I found some additional info about this medical intervention and the reasons why they choose for this option :http://www.uhasselt.be/UH/Tijdschrif...ing.html?i=482

This new treatment approach is a world première and a new option between other to choose from .

Ask someone who wears glasses:yawn:

http://images.wikia.com/villains/images/b/be/Jaws.jpeg

first thing that sprang to mind

Maybe because it would give some an unfair advantage in some way. Sports would be one area that comes to mind.

I think there was a sprinter who was a bi-lat BKA who was putting up Olympic type times due to his new springy legs.

It's also unfair to not let a person change something about themselves. Sports are already in trouble from performance enhancements.

What if we can replace a pitcher's damaged shoulder? Should we allow it or force him to retire? You could make the case that fixing his shoulder gives him an unfair advantage over those who have a natural ability to heal or whose anatomy/genes/etc prevented them from damaging their shoulder in the first place.

Life is already unfair. Money gives people an unfair advantage, so does natural born talent, good genes, social standing, random chance, etc... Who gets to decide what we're allowed to change about ourselves?

Is it unfair to let a person change themselves to have the same intellectual capacity as someone who was just lucky enough to be born with the right genes to make them smart?

What if someone wants to change their eye color, skin color, hair color, or even their gender altogether? What if they want to be taller? Or shorter? Or regrow their hair? What if they want to see in the dark? Who has the right to tell them they can't and why?

What meaning does race have when you can change your skin color?

What does sexual orientation or marriage mean when gender can be changed completely and perfectly?

What does it mean to be human if you can add "after-market parts" like a tail and cat ears or eyes that can see in the dark?

What are the implications on society when those with access to good healthcare are able to live forever?

A lot of those questions seem like science fiction, but they'll all almost certainly become a reality in the next 20-50 years. It'll change not only medicine, but society itself.

I'm not talking about repairing damage or even natural physical shortcomings. I'm talking about a replacement shoulder that gives said pitcher a 200mph fastball. If you allow it then you basically mandate players having to be enhanced in order to play in the major leagues now. You're ok with that?

Why not? Baseball's getting kinda boring anyway... If the players want to do it, who cares?

Forget the shoulder, give all the outfielders a big hand so they can catch the ball easier, that way anyone even in little league will be basicly mandated to play with a big hand.

can you see people going through double amputations just to run a bit faster?
a double amputee might take up sports but a sportsman taking up life as a double amputee???????

Sooner or later we'll se those kind of idiots.
There were no voluntary amputees (at least in sports) because the replacements were far inferior to the real thing. Personally for me, replacements will always be inferior to the real thing, but if sportsmen (and women) are prepared to kill themselves with chemicals just for a piece of metal around their neck, some prestige and 20min of fame I guess they'll start chopping their legs off for a deluxe aluminium jump hip, that can make you jump 120m (in 5 colors).
Anti doping laws will have to be expanded into anti enhancement laws

Will we though?
its a major permanant proceedure with massive implications and lifelong complications on every aspect of a persons life, its not like doping at all.
To get any real benefit to any potential very short career the proceedure will have to be undertaken at an early age, which leads to further complications as many young amputees end up having severe problems with prosthetics due to growth which probably negates any possibility of even the short career.
But like you point out, there is a factor to weigh...."idiots":03:

Less than one in 10 million athletes will be the ''idiot'', but he/she will get the full media attention. And then saying how he improved his performance, media then blowing everything out of proportion and you get more followers that were persuaded like sheep... and soon you got a trend

Springy legs got lots of media coverage over his times, all the developments in sports prosthetics have got good coverage over the years. Has anyone even approached the idea of cutting their legs off to run on them?
They have approached however idea of fitting them on your feet as footwear. Rather like wearing a baseball glove instead of an operation to give big hands.
Likewise sports wheelchairs rack up some amazing times and are constantly getting lighter and faster, has there been a single case of an athlete wanting to cripple themselves so they can get the same marathon time as the wheelchair competitors? There have been cases of able bodied people using wheelchairs, but not of people going through the other way.