I got this a while back from a fellow Hubber: http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/534131_10151295627345310_1171943072_n.jpg http://altitudetraining.com/cat/aux/about/ethics/physiological The Ethics of Altitude Simulation in Sport As the use of prohibited performance enhancing drugs becomes more prevalent in sports, the governing bodies (IOC and WADA) are coming under increasing pressure to proactively eradicate such practices in sanctioned sporting events. CAT has always seen itself as a significant part of the anti-drug movement, and a contributor in the move towards creating a level playing field for athletes. Recently, however, attention has been diverted away from the real issue at hand to focus on the use of altitude simulation technology because some people have claimed that altitude training is tantamount to blood doping, or worse, that it is the same as performance enhancement through illicit drug use. Upon review of the facts of simulated altitude systems as a training aid for sport, the contention that such practices should be banned is largely indefensible. Does altitude simulation technology impart an unfair advantage to the adopters of the technology? No. Before this technology was available, there had been an advantage for those who had access to the mountains, either because of where they lived, or because their particular country had mountains training facilities where they could stay. For nearly two decades, simulated altitude technology has made this opportunity available also to athletes of countries without mountains. The altitude tent is merely the latest in a line of products which has progressively reduced the cost of such technology. Just as with all equipment and access to training, there can never be a totally level playing field, however the ever-dropping price of simulated altitude systems has gone a long way to making this opportunity available equally around the world. Does this justify taking drug to make up for a lower-than average natural hormone level? Of course not, there is a clear difference between physically manipulating the body with drugs, and spending time at altitude (natural or simulated) to stimulate a totally natural response. Is the manipulation of the environment something that should be banned? No. Nothing foreign is added to the air in CAT's hypoxic systems. Instead, some of the Oxygen molecules are filtered out before the air is passed on to the enclosure. This is the same concept as an air-conditioner, which removes some of the water molecules before the air is passed on to the room. Both items create a simulated environment that is found naturally in other places around the globe. Athletes use both of them because it helps their overall performance. Both of these processes have resulted in a more level playing field, not an unsporting advantage. In modern days of increasingly close elite athletic performance, athletes from all geographical areas can have the same competitive advantages. Other examples of technology advancements that have helped level the playing field by manipulating environmental factors include refrigerated ice rinks, heat acclimatization chambers, and even the automobile which allows an athlete to easily travel to different natural elevations in order to "Live High, Train Low." My results: http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/534671_10151295649795310_105384261_n.jpg Haematocrit when from0.4 to 0.48 after 2 months of been in tent!!! So is it ethical?
