Slashdot Mirror
Olympic Swimmers 'Certain' To Pick Up Virus From Three Teaspoons of Rio Water (independent.co.uk)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via The Independent: The Associated Press has released a 16-month-long study that shows just days before the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro begin, the waterways in the city are teeming with dangerous viruses and bacteria. The report says both athletes and tourists are at risk of getting ill from the contaminated water. "The first results of the study published over a year ago showed viral levels at up to 1.7 million times what would be considered worrisome in the United States or Europe," reports The Independent. "At those concentrations, swimmers and athletes who ingest just three teaspoons of water are almost certain to be infected with viruses that can cause stomach and respiratory illnesses and, more rarely, heart and brain inflammation -- although whether they actually fall ill depends on a series of factors including the strength of the individual's immune system." Many of the athletes have been taking antibiotics, bleaching oars and donning plastic suits and gloves to prevent illnesses, but antibiotics combat bacterial infections, not viruses. The AP investigation found that infectious adenovirus readings turned up at nearly 90 percent of the test sites over 16 months of testing. What's more is that "the beaches often have levels of bacterial markers for sewage pollution that would be cause for concern abroad -- and sometimes even exceed Rio state's lax water safety standards," reports The Independent.
Just don't take your teaspoon while you swim. Problem solved.
The water-sports athletes at Rio will be up shit creek.
They've known for years and it is not uncommon for the Olympic city to host an event in another city (e.g. London held Sailing etc in Dorset), why did they HAVE to have these events in the dangerous Rio waters? I mean sure, a city that is on the coast, unlike others like the aforementioned London, COULD host water sports IF there are suitable waters. In this case there are no suitable waters, why couldn't they just move the event? It is not like they spent money for infrastructure for Sailing - in fact they didn't spend the promised money for sewage treatment, so they could just move the venue at any time.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
And then bring it home to the rest of the world.
An example of the Olympic games forward planning and their high standards.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Will they be swimming in the waterways? Don't they have swimming pools with chlorinated water?
Some of the events are events.
If I was in one of those sports I would be thinking pretty hard about skipping the Olympics no matter how big a deal they happen to be. I can't imagine a gold medal being worth the problems that would come from swimming through raw sewage. The fact that the IOC hasn't stepped in to change the venue tells you everything you need to know about how much the IOC cares about the well being of the athletes.
In this case there are no suitable waters, why couldn't they just move the event?
A great question. I think the answer is that the IOC doesn't actually give a shit (pun intended) about the well being of the athletes as long as they get paid. They let the Russians into the games despite CLEAR evidence of state sponsored doping. The IOC could easily have set benchmarks for water quality and time tables and made arrangements for a backup venue if the cleanup couldn't happen in time. But they couldn't be bothered. Why? I think the answer will be found if you follow the money.
The reality is that (a) most of the athletes are borderline sociopathic animals,
Speaking as someone who knows several Olympic athletes personally you are completely full of shit if you actually believe that. I played D1 college sports (wrestling) and one of my coaches was a multi-time Olympic gold medalist. Nicest guy you would ever care to meet. He loved to compete in his chosen sport like some people here love to tinker with nifty technology. But that doesn't make one a "borderline sociopath". Furthermore through sport he managed to get out of some fairly rough circumstances and so have several others I know. I've trained with and interacted with numerous Olympians over the last 35 years competing and coaching my sport. If you actually knew any of these people the word "sociopath" would be the furthest thing from your mind. The fact that you feel the need to tear down someone you never met and know nothing about means that YOU are the sociopath in this conversation.
and these sorts of problems are not going to prevent them from fighting hard for their shiny piece of metal;
If you think an Olympic medal means winning a "shiny piece of metal", you don't have a clue what it represents.
From living through the London Olympics, it was pretty clear that the whole event is just for TV.
Of course it is. That's one of the main sources of revenue for the Olympics and for any major sport. Every major sports league is made for TV because that's how you get the largest audience. The number of people who can actually attend any given event in person is comparatively small. NBC pays the Olympics tens of billions of dollars for broadcasting rights. Of course the games are televised.
The fact that the athletes are still going there tells you everything you need to know about how much the athletes care about their own well-being.
A lot of them aren't going because of the sanitation problems. But let me ask you this. If you had worked and trained your whole life for something that you probably only had one shot to accomplish, would you give that up easily? Something that for many of them can literally change their life and that of their family for the better? If you say you would give it up easily then you don't adequately understand the question or the stakes involved. I was once an athlete that competed at a fairly high level and I still coach in my sport. I understand why the athletes are conflicted about giving up their chance at an Olympic medal.
For some of these athletes they are literally competing for their future financial well being. Winning an Olympic medal in some places can be life changing. It can make some of them national hero's and set them and their family up for years to come. Would you swim through a river of shit if it would drag your family out poverty? Because for some, that is the stakes on the table.
Even for those not attempting to drag themselves out of poverty, competing in the Olympics can be life changing. In my sport it's basically a job interview. Competing in the Olympics can result in a modest but solid income and career for those who want to coach in the sport. Win a gold medal and it can result in substantial economic benefit if you play your cards right. It's about a lot more than just a shiny piece of metal.
The poor people of Rio are paying for those games with their health and their lives. Sociopath is too strong a word but be honest: how they suffer doesn't bother you or anyone else living it up at the Olympic party at public expense. http://money.cnn.com/gallery/n... http://www.businessinsider.com... https://www.theguardian.com/sp... http://www.theatlantic.com/bus... http://www.economist.com/blogs...
The word he is looking for is Narcissism: the pursuit of gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one's own attributes. Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a long term pattern of abnormal behavior characterized by exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, and a lack of understanding of others' feelings.
"The first results of the study published over a year ago showed viral levels at up to 1.7 million times what would be considered worrisome in the United States or Europe,...the beaches often have levels of bacterial markers for sewage pollution that would be cause for concern abroad -- and sometimes even exceed Rio state's lax water safety standards..."
When viral levels are that high, why are you trying to convince anyone that Rio even has a documented "water safety standard"? You've got to be fucking kidding me with that shit.
With those kinds of "standards", bleach would considered a safe alternative to drinking water, asbestos is just a "mild irritant" in construction, and DDT is considered a flavor additive in food production.
No wonder no one gives a shit about Zika infections anymore.
Given all of Brazil's problems, was hosting the Olympics such a good idea? Never mind that the FIFA World Cup nearly bankrupted the country, they're now putting on a show that they can't afford. They have rampant poverty in Rio, pollution issues, body parts washing up on beaches and even Zika yet here we are about to have another meaningless Olympic games in a country that won't easily recover from it.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
The IOC committee members who selected Rio for the Olympics should be require to pre-swim the open water race courses. Also I expect all IOC committee members to give up their hotel suits to athletes whose residence rooms are not ready. Because the games are about the athletes, right?
Given the odds and the competition, that's an incredibly short-sighted gamble. To devote years to something that unlikely when there are MANY better ways to provide. It's all about ego. "Look at me".
Just because something is a long shot doesn't make it unworthy of pursuing. Very few Olympic athletes put all their eggs in the pro-athlete basket. Most who pursue Olympic dreams have backup plans independent of sport. In my sport (wrestling) virtually all the athletes who compete in the games are either college graduates or are currently in college. They pursue their Olympic ambition but most have jobs and go on to perfectly normal careers. You only have a few years to be a top level athlete in most cases so the opportunity cost to chasing the Olympics is relatively small in most cases in the long run.
All about ego? No it is not. I won't deny that ego is a part of it but that is far too glib an evaluation of what is really going on. It's about fun. It's about money. It's about opportunity. It's about goal setting and achievement. It's about a lot of things well beyond ego. And frankly there is nothing wrong with trying to prove you are the best in the world at something. If you are good enough to qualify for the Olympic games that proves you are remarkably talented at something. No different than an engineer building something amazing or an artist creating a fantastic work of art.
Point taken. But really, in this regard how does competing at the Olympics differ from a stint on any of several reality TV shows? And arguably the TV shows might be safer.
Sports is a business of entertainment. To get money from sports it has to be able to draw a crowd. There are however some pretty substantial differences between sports and reality TV. 1) Reality TV isn't real whereas sports (usually) is. 2) Sports demonstrably has a lot of benefits for those who participate even if you ignore the financial. I defy you to say the same about Reality TV. 3) Sports still exists even if there is no camera recording the event. Most of the competitions were never recorded and certainly never broadcast. Reality TV doesn't exist without a broadcast.
I'm not saying this to be flippant, nor to minimize the dedication and hard work and sacrifices of athletes who compete at the highest levels. But seriously, when do we stop giving in to corporate greed and corruption?
Cut off the money and the greed and corruption will go away. Sports business is no different from any other business, be it technology, manufacturing or retail. If you bring money into the picture, you can be sure greed and corruption will follow. The best you can hope for is to keep it contained.
I don't know about you, but to me that sounds even more like "Hunger Games".
You mean except for the bits about killing people or the fact that it's quite voluntary, right? Spare me the silly comparisons. There are things you can rightfully criticize about high level sports but comparing them to the Hunger Games is just idiotic. If you want to make serious criticisms I'll be happy to provide you a long list of problems to work on. Plenty to choose from I assure you.
If I was any kind of a swimmer, then yes, I probably would. The more important question is, "with all of humanity's productive power and technological advancements, why is it still necessary for anyone to swim through a river of shit in order drag their families out of poverty?" Never mind doing so for a chance at a 'job interview'.
Now you are on to the right question. The fact is that the IOC could EASILY have relocated the venues. The fact that they didn't speaks to the corruption within that organization. The IOC professes to care about the well being of the athletes but their actions often seem to indicate otherwise. What they really care about is the money train for the people within the IOC. This isn't surprising but I'm a little surprised they care so little for their brand that they are willing to endure all this bad press over what really was an avoidable problem.
http://i.imgur.com/FApqk3D.jpg
The remaining events they're in aren't as readily impacted by long-term doping, only short-term doping and other exploits (such as hyper-oxygenated blood for cycling) which all of their athletes are being invasively triple-checked for at this point.
Sadly not true at all. Russian wrestling has the largest number of positive doping results for Russian athletes after athletics and weightlifting. I've been in that sport for 35 years and I can assure you that both long and short term doping would help a lot in wrestling. Same with swimming, gymnastics, and a variety of other sports. What people don't realize about doping is that the most useful thing about it is that it reduces recovery time. It allows you to train more and at a higher intensity. This can make a huge difference even in skill based sports like wrestling.
Furthermore you can check all you want but it isn't hard to pass a drug test. Lance Armstrong was tested hundreds of times over years and never tested positive. With the aid of a doctor it's almost trivial to avoid testing positive even if someone is using something that the tests can detect. Which often isn't the case.
So yeah, Russian got a big bucket of banhammer to the noggin' this year, and I expect several more of their athletes to get stuck by the at-games testing and DQ'ed.
Not big enough. The Russians engaged in state sponsored doping. The ONLY response to that that has any meaning is to ban the country that engages in it. All of them. The government of Russia and their sports ministry engaged in systematic corruption of sport. You cannot remedy that by banning individual athletes. By the IOC being unwilling to make the tough decision they have effectively sanctioned state sponsored doping. Every country can look at Russia now and rightly think "there is no punishment for state sponsored doping programs". If an athlete tests positive they just throw that athlete under the bus and send the next one out there. Economists call this moral hazard and that is exactly what is happening here.