Arguments in favor of strict regulation of drugs that increase the effectiveness of athletes

THE CYBORG OLYMPIC GAMES

NEW WORLD

WHAT IF FANS DON'T CARE IF A PLAYER IS USING PERFORMANCE-ENHANCING DRUGS?

In February 2013, Lindsey Vonn -- perhaps the most accomplished female skier in American history -- tore her anterior cruciate ligament in a crash in the mountains of Austria. She had major reparative knee surgery, then spent the year rehabilitating the knee, but ultimately chose to withdraw from the 2014 Olympics in Sochi, citing "instability" in the injured leg.

Some wondered if Vonn would have recovered more effectively if she had taken human growth hormone and steroids -- both banned by the International Olympic Committee and the International Ski Federation. After all, research has suggested that these meds help injured athletes to better heal.

That leads to an intriguing question, one that has been playing out with Major League Baseball's steroid situation. What if fans don't care if a player is using performance-enhancing drugs? In fact, maybe that's what they want. After all, Vonn's withdrawal was a huge disappointment to skiing fans, who hoped to see her defend her gold medal win in 2010. Why not let Vonn take human growth hormone, or whatever she needs, in order to recover quickly?

In fact, why not push this thought experiment even further? What if Vonn decided not to repair her torn ACL, but opted instead to replace her entire leg -- or both legs -- with advanced prosthetics better than her originals? She might add attachments allowing her to jump higher, ski faster and perform stunts that are impossible with legs made out of flesh, muscle and blood. Her legs would never suffer an injury again.

Such a RoboCop twist would, obviously, change the nature of Olympic competition. If Vonn was allowed to use prosthetic legs, pairs figure skating competitors, for example, might be assisted by low doses of Adderall. This stimulant is prescribed for patients with ADHD to focus their attention, but is also used off-label by millions of healthy people to improve their concentration and performance. Speed skaters could be allowed to utilize lowdose steroids to boost strength and recovery time. Sports authorities could establish rules governing the dose and safe use of these and other drugs just like those that set the strict parameters for size, weight and composition of skis, bobsleds and other equipment.

For many, the idea of an enhanced Olympics is upsetting and unethical. But consider that these enhancement technologies all exist, or are on the cusp. Versions of some of these have already been used -- and sometimes abused -- in elite sports.

Two years ago, in the London Olympic Games, Oscar Pistorius competed in track and field, using his artificial Cheetah legs. And the Lance Armstrong doping story is all too familiar. Last year, he admitted that he illegally won seven Tour de France victories while on a steady diet of steroids and erythropoietin, a hormone that pumps up oxygen-rich red blood cells and gives an edge in endurance.

A major difference, of course, between these two athletes is that the disabled Pistorius used his enhancement technology legally, while the healthy Armstrong did not. But this is a line that soon may begin to blur, as technologies developed to augment the ill and the disabled continue to push into the realm of enhancements for the healthy.

For example, scientists and engineers have recently developed devices that bump up cognitive performance by dousing the brain in low levels

...