lowheel, on 09 October 2017 - 03:56 PM, said:
I think its going to create sticky situations.i just got 2 cortisone/steroidal injections in my lower back and sciatic nerve and the doc knows im a pro golfer and basically told me if they test you you'll fail so i can give you a medical letter.i told him dont worry im in lower tours they dont care!!
Cool Hand Luke, on 10 October 2017 - 10:23 AM, said:
The main benefit is it speeds up recovery from injury and this is where I think the anti-doping bureaucracies need to listen to doctors as it is a viable treatment to help players get back on the field quicker following a major injury.
These examples show what a slippery slope PEDs (and corresponding TUEs) are.
Say you have a golf swing that is particularly violent on your back (or knees, or whatever) that enables you to drive the ball 40 yards farther. I could swing the same way as you, but I don't want to destroy my body doing so. No big deal, every three months, you go in for a cortisone shot to make it all better (or at least feel that way). Do we really believe that these drugs didn't enhance your performance? Without them, you'd be retired after your first major injury while I have a long career. With them, you're a better golfer than I am.
Likewise, the availability of HGH to speed "recovery" after injury might lead you to take greater risk on the field of play, knowing that you can come back from injury pretty quickly. Is that not a performance enhancer?
And then you get to the next derivation ... things like Tommy John surgery. Some guys throw harder
after TJ than they did before. Some guys are proactively having it before they blow out their elbows. Is performance enhancing surgery
It's a very messy sports ethics debate...which, by definition, cannot be solved here (or anywhere, really).