UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => shootin' the shit => music, art and culture => Topic started by: Loos3-tools on March 03, 2021, 07:51:45 pm
-
I was asked an interesting / thought provoking question on the covid thread based upon my slightly unpalatable observation about Dolly Parton's plastic surgery and the objective reality that her appearance has been altered and augmented with the presumed intention of combatting the ageing process and by doing enabling her to live a better, happier life through her new found normal. My original point was that it elicited some discomfort that someone who quite rightly has the freedom to access such drastic cosmetic health procedures without recourse to feelings of shame or guilt should impose those conditions on others for making their own health decisions. e.g. don't be a coward have X health procedure.
The thought provoking question, which I don't have any solid answer too was this -
If an athlete or individual, chooses to undergo surgery, to prolong their career/hobby life, where such surgery does not prolong life, or, could be considered “unnecessary” by purely objective standards; would you say that was better or worse, than somebody who chooses cosmetic changes, for similar reasons?
Cosmetic surgery as with any other health intervention raises ethical, moral and philosophical questions. The relationships between positive individual and social experiences of cosmetic surgery and those experiences with potentially more dire or damaging consequences are not clear to me (e.g. BDD). I think we can say that surgical reconstruction of a body part that allows function or return of confidence after injury is not the same as surgery to augment or enhance performance or aesthetics. For example a runner who suffers a disabling cartilage tear that goes on to have an arthroscopy to allow them to run again or a person who has suffered a facial injury that is reconstructed to allow a more 'normal' life, is not the same as a person who chooses to have extensive cosmetic facial surgery for aesthetic reasons.
All that said if a climber chooses to have hooks grafted onto their hands or an extra limb grafted onto their forehead or even dose up on performance enhancing drugs get the edge for the send then go for it. Maybe this new found success will bring them the confidence they've always dreamed of and their achievements will leave ripples into eternity. A sort of immortality I guess.
-
Fiend is going in for his neck surgery soon.
I've got an image now of Fiend going to some underground illegal plastic surgeon in Frankfurt.
The surgery is a blood-spattered concrete cell with rusty saws hanging from the wall.
"Make my neck 2 inches longer. It's the only way for me to climb V5".
"Ze money first".
Herr Doctor then places Fiend on the slab and, at Fiend's own request, puts the ultra-high tempo GoreGrind music on the stereo. It blares out, an incandescent rage of sound.
The Doctor shrieks with laughter as he pulls and pulls at Fiend's head. The patient opens his mouth to let out a blood-curdling scream, but no sound can be heard over the waves of guitar thrashing, until with a sound of rending tissue and flesh, the head parts from Fiend's shoulders.
-
I've got bionic eyes, where does that fall? Had I not been flush for the first time in my life I'd still be wearing contacts. Surgery for convenience's sake and the best two and a half grand I ever spent.
-
Dunno, ask Oprah. Or the ukb equivalent
-
Does a Prince Albert count? (asking for a friend obvs...)
More seriously - this might be of interest to the topic (or not): Barratt, P. (2011) Vertical Worlds: technology, hybridity and the climbing body. Social and Cultural Geography, 12(4): 397-412. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14649365.2011.574797
-
I think you “ could “ say, that the athlete’s (participation incurred) injury (in a great many instances) was “self inflicted”, by lifestyle choice; whereas, cosmetic surgery to (subjectively) correct a perceived birth defect, seems equally, if not more, justifiable (if only from a mental health perspective).
I had some quite impressive orthodontics carried out as a child, for instance. That was to do with facial damage incurred on my first school day, that lead to some pretty odd growth in both upper and lower jaws.
I was quite off putting, in terms of my participation in academia and detrimental to my enjoyment of the school environment...
That included several “operations” under a general (having my mandible extended and wired to compensate for the lack of growth in the bone due to nerve damage).
I suppose this has made me a little more sympathetic to those who feel awkward in their own skin. Society and kids in particular, can be quite unpleasant to those who have any sort of peculiarities in their appearance. That is true, even where no such peculiarities are visible to the objective observer, if the wrong people discover their victim’s insecurities.
It is too simplistic to merely ascribe the desire for cosmetic surgeries, to vanity alone.
Plus, in the specific example of the “Pop Star”, it seems likely that professional considerations of prolonging her career, might have played into her choices.
-
Maybe she smashes cans and owns an island and a nightclub! Oh the wonderful world of cosmetic surgery. To quote Dolly....
If I see something saggin', baggin' or draggin', I'm gonna get it nipped, tucked or sucked”
https://youtu.be/nha00zuQ4iA
-
Does a Prince Albert count? (asking for a friend obvs...)
More seriously - this might be of interest to the topic (or not): Barratt, P. (2011) Vertical Worlds: technology, hybridity and the climbing body. Social and Cultural Geography, 12(4): 397-412. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14649365.2011.574797
I’ll keep zipped on this guff being as it’s representative of the sanitisation and performance enhanced culture which I find so odious
-
All that said if a climber chooses to have hooks grafted onto their hands or an extra limb grafted onto their forehead or even dose up on performance enhancing drugs get the edge for the send then go for it.
I like how the use of performance enhancing drugs is considered comparable here. My slightly controversial view is that I'd be amazed if some of the top climbers aren't already using them, on the basis that climbing is completely unregulated out of competition, whilst simultaneously being dependent on strength/fitness/etc. We know people do it in other sports. Hey, I've got old school mates who are on the stedz just to fill out the sleeves on an XL T-shirt down the pub.
-
Does a Prince Albert count? (asking for a friend obvs...)
More seriously - this might be of interest to the topic (or not): Barratt, P. (2011) Vertical Worlds: technology, hybridity and the climbing body. Social and Cultural Geography, 12(4): 397-412. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14649365.2011.574797
I’ll keep zipped on this guff being as it’s representative of the sanitisation and performance enhanced culture which I find so odious
Feel free to let rip... I like Paul - but didn’t agree with much of what he wrote (iirc).
-
All that said if a climber chooses to have hooks grafted onto their hands or an extra limb grafted onto their forehead or even dose up on performance enhancing drugs get the edge for the send then go for it.
I like how the use of performance enhancing drugs is considered comparable here. My slightly controversial view is that I'd be amazed if some of the top climbers aren't already using them, on the basis that climbing is completely unregulated out of competition, whilst simultaneously being dependent on strength/fitness/etc. We know people do it in other sports. Hey, I've got old school mates who are on the stedz just to fill out the sleeves on an XL T-shirt down the pub.
More power to them I say, if roids get you up project or help you feel happier about your body then why not? Why stop there. The body-mod culture is another level. Don’t like a limb? Simply have it removed. Want to look like a lizard? Great idea! With moral equivalence in power all things are equal unless we say they aren’t, I.e. some things are more equal than others. This has served America well for a fair while now and excused many a grim act.
Back to the roids, I watched an Eddie Hall documentary recently. You’ve gotta love that guy, such a character! The fragile grandiosity laid bare, I loved his apparently normal mum and dad and couldn’t help wondering what was under the surface. Anyway him and his strong man pals waddling around with thighs chaffing like a gathering of emperor penguins roided up to the max was a sight to behold. The moment with Arnie celebrating the deadlift record with him was wonderful. Talking of Arnie it was nice to see another promoter of healthy life choices condemning others for their healthy life choices recently. Gotta love the double standards with these people.
-
None of us here have any idea why Dolly Parton has plastic surgery or how it makes her feel, and I don't think we should presume we do.
-
While non of us are her personal analyst, she’s spoken openly about her cosmetic surgery in lots of interviews and at least the superficial conscious motivating factors. I guess we can go off that. Anyway it’s besides the point I was making. I really couldn’t give two hoots what Dolly chooses to do or not do.
-
If you can't give two hoots why did you bother starting this thread?
-
So he can get peoples attention and find some meaning in his life.
-
at least the superficial conscious motivating factors. I guess we can go off that.
From which, in the Covid thread, you presumed (your word) to analyse in her a "neurotic desire." Of course, her own stated understanding is merely superficial.
And as others have said, if you have no interest in what she does, then why start this thread, given it has its origins in your beliefs about her motivations.
-
So he can get peoples attention and find some meaning in his life.
Exactly, as it is so for all things human
-
If you can't give two hoots why did you bother starting this thread?
I started the thread to try and answer an interesting question posed by OMM without disturbing the covid thread further
-
I'm not sure I buy the difference between some cosmetic procedures vs injury fixes, but perhaps it depends on the details. Getting something done aged 18 might be like PEDs or grafting on hooks, but having something done aged 40 in an attempt to still be 20 is probably the same as most injury-related surgeries. I've had a lot of angst the past few years about my injuries meaning things will never be what they were or what I want them to be. Having had that, I wouldn't begrudge anyone their attempts to regain or retain a certain feeling or bend the universe to their will though surgery. If you told me I could spend 10k and send my finger back to feeling like 25 I'd snap your hand off. I'm not ready to be old and maybe Dolly isn't either. Pity cosmetic surgeons don't do PIP joints really
-
So he can get peoples attention and find some meaning in his life.
Exactly, as it is so for all things human
Is all your thinking so concrete.
-
So he can get peoples attention and find some meaning in his life.
More like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKYz2M6zoII
-
If you can't give two hoots why did you bother starting this thread?
I started the thread to try and answer an interesting question posed by OMM without disturbing the covid thread further
Actually, I fear you started the thread as an opportunity to voice some rather mocking opinions and assert/project moral authority over your chosen examples.
Your format, thus far, is to describe a “type”, highlight a specific example/person, then state that they are “free to chose” and/or make a “more power to them” type of statement. This constitutes around 10% of your input.
The remaining 90% is a tirade of disparaging and derogatory terms and descriptions of the examples and people you selected.
All rather “Straw Man”.
This nullifies the opening 10% and really doesn’t achieve much beyond “confused rant”.
You have yet to engage with anybody else’s counter arguments or discussion points. Giving the impression you began this merely as a vehicle to express your own, preconceived, prejudiced, opinions and have no intention to debate or consider/review your own views.
When challenged, you simply revert to the “Uriah Heep” mode (yes, I recall how badly you reacted to my using that term in one of your previous incarnations. That in itself, is telling).
You obfuscate and deny, leaping straight into the faux humble of “What do I know” or “I’m just asking questions” style of avoidance. A tactic which, somewhat flaccidly, hopes to deflect criticism of your previously (rather firmly) stated position.
But ultimately, this subject, plays straight back into one of your long standing obsessions and frequent posting topics. You could put it all under the banner of “self improvement”.
Be it training, exercising, cosmetic surgery or even people attempting to improve their technical/academic knowledge that underpins their training or development; you are straight in there with some disparaging or mocking blurb, often dressed up or disguised as humour or “just asking” but only ever thinly so.
You political commentary, even more so.
You do not appear to be coming to ask or inquire, to learn and expand. You seem only interested in coming to expound some “truth” that you have established in your mind before you even begin typing.
Your opening “question” only there to provide you the chance to express that revelation.
This is not to say that some of your thoughts and ideas are not intriguing or worth discussing. Many are. It’s just that you are not debating and discussing, merely trying to drown out contrary opinion or argument with hyperbole.
-
Hey I tried to answer your question seriously. Now you’re saying it was just weak rhetoric disguised as a question?
-
Now you’re saying it was just weak rhetoric disguised as a question?
Is it?
-
Now you’re saying it was just weak rhetoric disguised as a question?
I'm afraid I'd agree that this does basically sum up a large amount of your posts under your current pseudonym!
-
I’d expect nothing less
-
It is an interesting thing though, dealing with change and the ageing process. I wrote a bit on it a while ago, exploring the relationship between consciousness, time, space and the sense of self. I won't bore you with that. It is sort of summumed up in this poem I wrote when thinking about Simon throwing himself against the rocks on his quest to climb the oak.
Tree of Life
Ascetic practice
Walking meditation
The tree of life
Sublimation reincarnation
Tiger style
Marathon monk
36th Chamber
Blind date not drunk
Almost esoteric
Immortal quest
Stoic living
In existential unrest
-
It is an interesting thing though, dealing with change and the ageing process. I wrote a bit on it a while ago, exploring the relationship between consciousness, time, space and the sense of self. I won't bore you with that. It is sort of summumed up in this poem I wrote when thinking about Simon throwing himself against the rocks on his quest to climb the oak.
Tree of Life
Ascetic practice
Walking meditation
The tree of life
Sublimation reincarnation
Tiger style
Marathon monk
36th Chamber
Blind date not drunk
Almost esoteric
Immortal quest
Stoic living
In existential unrest
Ah.
Like this, then:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CMAFWNQnSKJ/?igshid=1p0pz9ctw8aa1 (https://www.instagram.com/p/CMAFWNQnSKJ/?igshid=1p0pz9ctw8aa1)
-
It is an interesting thing though, dealing with change and the ageing process.
I agree, although
exploring the relationship between consciousness, time, space and the sense of self.
I think I find it interesting in a different way to you, for better or worse
-
I can post it, quite short but to the point. You may enjoy it? 👍🏻
-
Found it!
Altered states of consciousness and climbing life. pt 1
'zen-ego annihilation' is it all it's cracked up to be?
at the junction between time and space we experience 'self' consciousness. the past, the future, memories, dreams and desires fuse together in the present space to inform who we are or who we 'feel' to be. this provides the building blocks for our current conscious and unconscious experiences as well as the scaffolding for our future selves and the potential development of a meaningful life. the space we occupy both physically and psychically, internally and externally is the environment from which information is gathered and meaning is made. the cluttered mind, the busy life, hoarding wealth, knowledge, belongings, represent part of this striving for meaning. goals and aspirations, lists of what we've 'gotten' or hope to 'get' defines who we are and what we may become.
This search and striving for meaning [or lack of] may be considered in terms of mans tendency towards avoiding the anxiety of existence. The paradox being the very act of the search or having the goal provides the distraction. Heidegger's 'das-man' or 'you' base state is to engage in this behaviour which superficially may seem to transcend the normal but in reality it is an [often rewarding] act of seeking comfort in compliance and conformity.
You get a hobby
you aspire to be 'better'
you share this with others
you get a training program
you learn how to use instagram
you aspire to be different
you are human and become [or desire to become] integrated into a society, a community, a friendship group, a shared culture and everything feels well. This is the state of consciousness of everyday being. Of course this process of being can be disturbed in so many ways, represented by the experience of 'not getting what we want'. or otherwise put, my external reality does not match up to the desired state represented internally or vis-versa. dis-equilibrium. i do not feel myself, i am in bits, i want to feel whole again, are all common statement representing this experience. so what opportunities does our mind posses for change and why would we seek them. Altered states of consciousness or experiences which exist outside or or act as interruptions to being 'you'. trance, meditative states, flow, drug induced, psychedelic, mystical and religious experience, boredom, depression, dissociation, arousal, fear and numbness, the reduction of the self and dissolution of the ego, the 'power of now' vs the terrifying timelessness of psychosis or schizophrenia, fragmented, lost unable to be gathered up, isolated, distant and disintegrated. How does this potential for 'zen-ego annihilation' relate to you and your climbing life? it does in every way.
-
TL:DR
-
I don't know what that means?
Ah googled it, gotcha
-
All that said if a climber chooses to have hooks grafted onto their hands or an extra limb grafted onto their forehead or even dose up on performance enhancing drugs get the edge for the send then go for it.
I like how the use of performance enhancing drugs is considered comparable here. My slightly controversial view is that I'd be amazed if some of the top climbers aren't already using them, on the basis that climbing is completely unregulated out of competition, whilst simultaneously being dependent on strength/fitness/etc. We know people do it in other sports. Hey, I've got old school mates who are on the stedz just to fill out the sleeves on an XL T-shirt down the pub.
Performance enhancing drugs? Creatine? Caffeine? Energy drinks? Cannabis? It's funny where we've drawn a little moral line in the sand after a point.
Obviously being a facetious twat but it's interesting to think about why some substances we deemed dreadful because they just actually work, where others we don't bat an eyelid.
-
I read it, quite liked it in some ways, and broadly agree with lots of it. Not that that makes plunging into the focus of my constructed meaning less fun, nor does the meaningless nature of it all make it any easier to not have an existential crisis every time I'm injured again. Still miss being young!
-
Great, I’m glad you read it. Yeah the states of mind aren’t mutually exclusive. I’m not so happy about being broken and love to find meaning in climbing whatever it might be.
-
All that said if a climber chooses to have hooks grafted onto their hands or an extra limb grafted onto their forehead or even dose up on performance enhancing drugs get the edge for the send then go for it.
I like how the use of performance enhancing drugs is considered comparable here. My slightly controversial view is that I'd be amazed if some of the top climbers aren't already using them, on the basis that climbing is completely unregulated out of competition, whilst simultaneously being dependent on strength/fitness/etc. We know people do it in other sports. Hey, I've got old school mates who are on the stedz just to fill out the sleeves on an XL T-shirt down the pub.
Performance enhancing drugs? Creatine? Caffeine? Energy drinks? Cannabis? It's funny where we've drawn a little moral line in the sand after a point.
Obviously being a facetious twat but it's interesting to think about why some substances we deemed dreadful because they just actually work, where others we don't bat an eyelid.
I agree, actually. Whilst I think performance enhancing drugs are clearly defined, e.g. creatine isn't because it's not a drug, but caffeine is, drawing the line of acceptability is a funny one. I've even heard one of those mates with the tight sleeves exclaim testosterone is ok because it's natural and he's just getting a bit more of it!
-
I have no problems with people taking performance enhancing drugs or having hooks grafted on to their arms.
-
All that said if a climber chooses to have hooks grafted onto their hands or an extra limb grafted onto their forehead or even dose up on performance enhancing drugs get the edge for the send then go for it.
I like how the use of performance enhancing drugs is considered comparable here. My slightly controversial view is that I'd be amazed if some of the top climbers aren't already using them, on the basis that climbing is completely unregulated out of competition, whilst simultaneously being dependent on strength/fitness/etc. We know people do it in other sports. Hey, I've got old school mates who are on the stedz just to fill out the sleeves on an XL T-shirt down the pub.
Performance enhancing drugs? Creatine? Caffeine? Energy drinks? Cannabis? It's funny where we've drawn a little moral line in the sand after a point.
Obviously being a facetious twat but it's interesting to think about why some substances we deemed dreadful because they just actually work, where others we don't bat an eyelid.
I agree, actually. Whilst I think performance enhancing drugs are clearly defined, e.g. creatine isn't because it's not a drug, but caffeine is, drawing the line of acceptability is a funny one. I've even heard one of those mates with the tight sleeves exclaim testosterone is ok because it's natural and he's just getting a bit more of it!
That is kinda the thing though. Why don't we like steroids / sarms / research peptipes? It's not a legal issue, some aren't illegal. Is it just because they work really well?
As an aside I'd love to see an Olympic games where everyone can augment as much as they want. World's strongest man level of doping with carbon inserts into their thighs etc. Mega.
-
Transhumanism. Who’s got the best biotech.
-
All that said if a climber chooses to have hooks grafted onto their hands or an extra limb grafted onto their forehead or even dose up on performance enhancing drugs get the edge for the send then go for it.
I like how the use of performance enhancing drugs is considered comparable here. My slightly controversial view is that I'd be amazed if some of the top climbers aren't already using them, on the basis that climbing is completely unregulated out of competition, whilst simultaneously being dependent on strength/fitness/etc. We know people do it in other sports. Hey, I've got old school mates who are on the stedz just to fill out the sleeves on an XL T-shirt down the pub.
Performance enhancing drugs? Creatine? Caffeine? Energy drinks? Cannabis? It's funny where we've drawn a little moral line in the sand after a point.
Obviously being a facetious twat but it's interesting to think about why some substances we deemed dreadful because they just actually work, where others we don't bat an eyelid.
I agree, actually. Whilst I think performance enhancing drugs are clearly defined, e.g. creatine isn't because it's not a drug, but caffeine is, drawing the line of acceptability is a funny one. I've even heard one of those mates with the tight sleeves exclaim testosterone is ok because it's natural and he's just getting a bit more of it!
That is kinda the thing though. Why don't we like steroids / sarms / research peptipes? It's not a legal issue, some aren't illegal. Is it just because they work really well?
As an aside I'd love to see an Olympic games where everyone can augment as much as they want. World's strongest man level of doping with carbon inserts into their thighs etc. Mega.
If we allow a free-for-all then, then really we're not just allowing it but requiring it, e.g. any teenager who wants to make the team needs to get on the juice. I suspect there can be a number of health consequences
-
All that said if a climber chooses to have hooks grafted onto their hands or an extra limb grafted onto their forehead or even dose up on performance enhancing drugs get the edge for the send then go for it.
I like how the use of performance enhancing drugs is considered comparable here. My slightly controversial view is that I'd be amazed if some of the top climbers aren't already using them, on the basis that climbing is completely unregulated out of competition, whilst simultaneously being dependent on strength/fitness/etc. We know people do it in other sports. Hey, I've got old school mates who are on the stedz just to fill out the sleeves on an XL T-shirt down the pub.
Performance enhancing drugs? Creatine? Caffeine? Energy drinks? Cannabis? It's funny where we've drawn a little moral line in the sand after a point.
Obviously being a facetious twat but it's interesting to think about why some substances we deemed dreadful because they just actually work, where others we don't bat an eyelid.
I agree, actually. Whilst I think performance enhancing drugs are clearly defined, e.g. creatine isn't because it's not a drug, but caffeine is, drawing the line of acceptability is a funny one. I've even heard one of those mates with the tight sleeves exclaim testosterone is ok because it's natural and he's just getting a bit more of it!
That is kinda the thing though. Why don't we like steroids / sarms / research peptipes? It's not a legal issue, some aren't illegal. Is it just because they work really well?
As an aside I'd love to see an Olympic games where everyone can augment as much as they want. World's strongest man level of doping with carbon inserts into their thighs etc. Mega.
If we allow a free-for-all then, then really we're not just allowing it but requiring it, e.g. any teenager who wants to make the team needs to get on the juice. I suspect there can be a number of health consequences
True.
As things stand today.
Since we are, however, already deep into “Transhumanism” (anybody else wear glasses? Use technology to perform day to day tasks, otherwise impossible to you? Drive an Exoskeleton to work? Turn your legs into wheels, for recreation? Add an artificially sticky surface to your feet, for nebulous, performance related, reasons?) and it seems likely that technology will only increase the availability of “improvements”; at some point soon, we will have to decide what is permissible.
I think that will depend on what modifications become acceptable in society at large and might simply be the expansion on “categories” for various sports, much the same as our “Para” categories, now.
More will be expected, where greater “ability” is available.
-
There is a difference between a tool and being 'transhuman' I think. E.g. pointy stick makes my limbs longer and pointier, but using one doesnt make me 'transhuman'.
-
There is a difference between a tool and being 'transhuman' I think. E.g. pointy stick makes my limbs longer and pointier, but using one doesnt make me 'transhuman'.
I see your point.
But what about people who don’t have the limb to begin with? Is it a matter of being “removable”? If you have an artificial hip, or a pacemaker or even a drug administering implant, they’re not “readily” removable. Dental implants?
Is it still transhuman if you have a permanent “socket” attached, to clip your “tools” into, even if the tools themselves are interchangeable?
It just seems like it’s one of those sliding scales again. One where you can definitely say some state is not teanshuman and some state is transhuman, but picking the point on the scale where the transition occurs is difficult.
If climbing, for instance, was confined to “pure” human, then tool use wouldn’t be permitted, so we’ve already agreed that certain adaptations of human physiology are acceptable.
This is a matter of what society at large deems acceptable. I can remember when Chalk was thought of as cheating. Bouldering pads “ruined” the challenge etc etc.
Even today, the competitors with the best shoes (for instance) have an advantage over those who have lesser shoes and so on.
-
All that said if a climber chooses to have hooks grafted onto their hands or an extra limb grafted onto their forehead or even dose up on performance enhancing drugs get the edge for the send then go for it.
I like how the use of performance enhancing drugs is considered comparable here. My slightly controversial view is that I'd be amazed if some of the top climbers aren't already using them, on the basis that climbing is completely unregulated out of competition, whilst simultaneously being dependent on strength/fitness/etc. We know people do it in other sports. Hey, I've got old school mates who are on the stedz just to fill out the sleeves on an XL T-shirt down the pub.
Performance enhancing drugs? Creatine? Caffeine? Energy drinks? Cannabis? It's funny where we've drawn a little moral line in the sand after a point.
Obviously being a facetious twat but it's interesting to think about why some substances we deemed dreadful because they just actually work, where others we don't bat an eyelid.
I agree, actually. Whilst I think performance enhancing drugs are clearly defined, e.g. creatine isn't because it's not a drug, but caffeine is, drawing the line of acceptability is a funny one. I've even heard one of those mates with the tight sleeves exclaim testosterone is ok because it's natural and he's just getting a bit more of it!
That is kinda the thing though. Why don't we like steroids / sarms / research peptipes? It's not a legal issue, some aren't illegal. Is it just because they work really well?
As an aside I'd love to see an Olympic games where everyone can augment as much as they want. World's strongest man level of doping with carbon inserts into their thighs etc. Mega.
If we allow a free-for-all then, then really we're not just allowing it but requiring it, e.g. any teenager who wants to make the team needs to get on the juice. I suspect there can be a number of health consequences
But then if the only argument is that it's an accessibility thing then most sport is already fucked for financially worse off. All the equipment, clubs, travel to and from events etc. It's already a game of haves and have-nots before you even get the first hair on your chest!
Then with more physical sports like rugby there's already somewhat of a pre-requisite to get on the gear. Just take a look at the current UKAD sanction list and see how many rugby players have been caught pissing hot because they messed up their dosing.
-
Then with more physical sports like rugby there's already somewhat of a pre-requisite to get on the gear. Just take a look at the current UKAD sanction list and see how many rugby players have been caught pissing hot because they messed up their dosing.
The recall reading that the situation is completely out-of-control in South Africa. To get a place at Pro rugby team, you need to have had scholarships at the best schools and colleges. The result has supposedly been 12-13 year olds relentlessly weight training while on the gear, in order to get into the best high schools.
It's not an easy situation and there seems to be a lack of consistency with attitudes and rules. For example, baseball acknowledged its steroid situation, and steroid use now results in opprobrium and sanctions. But a now common surgery in baseball is now the Tommy John procedure for pitchers' elbows - a "spare" tendon is threaded through tunnels drilled in the heads of the ulna and humerus and sutured into a figure-8 bow! So.... therapeutic steroid use that might have allowed recovery and prevented damage is "bad".... and the better "good" alternative is for players to get damaged and then have frankly unpleasant sounding surgery. I can see there are differences between drug use and surgical repair... but it still strikes me as a bit of an odd situation.
-
I think we're a long way before exoskeletons or any other form of physical implant becomes (a) cheap and (b) mainstream enough to be readily available to more than half a dozen people in the world (random number I've made up to make the point)...
-
I think we're a long way before exoskeletons or any other form of physical implant becomes (a) cheap and (b) mainstream enough to be readily available to more than half a dozen people in the world (random number I've made up to make the point)...
But, you mean “powered” exoskeleton, don’t you? A sort of “Aliens”, “Ironman”, sort of thing?
Because we already use exoskeletons to adapt our natural physiologies to better suit environments and activities and that technology continues to advance.
I know you think this is just being pedantic, but my point is, it’s a spectrum and we’re already a long way along it. I don’t think it has to reach it’s extreme conclusion to be relevant, imminently. Even without trotting out some early 1990’s quotes from supposed professionals about how the internet is just a fad or electronic gaming isn’t going to last etc etc.
The advancement in prosthetic limbs has already reached a point where it’s possible that somebody with artificial legs can out run the majority of people with quite well trained “natural” legs and conceivably even out run the fastest human known, without a power source other than human muscles.
A point, where it is becoming feasible for a healthy human to replace a healthy limb, for a perceived performance gain and whilst cost continues to be a factor, it is already less so than it was even twenty years ago.
-
Seem to remember Colin McCrae breaking a finger and it not healing quickly enough, so he thought about doing without it.
-
This is why I mentioned my eyes in post #3. Eyes are quite useful. Mine are now better corrected than most people's will ever be naturally.
-
What about Steve Dunning's finger being fused into the half crimp position? Not quite exoskeleton but still handy for climbing. :worms:
-
What about Steve Dunning's finger being fused into the half crimp position? Not quite exoskeleton but still handy for climbing. :worms:
I think that makes it worse for small crimps
-
Yeah I'm just poking the bear, I bet its a right pain in the arse on all sorts of hold types. Good for fingerboarding though!
-
Really need a winch system like an adjustable board, to change position while hanging out in kneebars between sections. Or maybe voice activated so you just shout "CRIMP" or "DRAG" really loud between moves.
-
Really need a winch system like an adjustable board, to change position while hanging out in kneebars between sections. Or maybe voice activated so you just shout "CRIMP" or "DRAG" really loud between moves.
Elon will be along with a chip to implant in your brain, soon. Then you won’t even have to shout.