Much to my surprise, performance enhancing drugs have been used for a lot longer than we think. But is the whole “performance enhancing drugs” scheme really that unfair?
If you look at Michael Phelps, for example, he has size 14 feet and grew up in a high altitude location. Anyone who grew up in a high altitude location automatically has blood with greater oxygen capacity compared to someone who was raised at sea level. These specific features help him travel through the water at a much faster pace. Some may say that this is an unfair advantage. So would it actually be fair if people unlike Michael Phelps took a performance enhancing drug to level the playing field? Even though performance enhancing drugs started being used decades ago, they are becoming much more widespread.
It’s an obvious fact that drugs are against the rules and will more than likely stay this way for a long time, but we’re the ones who are ultimately defining the rules of sports. According to the World Anti-Doping Agency code, a drug is illegal if “it is performance enhancing, if it is a health risk, or if it violates the ‘spirit of the sport’.” One effective example that is used is the comparison of human sport and animal sport. Take horse racing, for instance. The sport itself has close to nothing to do with the jockey. Of course his weight matters, but the skill level and training level of the horse is what counts. This is biological enhancement, or which horse has the best natural skill level. Human sport is much different than this because it has close to nothing to do with natural ability. Going back to the whole argument regarding the “spirit of sport”, human sport is far from being against this concept.
Sticking to the topic of biological enhancement, genetics come into play, as well. African Americans, for example, are better at short distance running than others typically are because they have a gene in their body that gives them better muscle type and bone structure for short distance running. So why is it that we don’t criticize against the players who have this genetic superiority? Isn’t this just as unfair as a player who takes performance enhancing drugs?
Watch this video further explaining performance enhancing drugs today.
Sources
http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/38/6/666.full
http://www.beep.ac.uk/content/671.0.html
This is a vey interesting debate and like you said no PEDs will probably be allowed anytime soon in sports. Disagreeing with a comment earlier however, currently there is no HGH testing in football so for all we know they are already drugged out right now. And does anyone really care about the Home Run Derby as it is now because the tv ratings are terrible when it is on. But also, PEDs aren’t only anabolic steroids. Currently right now painkillers, HGH and amphetamines also fall under the PED category. I’m just wondering what your opinions are about banning only steroids or every substance than can make the body recover faster and boost performance?
I also can say I disagree with this post as well. Taking PEDs have long term effects to ones health. Also, taking PEDs will make some sports unfair to those who work hard( I also get genetic factors may make this unfair but genetics is something that is out of your control; where as injecting something is in your control) Branching off of your comment about african americans being able to perform better in short distances I am taking a stand and also agreeing with a previous comment, by saying that that is also a theory. There are several cases where a Caucasian can have more muscle than an african american. I see that as a theory along with a generalization. Besides that, your blog was written very well and had a nice structure to it 🙂 It was nice to read something that brings up a bit of a stir ; way to take a risk!
I disagree with this post. Minding the obvious issue that PEDs could cause serious physical issues, what good would that do for athletes to be dependent on PEDs? Is that really what fans would want to watch? And I would love to see actual evidence of the THEORY about ALL African-Americans being able to run faster than other races in short distance. That itself is a theory in which does not have enough definite proof. And if that theory was proven to be true, no, it is not in the least sense comparable to being born with a specific gene and choosing to take a prohibited man-made drug.
I also disagree with this post. Allowing PEDs in sports has severe long-term effects on people’s bodies. Also if PEDs were allowed in sports don’t you think sports would lose their luster? The Home-Run Derby would be pointless, football would be drugged out athletes hitting each other at extreme levels to the point where they lose their “humanness.” I think allowing PEDs would negatively affect sports. And most importantly, sports would become a drug race for who could get their hands on the best drug the quickest to gain the best advantage. You would loose the pizazz of sports by allowing drugs.
I completely disagree. The way your body is born has no comparison at all to knowingly taking performance enhancing substances. You have no control over what skin color you came out of the womb as or where your parents chose to live when you were a baby. You do on the other hand have control over whether or not you chose to inject yourself with anabolic steroids.