DisneyJamieCA
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2007
- Messages
- 8,054
No, caffeine meets all 3. It can enhance performance - it gives an adrenaline rush. . It can be dangerous to the athlete’s health because it increases the heart rate. . And both of those together therefore meet criteria 3. Alcohol probably wouldn’t enhance an athlete’s performance, but definitely can alter it. I understand that for the most part alcohol & caffiene are more widely accepted- it doesn’t however make them any safer. It is a societal problem that two are accepted while the third isn’t, when they all have similar effects on the body.Raducan had no idea what she was taking and she was a minor. She trusted the team doctor and she paid for that mistake.
Caffeine only meets one of the criteria, not two. Same with alcohol. Both caffeine and alcohol are not seen in the same light as marijuana is - both are socially acceptable in the majority of the countries, pot is not.
I'm agreeing with you that it's idiotic in our perspectives. If an athlete wants to smoke pot that's going to harm their performance, not enhance it. But that's one of the reasons why it's banned - it can dull their senses and cause injury to themselves or others.
And that’s the problem with this rule. She didn’t ingest (in whatever form she did) during the trials. THC stays in the body much longer than it alters anything. It wasn’t a danger to her or anybody else, nor did it alter her performance during the trials. Even the governing bodies have said that. But if they don’t care if an athlete got hammered the night before and shows up hung over to the meet - therefore dulling their senses and potentially being a danger, why should something she did weeks before be such a problem? So again, it’s the hypocrisy of the rule that bothers me.
And fwiw, I don’t smoke marijuana or ingest it/THC at all. I do drink both alcohol and caffeine. But I am cognizant enough to realize that my vices aren’t any safer.