For athletes with type 1 diabetes, technological advances have opened up a whole new world. Tell your doctor you want to run a marathon? In past decades, the announcement might have been met with words of caution, even dismay. Exercise wasn't even part of the equation when it came to diabetes management. Being diagnosed with diabetes was a death knell for the careers of budding young athletes. Today, however, docs (well-informed ones, at least) are more likely to say, 'okay, let's come up with a plan.' Diabetes-related technology is a big reason for this shift in attitudes. An article just out in The New York Times. looks at the extent to which technology has made life easier for type 1 diabetics. Devices like digital meters and automated pumps are not cheap. But they are increasingly efficient, safe, and sleekly high-tech. Above all, they give athletes the tools they need to control blood sugar levels with absolute precision - the kind of precision that was impossible in the days of the urine-glucose test. The down-side, I guess you could say, is the mixed blessing of all that control: "We are essentially the CEOs of our own bodies," observes type 1 diabetic and long-distance cyclist Paul Southerland, "and we don't get a break from them."
1. While diabetic athletes have more-than-normal hurdles to clear on their way to athletic excellence, I have a question. Some international sports agencies have declared “insulin” to be illegal, and categorized it as a performance-enhancing drug. While diabetics MUST take this drug to live, do they not also benefit by escaping recognition as users of performance-enhancing drugs? Besides controlling blood glucose levels, insulin offers athletes added benefits related to endurance performance. On the one hand, this may be looked at as an acceptable “trade off.” Diabetics are penalized by being burdened with the disease; are they being rewarded with enhanced performance BECAUSE of the drug they must use for life? Does this drug give them an advantage unavailable to non-diabetics? Should non-diabetics be allowed to use insulin for its performance-enhancement properties, thus leveling the playing field? Or perhaps diabetics must be segregated, and the playing field leveled by allowing diabetics to compete with/against other insulin-using diabetics? What’s fair? We KNOW that diabetes isn’t FAIR . . . but are the regulations that overlook required insulin-usage FAIR?
Today’s rDNA insulin and analogs provide an unnaturally quick uptake of “fuel” for the muscle tissue. A diabetic on this pathway, who experiences a low bG severe enough to induce the “flight or fight” response, has likewise induced autonomic counter-regulatory responses that include increased levels of cortical steroids, epinephrine, liver enzymes, etc. that could be effectively managed by a “CEO” to cheat the tests and enhance performance “legally.”
Insulin is an anabolic hormone. Athletic endeavors requiring strength and endurance are enhanced by insulin usage. Sports where timing and accuracy are paramount are impaired by fluctuating blood sugar levels.
Golf was faced with a similar “fairness” question which was answered in court: if a competitor with a genetic muscle disorder knows the rules and cannot compete LEGALLY (by walking the course)—he cannot compete.
If insulin is NOT an illegal substance, why are weightlifters using—and dying—from this medication?
Posted at 1:43PM on Jul 27th 2007 by Melody