If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Scientists continue to be divided over whether a double amputee would have an "unfair advantage" competing against able-bodied sprinters in the Olympics   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 16
    More: Asinine, International Association of Athletics Federations, Court of Arbitration for Sport, Paralympic Games, Southern Methodist, athleticism, lower leg, Oscar Pistorius, Pretoria  
•       •       •

6495 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Jun 2012 at 7:41 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-06-27 04:50:23 PM
5 votes:
Scientists continue to be divided over whether a double amputee cyborg with hyper-legs would have an "unfair advantage" competing against able-bodied sprinters in the Olympics.

/Would neuropazine be a performance-enhancing drug?
2012-06-27 09:59:51 PM
2 votes:

mr smart the great: loadin


myspace.roflposters.com

/I consider it every time myself
2012-06-27 08:25:27 PM
2 votes:
The title is completing misleading (what else is new on Fark?). This is not about whether double-amputees have an advantage over able-bodied people (they do not), this is about whether it's fair to have someone with a performance-enhancing prosthetic compete with those who don't.

Here are the facts:
1. These prosthetics are clearly performance-enhancing. They were designed specifically for running and nothing else (e.g. impossible to climb mountains, walk in mud, plenty of other things that generic doctor-prescribed leg prosthetics are able to do).
2. Science was eventually going to reach this point, where a person with a targeted prosthesis could outperform a human in an isolated skill; science will also inevitably surpass this point (but I doubt with this man or this particular set of legs, as he's struggling just to reach qualifying time).
3. As others have pointed out, once you open the floodgates (though I'm sure they'll be closed in no time once people realize how stupid it is), you open the door to all sorts of shenanigans. Runners on stilts. Amputees on bicycles. Most obvious to me is a double-amputee with spring-loaded prostheses for high jumps; no more (or less) of an advantage than this guy.

TL;DR: Completely unfair.
2012-06-27 08:13:31 PM
2 votes:

Lonewolf45100: JC Denton unavailable for comment.


But Diana Moon Glampers will happily give you a comment, you just won't remember it due to the claxon horns in your ear.
2012-06-27 07:54:48 PM
2 votes:
The only debate in this is the definition of "fair".

Is it fair that some people are born with a genetic advantage? Should we have the Handicapper General weigh down the competitors in such a way that they all have a perfectly equal chance of winning and the only variations will come down to random quantum chance?
2012-06-27 04:48:11 PM
2 votes:
Uhhhhhhh duh. He's not running on his legs. Wearing those things make you go much faster.
2012-06-28 08:19:25 AM
1 votes:
scm-l3.technorati.com
2012-06-27 10:15:58 PM
1 votes:
My thoughts have been echoed here already I think, but for lack of anything better to do I'll vomit them on you.

I'm not so much concerned with the current level of prosthesis these guys are rocking, but it very quickly becomes a slippery slope where the mechanical beats the flesh. Even if you limit the technology somehow, these devices are still subject to engineering and manufacturing techniques which a similar competitor cannot achieve without removing his own limbs, something detrimental to his health (also the nominal reason performance enhancing drugs are no-fly).

Others have mentioned, these are strap on limbs; they always perform at peak capacity and can be battered, abused, and completely destroyed with abandon then simply replaced in an instant; flesh can only be pushed so far, so hard, and when it is destroyed, it's done.

If people get over the squeamish fear of seeing people with missing limbs, the paralympics will become a much more interesting game to watch in the future, but only if the money is there.

Flesh and blood simply can't compete with mechanics and engineering; we don't ride horses anymore for a reason.
2012-06-27 09:09:36 PM
1 votes:
This thread needs more Aimee Mullins.
2012-06-27 08:59:43 PM
1 votes:

Epicanis: Honestly, I'd be pretty interested in seeing "unlimited class" (no enhancements prohibited) athletic competitions - it'd definitely spur on a lot of medical and prosthetic research and development that would probably also be very useful for people with injuries, ailments, and general physical problems (if someone develops a mysostatin inhibitor to promote muscle growth, that might also be useful to combat sarcopenia in the elderly, for example).


You know why drugs are banned from the Olympics (and technically all sporting competition)? Because they are a detriment to the athlete's health. Winning is important, but not at a deleterious cost to life. If some people are willing to risk/shorten their lives for glory, that forces other athletes who don't want to risk their lives to do also just to stay competitive. It cultivates a culture of death, misery and trauma, where winning at all costs takes precedence over health and well-being. That is the very antithesis of the essence of sport.

People should not be forced to make a choice to modify their bodies just to compete.
2012-06-27 08:53:50 PM
1 votes:
It's not just the equipment.

It's the fact that the runner has the advantage of NOT HAVING LEGS full of muscles that cost energy, that must pump blood and oxygen to move them. The prosthetics are lighter, sleeker, more aerodynamic, but most importantly, do not require the nominal upkeep it takes to move them. There is less stress on the heart, lungs, and other body faculties without having to send signals to the feet. This is an incredible advantage.

I say no. Only what you are born with. If guy wants to win, the Paralympics are a month after.
xcv
2012-06-27 08:14:28 PM
1 votes:

Donnchadha: Magorn: Will that answer change when genetics has advanced to the point that we can custom build our offspring?

I think that people (as a whole) will generally eschew the idea of genetically building offspring. The technology will be there, but something about that idea will just be too weird and creepy to really catch on. I'm not saying it will never happen, but I don't see it becoming "normal" or at least generally acceptable anytime in the near future.


It's going to happen, with a generation of super-boys out of Asia first, Indian parents giving birth to sons with perfect recall, 7' tall Chinese with all sorts of endangered species genes grafted into their DNA to give them an edge on the basketball court and university entrance tests. South Korea might act all, holier than thou Christian ethics and reject the science at first but wait till they see the ability to raise their mouse-click speeds with a few chromosome tweaks. And the Japanese will be outright horrifying as they fully morph into real-life anime characters.

America will have to follow suit out of necessity or we'll never win another spelling bee or video game tournament again and eventually be conquered by mecha piloted by tweens.
2012-06-27 08:05:40 PM
1 votes:
If we have separate men's and women's events then obviously people with these prosthetics should be in a separate class of competition.

There's no logical way to distinguish between this and letting the Six Million Dollar Man compete. Usain Bolt can sprint at perhaps 30MPH. Col. Steve Austin's nuclear-powered bionic legs can sustain 60MPH, so if he existed he'd beat everyone except other bionic people.
2012-06-27 08:03:40 PM
1 votes:

yelmrog: All2morrowsparTs: Donnchadha: Magorn: Will that answer change when genetics has advanced to the point that we can custom build our offspring?

I think that people (as a whole) will generally eschew the idea of genetically building offspring. The technology will be there, but something about that idea will just be too weird and creepy to really catch on. I'm not saying it will never happen, but I don't see it becoming "normal" or at least generally acceptable anytime in the near future.

Creepy Idea? sure. Will people shy away from it? Hardly. Look at those crazy ass parents botoxing thier kids, taking them to tanning booths and talking about surgicilly enhancing them before puberty.

If they had a chance to have designer babies they would jump on that chance in a minute.

This. People would kill for the chance to customize their kid.


It's pretty easy to customize your kid. If you want a loser, get a ginger pregnant and keep the kid if it comes out translucent and spotted. If you want a serial killer, just make him blow the dog when he pisses the bed. I'm not sure how to customize your child into good things but it's a start.
2012-06-27 08:00:19 PM
1 votes:

JesseL: The only debate in this is the definition of "fair".

Is it fair that some people are born with a genetic advantage? Should we have the Handicapper General weigh down the competitors in such a way that they all have a perfectly equal chance of winning and the only variations will come down to random quantum chance?


I see it the other way, if you want to let people with enhanced prostectics compete with abled bodied persons then why not let bicyclists compete in track races too. I mean a bicycle can be consided a prostetic as well.
2012-06-27 07:55:01 PM
1 votes:
Tough question.
I'm stumped.
 
Displayed 16 of 16 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report