Doping

In light of the recent doping allegations in our domestic Masters racing scene, several of us had a conversation via email. This was what one of my teammates had to say on the matter. I thought it was worth posting here. Interesting perspective.

(qualification: the author has 3 Sociology based Masters degrees)

"I know I am a little late on this one.  Haven't worn a sociologist hat in a while, but as a cyclist and reviewing the salary differential among pro cyclists from the recent blog Shawn posted here are my two cents (I know it's long, it's a sociology thing).   Obviously there are social expectations and there are rules or laws.  On our team, the expectation is that we all bike pure and enjoy the challenge of performing our best.  None of us however, are riding each race hoping to put dinner on the table.  We have other things in our lives besides cycling (family, careers, etc).  We all have a similar set of beliefs (regarding cycling).   UCI says doping is bad and bans substances that can easily be obtained are are the miracle drug in the eyes of the FDA. Physicians can legally prescribe these wonder drugs and make lots of money.  The US government is not going to take a cyclist or the prescribing physician to jail for using EPO, though UCI and USAC can ban you and fine you and strip you of your title and earnings.   So really what is the cost of doping?  When looking through the lens of the UCI/USAC then doping is immoral, against the rules and you shouldn't do it.  But we as moral beings break rules all the time.  It is the risk of being caught.  It is always against the law to speed, yet many of us do it anyway.  Some of us simply because we are following others around us. Speeding only becomes a problem when you are caught.  Same thing with doping, but at a higher cost.  If your life, your sanity, your salary depends on your performance of as a cyclist, then "doping" may not seem as immoral at that level.  We are talking hundreds of thousands of dollars.  You have the pressure or expectation to perform and to perform well. We all know those who come back from Europe and say how much pressure there is to perform and perform great day in and day out. The athlete is consuming something or doing something to enhance performance.  We do it all the time with our recovery drinks, our foam rollers....  It's the nature of the sport and they feel it is worth the risk of getting caught.   The joy of sociology is that there never is one truth and explanations are not black and white, but many shades of gray.  It's the chicken and the egg.  Doping in general is incredibly gray, because many of the things athletes are doing or taking to enhance performance can be seen as innovation.  If I have leukemia and I have my blood "cleaned up" with fresh platelets, a doctor is awarded a peace prize for improving my quality of life.  If I have leukemia and want to be a cyclist and I go through the same process to enhance my performance does that make me more or less moral?  There is no correct answer.  ESPN did a special on Bill Parcels a few weeks ago and he said in the end if you are you happy with the man staring back at you when you look in the mirror....  If you can answer yes, then doping is worth the risk.  Lots of people each day take the risk to speed, something that is clearly illegal and potentially dangerous.  But is speeding really that immoral, that bad?  It's just an annoying fine.  Most people are ok with those who speed.  If you look at the people getting busted for doping, they are the high salary big stakes guys (or recent local cases who probably have some emotional instability in their lives) .  Everyone is doing it...is it that bad (in their circles)?   Even the UCI allows you to come back and race again after your 2 year suspension, so really do they feel it is that bad or are their rules a result of pressure from the societal perception that doping is bad?  If doping was that immoral, why would the UCI let you come back and race after 2 years?  They are doing what they feel to satisfy societal expectations. The US Supreme Court makes decisions based on societal expectations all of the time.   In the end if doping allows you to enhance your performance so you can earn a living doing something you love, to provide opportunity for your children, to make your team and sponsors happy, to break records, to be the first to overcome cancer and win a tour...is it that bad.  Let's just say hypothetically Lance doped.  Now I am not a fan of him, but look at the impact his performance has had on our society and our sport."