Sports, Drugs, and Genetics: What is Cheating?

Lately, there's been such a fuss in the sports world over the use of steriods and other performance-enhancing drugs. Today, I read an article on ESPN.com about genetic testing in babies that can suggest what types of sports he / she will excel in or fail in.Why again do we care so much about performance enhancing drugs? To some degree, it's a health concern. But there's definitely something more than that.

---

Here's the only argument that seemed reasonable to me:

Sports limit the equipment used in the game. If we don't limit the equipment, then the nature of the game itself changes. The point of a sport is simply to compete given some set of (arbitrary) rules, so these arbitrary rules are important. Limiting performance-enhancing drugs is simply a way to limit tool use.

But if that's the case, then what about people with "extroadinary" genetic endowment, such as Yao Ming or Shaq (Biggie-sized professional basketball players), etc. What about people who have ambular abnormalities that give them an advantage (such as a Sri Lankan bowler whose inability to straighten his elbow gives him an advantage over other cricket bowlers, or the NFL kicker whose foot abnormality allowed him to kick with a different, advantageous surface from his shoe). Or what about this guy? Should he be allowed to compete? How is this any different than simply taking EPO?

---

I think this is all bollocks and hypocrytical. We're super-happy and shell out billions of dollars to watch genetic "freaks" play, but people who dope "ruin the game." If you don't like watching doped atheletes play, then STOP WATCHING. If you want "purity" in sports then you better screen genetic "freaks" too.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

I think the cultural narrative of sports is that its supposed to be about the best that a person can achieve based on their hard work, their skill, and their natural talent.In other words I don't think its hypocritical that we disallow pharmaceutical doping but allow "genetic doping"; that's a double standard implicit in why we have sports in the first place. Some people have innate physical talents that allow them to surpass others in a sport. That's part of the magic of sports. (And I say that as someone who doesn't really watch, play, or enjoy any sports.)I'd allow pharmaceutical doping in sports, too, if it was the athelete who developed the pharamceutical. It's all about that sense of individual achevement; its about what someone can achieve given only that which makes a person who they are.

in a lot of sports this kind of doping is allowed all the time. I'm thinking of formula 1 racing, etc. Okay it's not a "sport" in the same way that atheletics is, but the fact is if you have a ferrari then you are going to beat the guy driving a nissan micra.Personally I've never been very sporty. I appreciate the aesthetic appeal of pure, undoped atheletics. But part of me is quite keen to see these guys drugged up to the eyeballs. for example I find boxing quite boring, but if you drugged them up as much as possible, gave them chainsaws, nets and tridents, and what have you, I daresay that would brighten up the sport for me

You'd be surprised. Racing is an amazing feat of mental and physical endurance for the driver. (Have you ever seen a really fat guy climb out of his car at the end of a race?) Those guys have endurance like you wouldn't believe; probably better than a lot of other atheletes. I have an uncle who is a race car driver. Well, yeah, which is why race cars are very heavily regulated by the rules of the sport. That's the difference between NASCAR, Formula 1, Grand Prix, and all that. There are very strict rules about pretty much every aspect of your vehicle. And put 'em on skates! And get James Caan to star in it.