Dragash: Paraplegic S. African runner Oscar Pistorius deserved Olympic shot
By CRAIG DRAGASH
ISL Correspondent
Note: Dragash, a Purdue graduate, is a physical education teacher at Clay Middle School in Carmel, Ind.
Growing up, my mother never said to me Craig, put on your legs and go play outside! She didn’t have to; I had two capable legs that allowed me to play without needing to add something to my body to allow me to keep up with other kids in the neighborhood. The command, however, frequently was issued by the mother of Oscar Pistorius, A South African 400 meter runner who competed in the 2012 London Olympics as a paraplegic with prosthetic legs.
I can’t imagine anyone who is familiar with this story doubts that Pistorius has the heart of a champion by simply competing in these Olympic games with able-bodied athletes. However, there are some who believe that Pistorius should not have been allowed to compete in the Olympics because they believe that his carbon fiber prosthetic legs, commonly known as cheetah legs, gave him an advantage over able-bodied athletes. Dr. Ross Tucker, in an article published in Runner’s World magazine, provides some convincing scientific evidence to support those who would rather see Pistorius compete only in the Paralympic Games. However, Ethan Case, who holds a degree in mechanical engineering and wrote an article in Polycimic magazine, offered support for Pistorius being allowed to realize his Olympic dream.
Dr. Tucker specifically cited the lighter weight of the carbon blades, the fact that the blades return more energy than able-bodied athletes, and less muscle fatigue as advantages that Pistorius gains when he races. Case, on the other hand, pointed out that Pistorius is missing vital running muscles, such as calf muscles, which provide power that the blades simply don’t. He also said the angle in which Pistorius’ blades turn in the starting blocks gives him a disadvantage because he needs to be more upright in his starting stance.
An online article from The Telegraph in London conducted a poll asking readers to say whether or not athletes with prosthetic limbs should be allowed to compete in able-bodied races (my vote was yes); while I know this controversy has become widespread, I was very surprised to see that 81% answered no. To me, this is disheartening because it seems as though perspective has been lost to a certain degree as far as having compassion for disabled athletes who want to be treated as belonging with the able-bodied.
Here’s a potentially controversial point of view; I am a big baseball fan, and I contend that the athletes who competed in the steroid era who were known to use steroids should be allowed in the Hall of Fame if their careers merited induction. I think the Hall should create a wing where these athletes should be recognized for their accomplishments, while also acknowledging that they used performance enhancing drugs during their career. Do I think they cheated the game? Yes, I do. Do I think they deserved to be punished? Yes, I do. Do I think they still required the eye-hand coordination and high skill level to compete against the best in the world even though they used performance enhancing drugs? Yes, I do.
Please don’t take this as me comparing Oscar Pistorius and his artificial limbs with baseball players who cheated the game by using performance enhancing drugs from an ethical standpoint. But just as you can’t accurately measure how much Pistorius’ limbs help him, you can’t measure how much steroids helped those players. There is no way of determining how many home runs Barry Bonds would have hit without using them (allegedly). In a similar way, you can’t determine, at least at this point, what advantage Pistorius would have by using these artificial limbs. He still has to train, he still has to sacrificehe still has to run the race and compete!
The fact of the matter is that not enough research has been done to determine if there is indeed a significant advantage (or disadvantage) by using carbon blade prosthetic limbs to compete in able-bodied races. In this case, it seems as though you can manipulate what evidence does exist to support your opinion on why he should run, or why he shouldn’t. But isn’t the Olympic movement about competing for the pride of your country, fair play, and the training and sacrifice that the athletes put forth in preparing for their one moment of glory? How many athletes would trade places with Oscar Pistorius? How many of them could even relate to what he has faced throughout the course of his life? Michael Johnson, who won Olympic gold in the 400 meter race in 1996 and 2000, has been one of the more outspoken detractors to allowing Pistorius to compete. Johnson’s main reason is that we don’t know if Pistorius’ blades provide him with an advantage.
..Exactly!
