Mind enhancing drugs in racing

[Ciro Pabón]

the problem is what constitutes a drug?

...

define drugs and then we can talk

I already gave this link: it's the WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) list of prohibited drugs. That's the exact list of what is forbidden, no more, no less.

WADA list of prohibited drugs: http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/docu ... ist_En.pdf

I don't think it's a moral problem, I find it a very practical one. Most people don't want to work their butts off for many years to be defeated by a cheater in the end. Simple.

About the balance WhiteBlue mentions, here lays the crux of the matter: actually, modern drugs can improve your balance. Notice, White, that the drugs that worry me are for "healthy individuals" and, according to the "first batch" of users I know (Nature and Wired readers), they actually improve your mental power without apparent side effects on the short run. It's not like marijuana or coke, these are things designed to improve your brain function. They don't get you "high" in the normal sense we know, you don't get a "hangover" after using them and their side effects are minimal, they're used on children after all.

I believe the XIXth century was the century of machines, the XXth century was mainly devoted to advance in electronics, the XXIth century will be one devoted to genetics. There is no way to dismiss the fact that the knowledge we have about the human brain is not going to get worse, on the contrary. What kind of enhancements for people can we expect in the future? Do you want to have a tail? Do you want a third arm? Better muscles? Larger brain? I'm exaggerating a little, like a good spaniard, but these possibilities are becoming closer to be a reality. After all, gene therapy was included in the WADA list few months ago.

That's what worries me.

Besides, I don't think WADA levels are strict enough FOR RACING.

To counterargument nae's position about "I took a cough pill and they banned me", which is the "normal" defense of athletes when caught, the permited levels of drugs are well above that kind of mistakes. You have to have 4 times the levels of natural hormones ever registered in a human body to be sanctioned automatically, for example.

It's not a problem of morals: drugs are an epidemy in most sports. I haven't watched bycicle racing anymore, for instance. As for "regular people" I strongly stand for the position that it's their life. I'm sorry for drug users, I don't feel vindictive.

Let's hope racing continues to be relatively clean and I'm not counting junkies, marijuana users or alcohol adicts here, these people are not part of the problem: it's not the vices of people what matters, it's the intentional use of exotic drugs, that don't get you "high" but improve your performance.

I find disturbing the fact that you can take happily a pill (20 mg) of Ritalin and as much atomoxetine as your body can handle, right before the race, and you will not get even a report about it. That's unfair.

About the problems of science and "brain-steroids" I don't know what to say. I believe this is mainly a personal problem: do whatever you wish with your body, but you will pay the price, I think.

Belatti, for heaven sake, next time take a taxi and park the car.

[nae]

the WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) list of prohibited drugs. That's the exact list of what is forbidden, no more, no less.

so if i find a drug that is not on this list
1 its not a drug
2 its not cheating

which is wrong on both counts

but , and this is where i bring up morals, it is morally wrong
to gain an unfair advantage or at least it is perceived to be.

(missing out the whole issue of the high school structure in the USA
to train up budding young athletes professionally to take part in the
Olympic games as amateurs which isnt a patch on what the soviets did or
what countless other country's do today, still not quiet in the spirt
of the games but accepted. athletes are now profesional to avoid this
argument, but i digress)

and as it is now in the realms of possibility to mask or hide
or other wise conceal performance enhancing (lets not call them drugs)
techniques it is impossible to police

it is such a moral issue. a guy with no legs but man made enhancement is
mooted to race in the Olympics, lol . not in the spirit at all, but accepted.

there is only 1 way forward if you wish to consider it and that is a list of accepted substances and practices that every sports person does / takes. if
you dont conform you cant compete in the premier class. perhaps an open class
also

cyclists of an international level with or without drugs tend to die of heart failure early. that could be morally wrong but again its accepted in the sport
i fail to see the difference in drugs or 'enhancement techniques' its a free choice
and soon to become (as is pointed out about) completely un-detectable (if it isnt already)

as for motor racing who is to say that the vodka that kimi seems to like isnt just a cover to hide his 'enhancement technique' all be it with the side effect of being a pr nightmare

[WhiteBlue]

so in principle you agree with me, Ciro. one should not use artificial substances to do brain doping!

it is simple common sense. the thing I do not know because I'm not an educated bio scientist is how to police those principles.

as allways one should observe the research results and have independant top level experts on the side of the law. the cheaters will always use their money to buy corrupt scientists to find new cheats. the law needs to keep up with it.

You may not catch all the cheats but you allways get some of them and when you do there must be draconian bans and penalties.

The FIA should have a clear policy of dealing with substance abuse for gaining unfair advantages. I have descibed how you traditionally influence the best working of the brain. there should be a positive list of methods that are acceptable in addition to the principles.

[DaveKillens]

Performance enhancing drugs is a relatively new field, and it may take decades to understand, and handle all the major ramifications. But at least, there are attempts to understand and control them.
But even their definition can be confusing. Years ago, when I used to play baseball, our team usually gathered just before a game, and we all had one beer each, just chilling and relaxing. True, the negative effect of alcohol is real, but more important to us, was approaching the game in a positive method, and to be relaxed. I personally believe that in this situation, one beer enhanced our performance as a team.
Now to jump down the road a few years (or was that decades?) I race online competitively. And I know from personal trial and error, that the best way to be is totally clean and sober. Drugs and alcohol, while they can send the recipient into a wonderful state of bliss, rob performance. The slight loss in sharp concentration, the slight relaxing of reflexes, all negative.

[Ciro Pabón]

C'mon, White, I live in Colombia: I've fought with the really hard consequences of drugs all my life. I'm pretty relaxed about marijuana or alcohol moderate use, but, as it is easy to understand, the abuse of these substances and the system of prohibition in place have cost me dearly. Not one, but two presidential candidates I supported have been killed in my country, not to count hundreds of honest judges, cops and journalists: if it weren't for them, I would be under the rule of a drug lord.

As for FIA, they have a clear policy in place. The form I have to fill once a year to renew my racing license is clear enough. I have to take a drug test every time I renew it.

In my country we have a doctor from the local association at every FIA sanctioned race that test you with a breathalyzer and (curiously) demands of people to take out their jewelry and piercings before the race. He's also responsible for drug testing (randomly, annually for everybody and by suspicion).

FIA states they also have FIA doctors to make random tests. Anyone can dennounce a driver who thinks is under the influence and they will test him. Appendix L to the International Sporting Code is clear (and long!). You can download it with the rest of the regulations at FIA site.

That's not enough, in my humble opinion. Seven NASCAR racers have been caught since 2000, three of them by police, as I already mentioned. On the "european side" I know of no penalties (except the single one mentioned in this thread in LMS or something).

Ritalin use among baseball players incremented 600% in a year, after steroids were effectively banned. That's a matter for concern.

The fact that controversies about drugs are absent in racing, when (pleeeze, don't be naive) around 5-10% of the general population use "regular drugs", means to me that the policy is not good enough. While the drugs impaired your physical functions, it was OK, because you have to be out of your mind to use coke or speed and race (and there are people out of their minds).

Now that new drugs do NOT impair your driving but maybe enhance it (apparently, I haven't tried the new drugs), the policy seems to lack enough tools. I find hard to believe all drivers are angels (with the exceptions of Alonso, Kubitza, Webber, Heidfeld and Räikkönen... ).

I fail to imagine a sport (well, maybe archery or shooting) that is so apt for "brain steroids" usage as racing.

Dave is right: even in a simulator is clear that you do not diminish your speed when drunk or drugged. You simply have more crashes.

[WhiteBlue]

Ciro, it appears that you misunderstand my post.

I agree with you that any performance enhancing drug should be banned and suitable checks be developed. I have said that in my prior post. I also think that controlling the usual recreational drugs isn't the big problem because we have methods of testing.

My view towards the FIA having a proactive policy is more of a fundamental thing. I would like to see a statement that traditional methods of training and nutrition are suppoesed to be the accepted means to enhance performance of the mind and that any use of drugs is to be avoided except for medical purposes. I would even impose record keeping on top athletes that can be checked in drug testing and if not true would disqualify the athlete.

[nae]

so then we all agree

drugs in sport = bad
policing = difficult

morally its is dubious

coming from a family with millions in the bank isnt an advantage at all
therefore imho it is hardly surprising some people seek to level the field

and in the high earning TV sports (baseball etc) all they are doing is trying to keep up to cover a lack of skill to cover there income

oh and we here in the uk are run by a government that is at least in cahoots with drugs barons, they call them companies and they force all sorts of unwanted drugs on patients, but that's another matter

[Carlos]

What was the question? My attention wandered a bit. Anyone got an Rx?
Racing isn't as squeaky clean as we have concluded; it's just that memory ( maybe drugs would help ) is short and we don't always drop the sleazy incidents into the memory slots, although some posters may dispute that. I found a thread with quite a few familiar names, from other series. I do distinctly remember the suspicion that F1 teams smuggled drugs in the late 1990's. There's a comment from Bernie farther down this thread from AtlasF1 along with information that suggests drugs have more to do with motor sport than we may like to admit. The second article is specifically about F1.

http://forums.autosport.com/showthread. ... adid=26714

http://www.grandprix.com/ft/ft00336.html

Here are a few articles about drugs mentioned (and others) targeted at cognitive deterioration, sleep and attention disorders. The effects, applications and possible therapeutic value are a little more complicated than exploding monkey heads.
http://www.modafinil.com/article/off-label.html
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.1 ... topic_set=
http://www.kensavage.com/index.php/arch ... -caffeine/

Hypnion , Ambien Where do they get these names from? Heres the answer.
http://englishmojo.com/?p=107
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industrie ... ames_N.htm
http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/129/8/677

[Pup]

Who is more worthy of admiration -

1. An average-working athlete who wins a championship thanks to a chance genetic abnormality.
2. An average-working athlete who wins a championship thanks to the use of an enhancement drug.
3. A hard-working athlete who wins a championship thanks to the use of an enhancement drug.
4. An extraordinarily hard-working athlete who never wins a championship despite using an enhancement drug.

Which would you tell your child who's been diagnosed with ADHD -

1. Taking prescription drugs for your condition is cheating, even if it means your life will be harder and your chances of success smaller.
2. Taking prescription drugs for your condition is ok, since you are merely correcting a genetic flaw.

Which of the athletes above would provide the most encouraging example for a child with ADHD?

Would your answers to any of the above be different if you substituted myopia/corrective lenses for ADHD/enhancement drug?


The issue of drugs in sport is important because it requires us to reexamine the purpose of sport and the values we place on it. It's fascinating, in a way, since - at least on an intellectual level - we value and enjoy sport as a model of life, and use that model to teach our children (and ourselves) those lessons and qualities that require experience to understand. I say fascinating, because I think the moral issue of enhancement drug use has already become as important outside of sport as in - and how we are able to deal with this issue within sport should be a good indication of how we deal with it in life. So far, not so good I would say. That's troubling, since this issue is minor compared to what science has in store.

For me, I find I don't necessarily devalue the accomplishments of individuals who I think have some unfair advantage (regardless of the source) but rather appreciate their accomplishments from a different, I think better, perspective. So my opinion is that drugs should be allowed, but publicly disclosed so that we can make our own judgements on an athlete's accomplishments.


One last set of questions -

Does this discussion effect at all the way you perceive the accomplishments of a winning driver who has the unfair advantage of a faster car, or of a team that has the unfair advantage of a larger budget?

If you think that sport should be played on a perfectly level field, why on earth are you reading an F1 forum?

[nae]

If you think that sport should be played on a perfectly level field, why on earth are you reading an F1 forum?

=D> =D> =D> =D>

and that is pretty much the crux of the matter in all sport in general, there is no such thing as a perfectly level playing field as those that are at the front help set the rules, which always seem to be to there advantage. it has always been that way and in all probability it always will.

well apart from the english who have invented so many sports but are just crap at them, very sporting dont you think

[WhiteBlue]

I think that F1 fans want to experience the technical fascination and the challenge beside the sport. for that purpose they are prepared to accept differences in the cars. after all it is also a constructors championship. where it stops to make sense to me is when tyre compagnies compete and drug companies potentially for the best doping methods.

[Pup]

If you allow F1 fans the intelligence to understand a driver's accomplishments in relation to, let's call them unearned advantages, then why aren't you as generous with fans of other sports? And is an F1 fan's technical fascination barred from neuroscience?

Tyres? Really?

[Pup]

Here's another question to ponder -

Since success in F1 is largely, if not primarily, dependent on the abilities of a constructor's engineering and manufacturing staff, shouldn't an advocate of a drug-free sport demand testing of the entire team for these drugs?

[modbaraban]

Are you saying that things like 'dumbo ears' were made under LSD?

[Pup]

Are you saying that things like 'dumbo ears' were made under LSD?

It's the most logical conclusion.