Should MMA Adopt Olympic style Drug testing?
State athletic commissions are just beginning to seriously consider implementing state of the art monitoring and testing for banned substances in combat sports.
Most athletic governing bodies only test urine but Olympic style (WADA or USADA) can also test blood. As most everyone knows, science still hasn't quite caught up with the potential cheaters and shady chemists of the world. Certain substances are far more accurately detected in a sample of blood,specifically Hgh (human growth hormone).
Why have governing bodies waited so long to even consider this issue?
Politics and money...which really means money and money.
The thought process goes like this. Who really benefits from your favorite fighter testing positive?
When the cash cow gets suspended for a year everyone, and I do mean everyone, stands to lose serious money.
Most athletic governing bodies only test urine but Olympic style (WADA or USADA) can also test blood. As most everyone knows, science still hasn't quite caught up with the potential cheaters and shady chemists of the world. Certain substances are far more accurately detected in a sample of blood,specifically Hgh (human growth hormone).
Why have governing bodies waited so long to even consider this issue?
Politics and money...which really means money and money.
The thought process goes like this. Who really benefits from your favorite fighter testing positive?
When the cash cow gets suspended for a year everyone, and I do mean everyone, stands to lose serious money.
- The fighter loses fight purses, bonuses and endorsements.
- The UFC loses potential ppv's.
- The ticket sales (gate revenue) suffer.
- Growth may slow.
- Merchandise doesn't sell the way it should.
- Taxing and fees related to all the above decrease the governments take.
Now let's be honest. That is a lot to potentially lose just for the sake of fairness.
Yes, it's an issue of fairness, but isn't it also a matter of health?
Reply to this
Wonderful! Your writings are always thought provoking.
Reply to this