Yeah and I thought the Olympic swimmers shaving off all their body hair was hardcore.

Well yes, that's the entire point of not being anal retentive.

If an athlete has a medical condition that requires treatment, then it is simply inhuman to punish that athlete for it. Athletic competitions are never going to be "fair" everybody has different DNA, different heights, different builds, different natural hormone levels, and etc. This is quite normal and natural. It is literally impossible to make athletic competitions fair without disqualifying everyone who is not a robot or a literal clone of their standard athlete. And people shouldn't try because when they try we end up in the world of Kurt Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron, a whole different type a dystopia where exceptional people are brutally executed by the Handicapper General if they dare to remove the heavy weights that hold them down.

Of course, allowing unrestricted steroid use would create an unstoppable spiral amongst anal-retentive athletes who are under the extremely bizarre delusion that the potential for Olympic glory is more important than being paid, which is why it should only be allowed under a doctor's supervision.


And it isn't a real word in relation to drug use. It is a slang word. Its use by official agencies, such as the World Anti-Doping Agency is nothing less than the cold-blooded murder of the English language and should be punished by fiery nuclear death.

And that's just it. Detractors say that he isn't having to work as hard, but I have yet to see any actual evidence or measurements that show one way or the other. I tend to give less weight to naysayers when they come in the form of whiners that got smoked by who they're whining about (or that are worried they will be). Personal bias, I know.

I think if it's not in the scrabble dictionary then it shouldn't be a word.

I'm sure that the months of physical therapy required for him to learn how to run with his new legs certainly contributed to the enhanced performance. It isn't like you can just cut off a leg and slap on a new one like in Shadowrun. Adapting to the artificial limb is an arduous process. If they're going to ban anything that can result in enhanced performance when accompanied by several months of intense exercise, you'd end up banning everything. It would be must easier just to ban exercise altogether.

They might as well make it illegal for a run to employ months of excruciatingly painful leg-lengthening surgeries and accompanying physical therapy, but if they did that then you'd also have to set a single standardized leg-length just to be fair.

Isn't there some fluff in one of the books about the therapy you go through to acclimatize to your new cyber? Like how a good shadow clinic is one that does follow up, not just slaps the part on/in.

If it's not in a SR book, I read it in a novel or something. Interesting fluff to add to the game, IMO.

The reason that the IOC wants to maintain Olympic Athletes as "pure" and "on the same playing surface" (ie. no drugs or bionics):

1. Economics: big surprise, some countries are wealthier than others! If you allow people to augment their body with technology only those in the wealthier countries, who have some disposable income to spend on such technology will be competitive. That runner from Kenya who scrapes by on several hundred dollars a year won't be able to afford Steriod treatments that cost several thousand every month.

2. Human Rights: National Athletics Programs and victories in international competitions are a major measure of the prestige of a country and how prosperous it is. Countries invest millions (if not billions) of dollars into their athletes to try and win gold medals. What happens when a country falls prey to the effects of above? What if you could find a way to circumvent that? Suddenly you'd end up with Mengele's wet dream--dozens of poor, LDCs who have 0 human rights and allow all sorts of testing and abuse on their citizens. "Hmm...you want to test out this new super drug that makes people stronger and faster? Well, test it here and we'll see how many medals it brings. If it works you will provide me with enough to turn my army into super soldiers that can wipe out the rebels pestering me. If it doesn't then I always have more people. In the mean time, give me lots of money, I'll make whatever laws you need and I can use the money to fund private security companies to keep me in power and you testing."

Of course considering what forum this is and some of the people who frequent it I imagine lots of you won't see these as a problem.

Can drugs increase performance without intense exercise?

Done and done.

I'd tune in to watch the Whale-ympics.

This example was brought up in the NRP link I posted above. In that case the example was Tiger Woods had laser eye surgery and now sees better than 20/20. The thing is anyone can get eyeglasses that correct their vision to greater than 20/20, so being better than 20/20 isn’t a competitive advantage.

This one I don’t know about. Perhaps there’s something to be said about it being a part of them, but I’m not about to get behind transplanting a leg into an arm socket for extra strength….

What are some examples where this would create a competitive example? What sports are currently limited by how far you can go before breaking a bone? What performance advantage is granted here?

Anyone can wear shoes, however IAAP does place limits on what kind of shoes you may use. They may not incorporate springs or wheels in such a way that they grant you a competitive advantage.

The thing that stood out from the Talk of the Nation segment on this was the desire to prevent these sports from becoming about manufacturer’s abilities rather than athlete’s abilities. While this pair of legs may or may not be a competitive advantage, the technology is not going to stop here, and at what point does this stop being a gold medal for a runner and end up a gold medal for the manufacturer.

The winner of the special olympics should compete too if they could actually make the qualifying times for the real olympics.

The point isn't whether his foot acts like a spring (it does.) It matters whether the cheetahs actually confer to him an advantage over an able bodied runner. Most of the studies done for this kind of running shows that the runner has to work harder than an able bodied person and cannot use tried an perfected running techniques as well.

If the retooling of his legs has improved his times it's because he's at less of a disadvantage. The olympics will just have to test and rule on each model or brand of prosthesis and ban any that confer an unfair advantage, like they already do with all manners of drugs and training. I think we'll see him running in the olympics soon if he can make the qualifying times.

That is a response to the suggestion that you allow him to run without competing. Just run, be there, for posterity or something...