Prosthetic-Limbed Runner Disqualified from Olympic Games 509
contraba55 wrote with a link to an Engadget story on a sign of the postmodern times. Oscar Pistorius, a world-class sprinter, has been denied a shot at participating in the Olympics this year. He's a double-amputee, but he's not out because of his handicap; he's disqualified because he's faster than most sprinters. "The runner — who uses carbon-fiber, prosthetic feet — was reviewed by the International Association of Athletics Federations (or IAAF), a review which found the combination of man and machine to be too much for its purely human competitors. According to the IAAF report, the 'mechanical advantage of the blade in relation to the healthy ankle joint of an able bodied athlete is higher than 30-percent.' Additionally, Pistorius uses 25-percent less energy than average runners due to the artificial limbs, therefore giving him an unfair advantage on the track."
Not faster... more efficient (Score:5, Informative)
The only real surprise is that he hadn't worked this out and competed at the 800m, 1500m or even the 5,000m as that efficiency would really pay off.
Its an artificial aid in the same was a drugs are or riding a bike would be. Its unfortunate for the chap but its the right decision, otherwise you might as well let Marion Jones back in with a terminator suit and a jet-pack.
AS USUAL (Score:5, Informative)
He's not out because he's "too fast"
He's out because his specific prosthetic lower legs and feet have less wind resistance than normal legs, return WAY more energy per stride than normal legs, and offer him what amounts to a competitive advantage over other runners.
If he wants to compete, he's free to do so, just not with those specific prosthesis.
He can submit others to the Committee for acceptance all day long.
This is no different than the way the olympic committee judges the use of certain swimsuits, softball bats, or any other equipment in use during the Olympics.
Re:Any downside? (Score:3, Informative)
Paralympics (Score:5, Informative)
He could however compete in the Paralympics which are geared towards physical disabilities such as amputees or blind people. They are held in the same year and same city as the regular olympics. The one catch with the paralympics is that because there are so many classifications disabilities they have to rotate through which type gets to compete each year. Think: you couldn't very well have someone missing a leg and a half swimming against someone only missing a foot. I can't remember exactly how many classifications of amputees there are but I think there are enough that an athlete might only get to compete in one Paralympics that falls into their particular condition.
Re:Isn't there a Special Olympics (Score:4, Informative)
More information here (yes i know, reliability etc. but i'm lazy) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Pistorius [wikipedia.org]
This isn't, sadly, unfair... (Score:5, Informative)
Second, while most anyone can get a set of limbs like this runner has, actually they can't without significant sacrifice, ie, amuptation. The IOC should, for the sake of decency, not permit that. Speed skaters only had to buy a pair of clapper skates - the barrier was either money or a willing supplier, neither of which was as expensive nor life-altering as amputation for sprinters. Cyclists go through this a lot, with new equipment and all. IIRC, the NBA may have banned a certain Nike sneaker because it assisted jumping too much. Yes, define 'too much'. the IOC has.
Now, if the running community can come up with a similar prosthesis designed for non-amputees that offers the same or nearly equal advantage, then the IOC has an interesting, but easy decision to make. No. The solution isn't to give everyone else some mechanical advantage. It's to resign ourselves to the reality that life is so unfair that a dual amputee needs to use a less effecient prosthetic to compete fairly. And that way lies so much trouble. It becomes some sad exercise in statistics, engineering, and the frustation of figuring out what 'fair' is.
We know fair doesn't include using drugs. And it may not even include using hypobaric chambers to enhance training, someday. It involves runners using the same basic equipment (their natural body, shoes available to all, etc).
I wish this guy could compete. No doubt he will go back and have the limbs redesigned to be more equal to natural limbs. Then he might get a fair shake from the IOC. I hope they let him compete on equal terms.
ps- If he got waxed by Olympic-caliber sprinters with the 'hot' limbs, that doesn't really change anything. It may be that he's not that good, but let him in and surely some runner will say they should be allowed to wear a prosthesis. And another. Chaos. Pure chaos.
Re:man... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Life imitates art. (Score:1, Informative)
Re:In other news... (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, if you would read the link above, no they can't. Bonds' device was grandfathered in, and no new player can get one without a legitimate medical reason. The link describes how his enhanced elbow device has grown and advanced over the years up to 2001.
Re:Get over it. (Score:3, Informative)
As a hard core atheist, allow me to be the first to say fuck you and the high horse you rode in on.
Atheism has no a jot to do with accepting or discarding human augmentation.
Re:I never thought I'd see the day ... (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.vietvet.org/glossary.htm [vietvet.org]
Re:I never thought I'd see the day ... (Score:5, Informative)
"More intense training" is not the path to elite performance. The goal of coaching is to find the level of intensity at which the athletes body responds and builds fitness most efficiently. When training is too intense, the body becomes less fit. Tissues are broken down faster than they can be rebuilt. Injury or even overtraining syndrome [physsportsmed.com] results.
Re:Spring instead of 'feet' (Score:2, Informative)
Liberal use of a clue stick is indicated... (Score:5, Informative)
The first was pretty much carbon-fibre, carbon-carbon, and titanium. The foot [ossur.com] provided a bit of energy return to simulate the toe-push on pronation, but was not like the real thing.
The second foot [oandp.com] added an articulated ankle which aided on uneven terrain, but was still not very lifelike.
The third has similar foot to the first, but added a shock-absorber [ottobockus.com] and a vacuum system. Although this leg has some of the best of the current technology, at the end of the day, it sucks. [1]
Understand that I can walk pretty well. Most days, or when I'm not tired from walking all day long, my gait is indistinguishable from other folks. However, even though my 'foot' does provide *some* energy return, it in no way approaches the muscular push-off normal toes provide when walking. (I expect most folks don't even know or feel that they do this any longer.) Of course, I don't have one of the sprinter foots this runner will use in competition. They are specific to that function and just wouldn't work as daily 'footwear'.
All of that is immaterial. His feet don't 'give him way more energy' than a naturally footed sprinter. They can't. The only energy they store is that which is put there by the runner. I haven't studied his running style, but I expect that he has modified his style to maximize the energy put into the foot, and that the foot unloads the energy back into his lower leg on rolling off of the toe. Now, this is unnatural and required a great deal of training before he mastered it well enough to beat footed sprinters. I call bullshit on the IAAF.
That energy is not 'free'. He's had to train to get more fit than footed runners because his gait will not be a natural bone/muscle gait.
Oh, yeah, aerodynamics my ass...
[1] Compared to a real foot.
Re:Harrison Bergeron anyone? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I never thought I'd see the day ... (Score:1, Informative)
If you want to look at a group of people who probably are using steroids and other non-human things, look no further than professional athletes. In the Olympics, at least in theory, all the athletes are required to be amateurs.
Don't just assume that because a couple of them have been caught, that all of them are cheating.
Re:man... (Score:5, Informative)
The thing is, the human ankle is also useful for climbing a tree, kicking a football, balancing on one foot and tons of other things where these prostethics would be quite unpractical.
If he was allowed to attach another, more fish-tail-like prostethic, I bet he woulda won the olympics in swimming too...
Re:Liberal use of a clue stick is indicated... (Score:1, Informative)
That whooshing sound you hear is physics flying past your head.
Athletes do not have "on-demand", "renewable energy". It's a limited resource. It's runs out as lactic acid builds up in their system. THAT's the big issue with these prosthetics.
Yes, they do not return as much energy as the calf & thigh muscles of a two-legged athlete...but the energy they do return is basically free. A two-legged athlete has to expend energy to get the same "bounce" provided by these prosthetics.
Yes, it means he has to run using a quite awkward gait. Yes, it is unlikely that he would be able to win with this technology. That's not the point.
It provides an advantage that two legged athletes do NOT have. The IAAF was right on the money here.
Because our knee parts are non-replaceable (Score:4, Informative)
That is the problem: if you put springs on your shoes, you will run faster, but you will bust your knees faster too. This guy apparently has mechanical knees -- which can be easily user-serviced in case of wear and tear. I would like to see someone trying to do a meniscectomy to itself.
Re:I never thought I'd see the day ... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Because our knee parts are non-replaceable (Score:2, Informative)