Quake3World

Came across this and wondered what the general opinion about it is. I believe this could be the start of a slippery slope where enhancements to the human body may be allowed. After all, in the case of doping, where do you draw the line between needing a medicine and using drugs purely for performance enhancement?

Source: http://www.nbcolympics.com/news-blogs/t ... -team.html

Like I said: take away the political correctness and you're left with a dude with no legs. Why should he compete in a 400m sprint at the Olympics?

Indeed Eraser. I don't begrudge him running or making a name for himself but how do you regulate the "parts" he is using for his lower limbs? You could have all sorts of things going on to aid with his speed that you couldn't detect because the processes are not in place for things like this.

Surely, given the level of PC involved they are discriminating against people who have their whole legs who should be able to use these:



?

PC can suck my balls. I'm all for helping people who are disabled (sorry...less abled) than myself but when it comes to this sort of stuff you have to draw a line.

r3t wrote:this could be the start of a slippery slope where enhancements to the human body may be allowed

It is an enhancement of the human body and it is allowed...
Usually when people talk about a slippery slope it's about going downwards, into a pit of suffering, not progress towards a load of ENHANCEMENTS of anything. Fucking moron...

This is how the Olympics is SUPPOSED to be, it's the Paraolympic games that should be stopped; that is plain retarded. Either you are good enough to compete with the best, i.e. in the Olympics, FFS, or you are not.

Next you'll be saying that runners should not be allowed to wear trainers, cause those are enhancements of the body. Oh, how about those special swimsuits that were invented especially for faster swimming? Yeah, I suppose you were against those, too... (Yeah I know they banned them, but please, they ban things in Formula 1, and you're not going to tell me F1 is against progress of enhancements, are you?)

they let him in because he has no chance of winning. RSA had to relax their qualifying time for him to make the team. just a publicity stunt.

DTS wrote:

r3t wrote:this could be the start of a slippery slope where enhancements to the human body may be allowed

It is an enhancement of the human body and it is allowed...
Usually when people talk about a slippery slope it's about going downwards, into a pit of suffering, not progress towards a load of ENHANCEMENTS of anything. Fucking moron...

This is how the Olympics is SUPPOSED to be, it's the Paraolympic games that should be stopped; that is plain retarded. Either you are good enough to compete with the best, i.e. in the Olympics, FFS, or you are not.

Next you'll be saying that runners should not be allowed to wear trainers, cause those are enhancements of the body. Oh, how about those special swimsuits that were invented especially for faster swimming? Yeah, I suppose you were against those, too... (Yeah I know they banned them, but please, they ban things in Formula 1, and you're not going to tell me F1 is against progress of enhancements, are you?)

Your argument is invalid as you confirmed that he should not be allowed to compete with paralympic games comment.

He is not good enough to compete in the 400 meters without an aid, so why should he be allowed to compete (your logic applied there)

DTS wrote:

r3t wrote:this could be the start of a slippery slope where enhancements to the human body may be allowed

Usually when people talk about a slippery slope it's about going downwards, into a pit of suffering, not progress towards a load of ENHANCEMENTS of anything. Fucking moron...

Are performance enhancing drugs an improvement? Or implants? Or perhaps just chopping your legs off, so you are entitled to prosthetic limbs with build-in actuators? That's the slippery slope I'm talking about. Fucking idiot.

menkent wrote:they let him in because he has no chance of winning. RSA had to relax their qualifying time for him to make the team. just a publicity stunt.

Could be (do you have a source for this), but then I wonder if this is because of his athletic abilities or because of his prosthetic. Or, in other words: what were his abilities when he still had his legs?

Maybe we should create a legless Bolt clone to find out...

he never had legs, lost them due to a "bone defect" as a baby.
CNN confirms this and that he didn't run the "A level" qualifying time (well, apparently you need to run below 45.30s twice to qualify for the 400m and he only managed it once):
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/04/sport/pis ... =allsearch

Ok, so I see this spinning into a different discussion. Apparently the guy wasn't good enough to compete at an Olympic level to begin with, so that makes it even strangers that he was admitted.

But what if this guy ran a 400m nearly as fast as the top level athletes? What then?

then he should be cloned into an army of supersoldiers.

THIS IS JUST LIKE DEUS EX

Eraser wrote:Ok, so I see this spinning into a different discussion. Apparently the guy wasn't good enough to compete at an Olympic level to begin with, so that makes it even strangers that he was admitted.

But what if this guy ran a 400m nearly as fast as the top level athletes? What then?

Robert Kubcia once drove as fast as anyone in F1, but it looks like he wont be able to drive an F1 car again. Should he be given a bionic hand/arm that doesn't ever get tired and be allowed to race again?

It is a difficult question to answer and I don't think he should as he would not be on a level playing field. There is a difference between natural tallent, hard work and being gifted with the ability to do something you shouldn't be able to via an aid/addition to ones physical self.

Another thing is, it's not clear to me if these legs of his actually give him an advantage. I guess he'd run faster if he had normal legs than he would on these blades.

But I don't see what's so hard about saying "you don't have legs, you're not going to compete in the Olympics" even if he's at a disadvantage with them, especially if the underlying reason is to avoid future sticky situations where someone could potentially have an advantage from artificial limbs.

You're luddites practically siding with creationists

Go ahead and ignore what I said about trainers and swimsuits, see where it gets you

Donny already blew a hole in your argument with a bright beam of logic.

Actually, he misunderstood my post and his post made no sense.

What you really want is the biolympics, isn't it?

Fuck humans, they are weak and puny and need to be bionically upgraded to perform outlandish feats of uncomprehensive awesomeness. This would make it much more fun. That way even if you a paraplegic you can still compete in the sub 5 second 100 meters contest. But be damned if those paraplegic mother fuckers try and do something under their own steam. Damn them to hell.

DTS wrote:Actually, he misunderstood my post and his post made no sense.

What he's saying is that the "Blade Runner" is no good at running at all when he doesn't have his artificial legs. Any conventional athlete competing at the Olympics isn't any worse at their respective discipline without stuff like shoes as any other of the competing athletes when you take away the aids for them too.

This all sounds like that "Eddie The Eagle" bullshit from a few Olympics ago.

Don Carlos wrote:be damned if those paraplegic mother fuckers try and do something under their own steam

He is doing that running under his own steam ...

There's no external force acting upon him.

You are right about my want for technology to be part of what makes people faster, though; I have more respect for Formula 1 than some people running along for 100 meters.

Yeah, but Eddie the Eagle wasn't physically impaired, just a complete fucking talentless moron.

DTS wrote:

Don Carlos wrote:be damned if those paraplegic mother fuckers try and do something under their own steam

He is doing that running under his own steam ...

There's no external force acting upon him.

You are right about my want for technology to be part of what makes people faster, though; I have more respect for Formula 1 than some people running along for 100 meters.

the original argument against him competing (ie, in 2008) was, iirc, that the carbon-fiber "blades" conserve more energy than human feet because they're rather springy. the obvious counter argument, which seems to have succeeded, is that the blades also have no muscles and whatever he might gain by using springs instead of calves/ankles he would certainly lose by having to expend that much more energy in his upper legs.
i don't think it gives him an advantage, i think it just goes against the idea of the games. then again, i've always been against a lot of the tech and doodads they use in some of the events (eg, buoyant swimsuits, those flappy speedskates and various archery aids).

DTS wrote:Next you'll be saying that runners should not be allowed to wear trainers, cause those are enhancements of the body. Oh, how about those special swimsuits that were invented especially for faster swimming? Yeah, I suppose you were against those, too... (Yeah I know they banned them, but please, they ban things in Formula 1, and you're not going to tell me F1 is against progress of enhancements, are you?)

oh my fucking god it's Herple McDerple in the house

the difference between trainers/swimsuits and a pair of carbon leg extensions is that the former performance enhancers are available to all athletes while the latter clearly aren't (unless athletes start cutting off their own legs), ergo he has an unfair advantage. same is true for F1 tech etc