Blood. Why is gene doping so relevant? Due to the power of sport as a business, there are various pressures to be able to design the superman, capable of winning in this or that competition and achieving fame, money, or whatever it is that is sought. One of the main characteristic problems of gene doping is that our own body would be the producer of the physical advantage, so that its use is practically undetectable. For this reason, it is one of the main challenges that wada (world anti-doping agency) faces today and in the future.
On the other hand, if gene therapies work as expected and are capable of preserving a human being from muscular deterioration, improving and prolonging their good physical condition for years... Does it make sense to deprive a person, athlete or not, of these whatsapp number list benefits? So is the use of gene therapy in sport ethical or not? Here comes the real and indecipherable enigma: to find where the limit is between what is ethical and what is not. We could put the limit, for example, on the athlete's health and state that any external factor that poses a risk to the athlete's health is inadmissible. But then, if a gene therapy is shown to be safe, is it ethical to use it for performance enhancement?
Where is the limit between a pathological situation and a normal situation in which the administration of certain substances can be allowed? Furthermore, to what extent should we prohibit the use of these practices? From special effects in film to music production, all disciplines are punctuated by the intervention of factors other than the pure art or skill of the actors involved. Film post-production, the use of autotune (yes, well-known and undeniably talented artists use autotune in their recordings to perfect and explore their works), even more common and daily