OT: Drugs
I was just reading about Michael Phelps, and thinking about how our society deals with drug use in sports. I really don't get it that athletes get tested for drugs that aren't performance enhancing. I am really against anything that will improve their strength, speed, quickness, etc... But who cares if the guy/girl is doing a drug that hurts them?
I remember a snowboarder (but forget his name) who was stripped of an Olympic medal because he tested positive for Marijuana. What could that have helped him do? If anything he was worse off doing it. I don't mean to sound crass, and I also don't mean that no one should "care." I am speaking about fair competition.
Obviously if the athlete is a proffessional, the organization that is spending millions on him/her has a right to test for whatever they want. But in the case of sports that people don't make money to play, why do we care if they abuse drugs? They are really just hurting their own chances of success, and frankly what they do to themselves is none of our buisness.
recommend an OT on the front of this post, and get a little more explanatory on your subject post. Thanks!
Cocaine is a hell of a drug.
I'm Rick James bitch.
Yes.
Yes you are.
Because a drug that hurts them is still (probably) illegal. So just as they can have awards or medals stripped for doing other illegal things, so can they for doing drugs, regardless of what kind, assuming they're illegal.
Speeding is illegal too, and I don't know of any Olympians being disqualified over that. And if you say that's different, in Ann Arbor minor pot possession and speeding carry very similar penalties. Also, would someone be disqualified for lying under oath, beating up a hooker, or tax evasion?
Additionally, what if the athlete in question was from The Netherlands? Would they be subject to losing their medal even though pot is legal there?
I never thought about it in that way. Nice post
Pot isn't legal in the Netherlands; this is a misconception. You can get charged for possession, but it usually only happens in combination with another offense.
Is hoes legal?
Prostitution is actually legal there. However, a brothel will be shut down if there's evidence that the women were forced into the sex trade.
There are other countries where pot is legal, like Portugal. So if you adjust the example the point still holds.
Good point, but this isn't the netherlands, and before you go to the Olympics you have to qualify, so if the US sets whatever rules/guidelines and it doesn't directly conflict with Olympic rules, then perhaps there ought to be a penalty. I don't necessarily agree with it, but just playing devil's advocate.
Is based on the (likely incorrect) premise that drug bans in sports are PURELY to prevent unfair competition. Sponsors/league commissioners also worry about the image of the respective sports, whether that affects branding or revenue-generation. You might argue that letting a few potheads win medals won't hurt the image (and therefore, revenue from ad sales, etc.) of a sport. Fair enough. But those that care about the revenue stream probably disagree (or, at least, want to take the high ground on the issue).
Clearly, marijuana doesn't help in any sports competition... save for maybe professional eating. Kobayashi is a fucking pothead, man.
How does that guy eat like that? He's a tiny guy with a ginormous stomach!!!
I don't think that drug bans in sports are only about fair competition. I am making the point that I think they should be.
Is this Joe Rogan?
It's odd though, as the timing is really the determining factor. Phelps tests positive for marijuana tomorrow, or 1 year before the Olympics, and nothing happens. If he test positive AT the Olympics (which would merely require him smoking with 90 days of the games), he loses the medal. So even as a stance based on morals/ethics, it's pretty thin gruel.
If he tests positive one year before, he's probably suspended from whatever competition he could swim in at that time, but you're right, he can still go on and win 1000 gold medals.
But it's no different from other sports, right? Josh Beckett isn't suspended from MLB games for throwing at a guy's head in December on a Boston sidewalk. Wait. That makes no fucking sense, but I'm hitting reply anyway, suckers.
Timing probably matters more in year-long sports that aren't governed by a league commissioner and don't involve an easily defined "regular season." So Goodell might hammer an NFL player who gets in trouble in the off-season because that's the only way to hammer him is in the regular season... but there are many swimming, cycling, etc. tourneys that dudes get suspended from that we just don't watch/care about.
Yeah, but if there isn't testing for these drugs neither the degree of use nor the specific users will be known by the public. That would render your point about sponsors moot.
good point
I will grant you that your hypothesis that sponsors/league commissioners care about the image of illegal drug use in sports and that's why there are penalties for marijuana use is true. But this doesn't explain why they TEST for drugs. Isn't this just highlighting the fact that your players do drugs. If there were no test result, the public would be unlikely to know of any illegal drug use by players unless it was learned of by police action. Ricky Williams never would have been more known for his smoking habits than his playing ability if the NFL didn't test for pot.
I'm all for leagues issuing fines and minor suspensions if a player gets busted for possession. I just am not sure that testing is really necessary or even prudent.
I hear that. I definitely don't think the league(s)/sponsors WANT to know about recreational drug use... but unless they can selectively test for only PEDs (which would be hard considering various chemical compound overlaps, and the fact that a test that can detect one drug can often detect another), they'd have to: (1) test for the sole purpose of PEDs and if they found out the dude was hitting the bong, bury it, (2) some journalist would find out, and (3) they'd. Get. Hammered for burying the recreational drug use.
So I buy that PEDs drive the desire to test for drugs, generally, but once you open the door, you're risking credibility/image (as I referenced before) by burying the positive tests that are restricted to recreational drugs, you know?
in the next 5-10 years weed will be legalized
Maybe in more states, but I doubt nationally. The pharmaceutical companies wield too much power in Washington.
In more states? Are you talking medical marijuana or hippie mary jane?
I'm thinking the social toke will eventually be legalized in attempts to make money off of it for the government. I'm not a smoker, but I think we are heading in that direction.
There a small difference between "medical marijuana" and "hippie mary jane." I live in a state where medical marijuana is legal, and of the people that I know with a weed card (lots of people) not a single one of them has any more legitimate need for weed than you do. The medicinal distinction is one in name only, no one who smokes the medi weed is any different than the people who smoke the stuff they bought from a dealer.
It's a stretch to say that no one has a real medical need for it.
Everyone I know who has a "recommendation" got it so that they don't have to worry about getting caught with weed.
I'm not saying that everyone who gets it has a legit reason, just that there are some for whom it provides relief they cannot get elsewhere. It (the sytem)is definitely abused more than it is properly used... no doubt, but I don't see that as a "bad thing". Just my epinion.
I think the "weed does not help" argument misses the point. Weed is still mind/state altering. Good or bad, an athlete is putting something in their body that does not naturally go there. (yes, we could argue that spaghetti gives them carbs and meat gives them protein and Gatorade gives them electrolytes) but if I am not mistaken all of said things your body naturally makes....right? THC, not so much. I am not a hater, I just hate the argument that "if weed does anything it hurts your performance". Maybe not, maybe it chills your nerves enough to perform at a better level???
If you are not a hater than why do you hate the argument? I assume you are basing your chilling of the nerves statement on virtually no experience. IMHE marijuana is not a performance enhancing drug, whatsoever. The only light that it could be looked at in helping an athlete is pain relief, but thats why they are making medical marijuana legal. As Robin Williams would say, "Marijuana is only a performance enhancing drug if you put a big chocolate bar at the end of the (snowboarding) run" or something along those lines.
Let me clarify...before all you potheads get on my case. I do not hate people who use "Mary Jane", "Reefer", "Dank", "Angola", "Aunt Mary", "Northern Lights" or whatever you want to call it. So I am not hater in that respect. I am a hater of the argument though. My stance is: It changes your mental state so it should not be used in the sporting realms. Sorry for any confusion.
And you are correct, I am 29 years old and have no prior experience with the "KGB". My brother, however, has smoked enough for both of us and talked to me at lengths about it so I feel somewhat educated. The closest I have come to it is him blowing it in my face once and thoroughly enjoying Half Baked. Am I allowed to enjoy that movie without knowing what it is like to be stoned?
NOTE: The quotations are meant to be in a fun, self-deprecating sarcastic tone.
So I guess my original argument was flawed, but I would have to say that the scientific facts have proven that it is a performance enhancing drug. As for the altered state of mind, go chug 2 16 ounce red bulls and tell me if you feel like you are in an altered state of mind. Plus, of course you can enjoy Half-Baked. I only brought up experience as a result of the chill the nerves enough comment. I enjoy the song That Smell by Skynyrd, even though I have never used heroin or as they say in the song, st(u)ck those needles in your arm.
Well I do have experience with HGH. Quite a bit, actually. And I like it. The only performance it enhances is my ability to eat, giggle, and sit on my couch for prolonged periods of time.
HGH does that to you?
Haha, no. A little early still on the left coast. I was reading the top post about weed and I read that as THC (I even typed it without catching my retardedness). Go on with your day.
I do have experience with HGH, it does none of the aforementioned things.
I was reading your first post and came to the conclusion that your HGH experience sounds a lot like a THC experience. Glad we got that cleared up, I was confused.
Just curious, how did you get your hands the HGH (not specifics, obviously)? A buddy or your? A guy in the gym? Did you notice any nasty side effects?
Yeah, a buddy I knew took it, we played semi-pro football together (which is not as big of a deal as it sounds). It's intense, and you need to make sure you take it at the right time of the day or you will either never fall asleep or you will fall asleep too early. I've also used supplements that aren't HGH but stimulate your body to create more HGH naturally, which I would recommend. Good for losing weight. Still, watch the sleep thing.
Are those supplements legal? If so, what are they called?
Go to www.betterbodz.com. It's a supplement site with really good prices. They have a number of products with GABA in them, which is the HGH inducer. The one I used is called Dream Shape, it's a big seller and I know a few other people who used it with similar success. It's pretty cheap, and you only use it once a day.
Go to just about any 'anti-aging' clinic and they test you and make sure you fail. Then wala.. you have a script. I don't use GH but the sides are.... minimal. Actually most of these PEDs have minimal sides. They really shouldn't even be illegal IMO. Pretty much everyone the gov consulted agrees too, but they ignore that stuff.
I'm assuming you're excepting steroids from this?
Well, look.. all drugs have side effects. Sometimes very serious. With that said, steroids are amongst the safest drugs. You inject far too much heroin, you'll probably die. Too much testosterone.. maybe get boobs. Not saying it's the best thing to do but could be a whole lot worse. To note, I do natural(as in drug free) bodybuilding but I can't say I was never curious about the stuff. Legality is why I do not use.
"With that said, steroids are amongst the safest drugs."
Prednisone, yes.
Winstrol, no.
Steroids vs ANABOLIC steroids, big difference.
Meh, disagree. They don't prescribe them to people to downgrade their health. I'd much rather have HRT than shots of cortisol.
It's funny you mention chugging Red Bull because caffeine is one of the most studied, most effective, least utilized performance enhancing drugs and it is totally legal.
I love watching Tiger relievers chugging Red Bulls and tossing away the cans before they go into the game.
you are under the influence, I have done it and know first hand. Give me a bicycle a day later and I will be able to perform but while under the influence I would be in the first ditch (or junk food shop to cure the munchies) that I came accross.
It would not be illegal to drive while under the influence if it inhanced your performance. If you haven't done it before, picture yourself drunk and trying to swim the 100 m butterfly or cycle around a course (not exactly the same but to a degree it is similar).
(p.s. I don't know why this post ended up here, it was a reply to the guy who said weed alters your mental state).
Can we have a moratorium on the use of the word "hater" here? It's very high school-ish.