535 words
In the past weeks doping has been in the news quite a bit. Because – surprise surprise – a number of cyclists decided to ‘confess’ about some substances they used to improve their performance a decade ago. Now the surprise there is more the fact that there is a confession than the fact that substances were used. Even people like myself who have no idea whatsoever about cycling (or other sports) understand that much.
It just seems very natural for the athletes to dope themselves. After all they are in the sports business to win and earn money and not to live healthy and lose. And obviously their teams and sponsors want them to win as well, which – no matter what they claim now – means that they will support doping or at least tolerate everything that leaves them with sufficient ‘plausible deniability’.
Similarly, the media should know about the real extent of doping as their reporters on the subjects should be familiar with the sports they report on, should be able to judge what the athletes achieve and should be up to date with the latest trends. But of course they don’t report on that ‘dirty’ side. Because it will scare their ad sponsors and may put people off from watching their shows and reading their reports. People like heroes. Hero athletes even more.
The only thing that scares me is the extent to which doctors seem to be involved. While don’t care about athletes who want to kill themselves by using some questionable substances just to earn extra money (After all, our capitalist system makes people work in situations that are bad for their health around the world, why shouldn’t athletes be in that club as well? Unlike many of the other people in such dangerous jobs, their membership is voluntary, even.) – a doctor should never use substances needlessly or in a careless way. How shall I trust a doctor if I cannot totally rely on that fact? And don’t they have their Hippocratic oath for that?
But now that the ‘scandals’ made big news of course politicians start being concerned all of a sudden. I really don’t get that. Can’t they just punish all the people who peddle illegal substances and be done with it? And the market will take care of the rest. If the sports industry is committed to sports without extra substances, it surely won’t be a problem for them to test people sufficiently and to give them contracts with very clear and expensive conditions when it comes to doping.
If, on the other hand, the sports industry thinks doping is great, they could just go on, not check people and let those with the best pharmaceutical sponsors win. That, at least, will give them new records – the sports equivalent of ‘growth’ I suppose – for some more time and make their show more attractive to viewers. If some of the athletes die on the way – well tragic for their friends and families, but ultimately something they chose themselves. And something that their teams will not need to take responsibility for because they had some clever paragraph down there in page 17 of the contract…