| |
|
I'm going to look at Steve Lomard-esque "performance enhancers" here. Although, I admit, seeing a school of cyclist ripped to the tits on speed would be ace.
What you've got to remember is excess. While the most visible reason for prohibiting performance enhancing drugs is that is creates bigger imbalances in performance potential you've got to remember that we're all human, and humans can take things way too far. If you opened the floodgates to performance boosters you'd get athletes, either through ignorance or going with their competition-junkie nature, going completely ape with the 'roids and any other plus-drug you can name. The last thing any sporting body wants is a sharp increase in the number of dead bodies associated with it. Which brings me to another point; increased chances of litigation if a sporting org allowed prohibited drugs. "I was PRESSURED to take drugs to stay in the game!" etc.
Funnily enough, I was pirate-reading New Scientist today about superathletes and how a lot of it is just down to getting the right genetics. Being an athletic mutant, basically. However, they did allow that with the right training, diet and gadgets one can, for a little bit, be Batman. Then they started talking about DARPA superfoods (they're trying to create a fourth food group for energy production) and I had to leave the shop. |
|
|
