China may not be using doping to cheat, but they did break the Olympic rules by letting a gymnast who couldn't possibly be 16 compete and win them the team gold. I believe if there are rules they should be followed and the age of the two gymnast in question should be investigated and the team gold be taken away if indeed they are not 16 or will not be 16 in 2008.
Posted by: kerry hekrdle | Aug 13, 2008 11:44:13 PM
I like the idea of freedom for atheletes to do whatever they want to win, except for one thing. They will kill themselves with drugs and steroids. Do we want atheletes to have that moment of glory only to die an early death?
Posted by: Robert Smith | Aug 14, 2008 1:28:14 AM
All I ask is for a level playing field. All athletes have access to the same equipment, same food, same training time and tested for PEDs in a uniform manner.
Posted by: steve | Aug 14, 2008 8:52:25 AM
Did we read the same article in Nature? I read that a biostatistician complained that there were not open levels and standards, which is tantamount to telling would be cheats what to substances to avoid and how much naturally occurring substance they can "legally" take.
Posted by: Thomas | Aug 16, 2008 3:13:51 PM
Note from Ned Potter--
Hello, Thomas. There were two items in Nature. I was thinking of the editorial they published , which, in fact, references the paper you cite.
Posted by: Ned Potter | Aug 16, 2008 5:00:59 PM
Post a comment
