BooneThink

A few days ago I was talking with a father of a little girl. He was concerned about his daughter’s participation in gymnastics. She is 5 years old. Many parents and instructors of sports understand the importance of having athletic skills. Of course, almost everyone knows just how hard it is to be an athlete. Not all children and high school students have the same propensity for sports. Those who are athletic or, at least, enjoy learning different sports say it helps them in different ways. In general, most feel good about themselves. Young children who are not athletic often display anxiety when placed in the company of children who are athletes.

Among other reasons, helping children feel good about them selves is an important reason I directed an instructional gymnastics program for many years. My instructors and I taught 120 students of gymnastics every week for 6 years. The students were between the ages of 5 and 14. Except for one occasion I did not allow competition to drive the gymnastics experience. Frankly speaking, there is too much competition in the lives of young children. Far too many young children think athletics is all about winning. They and their parents and the coaches are willing to do anything to win. Instructors seem to have forgotten about the students and their diverse reasons for participating in the first place. Progression in skill development is critical to learning gymnastics. Safety is also critical to a young athlete’s involvement in sports. This is why I wrote a book on spotting techniques in gymnastics [1].

Sports ought to be coached by adults who are responsible and concerned about the safety and welfare of students and athletes. Unfortunately, however, winning is taught at all levels. And, in many places, winning at all costs is the only thing that is important. This, I believe, is a major problem. The attitude takes away from the other important reasons for participating in sports and programs that develop motor skills. This is why I believe athletics is over the edge. By this I mean the extreme approach to athletics. The attitudes of parents, coaches, and athletes who push sports to the extreme, who argue devotion at the expense of other important facets of life, and who believe that running faster, getting stronger, and winning are the only things important [2].

Whatever happened to “moderation in all things” is a mystery? When did society get so confused about athletics? Why do parents push their children to the extremes in athletics is a question that deserves an answer? Why educators and especially exercise physiologists are not helping others to recognize the problem of performance-enhancers in athletics is an important question? As a college teacher, I seldom hear papers at meetings or conversations among exercise physiologists dealing with the supplement issues and concerns. Obviously, the push to develop superior performances at a young age does not ensure that a larger percent of the population will continue to exercise as older adults. So I must conclude the emphasis is driven by a multitude of other reasons, including several different industries with big financial incentives.

All of this makes me feel that athletics in general and competition in particular have gone over the edge! There are many ways to win, to fulfill ourselves, and even to make a living outside of athletics. The advancement of children in music and education are just two. There are dozens of other career options whereby a person can access status and position. Acquiring both is not necessarily linked to athletics. Sports and winning are not the only goals that define life. But, when “winning” is the only thing in life that matters, it pushes everyone (including athletes) over the edge. They go beyond their natural abilities through the use of other means (such as sports supplements and drugs) to set the stage to win [3]. Others are even considering genetic modifications and possibly the use of surgery to improve their strength and endurance.

If you are an athlete, do you think it is justified that children are encouraged to use supplements, drugs, and who knows what else? Frankly, the idea itself scares the hell out of me. This does not mean that I am only interested in a little hard work. Sports, like life, require us to work hard and, therefore, we should commit ourselves. But, building the musculoskeletal system or regaining athletic skills through any procedure other than hard work and determination makes no sense to me. Clearly, by comparison, not every child is going to be good at math or literature. Some will understand how to think critically while others will not. Likewise, some children will acquire musical skills while others will not. That is life. It is not a complicated reality. It seems to me that we should learn to accept athletics as an important part of life, but it is not life per se.

Bear in mind one important fact. I am not arguing for mediocrity. It is always right to work hard and to better ourselves at whatever the task may be, whether it is dancing, writing, or thinking. If an athlete is not interested in the idea of doing one’s best, then why participate? To do one’s best is part of accepting the responsibility of being an athlete or being a student in class. This understanding is central to participating with integrity. To participate without giving one’s best raises all kinds of questions and concerns. Thus, when athletes are not interested in upholding the integrity of sports, they should be encouraged to pursue other goals. The striving for excellence is not in itself the issue. The issues (or problems) are: (1) too much involvement of the supplement industry in athletics; and (2) the increased likelihood of subtle to overt use of surgical and genetic opportunities to enhance athletics.

To understand the meaning of these deceptive practices and other technologies and how they distort performances is critical to upholding the integrity of athletics. Just as it is unethical to take credit for work that is not yours, the dignity of athletics cannot be defined by physical performances made possible by performance enhancers and drugs. After all, athletics is about the “individual” who makes sacrifices through hard work, sweat, and determination. No one should be interested in a performance that is not genuine. Cheating is still cheating [4]. No one should admire athletes who use performance enhancers to lift weights, to run, or to hit a baseball over the fence.

To believe that supplements or drugs are required to do one’s personal best is the kind of thinking that is over the edge. When sports nutrition is viewed in light of erythropoietin injections and anabolic steroids, then the subject matter should be questioned. Athletes are over the edge if they are in pursuit of synthetic muscle enhancing genes. This kind of thinking destroys the integrity of athletics. It cannot be allowed to impact athletics. Children and teenagers should never have to deal with these kinds of things. It is not what athletics is about. Yet, the marketers have convinced young athletes and others that “everything is a go” in sports. If a supplement helps you to win, then it must be okay. Athletes, parents, coaches, and healthcare professionals should know there is an ethical dimension to athletics. And, similarly, they ought to know that I am not questioning the role of better equipment or training practices that all athletes should have access to. Frankly, I define cheating as the use of performance enhancing supplements and drugs to improve athletic performance artificially.

Cheating is not a fad. If something is not done to correct it, it is going to get worse with time. The failure of authorities to put their foot down is a major part of the problem. Genetic enhancement of athletic skills destroys everything good about sports and athletic competition. It is exactly these innate differences that are unaccounted for that we admire in athletes when they excel. Down deep in our hearts, we know that the person gave everything and, therefore, deserves the public’s admiration. Not everyone is going be a winner. Not everyone can be a winner. Athletics is more about discipline and self-understanding than anything else. Those who care about children in gymnastics and other sports programs must stop sitting idly by and letting those who have an invested interest (which is often a financial one) to drive athletes to the extreme.

This is why the quality of the central nervous system, the musculoskeletal system, and all other body functions that go into a correct sequence of an athletic performance cannot be left to the muscle enhancement, profit-driven policies, and bottom line thinking of the CEOs of developing industries. Their biotechnological research and implications for athletics cannot be allowed to drive athletics. And yet, the influence of the supplement companies is already huge. On a personal level, the influence of the companies and their consultants is inappropriate and misdirected. To even imagine that society (i.e., parents, athletes, coaches, researchers, teachers, and all others) should consider enlarging skeletal muscle for athletic reasons from rat research or from concocted advertisements that have little or no research to support the claims is to show absolutely no love or care for children and athletes.

Frankly, if parents want their teenagers involved in athletics, they must be aware that there is a lot of peer pressure to take enhancers. As I said before, “It is insane.” The idea that experimental work always merit our respect and is the conclusions are always correct does not make sense. For example, the introduction of the mIGF-1 gene at the early-stage of mouse embryos, which is then integrated with mouse chromosomal DNA, has implications for human athletes. But, does it make sense? Is it safe? Is it ethical? If even it is safe and if the things that can go wrong can be understood and anticipated, stem cell and genetic engineering are decades away. Treating a disease is much different from designing an athlete with mIGF-1 gene treatment. Can you imagine that coaches are already thinking about gene therapy in their athletes? The message is this: “Parents, wake up and be smart about who is coaching your son or daughter.”

Does the behavior of coaches present an ethical problem when they promote performance enhancers? I think it does, and I think others agree. There is a difference between the use of new and improved equipment and the use of enhancers. There is also a difference between excellent training practices and dependence on performance enhancers. The latter in each case is cheating because the results are acquired without self-discipline, hard work, and training. This is a huge difference that cannot be overlooked or rationalized, even if it is not valued or understood in our society. This is also why parents, athletes, teachers, and coaches must speak out against supplement usage. Perhaps, we should remember that there are consequences to failing to do so.

There is no fairness in competition when athletes, good and the not so good, are encouraged to use supplements and drugs. There inequality of natural abilities is just that – life! It is what athletes learn to work with and, truthfully, overcome if they are lucky or the stars line up just right during competition. Moreover, there is a big danger in not appreciating that athletes who cheat are likely to cheat in business when athletics is behind them. The desire to win, to do whatever it takes to come out on top, and the impressionable mind of athletes carry over into adult life. None of this should be forgotten. Playing by the rules is founded in ethical behavior. If it is not valued as an athlete, why should it be valued as a medical doctor, lawyer, teacher, coach, or business person?

While I am familiar with the rhetoric that “playing by the rules” is a weak argument against the use of performance enhancers, I disagree with it totally. Breaking rules at any level is not acceptable and, therefore, the idea of gaining an advantage from enhancers is wrong. It is a big deal because it is wrong. By comparison, a coach who gives a drug to athletes under the pretense that it is a vitamin is not playing by the rules either. It is deception, and it just be a legal problem too. Also, coaches do not have the right to overlook the poor grades of college athletes to keep them playing. Similarly, coaches do not have the right to put pressure on athletes to win so that they can locate better coaching positions with more money and prestige.

The issue of moral development is equally important in athletics. Or at least it should be important to parents [5]. The willingness to sacrifice moral thinking to win is not acceptable. Love of a game or a contest is never more important than the safety and emotional development of the athlete. Playing sports can be a powerfully rewarding personal experience, but it must be a healthy one. In fact, at one time, the intent of athletics was to help develop the “noble athlete” – meaning, the athlete who plays fairly. It seems that too many athletes have forgotten this fundamental point of athletics. The health, safety, and welfare of the athlete should always be the most important part of a coach’s concern. I am afraid this purpose of sports programs has been terribly distorted for reasons that are not justifiable or honorable.

This reminds me of the father with the 5 year old at the beginning of this piece. Specifically, he was concerned that his daughter was not learning the basics of gymnastics fast enough! I reminded him that she was “5 years old.” After a few additional comments to encourage a more balance perspective and expectation, he lost interest. Unfortunately, some parents have lost sight of the real world. They would rather compete at everything all the time. Worst of all, they want their children doing the same. The culture of supplements and the “opportunities to build a resume and make money” have become ingrained in far too many people as a way of life. I think it all has gone too far. When profits, athletics, and competition are valued more than the human being, we have lost something very special in life. Also, when young children and teenagers are taught that they must conform to others, which takes from their individuality, it is a way of thinking that is wrong.

Hence, instead of thinking about sports as fun and something from which a person can learn something about him- or herself, it is all about winning. One has to wonder what the athletes are thinking about gene doping. Everyone knows it is just around the corner. Preventing it will be next to impossible if we do not start thinking about the ethical implications. For certain, the discussion will require more than “asking scientists” to figure out how to prevent it. Too many researchers have an invested interest. They want to develop gene doping. This is why prevention starts with parents and their children, coaches and their athletes, and teachers and their students. All of us must get involved if we are to keep athletes from becoming lab rats.

There is reason for concern, especially given the 2004 report by researchers from the University of Pennsylvania. Apparently, they worked with several exercise physiologists from the University of Texas at Austin to determine whether injected AAV-EGF-I into the leg muscles of rats, which was followed by an 8 week weight training program, would enhance healthy muscle [6]. Guess what? The injected muscles gained nearly twice the strength as the control muscles in the same rats. It does not take a genius to see the implications. What is next? Perhaps, the better question is “Who is next?” Athletes have been already, but they will become increasingly “the human guinea pig” for questionable experiments. Why? The athlete hopes to be the next champion, and the researchers/companies expect to make a lot of money.

Without a philosophy of athletic care and concern as well as an ethical thinking policy, many sports authorities have already failed to distinguish performance enhancers from gene therapy. Instead, they embrace the more immediate commercial interests of fitness and industry companies. This is a sad view of coaching and athletics. Children are being marketed beyond anyone’s comprehension [7]. It seems that very few professionals are interested in the safety of athletes. If it is gene transfer, if it is technology, and if it is about winning, it must be good. Wrong! It is all bad when it deception.

Hopefully, exercise physiologists who teach sports nutrition will develop a professional policy to stop the insanity that allows for pushing athletes over the edge. If such a policy is not developed, if society does not wake up to the problems I have mentioned throughout this piece, and if athletes do not take back athletics from those who use it to profit from, I am afraid that it is just a matter of time that sports programs and athletics will be the wrong place for our children [8].

References

1. Boone, W.T. (1979). Better Gymnastics: How to Spot the Performer. World Publications.
2. Boone, T. (2006). Shouldn’t we be Concerned about Performance-Enhancing Substances? Journal of Professional Exercise Physiology. 4:1 [Online]. http://www.exercisephysiologists.com/JPEPJan2006PES/index.html
3. Boone, T. (2004). Sports, Its Purpose, and Dietary Supplements. Journal of Professional Exercise Physiology. 2:6 [Online]. http://www.exercisephysiologists.com/JPEPJune2004/index.html
4. Boone, T. (2006). Cut the Crap: Using Creatine is Wrong! [Online]. http://www.boonethink.com
5. Boone, T. (2003). Cheating in Sports. Professionalization of Exercise Physiologyonline. 6:9 [Online]. http://faculty.css.edu/tboone2/asep/CheatingInSports.html
6. Sweeney, H.L. (2004). Gene Doping. Scientific American, Inc. [Online]. http://www.sciam.com
7. Boone, T. (2005). The Negative Impact of Marketers on Children, Athletics, and Exercise Physiology. Professionalization of Exercise Physiologyonline. 8:11 [Online]. http://faculty.css.edu/tboone2/asep/NegativeImpactOfMarketers.html
8. Bats, Balls, and Needles. (2005). Introduction. [Online]. http://www.todayinsports.blogspot.com/