Olympian Adam Kreek criticized for exploring pro-doping viewpoint
Extreme opinions can stir conversation, Kreek says
Olympic rower and CBC Sports columnist Adam Kreek came under fire this week after we published his latest Kreek Speak feature article.
Kreek took the rarely heard "pro-doping" point of view, and spoke with David Asprey, a "biohacker", and himself a doper, who "believes everyone over 24 should be free to use any and all performance-enhancing substances."
Anti-dopers were quick to chastise the point of view that seemed to sympathize with dopers.
"Sports harm athletes who dont dope". Really??? Give this guy with no credentials platform on <a href="https://twitter.com/cbcsports">@cbcsports</a>, shame <a href="https://twitter.com/adamkreek">@adamkreek</a> you can do better
—@AlisonSydor.<a href="https://twitter.com/adamkreek">@adamkreek</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/AlisonSydor">@AlisonSydor</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/cbcsports">@cbcsports</a> You're pushing acceptance of doping. Why always so sympathetic? Insulting to clean athletes & true sport
—@GeoffKabush<a href="https://twitter.com/adamkreek">@adamkreek</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/cbcsports">@cbcsports</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/therealjayirwin">@therealjayirwin</a> "Early adopter"? Is that what they call innovative criminals in your circle?
—@ListerFarrarThey included Olympic gold medal kayaker Adam van Koeverden who didn't agree with the one-sided stance of the article.
<a href="https://twitter.com/cbcsports">@cbcsports</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/GeoffKabush">@GeoffKabush</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/adamkreek">@adamkreek</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/AlisonSydor">@AlisonSydor</a> looking fwd to it, since as it stands you've just published a piece that endorses cheating.
—@vankayakRetired Olympic gold medallist Simon Whitfield, on the other hand, viewed the piece for what it was: one side of the conversation.
.<a href="https://twitter.com/GeoffKabush">@GeoffKabush</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/adamkreek">@adamkreek</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/AlisonSydor">@AlisonSydor</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/cbcsports">@cbcsports</a> as a clean athlete I wasn't "insulted", I just read it as an <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/opinion?src=hash">#opinion</a> - <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/counterpoint?src=hash">#counterpoint</a>
—@simonwhitfieldBut there is method to Kreek's "madness" in all of this.
<a href="https://twitter.com/AlisonSydor">@AlisonSydor</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/cbcsports">@cbcsports</a> Pushing the doping conversation forward requires conversations with people of extreme opinions and experience
—@adamkreekIn the coming days, he will be publishing a follow-up taking the "anti-doping" stance in which he speaks with Trent Stellingwerff the Innovation & Research / Physiology Lead at the Canadian Sport Institute.
Required reading
The doping conversation has been newly ignited since the initial release of the World Anti-Doping Agency report on doping in Athletics in November, and the follow up, just last week.
15 things to know about the athletics doping scandal <a href="https://t.co/T5vxCnK4dp">https://t.co/T5vxCnK4dp</a> <a href="https://t.co/qkpiX4La1x">pic.twitter.com/qkpiX4La1x</a>
—@CBCOlympicsCBC reporter and former 100-metre Olympian Anson Henry's opinion piece on why he understands the reasons some athletes cheat also adds to the discussion. Henry himself was sent a Pan Am medal in the mail months after competition because the original gold medallist was caught doping.
What do you think? Did Kreek's article endorse cheating? Do you understand why some athletes would be drawn to PEDs? Let us know in the comments below.