phlogiston
All Australian
- Sep 10, 2019
- 699
- 2,139
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
This argument is kind of similar to the pill testing argument at festivals.
If the government sanctions pill testing, are they promoting illicit drug use or are they providing a service to hopefully stop kids overdosing?
Sure you can make an argument they are facilitating drug use, but the purpose of pill testing is to stop people dying. Same argument can be made for safe injecting centres - they facilitate drug use but that is not their primary purpose.
People are going to take drugs, it is inevitable. The AFL are trying to deal with that reality as best they can. Meanwhile the NBA, NFL, MLB, EPL etc. are all running their own programs independent of WADA - ie. allowing all sorts of substances.
Regarding your last point, blood oxygenises are not allowed in competition or out of competition so it is moot point. WADA can ban players at any time for using them.
And the same argument can be made for abortion, and pretty much for anything else where there is (a) demand, and (b) a lack of regulation.
The AFL needs to remember that it is part of a larger ecosystem. Where it has absolute authority stops at the boundary line (metaphorically speaking). The decriminalization of abortion, pill testing at festivals, etc have been introduced by governments to make society safer as a whole. Why is the AFL introducing this partiular approach? I don't think it's for the betterment or safety of society...
FWIW, I used to work in an alcohol and drug unit back in the 80s and 90s (not in a clinical capacity, part time job when at uni), and saw some of the issues first hand that unregulated use can bring. Alcohol, being legal and regulated, gave us many more patients, but the drug patients were in far worse condition, usually because they had no idea what they were really taking.
P