Double amputee banned from Olympics

I think that whether or not this guy has an advantage is beside the point, or at least putting the cart before the horse.

The problems in situations like this is that the purpose of the the test (competition) is not being spelled out.

I think about math tests in high school where we weren’t allowed to use calculators. Calculators can certainly be used to achieve the goal, but the tests were specifically meant to test our abilities without the aid of a calculator.

Let’s look at a race. What is the function of a 1500m? What are the skills and abilities that we are choosing to pit against each other? Does having prosthetic legs prevent this? I’d argue that they do.

So, define the competition. Set the parameters so that the outcome of the race will show you what you want it to show. I think that someone moving around in such a different manner is not going to be able to be fairly judged against a more traditional “runner.”
wants a prosthetic forehead on his real head

This is really fascinating. I had no idea, and it’s a convincing argument.

Oh, for the love of…

Are you actually bothering to READ the links? HE HAS LEGS! It’s his lower legs that are missing, he has thighs, knees, lower leg stumps that fit into sockets in his prosthetics. He RUNS. He is not bouncing on his hips, or using wheels. He has legs and he WILL face leg problems like able-bodied runners!

I’ve no idea whether prosthetics of this kind can convey a net advantage or disadvantage. I don’t even know if it’s possible to determine that, and if it isn’t possible, then he shouldn’t be allowed to compete. But let’s at least debate the facts.

And that’s the rub. Wheelchair users have significantly less muscle mass propelling them along, but they have wheels… the advantage of the latter outweighs the former.

What Pistorius is doing is arguably running, and running at a disadvantage. When an able-bodied person runs, they store elastic energy with every footfall in the tendons of their lower legs, and then add to that with the contraction of the calf muscle in the subsequent push-off. Pistorius has no calves, he has to get by only on the stored elastic energy in his prosthetics. His running action is as close an approximation to able-bodied running as he can achieve without calves or articulated ankles.

Wheelchair users are not running, by any stretch of the definition.

I think they should confiscate his carbon fibre prosthetics and make him run on DORRANCE #5X STAINLESS STEEL HOOKS!

I’ve seen the guy several times- when I say no legs, I didn’t mean he was a torso. Go out and run as far as you can as long as you can and tell me what starts burning first- the parts of the leg he has, or the parts he doesn’t.

Fair enough. Then I misinterpreted “his way of getting to the finish line is an entirely different process, like if he was running on his hands” and especially “he has no leg problems to deal with”. I disagree with the first and am not qualified to judge the second. I was under the impression that Pastorius is a sprinter rather than an endurance runner, though.

My mom had 20/15 vision for years.

He’s a sprinter. He holds world records for amputees in the 100, 200 and 400 meters.

No citation, here (bolding mine):

Presumably, the rest of the population has worse visual acuity, but the statement indicate whether that’s accurate.

An interesting piece on vision enhancing measures in professional baseball players:
Enhancing Vision in Baseball. This, of course, was touched upon in the OP’s article. But at some point, you have to define enhancement in terms of providing an unfair advantage or normalizing that which is inferior.

However, this is less about fixing what’s broken and more about artificially replacing what’s not there, so there’s really not much correlation. You can’t really compare the two.

What struck me is that the I.A.A.F. seems to be disingenuous about it’s qualms with allowing him to compete. Alluding that allowing a runner with artificial limbs will lead to athletes that enhance themselves to do something no human can do (“Next will be another device where people can fly with something on their back.”) is completely ridiculous. Their concern that he could topple over and put other runners at risk ignores the fact that every runner is subject to the same risk. Further, that they don’t “accept something that provides advantages” is misrepresentation of the same rules that allow oxygen tents.

I think they need to do a little more homework and state unequivocally, and in scientific terms, to what extent the advantages they claim actually are. Based on the fact that his recent times wouldn’t even qualify him indicates that he’s not at an obvious extreme advantage or he’d be blowing away sprinting records from the get-go.