EPTPerformance Enhancing Drug in Starcraft 2? Yes. - Page 15
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
AJMcSpiffy
United States1154 Posts
| ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On April 07 2011 04:21 chonkyfire wrote: I see a lot of people saying speed doesn't make you better. What you have to understand is there is a difference between + Show Spoiler + A gosu on speed and a noob on speed. Also this whole hyperactive misclick/error theory is ridiculous. They give amphetamine to fighter pilots. Are they going to give someone who is flying a 150 million dollar plane something that will cause them to make errors? No. This needs to be cleared up. First they are giving very small controlled doses, it's not what you would compare to a typical kid trying to feel high. Second, they use it for extremely long missions where error from fatigue becomes a big risk so they try to balance it out with the drugs. It's used for long term endurance, not at all a quick performance pickup. If you are already alert and well rested or if you are dosing enough to feel a strong high the amphetamine can likely cause errors from hyperactivity. | ||
|
Neo.NEt
United States785 Posts
On April 07 2011 03:59 Grumbels wrote: According to this site possession of adderall is illegal in both the United States and the European Union without a prescription, so top players who use it would be breaking the law if they didn't take the trouble getting a prescription. Furthermore, the ease of getting a prescription apparently differs between the EU and the USA, giving NA players somewhat of a competitive advantage over EU players - all assuming adderall improves performance. Someone probably said this already but it is ridiculously easy for anyone in America to get adderall. Go to any psychiatrist and say "hi I have trouble focusing". They'll give you a piece of paper with like "on a scale of 1 to 10.... how much trouble is this for you" and you just put 10 everywhere it seems like adderall would help. What are they going to do give you a brain scan to see if you actually had ADD? Nah. | ||
|
GiantEnemyCrab
Canada503 Posts
| ||
|
TwentyOneJN
United States56 Posts
| ||
|
PowerKock
46 Posts
But just saying, if it has this effect on me, I cant immagine the effect it could have on an elite pro gamer. And if adderal is even better (never tried it) but they are similar in how they effect the body in some ways. I think it should be banned, if they call it a SPORT at the pro leval they should do random piss tests or after BIG tournments they should piss after a tournment. I know this sounds soo dumb, coke is dumb dont ever do it. im an idiot for even doing it. | ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On April 06 2011 23:51 GreEny K wrote: Ok so let us say that the community does say that the frown upon people who use PED's... What then? Since you say that enforcability is not an issue then what is the purpose of the community making it clear that they are against PED use? Simple. Some people who are on the fence won't use a performance enhancing drug because they aren't sure that it's a good idea and a rule encourages them to follow the little voice in their heads. Some people will get caught and dealt with appropriately because someone turns them in. And, of course, some will do it and get away with it, but that would be true no matter what kind of enforcement there were. What I find kind of absurd about this whole discussion is the idea that because the most effective type of enforcement, blood or urine testing, is not economically feasible, that there shouldn't be a rule. It's the "who cares?" attitude that really risks making pharmacological experimentation universal, because the legal risks and hassles are such that most healthy players who might otherwise consider it probably just need any good reason not to go there. As for prescription use, I'd agree that unless there's strong evidence that it tips the scales for healthy players to use prescription drugs to enhance performance, allowing use under a doctor's care is probably fine. | ||
|
SageFantasma
United States383 Posts
On April 07 2011 05:37 GiantEnemyCrab wrote: the idea of people using drugs for video games make me LOL hard When you're doing it for money, and to increase your chances, if you will, to win money, it's not quite so funny. If we don't compare e-Sports to "normal" sports, even in performance-enhancing drugs, then we're just crippling the development in e-Sports. As such, of course performance-enhancing drugs shouldn't be allowed. Not only is this not setting a good example for players who want to become better at the game, but we have to consider that there are people who are addicted to these drugs, and seeing their favorite SC player taking drugs to win games isn't going to help. Although it wouldn't be easy to enforce, I think it could be dealt with easily enough. For those of us who remember the match-fixing scandal not too long ago, I think this could be dealt with in a similar fashion; remove their credit for winning any tournaments won under the influence, force them to pay their winnings back, and temp-ban them from future competitions for a month or two. This isn't something to be taken lightly, I think this could have adverse effects and should be dealt with accordingly. | ||
|
Giwoon
Korea (South)431 Posts
are you still allowed to take your meds during competitions/LANs? cuz for me it just calms me down and thats usually it | ||
|
flodeskum
Iceland1267 Posts
On April 07 2011 05:00 dogmeatstew wrote: I'm just going to casually point out that you have yet to cite anything in any of your posts and claiming to have a PhD in the subject on the Internet doesn't get you real far. Hell I think I'll go ask Dr Tran, he's a real doctor you know. Anyways, as we seem to be throwing majors around here, I'm a Software Engineer which I guess makes me more qualified to post on the internet that the lot of you... or you know something like that... On topic, I don't mind that at all. I can provide citations for everything I've said in this thread. I only asked for citations because I'm genuinely interested to see if what is claimed is true. And I don't think anyone should care if I have a phd. I can see why you could think that was a brag or some claim to authority. But if you had bothered to look at the context provided I was explaining why I used the DSM as a reference rather than the ICD. As the DSM is also an important textbook of psychiatric diagnosis and would be more familiar to anyone that has studied psychology. Furthermore I don't really understand the view that because someone was medically diagnosed with any given disorder that they *deserve* to take their medication to bring them up to speed. We don't give bikes to people who want to run an Olympic marathon because some guy with an MD said that they have a respirator problem and that ridding a bike would help them with these types of activity... That would be absurd. While no one really likes to hear it, some people are genetically inferior to others in certain aspects. If you have ADHD and it's deemed that amphetamines are unacceptable in pro gaming then I guess you're not going to get very far in sc professionally. No one expects the paraplegic to win the 100m dash. So you would find it unreasonable that an asthmatic athlete would use something like flixotide to treat his asthma? You know, since it contains steroids... I also think you should note that amphetamine and methylphenidate are not the same thing, although related. And there is a considerable difference between a drug like adderall and a drug like concerta and other ADHD meds like strattera. | ||
|
ShamTao
United States419 Posts
Please don't take everything at face value. At this moment, with no objective evidence, we have to give people the benefit of the doubt. edit: I think it's an obvious point that if a drug gives somebody an advantage, it should be banned from any major tournament use. Just because I'm saying that they should not be banned at the moment does not mean that they should not be inspected or the topic investigated. | ||
|
Neo.NEt
United States785 Posts
On April 07 2011 05:50 ShamTao wrote: I'd be really hesitant to just write these types of drugs into the 'abuse' category. There are people who may really need them, so wouldn't that prove to be detrimental? Yes, the competition is serious and there's a lot on the line, but with ZERO evidence to support the claim that drugs like Adderall make you a better player, then this ENTIRE discussion is presenting the situation in a subjective societal view on drugs. Please don't take everything at face value. At this moment, with no objective evidence, we have to give people the benefit of the doubt. I've taken adderall every day for the last 16 months and I am 99.99999999% certain you play better with adderall than without it. How much better? Who knows. It might just be .000001% but I can't imagine that you could do worse. Not exactly scientific evidence, but you'll just have to trust me. | ||
|
REM.ca
Canada354 Posts
On April 07 2011 05:17 AJMcSpiffy wrote: I'd want to see an actual comparison between playing ability with and without these drugs,. This. WTB double-blind placebo trial to see if effects of adderall on cognitive performance translates to game performance. And I'd hope to god the difference would be non-significant if only to encourage players to stop injesting the stuff. | ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On April 07 2011 05:50 ShamTao wrote: I'd be really hesitant to just write these types of drugs into the 'abuse' category. There are people who may really need them, so wouldn't that prove to be detrimental? Yes, the competition is serious and there's a lot on the line, but with ZERO evidence to support the claim that drugs like Adderall make you a better player, then this ENTIRE discussion is presenting the situation in a subjective societal view on drugs. Effectiveness is kind of beside the point as well. If people who are playing in tournaments are seeking controlled substances to enhance their performance whether it works or not there's an interest in making clear that it's not tolerated in a tournament setting. The two reasons not to tolerate it are (1) that it will harm not just one tournament but the entire Starcraft scene if there were a high profile arrest or health problem as a result of drug use outside a doctor's care at a tournament, and (2) that even the perception that controlled substances may enhance performance is enough to start an "arms race" among players who may come to feel they have to use them to keep up, without regard to possible health or legal impacts. I can't speak for everyone in the thread, but my own argument on this is not about some "drugs are bad" kick -- it's solely a matter of their use in a tournament setting creating an environment where people feel pressured to make decisions against their better judgment or health interests to keep up. | ||
|
Moody
United States750 Posts
In the United States it is ridiculously easy to get a prescription for any type of ADHD medication. I wanted some while I was in college, so I went to my doctor, and said I needed it, and BAM I got a prescription. Now, The people voting "No" because take the drug if it is not prescribed to you is illegal, then... ok fine. But saying that anyone who is currently under the influence of any type of ADHD medication is not allowed to compete is a bit ridiculous. On April 07 2011 05:57 REM.ca wrote: This. WTB double-blind placebo trial to see if effects of adderall on cognitive performance translates to game performance. And I'd hope to god the difference would be non-significant if only to encourage players to stop injesting the stuff. LoL!!! I dunno if you've ever taken any ADHD medication, but when the "double blind placebo trial" you're suggesting takes place, the people in the trial will know for damn sure that they're on the medication, and the people not on it will feel the same as they always do. While I was in college, I took enough aderal to kill Charlie Sheen during finals weeks. Let me assure you, there's no way to mistake placebo effect for the actual effect. | ||
|
Lysenko
Iceland2128 Posts
On April 07 2011 06:06 Moody wrote: Now, The people voting "No" because take the drug if it is not prescribed to you is illegal, then... ok fine. But saying that anyone who is currently under the influence of any type of ADHD medication is not allowed to compete is a bit ridiculous. It's not ridiculous, it simply requires disqualifying those who are taking the medication even if under a doctor's care. Whether that's a good idea for a tournament to set such a rule depends on whether they're focused on preventing any performance enhancement or only illegal consumption of the drugs. | ||
|
lettle
United States34 Posts
On April 07 2011 06:06 Moody wrote: LoL!!! I dunno if you've ever taken any ADHD medication, but when the "double blind placebo trial" you're suggesting takes place, the people in the trial will know for damn sure that they're on the medication, and the people not on it will feel the same as they always do. While I was in college, I took enough aderal to kill Charlie Sheen during finals weeks. Let me assure you, there's no way to mistake placebo effect for the actual effect. Yeah man! Science? Fuck that, this guy has a story. | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On April 07 2011 05:57 Neo.NEt wrote: I've taken adderall every day for the last 16 months and I am 99.99999999% certain you play better with adderall than without it. How much better? Who knows. It might just be .000001% but I can't imagine that you could do worse. Not exactly scientific evidence, but you'll just have to trust me. This is what everyone will feel if they take any drug that much. You play better when you feel comfortable and you take it so often that's how you feel comfortable. People will say the exact same thing about any drug from weed to alcohol to caffeine, they play better because that's how they are comfortable playing, it doesn't mean it objectively makes you a better player. There is no way for you to know with such a crude method such as trying yourself. | ||
|
vyyye
Sweden3917 Posts
On April 07 2011 06:20 Treemonkeys wrote: This is what everyone will feel if they take any drug that much. You play better when you feel comfortable and you take it so often that's how you feel comfortable. People will say the exact same thing about any drug from weed to alcohol to caffeine, they play better because that's how they are comfortable playing, it doesn't mean it objectively makes you a better player. There is no way for you to know with such a crude method such as trying yourself. I'd argue that you can tell if you're playing better. I know for a fact that if I play in the morning my mouse precision is absolute crap, I get tunnel vision and my left hand spams as fast as my grandma types (that's a lie, she types faster). After a cup of coffee my play significantly improves as I won't be as tired. Same idea with alcohol, while I can feel more comfortable playing I know that I'm playing shit. It is possible for one person to realize that he plays better while on X, though it's impossible for him to know if it's a placebo effect or not, because as you said it might just be that he's comfortable that way. I'm not sure what I'm even arguing here, guess I'm playing the devil's advocate and the essay I'm writing is really fucking boring. | ||
|
ShogunRuaFan
United States10 Posts
Its almost moronic to even talk about it cuz it'll never happen and of all things Adderall isn't one of them. When nerds start taking HGH and using gear then you should prolly take a 2nd look. | ||
| ||
