Richardson banned from Olympics for pot use

[Anonymous]

Exactly. If she false started would we give her a pass and change the false start rule

[Anonymous]

1. Marijuana (thc) is not a masking agent.
2. It (canaboids) was banned long before masking agents of any sort existed.
3. Masking agents are not banned substances.

The three WADA criteria used to support a ban are:

1. Does the drug improve athletic performance?
2. Is the drug unsafe or unhealthy for consumption?
3. Does the use infringe on the fairness of sport?

God only knows what criteria 3 is, but it certainly is in use with the ban on thc/marijuana. CBD is fine by the way.

Obviously any smoking is not healthy though there is no research to support any conclusions on the health affects of ingesting thc by eating it. For the sake of argument though let’s assume that ingesting thc is unhealthy.

Does the use of thc improve athletic performance? There is no research to establish that is the case. What research that does exist works to the contrary conclusion - which is why we do not want people driving or operating equipment after ingesting thc. If it improved performance then we would be looking to give people thc before they drove or operated equipment.

So that leaves us with the “marijuana is bad” criteria. Okay. If marijuana is bad why is alcohol use okay? Why is tobacco use okay? Are not alcohol and tobacco at least as “bad” as marijuana?

What is it that makes alcohol and tobacco okay but not thc/marijuana?
3. It is unhealthy as is tobacco and alcohol so it meets that criteria (one of the three criteria used to justify a ban

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. Marijuana (thc) is not a masking agent.
2. It (canaboids) was banned long before masking agents of any sort existed.
3. Masking agents are not banned substances.

The three WADA criteria used to support a ban are:

1. Does the drug improve athletic performance?
2. Is the drug unsafe or unhealthy for consumption?
3. Does the use infringe on the fairness of sport?

God only knows what criteria 3 is, but it certainly is in use with the ban on thc/marijuana. CBD is fine by the way.

Obviously any smoking is not healthy though there is no research to support any conclusions on the health affects of ingesting thc by eating it. For the sake of argument though let’s assume that ingesting thc is unhealthy.

Does the use of thc improve athletic performance? There is no research to establish that is the case. What research that does exist works to the contrary conclusion - which is why we do not want people driving or operating equipment after ingesting thc. If it improved performance then we would be looking to give people thc before they drove or operated equipment.

So that leaves us with the “marijuana is bad” criteria. Okay. If marijuana is bad why is alcohol use okay? Why is tobacco use okay? Are not alcohol and tobacco at least as “bad” as marijuana?

What is it that makes alcohol and tobacco okay but not thc/marijuana?
3. It is unhealthy as is tobacco and alcohol so it meets that criteria (one of the three criteria used to justify a ban

You forgot to include the stuff at the end of the article.
https://sports.yahoo.com/sha-carri-richardsons-olympic-drug-ban-why-is-marijuana-a-banned-substance-141633284.html

[Anonymous]

As long as it's currently against the rules to do it, and you doit, you get kicked out.

She's just another promising young person who threw it all away due to lack of maturity, wisdom, and guidance.

There road to greatness is literally littered with people like her. She can shape up and compete in four years or not, her choice.

Why is this even being discussed?

[Anonymous]

If the sport banned tacos, which has no proven impact on the sport or performance, and every athlete was told that tacos were explicitly banned, and yet, you choose to eat tacos before a race and get disqualified.

Would you still be a victim?

Or just a person who loves tacos regardless of the cost?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As long as it's currently against the rules to do it, and you doit, you get kicked out.

She's just another promising young person who threw it all away due to lack of maturity, wisdom, and guidance.

There road to greatness is literally littered with people like her. She can shape up and compete in four years or not, her choice.

Why is this even being discussed?

She will race in the Workd Championship in 1 year.

Olympic are in 3 years.

She didn’t lose any endorsements… so no she didn’t “throw it all away”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as it's currently against the rules to do it, and you doit, you get kicked out.

She's just another promising young person who threw it all away due to lack of maturity, wisdom, and guidance.

There road to greatness is literally littered with people like her. She can shape up and compete in four years or not, her choice.

Why is this even being discussed?

She will race in the Workd Championship in 1 year.

Olympic are in 3 years.

She didn’t lose any endorsements… so no she didn’t “throw it all away”.

her Twitter feed prevented any endorsements. this was confirmation.

[Anonymous]

The question is: Why is WADA making moral and ethical judgments about anything? Is a substance something that will improve athletic performance- yes/no? That is WADA’s role. Is a substance “bad”? Why in hell is that something anyone would want WADA involved in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Marijuana is a masking agent that’s why it is banned.
Her time progression is suspect.
The timing of her positive test is also suspect.
Sad for her but she did it.

Who masks something with a banned substance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Marijuana is a masking agent that’s why it is banned.
Her time progression is suspect.
The timing of her positive test is also suspect.
Sad for her but she did it.

Who masks something with a banned substance?

thc is not a masked substance. WADA agrees it is not performance enhancing. It is banned because it is not good for you and because it is bad for sport. So is alcohol or tobacco. Ban them and be consistent. Easy. What? That will not happen? Then let's be clear -- WADA should have no role in deciding what is, or is not, good for sport. If a substance is performance enhancing then WADA can look at whether a ban of that substance is appropriate. Good nutrition is performance enhancing, and if WADA decided good nutrition was bad for sport then -- Big Macs for everyone on the team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as it's currently against the rules to do it, and you doit, you get kicked out.

She's just another promising young person who threw it all away due to lack of maturity, wisdom, and guidance.

There road to greatness is literally littered with people like her. She can shape up and compete in four years or not, her choice.

Why is this even being discussed?

She will race in the Workd Championship in 1 year.

Olympic are in 3 years.

She didn’t lose any endorsements… so no she didn’t “throw it all away”.

her Twitter feed prevented any endorsements. this was confirmation.

Nope. Nobody dropped her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is dumb and not fair. They should let her race wtf.

Are you 8 years old?

Serious question

[Christinamoms]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's dumb for them to monitor things that are not performance-enhancing drugs - but also dumb for her to do it since it's a known thing that they are testing for it.

You pretty much hit it on the head. It seems like more sports are backing off of marijuana suspensions but the IOC is a different story.