Time to allow doping? Really?

Yeah, but Lance had better $ and ability to cheat so it still wasn't as level as it sounds.

Completely a bad idea, but in a lot of sports the only thing that would change is it would be in the open.

As for the "safe"/"not safe" distinction...  again, that'll only change what you openly hear about.  It won't stop people from using the harmful stuff.   Cheaters are going to cheat... it doesn't matter the context.

You beat me to it!

It was hilarious that, when they were announcing the athlete and country, they were saying what they were taking.

You beat me to it!

It was hilarious that, when they were announcing the athlete and country, they were saying what they were taking.

I rather agree. We don't cry and moan when there are technological advances in aero gear and the pros take advantage of those advancements. If the drugs are safe when used properly I don't really have a problem with it. The only thing that makes using them "cheating" is that it is against the rules right now. Why is it against the rules? Change the rules and it won't be cheating anymore.

It's like having a rule that says you have to ride a knobby tired mountain bike in an IM. "Oh, well it really shows human achievement that a pro can complete an IM under 10 hours on a MTB." They would obviously be faster on a tri bike, but if that is the rule then a tri bike is cheating. I don't see why it is okay to use technology to build a faster bike but not a faster rider. 

Give an example of a "safe" PED.

I never said there are any safe PEDs.  Maybe I'll Google and see iof there are...then someone can dispute the reference.  In a perfect world we would have an even playing field and nobody would cheat...but we have the weekend triathlete looking for any advantage to race faster with nothing at stake but ego!  I can't imagine the pressure at a professional level!  Someone is always going to try to find something to make them fast, stronger, less fatigued, etc.  If a drug has serious side effects...I say no.  But there are lots of drugs that people take daily (anti-depresents, hear meds, viagra) that have minimal side effects.  I don't think they will ever stop the doping...so maybe just try to control it.

Aaron did.

I didn't mean to have you defend what you said, sorry.....I was asking out of curiousity because Aaron said, " If the drugs are safe when used properly I don't really have a problem with it. "....which PED's can be considered "safe" when used properly? 

There also is the problem that different PED's can affect people in different ways.  In SI's piece on the Lance mess they quote a rider who said that EPO actually made him perform worse....and it is indisputable that some riders benefit more than others based on blood counts before EPO is administered.

Didn't Aaron say "IF" the drugs are safe?

Well......"IF" there aren't any, the discussion's over, right?

Caffeine.

Way to keep the discussion alive!

Quick google found this.

http://www.teachpe.com/drugs/caffeine.php

WADA might have to re-evaluate taking it off the banned substance list.  No idea how old that page is.

It is interesting when you try to determine why some substances are banned and some aren't.  One you see commonly discussed is marijuana.  Frankly, I would be more than happy to see the guys in my AG burn one down pre-race.

LOL!  Yep.  Or in T1 or T2.  They may never make it out of the bike rack maze! 

Blood doping sounds safe, and probably other types of doping are, but I don't want athletes to become a laboratory experiment as the essence of spotrs would be lost (I'm naïve like that).

Now, in terms of deciding which substances are banned and which ones aren't, that is a grey area for sure and it is constantly changing.

See how the first Olympic doping case was for alcohol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans-Gunnar_Liljenwall

Now, in terms of doping at the Tour de France, apparently it was allowed back in the day:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_at_the_Tour_de_France

I know, it's wikipedia, but still...