don's report archive

by Donald B. Ardell, Ph. D.

Wellness in the Headlines
(Don's Report to the World)

As an avid age group runner and triathlete who trains hard nearly every day as well as a promoter of and enthusiast for wellness lifestyles, I might be expected to be supportive of anti-doping rules. I'm not -- I think anti-doping policies, and enforcement groups like the "World Anti-Doping Agency" (WADA) do more harm than good. Many of the same arguments that militate against the costly, futile and dysfunctional "War Against Drugs" apply as well to doping controls in professional sports, particularly the Tour de France. 

At this writing, the cycling world is in a tempest over Floyd Landis' testosterone levels after his amazing, wondrous and maybe too-good-to-believe performance in the 17th stage of this year's Tour. This year, the Tour was rocked by a doping scandal before it began. Drugs and the Tour de France are linked as much as "love and marriage" (an odd pairing given the divorce rate), "fat and American" and George W. Bush and moron." Our national hero Lance has had to endure much grief over the years -- "Does he or doesn't he?" rumors and accusations are endless, despite the absence of persuasive evidence that he ever took banned substances. The entire sport of cycling has been damaged by drug rules and drug infractions for a century. However, track and field and other Olympic sports, pro soccer leagues and even international cricket and tennis are also awash in drug scandals and conflicts. In these domains and our own Circus Maximi, major league baseball (think Mark McGuire and Barry Bonds), the NBA and the NFL, doping issues, worries and bans have created problems worse than the effects of the doping, at least for everyone save the performers.

While I do not and would not, for health reasons (and because the potential payoffs of using drugs to improve performance in age group triathlons would be insignificant), use the drugs now banned (coffee and Gatorade are OK with me, and after Lloyd's latest explanation, I'm considering adding Jack Daniels to my pre-race diet), I think the pros should have the choice to do so. They are in the entertainment business. They are paid to amuse and dazzle us. If juicing makes them faster, stronger and otherwise better able to do wondrous things, well, why not, from our spectator perspective? Let them decide. So long as the individual athletes are free to make the choice to use or not use substances likely to be good for performance/bad for health, the matter should be their business.

An article in the current edition of Free Inquiry was my tipping point toward this position, after years of pondering the benefits and costs of anti-drug rules in sport. Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at the University of Pennsylvania, assessed the issues raised by drug controls and closely related efforts to manage sport technologies. His article, "Altitude and Attitude" (Free Inquiry, August/September 2006, p. 25), depicts the arbitrary nature of enforcement and the degree of micro-management found in the drug-testing industry. As noted, it sent me over to the "let's not fight this war, either," point of view.

Ultimately, to take or not take hormones or other substances that might boost performance should be a matter of personal freedom and individual choice. That's a wellness perspective, I think. While nobody ought to be required or pressured to juice, dope or whatever, professional athletes should have the option to do so if they freely choose. Testing is far too invasive, disruptive and subjective, and takes the focus away from the spectacle.

I say, "let Spartacus be Spartacus," or the gladiators of cycling and other sports do what they like in order to wow us. Eliminate the Draconian testing that sullies sport more than it protects sportsmen, or the rest of us, from lost innocence, or something. Naturally, I do not take this view with respect to minors or even for those at the college level, where "win at all cost" coaches would surely pressure youths not mature enough to resist and think through the issues.

What do YOU think? Should we let the pros do as they like with substances, including cyclists and all the others?

While you're thinking about it, let me share another wellness perspective, that of my good friend Dr. Grant Donovan of Perth, Australia. I can always rely on Grant to cut to the heart of any matter. Also, I can count on him to express ideas in ways I find compelling, even when I don't agree, which is very rare, or when I can't be sure if he's having me on, which is common. Enjoy.

Grant Donovan's Wellness Perspective On Floyd Landis, The Tour de France And Doping Controls In Professional Sports:

Don, as always, I agree with every word you say except for the words I don't agree with. I definitely agree that they/we/everyone should be free to take drugs. Here's my motto: "Say NO to the War on Drugs."

As for athletes, they're only successful in the first place because they've been genetically endowed with the extra chemicals (testosterone, growth hormones, etc.) to beat the rest of us who cantdoit. They are lucky biological freaks who put on great freak shows, so let the best freak win. And for everyone else, just keep taking extra chemicals to catch-up.

"Wait," I hear you say, "it's not all about inherited chemicals and raw talent, it's also about hard work, dedication, strenuous training regimes and unbelievable human effort." You know, the stuff the "Rocky" movies are made of...that American stuff that makes the rest of the world cringe.

In a world of ever increasing anal retention, where each new turn leads to yet another person, or group, wanting to control all our behaviors, it's time to stand up and fight for our rights to use what ever drugs we like.

In the end, though, it's all meaningless twaddle. No-one cares who wins or loses. We just want the theatre, something to watch, to immerse ourselves in the feeling of war without the guns. To know that my tribe is better than your tribe. Then we go back to our meaningless lives, in a meaningless world, looking for another reason to control more of the human behaviors we think are ruining our meaningless existence.

That was Grant, ladies and gentlemen. Now, once more, what do YOU think? All comments welcomed. Be well. Always look on the bright side of life. 

(Note: This essay will be filed in the archives in the PHYSICAL DOMAIN under the skill area of adaptations and challenges. Additional articles related to this theme may be found there.)

(Ed. Note: Views expressed in this and other columns are those of the author and not necessarily those of the SeekWellness Editorial Board.)

 Send e-mail to Don Ardell