Sections

Services

Information

UK United Kingdom

Cronulla Sharks and thymosin beta-4 … is it doping?

Fairfax Media reported today that 14 players from the Cronulla Sharks NRL club may be suspended by the Australian Anti-Doping Agency (ASADA) for the alleged use of a substance called thymosin beta-4 (TB-4…

Unnamed players from the Cronulla Sharks NRL club are being investigated over the alleged use of performance-enhancing drug TB-4 … but what is it? AAP Image

Fairfax Media reported today that 14 players from the Cronulla Sharks NRL club may be suspended by the Australian Anti-Doping Agency (ASADA) for the alleged use of a substance called thymosin beta-4 (TB-4), during the 2011 season.

At this stage, according to the media, it’s believed the players' use of this substance (a naturally-occurring peptide) was inadvertent, and the players involved – who have not been named – may be offered reduced six-month bans (as opposed to two years) for their use of performance-enhancing drugs.

So what, exactly, is TB-4, and how does it tie into sports doping?

The beta-thymosins are a family of proteins, and there are currently 16 known versions in that class of compounds – among them TB-4.

TB-4 has been found naturally in human blood platelets, white blood cells, the thymus gland and the spleen. Because of its naturally high concentration in the human body and its ubiquitous distribution, it’s believed to play an important role in cell survival, as well as in the repair and regeneration of damaged tissue.

Is it doping?

In last month’s Australian Crime Commission report into organised crime and drugs in sport, thymosin was listed as a substance used in injury recovery, but the report seemed to be conflicted in terms of thymosin’s legality in sport.

The ACC report listed it as an unregulated substance that is prohibited under section S2 of WADA’s list of substances prohibited in-competition.

But the report also referred to it as a substance prohibited only if “subject to the form used” – a statement on legality which presumably (but not clearly) refers to how the substance is administered (intravenously, by intramuscular means, or orally).

TB-4 is not included as a specifically-named substance – in the same way as, say, growth hormone (GH), insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) and fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) – but would fall under the “catch-all” clause in the list that states:

as well as any other growth factor affecting muscle, tendon or ligament protein synthesis/degradation, vascularisation, energy utilisation, regenerative capacity or fibre type switching and other substances with similar chemical structure or similar biological effect(s) …

I have written previously on the issue of inadvertent doping and how many athletes often have very little knowledge of the legality of substances that they are using.

None of which is surprising, given the complexity of the guidelines.

Under the current World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Code, a substance or method is prohibited and considered doping if WADA determines it meets any two of the following three criteria:

  1. Medical or other scientific evidence, pharmacological effect, or experience that the use of the substance or method represents an actual or potential health risk to the athlete.

  2. Medical or other scientific evidence, pharmacological effect, or experience that the substance or method has the potential to enhance or enhances sport performance.

  3. Determination by WADA that the use of the substance or method violates the spirit of sport.

So, to determine if TB-4 should fall under the list of prohibited substances, it can be evaluated here based on the following criteria: health, performance-enhancing and spirit of sport.

Health

Based on US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommendations and various guidance documents developed by the International Conference of Harmonisation, 23 nonclinical studies have been performed to date that demonstrate the safety of TB-4 for its current and planned uses in humans.

In addition, in the Phase 1 clinical trial in healthy volunteers using a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled single- and multiple-dose Phase 1 clinical trial, the safety and pharmacokinetics of the intravenous administration of TB-4 was evaluated. From this, intravenous administration of TB-4 appears to be safe and well-tolerated by all subjects with no dose limiting toxicity or serious adverse events reported.

Performance-enhancing

To date, TB-4 has not been evaluated in a sports-performance context. But this is not unusual since substances are often evaluated for clinical use and not for sports performance-enhancement per se.

shutterstock.com

Recombinant EPO has allegedly been used in cycling for a long time, and only recently have there been more studies conducted on its sports performance-enhancing effects.

Even with some studies available in the sports context, most are still conducted on healthy, trained individuals and not on athletes, because of the ethical/legality issue of strict liability imposed on all athletes.

So any inference would have to be viewed from the perspective of how TB-4 affects clinical patients and how this can be extrapolated into the sports context.

TB-4 has so far shown promise in healing in patients with pressure ulcers and venous ulcers. It has also shown promise in patients with corneal wounds and heart attacks.

At this time, the use of TB-4 is definitely at the forefront of clinical medicine and touted for use in treating injurious diseases and conditions in humans, involving, among other things, those of the skin, eye, heart and brain/spinal cord.

Clinical trials have established TB-4’s safety in humans but its use as a sports performance-enhancer in healthy (and injured) athletes is uncharted territory. Based on its biological function, it would certainly have the potential.

Spirit of sport

Spirit of sport” is the most nebulous concept within the WADA Code and many academics disagree with its use in practice. Certainly there is a perceived inconsistency in its current application towards various substances and methods.

One potential precedent that can be used to judge TB-4 by this spirit of sport criterion is PRP (platelet rich plasma), which involves the injection of the patient’s own platelets into areas of injury to assist in recovery.

This technique is currently not banned by WADA and this has been specifically addressed by the International Olympic Committee.

Given TB-4 is a component found in human platelets, it is conceivable that part of the healing process of PRP may be attributed to TB-4.

So based on the current WADA criteria, TB-4:

  1. does not – currently – seem to have any major health effects to prevent its use in clinical trials

  2. may have potential to be performance-enhancing but only through its healing/recovery properties

  3. needs to be assessed – with regards to the spirit of sport – in relation to other similar substances, such as the current acceptance of PRP.

Again, one must consider the issue of inadvertent doping, and what athletes actually know, given many athletes may have had only a 15 minute Powerpoint presentation on the topic before signing a declaration saying they have been trained on anti-doping rules.

Also, could the the NRL use a similar “get-out clause” as is reported for the AFL clubs in this instance?

The clause may allow the players to escape punishment under “exceptional circumstances” if it can be proved they were given performance-enhancing drugs against their consent.

How ASADA interprets the specific “exceptional circumstances” examples given in WADA’s code in Article 10.5.1 remains to be seen.

Further reading:
Essendon faces a doping investigation … but what are peptides?

Join the conversation

47 Comments sorted by

  1. Tim Scanlon

    Debunker

    Given that this TB-4 is usually injected, either venously or subcutaneously, I find it hard to believe that the athletes and various coaches used it inadvertently. If athletes are being used as pin cushions then it is the coaches at fault, if the athletes are stabbing themselves silly, then they are to blame. Either way, nothing inadvertent about this, to my mind, unless I'm missing something completely.

    report
    1. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Tim Scanlon

      Thanks Tim. Insightful as usual! :)

      This bit got edited out to keep the piece short and for lay audience. Food for thought:

      Senate Inquiry into the ASADA Bill-

      Senator BERNARDI: I just have a couple of pertinent ones. After the press conference there was a lot of discussion through the media and a lot of supposition, and there were complaints that athletes associated with Essendon Football Club allegedly had gone off site and had injections and all sorts of things of that nature. It is not…

      Read more
    2. Tim Scanlon

      Debunker

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      Interesting, thanks Ben.

      Although, I have to say, whenever I see Cory Bernardi's name associated with anything I find myself wanting to throw a Qur'an at it. Not because I'm religious, just because Cory needs to read more before he opens his mouth and throwing books at him might help.

      report
    3. Trevor Kerr

      ISTP

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      "We have a large number of sports scientists at the Australian Institute of Sport, probably in the vicinity of 60 to 80."
      Does that mean he doesn't know who is on the books at any one time, or that they are popping in at irregular times for a bit of this & that?
      Even if the complement of sports sc... (sorry, hard to get it out, in deference to proper scientists) was steady at, let's say 70, then he'd be absolutely 100% confident none of them had their own quirky little ideas to push?
      On the subject, they should draw a line, stop the witch-hunt (unless crimes can be proven) and move on without any more retrospectivity. FWIW I agree with what Bernardi said in that last paragraph.

      report
  2. John Phillip
    John Phillip is a Friend of The Conversation.

    Grumpy Old Man

    Ben, I didnt think that the efficacy (?) of the substances in question was relevant. Isnt it simply the case that if the drug or method is proscribed at the time of consumption and is present in the athlete, then the athlete is guilty of doping?

    report
    1. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to John Phillip

      Hi John,

      Yes you are right. A substance/method does not need to be effective to be on the prohibited list.

      The issue at hand is whether TB-4 is on the prohibited list? It is not specified as a named/specific substance.

      We do not have much information from the cases, so we would have to base on what has so far been reported. If the reasoning that TB-4 is on S2-4 of the prohibited list is based on the "catchall phrase", then it would mean that amino acids, and by extension all meat in foods…

      Read more
    2. John Phillip
      John Phillip is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Grumpy Old Man

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      Thanks for the reply and link, Ben. It's a shame that this 'event' has been managed in the way it has - so much publicity, so much doubt, so much inuendo - so little fact. I guess it shows how easy it is to bring things that we take for granted into disrepute. Cheers.

      report
  3. Ron Chinchen
    Ron Chinchen is a Friend of The Conversation.

    Retired (ex Probation and Parole Officer)

    If these players have been found to have been given this substance, by whatever means, and that it wasnt clearly explained to them what it was they were taking, its not the players I would think should be targeted for punishment but rather the club oficials.

    I mean lets be clear about this. There are probably a huge number of substances prohibited, or semi banned, or banned now but legal in the past and vice versa. Rugby League players are not chemists, many of them have basic education, most…

    Read more
    1. Mal Booth

      University Librarian at UTS

      In reply to Ron Chinchen

      I don't agree with this take at all. These are all adults we are talking about here and they are "professional" footballers. They too have a responsibility in this as do their coaches and clubs.
      Yes, the "spirit of the game" is hard to define because it has been lost as that game and many other sports have become businesses. This does not, however, obviate the need for some form of professional ethics.
      Since the cycling issue attracted so much recent publicity I lost a great deal of faith that…

      Read more
    2. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Mal Booth

      Hi Ron,

      Thanks for joining in our little discussion.

      The issue of whether athletes and sports should be allowed to use licit substances (in society) for sports performance is a different aspect to the current academic thought piece. From my anecdotal experience speaking to various segments of society and various sports stakeholders, many have varied perspective on this issue. I've touched very superficially on this matter in:
      https://theconversation.edu.au/dopers-and-the-rest-a-case-for-splitting-professional-cycling-10177

      Read more
  4. Corinne Cowper

    general layabout

    I think it has come down to finger pointing and not much else in this situation which I think has been very badly handled from the moment the Ministers and the ACC held their press conference. Unless they have positive test results for banned substances they should stop their witch-hunt right now.

    It seems to be that ASADA is not requesting/demanding blood/urine samples of athlete so how can they know there is 'doping' or performance enhancing actually happening? And, from what I read in the article by Benjamin the definitions of banned substances seem to be just a little vague.

    I especially love that catch all clause 3. "Determination by WADA that the use of the substance or method violates the spirit of sport."

    report
  5. Sean Lamb

    Science Denier

    The players or the club had the option of asking for guidance on TB-4 if they wished to ensure they weren't breaking any rules.
    Elite atheletes shooting up poorly understood hormones under the guidance of quack sports scientists is not something to be encouraged. If any doctors had any involvement in this they should be struck off for professional misconduct.

    report
    1. Sean Lamb

      Science Denier

      In reply to Mark King

      Errr - what information is that precisely?

      You ask the Doping Agency is injecting this substance legal. Either they say yes or they say no. I struggle to understand how the concept could be anymore straightforward.
      Do you also have serious doubts regarding the difference between black and white or 0 and 1?

      report
    2. Mark King

      Senior Lecturer, Psychology and Counselling and Researcher, CARRSQ at Queensland University of Technology

      In reply to Sean Lamb

      The information is that presented in the story above, which makes the point that the situation was and is unclear, so your hypothetical absolute statement might either have not been forthcoming, or open to challenge.

      report
    3. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Mark King

      If this is of interest:

      In my research, various sports stakeholder have advised that when they called ASADA previously for advise on supplements, in cases where the over-the-counter substance did not include a named substance on the WADA/ASADA list, there is a disclaimer statement that they cannot confirm that it is legal/illegal.

      Also, on ASADA's website there is a statement when searching for specific substance:
      "...If you cannot find your search item, it may not return a result because…

      Read more
    4. Joe Gartner

      Eating Cake

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      Furthermore:

      'Athletes who take supplements are, therefore, at risk of committing an inadvertent anti-doping rule violation...The presence of a prohibited substance in a supplement product may result in an anti-doping rule violation, whether its use was intentional or unintentional.
      Under the World Anti-Doping Code strict liability principle, athletes are ultimately responsible for any substance found in their body, regardless of how it got there.'
      http://www.asada.gov.au/substances/supplements.html


      What you need to do
      If you are an athlete, you need to be aware that you are ultimately responsible for any prohibited substance found in your body. If you use a supplement, you do so at your own risk. '

      report
    5. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Joe Gartner

      Yes. But zero tolerance approach and re-active measures by complicit parties do not achieve the desired end-goal, which presumably is reduction of rules violation (inadvertently or not).

      Silly notion, but perhaps a pro-active preventative measure of better educational support (more than a 15mins Powerpoint presentation) may help? Should an organisation tasked with improving sports (inter alia educating athletes) be overly focused only on sanctions and penalties?

      Should sports codes overly focused on performance and sponsorships neglect player welfare and nurture (education included)? What's the duty of care?

      Food for thought: Are anti-doping agencies and sports codes/clubs complicit of inadvertent doping violations? Contributory negligence?

      report
    6. Mitch Dillon

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Joe Gartner

      That may be what is articulated, but it isn't working, apparently.
      Is this concept of continuing to leave the situation suitably vague, with regard to what is and what isn't legal, and then asserting the 'if in doubt, don't take it' scenario a realistic one, in a profession where athletes are paid to perform better than the next bloke?
      What strikes me is the inference in the regulations of an avoidance of resposibility in regards to clarification on the part of doping agencies who apparently have, teams of sports scientists within arms reach to assist in clarifying thelevel of assistance that these drugs may, or may not offer.
      There's no doubting the intent of people using any substance, even vitamin pills. But there is also the notion of being innocent until proven guilty, and these plyers aren't being given that chance.
      This is the way that sports bureacracies are dealing with this sort of thing in the post-Armstrong world.

      report
    7. Joe Gartner

      Eating Cake

      In reply to Mitch Dillon

      I merely copied the reference from ASADA ( which took me 30 seconds to find, by the way). I am not defending ASADA or suggesting that players should face criminal sanction etc.
      What I am suggesting is that ASADA appears to be quite blunt on the matter, it appears unambiguous to me. I am puzzled that a player could not read asada's position and come to any other conclusion than 'anything not in a supermarket ( and some things that are) should not go in my body.
      I don't accept that all players are…

      Read more
  6. Geoff Henderson

    Graduate

    This is a great article, and it gives insight into how difficult it is going to be to clean up this situation.
    Players, employees - professional and other wise have all been targeted in the outrage.

    Code managers stand out as being shocked, amazed, disappointed by these revelations. To a man they have gone straight to the high moral ground, all in defense I believe, of their sport business.
    I am quite convinced that their aim is simply to protect their "business plan" at the expense of anyone who can soak up some blame. They stand "outraged", shoulder to shoulder, shaking their heads like they had no idea.

    I could be wrong, but I don't believe them. They have managed/driven their codes for a long time - they had to be aware of supplements and thus likely complicit in activities is an inescapable conclusion.

    Isn't it time for some media focus on this aspect, even if it does conflict with vested media interests?

    report
  7. Paul Burton

    Professor of Urban Management and Planning at Griffith University

    Thanks for a great article Ben. Could you point me to a good definition of 'performance enhancing' in this context. I'm conscious of what seems to me to be a rather theological distinction between drugs (and I'm using the term very loosely here) that help an athlete perform at a level we know they are capable of, such as painkillers, and those that appear to raise their performance above that level. Am I on the right track?

    report
    1. Mitch Dillon

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Paul Burton

      Guilty or not, they're being punished for compromising the brand. Just like the swimmers were.
      Given the many vaguaries in the situation, as pointed out in the articles and the conversation that followed, players should challenge the ruling in court. But whatever the outcome, you could be assured that whomever does that will be ostracised from the NRL for taking them to task.
      This is a business, and though these players may not have in senso stricto broken the law, they have been found to have…

      Read more
    2. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Paul Burton

      Thanks Paul for your comments and kind words.

      As far as I am aware, the construct of "performance enhancement" has not been defined under the WADA Code and/or prohibited list [I provide MY definition of scientifically based performance enhancement below]. In practical terms, and to be facetious: water, food and air are all "potentially" performance enhancing. In theory, an athlete can also never go beyond his/her potential (although we do not know what that ceiling is).

      I interpret (albeit…

      Read more
    3. Daryl Adair

      Associate Professor of Sport Management at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      Hi Ben, according to the journal Nature in 2008: “Detecting cheats is meant to promote fairness, but drug testing should not be exempt from the scientific principles and standards that apply to other biomedical sciences, such as disease diagnostics. The alternative could see the innocent being punished while the guilty escape on the grounds of reasonable doubt.” I discuss some peculiarities within WADA policy in an article, should anyone be interested: http://sportsbusinessinsider.com.au/blogs-features/blog-academic-games/fear-and-loathing-in-sport-vegas-a-savage-journey-to-the-heart-of-the-athletic-dream-part-1/
      Cheers, Daryl

      report
    4. Joe Gartner

      Eating Cake

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      Ben,
      I think that your statement that painkillers are performance enhancing is a false conclusion. Painkillers do not enhance performance of the athlete at his baseline. They allow an injured player to perform at their baseline pior to injury. They do not enhance performance in uninjured athletes.
      They allow performance, not enhance it.
      Your contention that food and air are performance enhancing detracts from your argument. I think that any commonly accepted definition of performance enhancing assumes that the natural condition supporting life have been met. enhancement above those natural conditions for existence is what ethically and materially contributes to 'performance enhancement'.
      I understand that what might b deemed to be performance enhancement contrary to the 'spirit' or constition of sports can be nebulous and I'll- defined, but even my 11 year old niece can see the egregious abuse of logic in your premise.
      '

      report
    5. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Joe Gartner

      Joe,
      Insofar as the Code is defined, the examples are accurate. The lack of logic for a 11 year old notwithstanding.
      By your criterion of baseline, then testosterone supplement for athletes with low levels should be permitted. In addition secretagogues by that same criterion is not performance enhancing as it merely uses the body's own gland to produce its level. The secretagogue cannot allow the athlete to produce more hormones than the natural gland is capable of.

      report
    6. Joe Gartner

      Eating Cake

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      Ben,
      That does not follow. I objected to your conclusion from your premise. Stating that a natural condition of life is performance enhancing because it is a natural condition of life and therefore sporting performance would be impossible without it is not sound.
      To state that allowing medication to reduce pain is performance enhancing also is an unsound argument.
      I wish you would either admit this, or defend your logic.
      As to your second paragraph. Thank you for trying to shift the argument away from answering my assertions: yes and no to the questions.
      I have to admit, you appear disengenuous with some of your comments. I believe that you have valuable points in respect to your commentary on sport Nd doping in Australia, but for every good point and sound attack on ASADA that I see you make, you commit egregious breaches of logic that merely give the appearance of arguing from a baseless platform.

      report
    7. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Joe Gartner

      Joe,

      1. In a recent colloquium on drugs in sports, various experts from different disciplines discussed possible ways of improving the definition of doping and/or performance enhancement. Even with much time spent and with a wealth of expertise in the room, there were various valid but different opinions on the issues/constructs. Seeing that even the experts were unable to come to a consensus, I do not envision I will be able to change your, or others’, views on the topic here.

      2. Rules and…

      Read more
    8. Mark Goyne

      Lawyer

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      The sports law lawyers are going to make a fortune out of this, the only area sadly. I think, at last count, Cronulla had by Friday, 8 March two legal experts engaged, and the RL Players Association, 1. If Cronulla tries to force the players involved out for 6 months, it will be lawyers at 6 paces. Multiply that across all sports, the legal fees will be immense. This legalism is a sickness in our economy and society which needs surgical excision. Sadly, the lawyers have too much power and nothing will be done about it.

      report
    9. Paul Burton

      Professor of Urban Management and Planning at Griffith University

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      Ben,
      Many thanks for the amplification. As I suspected, the boundaries are by no means clear and as Joe demonstrates well, prone to theological wrangling over fine distinctions (once we've sorted this perhaps we can get back to just how many angels can fit on the head of a pin). Unfortunately athletes across the board are then vulnerable to exploitation by a range of people from ambitious coaches, shonky sports scientists, rapacious team owners and sanctimonious administrators.
      Looking back on my time as team captain of the Flying Sausers FC all I can say is that my team mates refused over many years to accept my evidence-based advice that eight pints of Blackthorn and a prawn bhuna on a Saturday night would do anything to enhance their performance on the field the next morning. And their estimates of their own baseline performance were usually wildly inaccurate.
      cheers

      report
    10. Joe Gartner

      Eating Cake

      In reply to Benjamin Koh

      Ben,
      Again there is nothing in your reply that would address your contention that performance anhancement= bringing a person's health back to their baseline. Your argument that some research suggests NSAIDS possess ergogenic properties is not germane to this comment. If you had originally said: ' NSAIDS may enhance performance in an otherwise healthy individual' that evidence would be germane to the argument. But you did not. You stated that NSAIDS improve performance (in an injured athlete back…

      Read more
    11. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Paul Burton

      Thanks Paul! Now that explains why athletes drink so much! :)

      You must also be very good at fortune telling! From the linguistic signatures of some of the responses, it seems that there are apparently different user names but using the same soap box.

      report
    12. Joe Gartner

      Eating Cake

      In reply to Paul Burton

      Hi paul,
      hardly theological wrangling. This whole discussion is underpinned upon 'what constitutes doping'. If the author cannot define it clearly, or without resort to poor logic, of what use is the article?

      report
    13. Joe Gartner

      Eating Cake

      In reply to Joe Gartner

      On reflection, I should have addressed your points in your reply. I have no argument with point 1,5 & 6. I have no issue with your broader arguments or points of contention with ASADA. Athlete education and support is clearly a major problem and it is hypocritical of agencies to enforce a rule that is unclear or inconsistently applied.

      report
    14. Paul Burton

      Professor of Urban Management and Planning at Griffith University

      In reply to Joe Gartner

      Hey Joe,
      My comments about theology were more about performance than doping per se. There seems to be a suggestion that 'baseline performance' is a straightforward concept and that it is pretty fixed, such that its easy to differentiate between exceeding and enhancing my performance and simply enabling it. This in turn implies that the legitimacy of any kind of supplement is determined partly by the motivation for using it (enhance or enable) and partly by its chemical composition. Furthermore…

      Read more
    15. Benjamin Koh

      Doctoral Researcher, Complementary and Alternate Medicine at University of Technology, Sydney

      In reply to Joe Gartner

      Joe

      Yes, athlete education and support is an area needing redress and that it is certainly unfair on athletes for agencies attempting to enforce a rule that is unclear or inconsistently applied. It is also not right that agencies are not taking enough ownership of their mission on prevention/education.

      (Perceived) Inconsistency, (sense of) disingenuousness and (impression of) lack of transparency was the purpose of this piece.

      Cheers

      report
  8. John C Smith

    Auditor

    ABC said something like sharks have taken equine drugs. Will they be put down immediately or let time takes its course? (sorry if anyone is hurt by my nasty comment but people who do things like this to other people...)

    report
  9. Mark Goyne

    Lawyer

    There is no such thing as inadvertent usage. Any one with half a brain would want information on a substance even if a coach was pushing it. And the players know their responsibility is personal under the rules.

    But there should be open slather. The humans of 2113 will be unrecognisable with genetic engineering producing freaks for sprinting, swimming etc.

    report
  10. jsavulescu@gmail.com

    Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics at University of Oxford, Humanities Division

    Ben I just found this piece while doing some research on TB4. Fantastic piece. I read a lot of this stuff and this is about the best I have seen. Well done. I just had this piece in Aeon which you might be interested in. Please email me any of your publications. aeonm.ag/1l7hB4q

    report