M, W, Th, F for me. I got in an extra day by attending a lecture (at my workplace) on one of my off days. Today was my first good and rainy commute.

The lecture was actually about performance enhancing drugs in sport, though not at all what I was expecting. It was by an ethicist, who is *for allowing* peds... he had some compelling arguments, but for me it comes down to the governing body of a sport can make any rule they want - without even having to justify it. What is a sport but a list of mostly arbitrary rules to play and create a score, by which a winner is derived. So no matter how good the ethicist's arguments were if the governing body of the sport says no PED's then to go against that rule is cheating and that should be the core issue, not whether or not the reasons that the drugs are banned are valid or not.