Let's ban it and tear up all their records and kick them out of the sport for life.

Getting it off for a emergency bathroom break..

Speedo introduced its shark-skin suit before the 2004 Athens Olympics and there was a lot of discussion then whether or not it gave swimmers an advantage. This is the same issue but a different year.

As long as all of the swimmers are allowed to use the same suit, then it should not be banned. Olympic-level swimmers can easily get sponsors so the $500 price should not be a problem.

In triathlon, there are restrictions whether or not the athletes can wear full bodysuits for the swim portion, because the full bodysuits increase buoyancy and so can provide an advantage.

...then swimmers should swim in the nude. That removes any "unnatural" help any suit may give. Ratings would go through the roof too. :)

Shoes should be banned in track and field.

Does the thing melt? Does it disintegrate in chlorine? I guess that would be a smart marketing trick.

My son swims for his High School team, so I don't know all about the competitive swim world, but I'm a little skeptical over such short life for the suit.

The introduction of clap skates provided a technological advantage in speed skating. They weren't banned.

The difference between "technological doping" and chemical doping is that one harms the athlete. Banning chemical doping makes sense because an athlete shouldn't have to put their long term health on the line in order to be competitive. New equipment is open to all, and should only be banned if, for instance, speedo would only sell their new suit to American athletes.

I bet it's about as fragile as a pair of nylons, especially given the contortions required to put it on by crawling into the armhole or whatever they have to do....

Once clothing is banned I suppose undersized "personal equipment" should be banned as well. Smaller "packages" obviously would create less drag and therefore be unfairly advantageous to less "manly" swimmers.

This sounds a bit like the fiberglas vs. bamboo pole vaulting controversy of a couple of decades ago.

But of course the point: equipment OK, drugs bad.

How about LASIK, tho? And wasn't there some golfer that was excluded bacause he has an artificial leg?

I think that these people are forgetting what the whole point is behind anti-doping programs: It is wrong to disadvantage people who refuse to use drugs that do long term damage to their bodies. These suits are not dangerous, and are available to all. Banning these suits would be like banning swimmers from shaving their bodies. The suits are not harmful, and the cost is nothing compared to the cost of having to travel to meets and training costs. Although I have to wonder why these people need a new suit so often.

Or maybe not. In sports like alpine skiing, the tech advantage is as old as the proverbial hills.

My prediction is that in a couple of years I'll be able to pick up mass-produced Chinese-manufactured LZR suits for my kids at Wal-Mart, attractive priced at at well under $100 -- with compellingly-efficient knock-offs a bargain at $29.99.