Ask HN: Should professional gamers be screened for performance enhancing drugs?

Post by sgillen » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 6:41 AM UTC

muzani wrote: post #9

paulcole wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beta blockers to reduce jitters. Adderall to increase focus. Modafinil to eliminate tiredness.

I'm not sure about beta blockers, but Adderall doesn't do well for games - it's more suited to holding down attention on things like spreadsheets. Modafinil doesn't work nearly as well as sleep. It helps in learning, but not so much on the battlefield, unless someone had an all nighter. A few cups of tea might just do all of these better than drugs would. And things like L Theanine or creatine don't really need to be…

Post by dsacco » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 12:58 PM UTC

fiftyacorn wrote: post #12

throwaway30yo wrote: post #7

No. Also I do not think Olympic athletes should be tested. I once competed at a very high level in sports and the use of drugs is significantly higher then anyone would expect. The difference was that the poorer countries only had access to old school steroids (testosterone, dbol, tren etc) while the richer countries had access to things which at the time were impossible to detect (GH, IGF-1, Research Peptides). The…

The problem is people respond differently to doping - and some people are hyper-responders An example being Lance Armstrong was considered a hyper-responder to his doping, and it put him at unfair advantage.

Post by zimpenfish » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 1:42 PM UTC

jhiska wrote: post #4

Powerofmene wrote: post #3

But not all stimulants etc are used for performance enhancement, etc. There are many legitimate uses so like anything else, there would have to be exceptions to “the rule.”

In meat sports, if someone has a legitimate use for a stimulant then they are barred from competition nevertheless. In practice, this is better than someone getting the edge because of a medical condition.

Post by jotux » Mon, Feb 05, 2018, 7:37 PM UTC

mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #14

Finnucane wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, in athletic sports, you're supposed to get by on training and skill. Drugs are seen as cheating. What sort of enhancements would be seen as cheating by gamers?

There's also markets for gaming gear that has lower latency and modified gaming gear like console controllers with extra buttons or scriptable buttons. I think the gear would give more of an advantage over drugs since it would be more consistent.

Post by vanillaboy » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 5:37 PM UTC

JamesBarney wrote: post #18

throwaway30yo wrote: post #7

No. Also I do not think Olympic athletes should be tested. I once competed at a very high level in sports and the use of drugs is significantly higher then anyone would expect. The difference was that the poorer countries only had access to old school steroids (testosterone, dbol, tren etc) while the richer countries had access to things which at the time were impossible to detect (GH, IGF-1, Research Peptides). The…

Many people like to believe our choices are between letting the best drug infused athlete win, or the best drug free candidate win. But based on your comment and other readings I think that is a false choice, and the real choice is between letting the best drug infused athlete win, or letting the best athlete who can hide their drug use win. The difference between natty and enhanced body building is not drug use, but…