Doping, fairness, and unequal responsiveness: A response to Lavazza.

Bioethics

Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.

Published: September 2021

In a thought-provoking article in Bioethics, Andrea Lavazza defends the view that for reasons of fairness, those who cannot benefit from the use of performance-enhancing methods such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) should receive compensation for their inability. First, we argue that Lavazza's proposal to compensate athletes who are non-responsive to tDCS is practically unfeasible. Second, the compensation principle-which he appeals to in his defense of his compensation scheme-is false, as it is incoherent to focus only on the compensation of athletes who respond less well to tDCS, and not to compensate athletes who respond less well to all other types of enhancers such as mental training and food supplements.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12908DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

compensate athletes
8
athletes respond
8
respond well
8
doping fairness
4
fairness unequal
4
unequal responsiveness
4
responsiveness response
4
response lavazza
4
lavazza thought-provoking
4
thought-provoking article
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!