More on Lance.

Nick Gillespie has a somewhat interesting piece over at Reason‘s “Hit and Run” blog, “What to Wear on Your Wrist Now That Lance Armstrong is Being Stripped of His Tour de France Titles”. Among other points, Gillespie makes an argument that echos mine from the comments in the previous post:

Steroids, goes this line of thought, turn an authentic competition into something less…real? But if any of that is true, why not ban, say, weight training or off-season workouts? Or special nutritional regimens that stop short of including certain banned supplements? What should be done about Lasik and other interventions that result in better than 20/20 vision? Or reconstructive surgeries that let pitchers throw faster than before undergoing the knife (just ask Chicago Cubs’ hurler Kerry Wood)? All of these things muddy that wholly mythical level playing field….

The flip side of this question is: do we really want people taking drugs that may have negative side effects, or undergoing surgery, or any of these other things, for our entertainment? How far do we go down this road before we turn into Rome? Are you not entertained?

Gillespie also links to this Outside article, which I missed: “Lance Armstrong: Victim?” Brian Alexander makes what I think is a very good argument that USADA

 …which participated in the federal investigation, isn’t part of the U.S. government and isn’t a judicial body. Newspaper stories tend to shorthand it as a “quasi-governmental” entity, but that’s not accurate. USADA is a private non-profit corporation hired to manage the anti-doping program for American athletes who hope to participate in the Olympics as well as various local, regional, national, and international competitions. And it’s gotten out of control.

More:

USADA says it has direct authority over thousands of citizens, with the ability to deprive them of property rights, ruin their reputations, and even conduct warrantless searches and seizures. It argues that it can use the courts to compel people who have nothing to do with sports to testify in its private proceedings under threat of perjury, to surrender evidence or other documents, and to name names. It insists that it doesn’t have to follow the usual rules of justice guaranteed by the Constitution. What’s more, it has been actively expanding its powers.

Comments are closed.