Research Study

[The Fury]

And Eric is not "right"

He may be right in your opinion just as he is wrong in my opinion.

[zipy]

hi

As I am conserned every research done on eney substance is a gain for all of us. It is one step closer to understanding chemical proceses in our bodys, and that is not important just for freediving.

About Erics statement:

If a person tries to cheat, and dies, then he gets what he deserved

I really hope this was not ment as it sounds!
It sounds like you almoust hate them.
I feel sorry for them for not realiseing what are they doing to the sport and themselfs!!

Why should it be our job to 'save his life' when he is the one who was willing to risk his life to win?

My oponion is that every life is WORTH saveing no matter what!!!

With researches like this we can spread the word about what substances or drugs do to our body , what are the risks and "or" benefits. I think we can save a few lives just doing that. Just makeing people aware what are they getting in to.

Zipy

Freediveing is a dangerous sport it can be deadly we don't need durgs to make it more leathal.

On the other hand :
Sport is as safe (dangerous ) as you make it.

[The Fury]

Thanks Zipy, I was beginning to despair.

You are right (in my opinion) that increasing awareness is of the greatest importance.

What are your views on banning substances?

If you have an opinion on this matter, I started a poll in the general freediving forum so go and vote!

Hamish.

[pkotik]

The innumerable freedivers I've taken the time and trouble to keep alive when they blacked out may not concur with your proposition that I have a complete disregard for the lives of other freedivers.

I regard all adult freedivers as, well, adult freedivers. I have no interest in legislating their personal risk-reward calculations. If a freediver concludes he likes the payoffs in the risk-reward matrix for sodium bicarbonate suppositories, or Gitanes cigarettes, or riding a motorcycle to the competition, that is his business, not mine.



Paul Kotik

[pkotik]

.... I mean, not to put too fine a point on it, but you DO realize that 99.99999% of the adult human beings on this planet would regard all of us as COMPLETELY INSANE to freedive at all !

They perceive the risks as a HUGE increment to those already inherent in simply being alive, and do not value the rewards.

We know better, right ?

Good illustration of how presumptuous it is to judge another person's risk-reward calculus.


Paul Kotik

[The Fury]

I accept that you value the lives of other freedivers enough to save one should they blackout. But not enough to prevent them from taking a substance which could greatly increase the risk of their own death.

So can you tell me why the IOC has a banned substance list? Surely it is to discourage athletes from cheating and from harming themselves. I don't see why all other athletes but not Freedivers should benefit from this protection.

[efattah]

The whole issue is too vague anyway. Drinking 1L of lemon juice with salt in it gives you the same results as taking NaHCO3 (since the citric acid in the lemon juice will become HCO3- anyway, and the salt becomes Na+). So did the lemon juice drinking athlete cheat?

In my opinion there are four classes of substances in the question of 'doping':
1. Hormones (epo, hgh, testosterone, IGF-1, prohormones such as N,N-androXXXX, etc..)
2. Substances which do not exist in your body in the first place
(This group can be broken down into:
2A: synthetic drugs such as ibuprofen, sildenafil, beta blockers, artificial O2 carriers, etc..
2B: herbal products, which may include drug like substances such as caffeine, THC, or beneficial substances like ginsenosides etc..)

3. Non-hormonal substances which are either essential to eat or created by your own body (bicarbonate, creatine, salt, potassium, ATP, vitamins, minerals, CoQ10, etc..)

4. Dangerous methods, not substances, such as blood doping.

If we follow the example of the IOC, all substances in class #1 are banned.
Some substances in class #2A are banned, if they contain substances shown to be harmful (i.e. artificial O2 carriers, beta-blockers, etc..)
Some substances in class #2B are banned, such as ephedra, marijuana, etc., but most herbs are allowed, because most herbs are not dangerous.
No substances in class #3 are banned, and all dangerous methods of class #4 are prohibited.

So, NaHCO3 belongs to class #3 (not banned), while EPO belongs to class #1, and some anabolics belong to class #1, while others belong to class 2A.

I think the IOC is correct in its philosophy; An athlete can take any substance he or she wants, helpful or not, so long as that substance does not have a history of putting the athlete in danger. The IOC does NOT ban performance enhancing substances, it only bans substances (enhancing or not) which are shown to be harmful or put the athlete in danger.

AIDA uses IOC drug tests, so the above philosophy applies to AIDA as well.




Eric Fattah
BC, Canada