Why in your view are banned supstances wrong to take?

I think if you are genetically superior enough to take the drugs and perform witht hem, then you have a true gift of handling a lot of shit in your system at one time.

Personally I know I am not genetically fit enought to handle some of those drugs and live to get a benefit from them. But, kudos to those freaks who can do it. Keep up the good work you f***in "cheats" I still respect you.

I wish I could take those drugs and run that fast without having a heart attack or something!!

Why is it wrong?

Come on, can't you think of something more worthy for contribution?

Just because something is banned doesn't always mean it is wrong to do. As in the case of banning free speach.

Why is it morally objectionable to cheat in the context I asked? and why are you so angry?

If you could spell speech you might be taken more seriously.

Why don't you actually put forward an argument? Cheating unfairly deprives others, that's why it is objectionable and considered morally wrong. This is obvious, so what is your point?

Spelling's not a good skill I've acquired.

Cheating is only wrong when there is an accepted rule in the game not being respected. Implied rule and not the defined rules make it moral according to the players involved. Why is it wrong to cheat when the governing bodies and coaches turn the obvious cheak and lip service is made and the blinders are put on unless there’s political repercussions. Players cheat and would cheat again if there was no checks and balance. Asking this question may bring responses to the essence of why we think PE drugs are immoral to start with.

Athletes are on PEdrugs.

Not all think its immoral, I do because it keeps a habit going which does not promote good heath and we are contributing to a system which exposes youth to the helthless habit and its wrong to lie to preserve the dignity of the sport. Political leverage from congress is further needed. Cut it out of baseball, football, and track and field. Cut it out at corporate levels,

Test heavily and punish heavily! case by case considerations

Why is it wrong?

1) In most cases use of PE drugs is against the rules. Once you agree to compete in a sport, especially at the elite level, you are agreeing to compete within the framework of the rules. Don't like it? Change the rules.

2) Now as to why they should STAY against the rules....

PE drugs come with risk of death and disease. They are also highly effective. Make them legal and athletes will be forced to use in order to stay competitive. So, in essence to allow PE drugs would change sport from a celebration of what athletes can accomplish through disciplined training and nutrition, to a pharmaceutical freak show that would take years off your life if you want to participate. Of course, some would argue that's the case right now in many sports.

For me, it is old fashioned ideal of everyone training to the best of his/her ability with what God gave them.

Also, many PEDs have the potential for health related side effects and no one should feel like he/she has to take or do something that is life threatening just to compete in a sport.

Another argument is economics: In theory the richest countries would have the best drugs and physicians so they would be at a huge advantage over a poorer country. In some sports this is going to be the case anyway as the equipment demands (or climate demands) will dictate who can participate.

If a group of athletes wanted to start their own league where there was no doping control and it was no holds barred, I would support them in doing it from a philosophical standpoint, but I would not watch the events. However, if they want to play in the Olympic sandbox, they must abide by the IOC rules. Same with IAAF, UCI, FIS, FINA, etc.

In itself, it is not wrong to take PED's at all. It is absolutely no different in philosphy to trying to improve one's diet, equipment or training.

However the reason why PED's are officially banned, I think, is from a safety point of view especially for the younger participants in sports. If PED's were suddenly made officially legal, then they would be open to be used by all competitors in sports.

With young highschool participants this would be potentially unsafe as it would be unlikely that these individuals would have the same medical supervision and support as a top level professional. This would put these people at a higher risk of all the medical complications resulting from useage of such substances.

I cannot see any other reason as to why PED's should be banned.

Banned substances are artificial fixes.

why do we compete? To see who is the best athlete and competitor? or to see who has the best druggist?

In any competitive event rules are established to level the playing field for all those involved. The breaking of the rules to achieve an unfair advantage compromises the integrity of the event creating a handicap for other competitors and taints the very essence of the competition rendering it unmeritorious. These truths are self evident and the very reason rules are created in the first place. When these rules are violated there must be punishments associated with each individual rule to coincide with the severity of each broken rule.

In the world of professional sports the rules take on far more serious consequences due to such things as money, morality, community, etc. If you're a kid playing sports with some friends and someone cheats is it a big deal? To some, but when you're breaking the rules as a professional athlete making millions of dollars that are paid by the fans themselves then you're in effect stealing from them and the other players who follow the rules and get paid a far lesser amount of money because of it. Also if the message that we're sending to the youth of our society is that cheating is okay then the ramifications to our future morality as a whole become degraded.

Cheating in sports and all walks of life for that matter at all levels must always be met with stiff consequences for these very reasons. Taking banned substances are a violation of the rules and constitute cheating creating a degradation to the event and rendering ineffective the very rules that were created to prevent cheating in the first place. That is why banned substances are wrong to take.

Yours truly,

Locknload

You say the rules are there to level the playing field, but I would argue that the rule against performance enhancing drugs makes the playing field unlevel - we know there are clean athletes out there, but we also know there are dirty, and potentially uncaught, dirty athletes (another BALCO). Hence and uneven playing field.

Another argument was posted above about how PED's are banned and supplements and vitamins etc. are not banned because PED's carry a health risk. I pose this question to you - what about gene doping? In this, there could be a treatment with less health risks than supplements, hence no logical reason to ban the procedure other than the fact that it just seems like cheating, whereas supplements don't carry this connotation. What will the IOC do about this when it becomes a reality? Already we know that it will be impossible to detect...

I realize you're playing devils advocate here but your first point has no merit. The rules are clear that taking PEDs is a violation of the rules not the other way around as you would suggest. Rules are rules, created by the committee that decides on the rules. You may not like the rule or agree with the rule but again the rules are the rules.

I think the health issue of PEDs is of concern to many but not the reason they are banned in my opinion. Of course you would have to ask the committee that established the rule for confirmation on that. I think with vitamins and suppliments, they are things we get from foods and other natural sources and that PEDs are not. As far as gene doping goes and what the IOC will do about it. That is up to the IOC committee to decide if and when they convene on the issue. I'm sure they will at some point and I'm also sure if they decide to rule against it then they will find a way to detect it occured. I'd like to think that we're heading in the right direction on these issues.

PE Drugs take the purity out of any sport. I remember John Treacy, in an interview after he retired from international running say that he never used a supplement, not even a vitamin.

Not that vitamins are banned substances, but I get his point.

There is something pure and "human" about clean sports. The fact that some people use drugs to get what they cannot naturally get from training lessens the outcome.

There is a fine line and where to divide is debatable. How would you feel if you lost a race to someone you previously and consistently beat and you found out that they started taking prozac (remember that?) and they said that since their outlook on life improved, so dod their training?

Listen

My opinion is similar to a lot of other people

Whether it is the MLB, NBA, NFL or track. A lot of kids look up to the top people in their sport. I remember my parents showing me pictures in the paper when I was a kid of Ben Johnson winning the 100m gold in '88.

If kids start to see their heroes using drugs then how will it affect them? What if they dont have heroes but they just want to make a big sports team?

Correct me if I am wrong but if they see older/pro athletes taking everything to get an edge... it will be a lot easier for them to think it is alright "everyone" is doing it. And we all know that younger kids don't exactly think about the future or mortality.

Bonds, Giambi all these jacka$$'s. If even one of them contributes to a younger kid taking some juice... then they have all done wrong. They lie in court, they mock the american judicial system, etc.

p.s: In track I would rather a kid have a 4:25 mile pb and be clean then run 4:05. The problem here is that kids no longer can view their own personal goals as achievements. I mean now that I havent ran competitively for 5 years I look back at my pb's with pride. They are mine! They are real! And they didnt come with any juice. I dont think i would feel any different had a ran 1 second faster or 5.

The REAL question here...is why are drugs banned in the first place? Is it because they cause health problems? If EPO and steroids did not cause health problems later down the line, would they be legal? Why not make them legal anyway? Pushing the body as far as it can go. The consequences however would be dire regarding health problems.

So this leads us to another question...would you rather be a world record holder and die in 10 years? or would you rather be clean and be a mediocre runner forever?

This is the question I believe cause many elite athletes to take drugs...their need to win is worth any potential health risks in the future.

realist wrote:

In itself, it is not wrong to take PED's at all. It is absolutely no different in philosphy to trying to improve one's diet, equipment or training.

However the reason why PED's are officially banned, I think, is from a safety point of view especially for the younger participants in sports. If PED's were suddenly made officially legal, then they would be open to be used by all competitors in sports.

With young highschool participants this would be potentially unsafe as it would be unlikely that these individuals would have the same medical supervision and support as a top level professional. This would put these people at a higher risk of all the medical complications resulting from useage of such substances.

I cannot see any other reason as to why PED's should be banned.

I noticed nobody responded to your post. Instead of saying the same thing less eloquently, I'll quote you and hope for a response.

One thing I would add, though is that if they were legal, EVERYONE would have to take them to be competitive, which I think is just wrong. But consider:

The playing field isn't level as it is: For example, in cycling, you simply can't be truly competitive unless you drop at least $1000 for a bike, and many drop much more. Those athletes aren't necessarily competing exclusively with "god-given talent", but also with the best equipment they can afford. That's specific to cycling, but there are similarities in other sports. For example, how is taking drugs FUNDAMENTALLY different than eating healthfully?

And the truth is simply what you said: they are dangerous, and their legalization would require that all athletes took them.

I think people sometimes forget why there were drug bans in the first place.

According to John Smith (who was there) banning steriods actually started because the athletes themselves became fearful of what the steroids (which were legal) could be doing to their bodies. This, I think is the bottom line. An Olympic Medal should not be the same thing as committing suicide.

As someone who has never been in the Oly Trials or US Nationals (but been close), taking, say, HGH like the Chinese might make the difference between getting there and not getting there. It's not that hard to get, and I don't think they can catch you if you do it right. But...YOU MIGHT BE DEAD IN 10 YEARS.

Imagine that you're Flojo, lying in bed, and you have to say good bye forever to your 5-year-old child because you're dying because of something you did to win a few medals when you were some years younger. Was it worth it?

That's the way I put it to my high school kids. I hope it sinks in, but I'm not sure.

I'm sure that health issues were part of the decision but not the only reason. Why is a corked bat illegal? Because someone might chew on the bat and get sick from the cork? How about spit or sandpaper from a pitcher? Because the sandpaper might have asbestos in it? Why not just let everyone use corked bats instead? Or spitballs? For health? I think not.