Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Friday November 25 2016, @10:03PM   Printer-friendly
from the amateurs-doping-like-the-pros dept.

After disclosures of an extensive, state-run doping program in Russia, sports officials have been retesting urine samples from the 2008 and 2012 Summer Olympics, in Beijing and London. Their findings have resulted in a top-to-bottom rewriting of Olympics history.

More than 75 athletes from those two Olympics have been found, upon further scrutiny, to be guilty of doping violations. A majority are from Russia and other Eastern European countries. At least 40 of them won medals. Disciplinary proceedings are continuing against other athletes, and the numbers are expected to climb.[...]

The drugs were not detected by the Olympic committee's drug-testing lab years ago, during the Games, because the science at the time was not sensitive enough to detect such small residual concentrations,[...]

"This completely rewrote my Olympics story," said Chaunté Lowe, an American high jumper who participated in four Summer Games but had never won a medal.[...]

Accompanying the joy of her belated recognition, she said, was an awareness of the opportunity costs she suffered. In 2008, her husband was laid off. The couple's house in Georgia was foreclosed on that year, something Ms. Lowe said would not have happened had she distinguished herself in Beijing. I was really young and promising at that point, and sponsors were interested in me," said Ms. Lowe, now 32. "A lot of interest goes away when you don't get on that podium."

Should the Olympics require countries to post a bond if their athletes win a medal, so that if they are discovered to have cheated the people most affected can receive compensation?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Francis on Saturday November 26 2016, @01:42AM

    by Francis (5544) on Saturday November 26 2016, @01:42AM (#433067)

    The issue with that is that some performance enhancing substances can be out of an athletes system even after giving an advantage. Creatine is a good example. It boosts performance and if you're mindful about how you come off it, you can retain the muscles without a positive test.

    The point of the rules on performance enhancing chemicals is to try and lessen the risk to the athletes. The Olympics are supposed to be about bringing countries together, not determining who has the best shit. Same goes for prosthetics. It was a huge mistake to let Pistorious into the Olympics as there isn't a clear answer to whether or not his prosthetics gave him an advantage. This is about human performance, not laboratory performance.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @03:20AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 26 2016, @03:20AM (#433090)

    The point of the rules on performance enhancing chemicals is to try and lessen the risk to the athletes. The Olympics are supposed to be about bringing countries together, not determining who has the best shit.

    Oh! It is so cute you think this, Francis! Risk to athletes, eh? What about risk to advertisers? Bringing countries together? How pre-LA Games of you! No, I think that everything you have said here is wrong. False. Incorrect. Not true. Francis.