Doping in Sports is a Problem Essay

Doing steroid hormones, which is known as doping, is a problem in variants that needs to be stopped and needs to be stopped fast. Ask any genius with a decent knowledge of swordplays and current events, and they whollyow for tell you nearly every workweek, both(prenominal) differentwise high-profile doping story makes its way to the headlines of newspapers approximately the world. A quick Google News search for doping revealed over 7,500 results from the past week alone. The stories ranged from the lesser known 2 Youth exceeding Games Wrestlers who were recently suspend to the more famous 2010 Tour de France gatherner Alberto Contadors positive test.This month, brent goose Musburger (an ABC/ESPN sports commentator) told a group of students at University of Montana that steroids work. Musburger blamed news media youngsters who got withal deeply involved in something they didnt know too much about for the negative image steroids and doping now have. He went on to say t hat steroids had no regularise in high school, notwithstanding nether the becoming c are and doctors advice, they could be dod at the schoolmaster level. (Quotes pay back from the Missoulian article.)If you know me (or have been in a family line with me), you know how I feel about doping in sports. In fact, anti-doping was one of the reasons I came to law school, and more specific all in ally to Marquette. My view is that doping has no draw a bead on in sport. The story of how I came to become so staunchly against doping is for a nonher day (and perhaps a different venue), but basically involves my issue for the sport of cycling and the systematic doping that plagues that sport. Suffice it to say that I believe a firm stance against doping in all sports in all forms.It probably goes without saying that I could not disagree with Musburger more. Doping, least of all in the form of anabolic steroids, has no place in sports recreational or professional. I think all anti-dopi ng arguments come down to deuce basic principles, except one of which Musburger addresses in his blanket approval of steroid social function in professional jockstraps.First, doping threatens the health of athletes. Musburger argues that with proper checkup supervision, steroids kitty be healthy. While this might betrue in some (and I would suggest limited) cases, it would certainly not be true in all cases. The enjoyment of steroids can have serious health repercussions, including touched liver, endocrine, and reproductive function, tumors of the liver and kidneys, heart conditions, and psychiatric symptoms. Additionally, the article just joined goes on to mention the increased probability of side effects when 1) steroids are used more than the recommended dose, 2) steroids are used in conjunction with otherwise performance enhancing substances, and 3) counterfeit or tainted steroids are used.Legalizing steroid use would not solve these problems. The side effects listed in the National effect for Biotechnology Information (a part of the National Institute of Health) article are not restricted to improper use of steroids. I will not detail out the side effects of not only steroids, but also the use of hGH and EPO (often used in cycling), the NCBI does a nice hire out of listing those and providing citations to studies. Furthermore, the drive to win will always encourage athletes to take just one more. Sure, proper medical supervision would ensure that an athlete receives the proper dose from that doctor, but when that athlete fails to win the next race, bouncy, or match, he or she is more likely to increase the dose or combine other methods of doping.Second, and unaddressed by Musburger, doping affects the integrity of sport. Sport is not about simply winning. The saying Its not about whether you win or lose, its how you played the game, although clich, is absolutely correct. The Olympic Movement identifies the Olympic spirit mutual understanding, spirit of friendship, solidarity, and fair play as original to sport. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) was founded on the principle that integrity of sport is fundamental frequency to the spirit of sport, and that integrity is threatened by doping. The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural government (UNESCO) division on anti-doping believes that doping jeopardizes the moral and ethical basis of sport and the health of those involved in it. The National Football League itself created its own steroid policy because steroid use threatens the frankness and integrity of athletic aspiration and sends the wrong message to youngpeople who may be tempted to use them. Sports are about competition on equal footing, with look upon for the opponent, and with respect for the rules of the game.Permitting the use of steroids under proper medical supervision would threaten the fairness and integrity of the game. First, athletes who choose not to use steroids are at an belo w the belt advantage or so will be unable to compete at the same level as athletes who are using steroids. Second, the integrity of the game is compromised because it is no greater about which athlete has the best skills or talent, its instead about which athlete has the best steroid cocktail or the cash to buy the best steroids. Thus, steroid use is contrary to the spirit of sport fairness, respect, and solidarity. The concept of mutual respect between competitors is thwarted when one (or both) athletes would preferably use steroids to improve his or her performance than compete based on individual strength, skill, or talent.However, if health and integrity concerns arent enough to exchange you, consider this final point. Law students, and indeed lawyers, are fond of the lubricious slope argument. I think it finds a comfortable place in this debate. Its a slippery slope between allowing steroid use with proper medical supervision and eliminating anti-doping regulations. Whe re is the line to be drawn? ordain it now be illegal to use steroids only if taken without proper medical supervision? How can proper medical supervision be proven? How does an athlete prove that the steroids in his or her body were as a result of proper medical supervision and not other means? What about athletes who use more than the recommended dose? What about other forms of doping (hGh or EPO)? Are those next to be permitted under proper medical supervision? Its difficult to see how regulating the use of steroids in sport is workable.The only way to preserve integrity in sport and protect the health of athletes is through a serious anti-doping approach. Anti-doping efforts are most successful when the law (anti-doping policy) sets forth clear, bright-line rules about when and what substances are prohibited. Although a long way from perfect, WADA has created the most comprehensive anti-dopingprogram in the world (indeed the only anti-doping program most of the world outside of the US models and implements). American professional sports leagues should be looking at ways to model the WADA code in its own anti-doping policies (like the United States Anti-Doping Agency is doing), not seeking ways to acknowledgment steroid use or compromise anti-doping efforts. Steroids have no place in sports.