THE DOPING DILEMMA by Andre Jute

[This article is destined for my blog Kissing the Blarney. http://coolmainpress.com/ajwriting/ ]

THE DOPING DILEMMA
by Andre Jute

You don't need to be Carl Jung to know that most people find it easier to conform, to go along.

There is no evidence that Lance Armstrong was the primary or even a main instigator of doping in top-level cycle racing. There is every evidence that he arrived in a sport where doping was already the norm — and went along with what was expected of him. Demonizing Armstrong will not change the facts.

I don't feel sorry for Armstrong. He'll be touring the talk shows, building his brand, which may now become Repentance and Redemption.

I see that picking on Armstrong and. even worse, waiting to do it until his career was definitely over, is symptomatic of collusion and incompetence and hypocrisy throughout the sport.

I feel sorrier for the fans, not Armstrong's fans in particular, but the fans of top-level cycle-racing. It seems to me unlikely that any result of the last 20 or 30 years -- and stretching much deeper than the podium -- is now above suspicion. That the UCI are not awarding Armstrong's wins to the second-place man is their admission that they know it.

As for the UCI, it is so contaminated and tarnished, it should be closed down. It's officials should be prosecuted. It is impossible to believe that they didn't know what was going on in their sport. Once that is agreed, it is impossible to believe that they didn't collude. Now, immorally, they're embarking on retrospective witch hunts, applying twenty-twenty hindsight, claiming to be whiter than white. It's immoral, disgraceful, and disgusting, the nadir of blazers covering their slack asses when the manure hits the spreader, and at the same time trying to put themselves forwards for new careers as drugs busters, the very activity at which they have already failed so ignominiously. We should start afresh with a new control body with new people, probably brought in from junior team sports, maybe girls' soccer, guaranteed to be clean because there's no money in it.

Turning now to drugs testing. I was vastly irritated during the Olympics, what I caught of it, by the constant advertising of the drugs testing laboratory, to the point where it seemed the Olympics was not so much a contest of athlete against athlete but against doping. Anti-doping has become the new Global Warming, with the same hysterical mob reaction to it.

The problem is clearly that effective drugs testing is less a science than an art, a matter of opinion, at the margins a toss of the coin. Putting a bunch of chemists in ultimate charge of our iconic sports isn't the answer either. We have already seen how politically committed "scientists" trashed long-range climate forecasting by concerted, consistent lying and thuggery to protect an ideal that shone only to them. They were supported every step of the way by the mob, as the chemists will be if my bleak scenario is enacted.

What we have already seen in sports where they control doping better, as in the better regulated Olympic sports, is that witch hunts lead to false accusations, people's careers ruined for taking a cough medicine prescribed by their physician for a slight cold. That's nonsense too, and the drugs laboratories and officials should be sued for consequential damages and penalties. Let's be clear on this: I would rather a hundred dopers escape punishment than that one innocent is falsely shamed. That is the only proper interpretation of the law and any regulation applied by anyone whosoever; to compromise on that principle is to betray human rights.

These facts together may make control of doping impossible. We may be heading for a Rollerball future in which athletes are a separate class of humanity, bred and doped from birth for extraordinary athletic feats.

***

Andre Jute's sports are cycling, rugby, racing in all its forms (automobiles, offshore powerboats, transocean yachts), polo, tennis and golf.

Copyright ©2013 Andre Jute. This article, as long as it is used complete including this notice, may be freely reprinted on not-for-profit sites. No commercial use without permission.

On Friday, January 18, 2013 12:56:24 PM UTC-5, Andre Jute wrote:
[This article is destined for my blog Kissing the Blarney. http://coolmainpress.com/ajwriting/ ]



THE DOPING DILEMMA

by Andre Jute



You don't need to be Carl Jung to know that most people find it easier to conform, to go along.



There is no evidence that Lance Armstrong was the primary or even a main instigator of doping in top-level cycle racing. There is every evidence that he arrived in a sport where doping was already the norm — and went along with what was expected of him. Demonizing Armstrong will not change the facts.



I don't feel sorry for Armstrong. He'll be touring the talk shows, building his brand, which may now become Repentance and Redemption.



I see that picking on Armstrong and. even worse, waiting to do it until his career was definitely over, is symptomatic of collusion and incompetence and hypocrisy throughout the sport.



I feel sorrier for the fans, not Armstrong's fans in particular, but the fans of top-level cycle-racing. It seems to me unlikely that any result of the last 20 or 30 years -- and stretching much deeper than the podium -- is now above suspicion. That the UCI are not awarding Armstrong's wins to the second-place man is their admission that they know it.



As for the UCI, it is so contaminated and tarnished, it should be closed down. It's officials should be prosecuted. It is impossible to believe that they didn't know what was going on in their sport. Once that is agreed, it is impossible to believe that they didn't collude. Now, immorally, they're embarking on retrospective witch hunts, applying twenty-twenty hindsight, claiming to be whiter than white. It's immoral, disgraceful, and disgusting, the nadir of blazers covering their slack asses when the manure hits the spreader, and at the same time trying to put themselves forwards for new careers as drugs busters, the very activity at which they have already failed so ignominiously. We should start afresh with a new control body with new people, probably brought in from junior team sports, maybe girls' soccer, guaranteed to be clean because there's no money in it.



Turning now to drugs testing. I was vastly irritated during the Olympics, what I caught of it, by the constant advertising of the drugs testing laboratory, to the point where it seemed the Olympics was not so much a contest of athlete against athlete but against doping. Anti-doping has become the new Global Warming, with the same hysterical mob reaction to it.



The problem is clearly that effective drugs testing is less a science than an art, a matter of opinion, at the margins a toss of the coin. Putting a bunch of chemists in ultimate charge of our iconic sports isn't the answer either. We have already seen how politically committed "scientists" trashed long-range climate forecasting by concerted, consistent lying and thuggery to protect an ideal that shone only to them. They were supported every step of the way by the mob, as the chemists will be if my bleak scenario is enacted.



What we have already seen in sports where they control doping better, as in the better regulated Olympic sports, is that witch hunts lead to false accusations, people's careers ruined for taking a cough medicine prescribed by their physician for a slight cold. That's nonsense too, and the drugs laboratories and officials should be sued for consequential damages and penalties. Let's be clear on this: I would rather a hundred dopers escape punishment than that one innocent is falsely shamed. That is the only proper interpretation of the law and any regulation applied by anyone whosoever; to compromise on that principle is to betray human rights.



These facts together may make control of doping impossible. We may be heading for a Rollerball future in which athletes are a separate class of humanity, bred and doped from birth for extraordinary athletic feats.



***



Andre Jute's sports are cycling, rugby, racing in all its forms (automobiles, offshore powerboats, transocean yachts), polo, tennis and golf.



Copyright ©2013 Andre Jute. This article, as long as it is used complete including this notice, may be freely reprinted on not-for-profit sites. No commercial use without permission.

IF Lance was only guilty of doping and lying about that doping it wouldn't be as bad as it is. It's the savage attacks on chracters, person's credibility and person's finances with the intent to ruin them that separates Lance from many other dopers. The man is despicable and from what I've heard of his so called confessiom on Ophra he is totally unrepentent as to what he did or tried to do to those who tried to out him. Will he make reparations to those he sued or destroyed financially to keep them quiet? Another question I'd like to see answered is did Lance siphon off any of the money that went to or was supposed to go to the Livestrong charity?

Cheers

On Friday, January 18, 2013 6:33:04 PM UTC, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

IF Lance was only guilty of doping and lying about that doping it wouldn't be as bad as it is. It's the savage attacks on chracters, person's credibility and person's finances with the intent to ruin them that separates Lance from many other dopers. The man is despicable and from what I've heard of his so called confessiom on Ophra he is totally unrepentent as to what he did or tried to do to those who tried to out him. Will he make reparations to those he sued or destroyed financially to keep them quiet? Another question I'd like to see answered is did Lance siphon off any of the money that went to or was supposed to go to the Livestrong charity?

That drive to win is what also what made him a winner. Why are we surprised and upset when the will to win spills over onto his defense against attacks? Or into raising funds for his charity? Or into his life generally? It's what made the guy, what we wanted from him, what we lauded and applauded and hugely rewarded him for.

Andre Jute

On Jan 18, 1:33*pm, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
Another question I'd like to see answered is did Lance siphon off any
of the money that went to or was supposed to go to the Livestrong
charity?

Cheers-

The charity has had been examined numerous times over the years,
apparently the answer to that was "no" and the charity ranked above
average amongst charities in terms of not wasting donated money and in
using funds directly to the cause.

now people do make distinctions between livestrong.org and
livestrong.com; but when nike uses pictures of lance alongside the
livestrong brand to sell stuff.......

I think if there was any real ethical impropiety there we'd have all
heard about it by now


this is nothing like that rapper raising money for victims of the
haitian earthquake and using it directly for his own

On Friday, January 18, 2013 3:13:32 PM UTC-5, raamman wrote:
On Jan 18, 1:33*pm, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

Another question I'd like to see answered is did Lance siphon off any

of the money that went to or was supposed to go to the Livestrong

charity?



Cheers-



The charity has had been examined numerous times over the years,

apparently the answer to that was "no" and the charity ranked above

average amongst charities in terms of not wasting donated money and in

using funds directly to the cause.



now people do make distinctions between livestrong.org and

livestrong.com; but when nike uses pictures of lance alongside the

livestrong brand to sell stuff.......



I think if there was any real ethical impropiety there we'd have all

heard about it by now





this is nothing like that rapper raising money for victims of the

haitian earthquake and using it directly for his own

Thanks for that. It's good to know that the money for the charity went to and stayed with the charity.

Cheers

On 1/18/2013 11:56 AM, Andre Jute wrote:
[This article is destined for my blog Kissing the Blarney. http://coolmainpress.com/ajwriting/ ]

THE DOPING DILEMMA
by Andre Jute

You don't need to be Carl Jung to know that most people find it easier to conform, to go along.

There is no evidence that Lance Armstrong was the primary or even a main instigator of doping in top-level cycle racing. There is every evidence that he arrived in a sport where doping was already the norm — and went along with what was expected of him. Demonizing Armstrong will not change the facts.

I don't feel sorry for Armstrong. He'll be touring the talk shows, building his brand, which may now become Repentance and Redemption.

I see that picking on Armstrong and. even worse, waiting to do it until his career was definitely over, is symptomatic of collusion and incompetence and hypocrisy throughout the sport.

I feel sorrier for the fans, not Armstrong's fans in particular, but the fans of top-level cycle-racing. It seems to me unlikely that any result of the last 20 or 30 years -- and stretching much deeper than the podium -- is now above suspicion. That the UCI are not awarding Armstrong's wins to the second-place man is their admission that they know it.

As for the UCI, it is so contaminated and tarnished, it should be closed down. It's officials should be prosecuted. It is impossible to believe that they didn't know what was going on in their sport. Once that is agreed, it is impossible to believe that they didn't collude. Now, immorally, they're embarking on retrospective witch hunts, applying twenty-twenty hindsight, claiming to be whiter than white. It's immoral, disgraceful, and disgusting, the nadir of blazers covering their slack asses when the manure hits the spreader, and at the same time trying to put themselves forwards for new careers as drugs busters, the very activity at which they have already failed so ignominiously. We should start afresh with a new control body with new people, probably brought in from junior team sports, maybe girls' soccer, guaranteed to be clean because there's no money in it.

Turning now to drugs testing. I was vastly irritated during the Olympics, what I caught of it, by the constant advertising of the drugs testing laboratory, to the point where it seemed the Olympics was not so much a contest of athlete against athlete but against doping. Anti-doping has become the new Global Warming, with the same hysterical mob reaction to it.

The problem is clearly that effective drugs testing is less a science than an art, a matter of opinion, at the margins a toss of the coin. Putting a bunch of chemists in ultimate charge of our iconic sports isn't the answer either. We have already seen how politically committed "scientists" trashed long-range climate forecasting by concerted, consistent lying and thuggery to protect an ideal that shone only to them. They were supported every step of the way by the mob, as the chemists will be if my bleak scenario is enacted.

What we have already seen in sports where they control doping better, as in the better regulated Olympic sports, is that witch hunts lead to false accusations, people's careers ruined for taking a cough medicine prescribed by their physician for a slight cold. That's nonsense too, and the drugs laboratories and officials should be sued for consequential damages and penalties. Let's be clear on this: I would rather a hundred dopers escape punishment than that one innocent is falsely shamed. That is the only proper interpretation of the law and any regulation applied by anyone whosoever; to compromise on that principle is to betray human rights.

These facts together may make control of doping impossible. We may be heading for a Rollerball future in which athletes are a separate class of humanity, bred and doped from birth for extraordinary athletic feats.

***

Andre Jute's sports are cycling, rugby, racing in all its forms (automobiles, offshore powerboats, transocean yachts), polo, tennis and golf.

Copyright ©2013 Andre Jute. This article, as long as it is used complete including this notice, may be freely reprinted on not-for-profit sites. No commercial use without permission.


Doping in sport is not a "magic pill". It's a small help to
recovery and VO2 capacity in our sport, a small help to
other factors in other sports. It's not a secret and we can
read history to get some idea of how 'pure' The Ancients rode.

' Jacques Anquetil, the first cyclist to win the Tour five
times, once said, “Leave me in peace; everybody takes dope.”
The relatively quaint drugs of choice back then were cocaine
and amphetamines, among others. Before Anquetil, Fausto
Coppi, the first superstar of cycling, when asked whether
riders took drugs to survive and win, replied, “Yes, and
those who claim otherwise, it’s not worth talking to them
about cycling.” '

from http://thedailybanter.com/tag/jacques-anquetil/

Here's a very nice overview with bibliography:

http://www.abcc.co.uk/drugs-and-the-tour-de-france/

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Friday, January 18, 2013 9:55:34 PM UTC, AMuzi wrote:

Doping in sport is not a "magic pill". It's a small help to

recovery and VO2 capacity in our sport, a small help to

other factors in other sports. It's not a secret and we can

read history to get some idea of how 'pure' The Ancients rode.



' Jacques Anquetil, the first cyclist to win the Tour five

times, once said, “Leave me in peace; everybody takes dope.”

The relatively quaint drugs of choice back then were cocaine

and amphetamines, among others. Before Anquetil, Fausto

Coppi, the first superstar of cycling, when asked whether

riders took drugs to survive and win, replied, “Yes, and

those who claim otherwise, it’s not worth talking to them

about cycling.” '



from http://thedailybanter.com/tag/jacques-anquetil/



Here's a very nice overview with bibliography:



http://www.abcc.co.uk/drugs-and-the-tour-de-france/



--

Andrew Muzi

www.yellowjersey.org/

Open every day since 1 April, 1971


Mr Muzi makes it sound as if, in the present climate of lillywhite perfection and sanctimonious outrage, there is a leaden inevitability about the cycle (sorry!) of the rise to fame by any cyclist, followed swiftly by his exposure as a drugs fiend and dispossession of his prizes. In short, Andrew makes this whole Armstrong tragedy sound unstoppable from the day Lance Armstrong climbed up onto his first bike. "Son, it grieves your mother and me that you want to be a cyclist. Do you really want to stand exposed one day as a drugs cheat?"

Andre Jute

On Friday, January 18, 2013 9:55:34 PM UTC, AMuzi wrote:

Doping in sport is not a "magic pill". It's a small help to

recovery and VO2 capacity in our sport, a small help to

other factors in other sports. It's not a secret and we can

read history to get some idea of how 'pure' The Ancients rode.



' Jacques Anquetil, the first cyclist to win the Tour five

times, once said, “Leave me in peace; everybody takes dope.”

The relatively quaint drugs of choice back then were cocaine

and amphetamines, among others. Before Anquetil, Fausto

Coppi, the first superstar of cycling, when asked whether

riders took drugs to survive and win, replied, “Yes, and

those who claim otherwise, it’s not worth talking to them

about cycling.” '



from http://thedailybanter.com/tag/jacques-anquetil/



Here's a very nice overview with bibliography:



http://www.abcc.co.uk/drugs-and-the-tour-de-france/


Andre Jute wrote:

Mr Muzi makes it sound as if, in the present climate of lillywhite perfection and sanctimonious outrage, there is a leaden inevitability about the cycle (sorry!) of the rise to fame by any cyclist, followed swiftly by his exposure as a drugs fiend and dispossession of his prizes. In short, Andrew makes this whole Armstrong tragedy sound unstoppable from the day Lance Armstrong climbed up onto his first bike. "Son, it grieves your mother and me that you want to be a cyclist. Do you really want to stand exposed one day as a drugs cheat?"


Oh, I did not mean to besmirch cyclists above all others.
Take mathematicians for example:

http://amphetamines.com/paul-erdos.html


" It's just that I don't want kids who are thinking about
going into mathematics to think that they have to take drugs
to succeed."



--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Jan 18, 5:32*pm, AMuzi wrote:
On Friday, January 18, 2013 9:55:34 PM UTC, AMuzi wrote:

Doping in sport is not a "magic pill". It's a small help to

recovery and VO2 capacity in our sport, a small help to

other factors in other sports. It's not a secret and we can

read history to get some idea of how 'pure' The Ancients rode.

' Jacques Anquetil, the first cyclist to win the Tour five

times, once said, Leave me in peace; everybody takes dope.

The relatively quaint drugs of choice back then were cocaine

and amphetamines, among others. Before Anquetil, Fausto

Coppi, the first superstar of cycling, when asked whether

riders took drugs to survive and win, replied, Yes, and

those who claim otherwise, it s not worth talking to them

about cycling. '

fromhttp://thedailybanter.com/tag/jacques-anquetil/

Here's a very nice overview with bibliography:

http://www.abcc.co.uk/drugs-and-the-tour-de-france/
Andre Jute wrote:
Mr Muzi makes it sound as if, in the present climate of lillywhite perfection and sanctimonious outrage, there is a leaden inevitability about the cycle (sorry!) of the rise to fame by any cyclist, followed swiftly by his exposure as a drugs fiend and dispossession of his prizes. In short, Andrew makes this whole Armstrong tragedy sound unstoppable from the day Lance Armstrong climbed up onto his first bike. "Son, it grieves your mother and me that you want to be a cyclist. Do you really want to stand exposed one day as a drugs cheat?"

Oh, I did not mean to besmirch cyclists above all others.
Take mathematicians for example:

http://amphetamines.com/paul-erdos.html

" It's just that I don't want kids who are thinking about
going into mathematics to think that they have to take drugs
to succeed."

--
Andrew Muzi
* www.yellowjersey.org/
* Open every day since 1 April, 1971- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

interesting find


people are biochemical reactions; our chemistry is in a constant state
of flux under the influence of everything that comprises our universe.
sugar, salt, di- enzine this and -thaline that and so on- it would be
a marevelous fool to believe that any one thing could miraculously
change who they are

On Friday, January 18, 2013 9:55:34 PM UTC, AMuzi wrote:

Doping in sport is not a "magic pill". It's a small help to

recovery and VO2 capacity in our sport, a small help to

other factors in other sports. It's not a secret and we can

read history to get some idea of how 'pure' The Ancients rode.

' Jacques Anquetil, the first cyclist to win the Tour five

times, once said, Leave me in peace; everybody takes dope.

The relatively quaint drugs of choice back then were cocaine

and amphetamines, among others. Before Anquetil, Fausto

Coppi, the first superstar of cycling, when asked whether

riders took drugs to survive and win, replied, Yes, and

those who claim otherwise, it s not worth talking to them

about cycling. '

fromhttp://thedailybanter.com/tag/jacques-anquetil/

Here's a very nice overview with bibliography:

http://www.abcc.co.uk/drugs-and-the-tour-de-france/
Andre Jute wrote:
Mr Muzi makes it sound as if, in the present climate of lillywhite perfection and sanctimonious outrage, there is a leaden inevitability about the cycle (sorry!) of the rise to fame by any cyclist, followed swiftly by his exposure as a drugs fiend and dispossession of his prizes. In short, Andrew makes this whole Armstrong tragedy sound unstoppable from the day Lance Armstrong climbed up onto his first bike. "Son, it grieves your mother and me that you want to be a cyclist. Do you really want to stand exposed one day as a drugs cheat?"

AMuzi wrote:
Oh, I did not mean to besmirch cyclists above all others.
Take mathematicians for example:
http://amphetamines.com/paul-erdos.html
" It's just that I don't want kids who are thinking about
going into mathematics to think that they have to take drugs
to succeed."

raamman wrote:
interesting find

people are biochemical reactions; our chemistry is in a constant state
of flux under the influence of everything that comprises our universe.
sugar, salt, di- enzine this and -thaline that and so on- it would be
a marevelous fool to believe that any one thing could miraculously
change who they are


Didn't have to look far, I'm an Erdos fan anyway.

And regarding your larger point, archaeologists note that
beermaking is found right at the start of many cultures.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971