I've heard the argument for allowing athletes to take and do whatever they want to improve their physical performance. The best argument against that approach that I've heard is that if you allow a virtual free-for-all in terms of performance-enhancing drugs, then you're essentially requiring every participant to assume the risks associated with taking those drugs. Not doing so means they'll be unlikely to compete, which has all sorts of negative implications on their careers.
Obviously, the consequences of tweaking a car are different that tweaking the human body, and there's certainly banned performance-enhancing methods in sports that aren't currently thought to be damaging to the human body, but I think my point is clear.
You don't think everyone is doping to some degree as it is?
I find that hard to believe. I think everyone at high level competition is enhancing.
So I support the notion that high level performance sports should allow performance enhancing drugs. That's what everyone is doing anyway. The way it is right now you not only have to enhance, and be great, but you also have to be a great cheater (i.e. not get caught doping). I don't like systems that give advantages to the best cheater.
Even if they are, they are bound to use it in ways, or during times that allow them to pass checks. If everything was flat out allowed they would use stuff that would never pass those tests in far higher concentrations.
While the deaths due to complications seem to be overblown in bodybuilding circles and the overall safety of performance enhancing drugs seems to be rather high it leaves to wonder if that would still be true if athletes would just use everything there is out there. Seeing that bodybuilders probably don't care about endurance, power, nutrient retention and the thousand ways the whole oxygen and glycogen supply chain can be screwed with.
I've heard the argument for allowing athletes to take and do whatever they want to improve their physical performance. The best argument against that approach that I've heard is that if you allow a virtual free-for-all in terms of performance-enhancing drugs, then you're essentially requiring every participant to assume the risks associated with taking those drugs. Not doing so means they'll be unlikely to compete, which has all sorts of negative implications on their careers.
Obviously, the consequences of tweaking a car are different that tweaking the human body, and there's certainly banned performance-enhancing methods in sports that aren't currently thought to be damaging to the human body, but I think my point is clear.