Watching the Olympics a few weeks ago, I saw a special segment about why so many world records in swimming were being broken (something like eight or nine out of every ten events had a new world record set in the Olympics this year). Apparently, it has a lot to do with a fairly recent type of ridiculous-looking, full-body swimsuit called the Speedo Lazr, which enhances a swimmer’s movement through the water (I’m not even going to pretend I know how).
Apparently, nobody except me thinks the use of this swimsuit is cheating.
But, the use of “performance-enhancing drugs”
is considered cheating.
I know that there are other considerations with doping, such as potential medical side effects. However, if that was the real concern with doping, you’d think they’d call them “potentially harmful drugs,” as opposed to “performance-enhancing drugs.” And, the first response when an athlete is found to be doping isn’t, “Wow, that guy could have seriously harmed himself”; rather, it’s, “That guy was cheating!”
So, clearly, doping is considered "cheating."
So, why is it acceptable to enhance one’s athletic performance with equipment, and not with chemicals?
Personally, I think it’s somehow related to the reasons why it’s acceptable to use machines to milk cows more efficiently, and to even process the milk, but not acceptable to genetically modify the cattle. The first scenario is just a sensible use of technology, while the second is an inexcusable, risky and suspicious attempt to play God. Biology (biochemistry) is being targeted, while other sciences are given a free pass without a second thought.
For the record, I do not support doping. Rather, I am against both performance-enhancing drugs and performance-enhancing equipment.
-Bluejay
Darwin loves you.
™ Version 4.2