stv 203

I noted in an earlier post that the Rio Olympics marks the first time that the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has proactively tested for cheating, specifically for gene doping.  

A recent article in New Scientist rehearses some arguments for why gene doping should simply be accepted, rather than banned and policed.  I want to briefly go over those arguments here.

One of the most fundamental distinctions made in Olympic sports (and others) is the division between men's and women's events.  Most sports on offer at the Games feature events that are divided into exclusively male or female categories.

(Some exceptions come to mind: rhythmic gymnastics and synchronized swimming are for women only, whereas Greco-Roman wrestling is for men only.  Men's and women's gymnastics involve some different equipment for men versus women.  Equestrian events are integrated.)

As the Rio Summer Olympics approach, the subject of sport, excellence, and cheating returns to the fore.  With it comes discussion of what cheating in sport is and why it is bad, or not.

One important means for enforcing rules of conduct is to allow police to search for evidence of violations.  Search can take many forms, as recent examples illustrate.

In the upcoming Rio Summer Olympics, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) will be searching for evidence of gene doping.  Gene doping is the insertion of genes into a body's cells in order to modify their behavior for the purpose of enhancement (as opposed to gene therapy, which is done to restore health).  

With the approach of the Rio Summer Olympics, the role of technology in sport comes naturally to the fore.  Many of those questions center on issues of enhancement.

Myriad Genetics is perhaps best known for its ultimately failed defence of its patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes associated with elevated risk of breast cancer.  

A new article describes another way in which the company has offended some cancer patients, namely by keeping details of their test results a proprietary secret.