Researchers: Prosthetic legs give Pistorius unfair advantage
November 19th, 2009From the New York Times and AP:
A new study published today in The Journal of Applied Physiology concludes that prosthetic legs worn by double amputee sprinter Oscar Pistorius give him an unfair advantage over able-bodied runners.
Researchers said Pistorius’s blades allow him to turn over his strides more quickly and with more power than a runner with biological legs.
The debate over the runner’s prosthetic legs has been raging for several years. Pistorius was cleared to race in the Beijing Olympics after a lengthy dispute, but failed to make the necessary qualifying time.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, November 19th, 2009 at 12:13 pm and is filed under exercise/sports, research news.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Email This Post
Our RSS Feed
December 15th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Wow. How ironic is it that someone with a disability is now considered to have a greater ability than a non-disabled person? Does this mean that there should be a separate Olympics, called the “Super Olympics,” so that all persons wearing prosthetics can participate? Perhaps the rules might state that every runner must wear identical prosthetic legs to have the same “fair advantage.”
December 7th, 2009 at 12:28 am
Technology is advancing quicker than society can keep up: we’ve reached a time when an individual with a prosthetic arm or leg can function better then a non-disabled person, yet still–ironically–be viewed with pity. Will prostheses eventually go the way of glasses—accommodating so completely that their users are no longer considered “disabled” by society? This hypothetical (but entirely possible) future would be appreciated, I think, by people who lose their limbs later in life due to injury or accident. Where, though, would it leave those who choose not to use prostheses (in particular, people who are born without a limb and simply adapt to their condition, in many cases, reaching full or virtually full functionality)? If technology is viewed as a “solution” to disability–a solution that makes the disabled body appear and operate as a non-disabled body–where does that leave those who do not see their physical difference as a defect?
December 1st, 2009 at 1:13 am
As technology advances, the controversy of prosthetic use will undoubtedly become more of an issue. Where will the line be drawn between what is seen as an acceptable prosthetic and what is seen as one that gives an athlete an unfair advantage? We live in a society regulated by the Americans with Disabilities Act which states that disabled people are allowed the same rights as nondisabled. However, when the time comes when people with prosthetics surpass nondisabled athletes, the ADA will certainly be questioned.