News & Analysis
Comment
Brian Fuller2
To amplify Junko's comment, where is the distinction between chemicals and ...
wilber_xbox
true, the test is for the humans and for technology.
Debating Olympic technology
George Leopold
7/25/2012 10:07 AM EDT
A competitor at the 2012 London Summer Olympics will be running on carbon fiber blades attached to his amputated legs. Double amputee Oscar Pistorius of South Africa is expected to compete in the Olympic 400 meter race.
The case of Pistorius serves to underscore the growing importance of technology and, specifically, mechanical engineering in sports. For Pistorius, technology has given him a chance to compete. Other Olympic athletes look to technology to gain that extra one-hundredth of a second that is the difference between a gold medal (and endorsements) and failure.
Better to rely on technology than chemicals.
The audio link below includes an interview with Phillippa Oldham who oversees manufacturing at the U.K.’s Institution of Mechanical Engineers. The discussion centers on sports engineering advances and whether they provide competitors with an unfair advantage:
Technology Could Give Athletes an Edge at Olympic Park
An Olympic medal for Pistorius is sure to stoke the debate about the proper role of sports technology at high-profile events like the London Olympics.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
askubel
7/25/2012 11:36 AM EDT
The Olympics is about countries competing to be the best at a particular sport. Why shouldn't engineers be part of that competition?
Sign in to Reply
george.leopold
7/25/2012 11:55 AM EDT
To a large extent, they are.
Sign in to Reply
wilber_xbox
7/25/2012 12:46 PM EDT
These sports are to test the human endurance and capabilities. Aiding the effort with technology would undermine the purpose itself.
Sign in to Reply
Bob744
7/25/2012 3:11 PM EDT
Perhaps there should be an Olympic category for enhanced/augmented people. Items such as the carbon fiber blades, I suspect, have much more "rebound", lacking a better term, than an normal achiles tendon. As such, the technology is providing a definite advantage over the un-augmented competitor. Taking this to a silly extreme, what about the competitor who has roller skates put on the end of his/her prosthesis? Just keep augmented and unaugmented competititions separate.
Sign in to Reply
george.leopold
7/25/2012 4:46 PM EDT
Reminds me a bit of the "Saturday Night Live" skit about the "All-Drug Olympics." Main difference is your variation wouldn't be illegal.
Sign in to Reply
Sanjib.Acharya
7/25/2012 11:21 PM EDT
I think it's not only the technology (carbon-fiber legs), but also the tremendous self-confidence or inner strength, whatever you may call it as, has made it possible for Oscar Pistorius to overcome the challenges.
Taking advantage of technologies in sports is good, only if, it is affordable and available to all participants around the world...otherwise it doesn't make sense.
Thanks for sharing the audio link! It was a great discussion and enjoyed learning many new technology trends in the sports.
Sign in to Reply
wilber_xbox
7/28/2012 12:16 PM EDT
I think that it is a great step ahead and thanks to technology that Oscar Pistorius is motivating a new crop of athletes but we should keep a check on the whether such technologies do not put anyone at unnecessary advantage.
Sign in to Reply
elctrnx_lyf
7/26/2012 2:16 AM EDT
Does it really mean all athletes would be looking at some sort of technology help in the future?
Sign in to Reply
elektryk321
7/26/2012 6:20 AM EDT
Not in future, they are using this right now. Look at the swimsuits or shoes. Even if the technical upgrades will be banned there are other possibilities.
I heard that cyclists take some kind of chirurgical operations to straighten the blood veins for better oxygen transportation for muscles. I believe in future the number of possible body modification will be bigger.
Sign in to Reply
george.leopold
7/26/2012 10:43 AM EDT
The "Science Friday" audio we linked to also mentions that the water temperature in the Olympic pools could be raised to speed up ALL swimmers.
Sign in to Reply
junko.yoshida
7/26/2012 12:30 PM EDT
This is mind-boggling. Where do you draw the line? But as George mentioned, better to rely on technology than chemicals... But still...
Sign in to Reply
nicolas.mokhoff
7/26/2012 12:51 PM EDT
Neither technology nor chemicals supported the competitors in the past; at least it wasn't so prevalent. It was supposed to be all about "fun and games" and may the best sports person win. It is shameful how commercialized and "do anything to win" is guiding today's sports, whether in the Olympics or on the local basketball court. It sure ain't your father's Olympics anymore: http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/07/26/12932649-millionaire-medalists-will-london-2012-remain-true-to-olympic-spirit?lite
Sign in to Reply
Barry.Moss
7/26/2012 1:35 PM EDT
In the extreme, surgical alterations and advanced prosthetic could come to dominate the game. Imagine a future where a "six million dollar" bionic man could complete. It's not hard to conceive of a time where technology trumps the best trained natural body.
Sign in to Reply
wilber_xbox
7/28/2012 12:18 PM EDT
true, the test is for the humans and for technology.
Sign in to Reply
Brian Fuller2
7/30/2012 12:32 PM EDT
To amplify Junko's comment, where is the distinction between chemicals and mechanicals as performance-enhancing technologies? Why is one considered OK and the other not?
Pistorius' blade technology is performance enhancing because he otherwise wouldn't be able to perform at this level.
To take @Barry.Moss' comment further, perhaps there should be two tracks for athletes: technologically enhanced and not. And eventually consumers will decide whether, like McDonald's v. Farmer's Market fare, which we prefer.
Sign in to Reply