>>My point about it being silly, and how that relates to this
>>discussion, is the role of biochemistry. If biochemistry
>>really gives people such a strong advantage (as I think one
>>can validly argue here, and as we've seen in numerous doping
>>scandals over the years), then is it really people who are
>>competing, or is it biochemistries that are competing? And
>if
>>it's biochemistries, why should anyone care?
>
>True
>like I said I knew there was more nuance
>shit you see I got Case to recant something down below
>sorry I'm a sucker for debates and discussions from
>everywhere
>thanks for breaking it down further
>I miss that on these boards

Yeah, and I'll admit that while I meant all that I said, I was playing up the shock value. You and I disagree on some aspects of this, and that's fine.