Performance Enhancing Drugs - Essay Example

PERFORMANCE ENHANCING DRUGS INTRODUCTION The use of performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) began as early as 800BC, sportsmen and women used these drugs to improve their performance. From gladiators to chariot racers, they all used some form of herb mixture to enhance their performance in sports by preventing fatigue and injuries. These extracts were made from mushroom extracts or plants seeds that are still used up to date in the making of either liquid or tablet performance enhancements. Sports people have used PEDs for a long time since the Greek and Roman age. During earlier years, coaches provided their sports men with their own recipes that included mixtures of strychnine. The danger imposed on these mixtures was that when taken in large doses they became poisonous. Actually, this is attributed as one of the causes of early athletes’ deaths like Thomas Hicks. For this reason, using performance-enhancing drugs is not new although it is increasingly becoming more and more popular. Over the years, a number of individuals involved in sports have died either during or after participation in different sports. The loss of many talented athletes who fell victim to PED overdose caused the Olympic team to start up a committee that formulated rules against doping. These rules provided ways in which any person would get a fair trial in case they tested positive of any PED. Nevertheless, some individuals argue that the move of making PEDs illegal was not justified. There has been continued controversy on whether performance-enhancing drugs should be eradicated or legalized. This controversy is at upper levels because some people are in favor of banning PEDs whereas others are continually discovering new ones. Reasons for not legalizing PEDs The use of performance-enhancing drugs should not be legalized. In sports, some PEDs are legal whereas others are not allowed. However, it is important to realize that the legalized PEDs are not harmful. Some of the legal drugs that can be used include supplements and sports foods that provide benefits in sports performance. These legal supplements include bicarbonate, creatine, calcium, carbonate powders, intramuscular iron, intra muscular vitamin, vitamin B12, liquid meal replacements, Melaton, and a few others. In any case, these are not drugs but considered as dietary supplements. Illegal performance enhancement drugs include steroids and methods for enhancement of oxygen transfer. These PEDs are banned because they are meant to increase a person’s activity. Continued use of the drugs, may cause danger to the user. According to most people, the legalization of drugs like steroids could result to lose of fascination in the sports world. In addition, there could be serious medical consequences for the users. Others believe that it is essential to legalize the usage of performance enhancing drugs because individuals would increase their activity, hence, increasing the fun achieved in sports. The awareness to stop the use of PEDs began after the death of a cyclist, Tommy Simpson, during the tour de France cycling race. After his death, specialists confirmed that he had been using amphetamine to enhance his activity during races. Amphetamines is a well known stimulant that is made to imitate adrenaline, hence, causes the users to experience increased alertness, energy and reduced fatigue. It becomes very harmful when the user is dehydrated and is exposed to a lot of heat. The campaign against performance increasing drugs went on and seemed to increase during the Helsinki games of 1952 and the Melbourne Olympics of 1956. However, the sports bodies involved in these games handled the cases ensuring that every player understood the consequences of using PEDs. In the current years, the debate has intensified with different people tabling their arguments about whether the use of drugs should be legalized or not. Some support the use of drugs saying that it makes the action more interesting while those who are against it argue that the use of PEDS poses a danger to the sports people’s health. These are not only the reasons, since people have aired different views. In addition to the reasons given above, there are many other additional reasons to either support or not support the use of PEDs. According to Thomas Murray, performance-enhancing drugs are not in favor with the original reasons and rules in sports. In sports, practice, perfection and admiration of natural talents should always prevail. This can be achieved through ensuring that competitors have skill, speed, endurance, and tactical awareness. With all these qualities, there would be no need to use performance-enhancing drugs, hence, promoting equality in every sport. If PEDs are used, acquired success is considered a result of test tube contents rather than skill and training. For this reason, all countries should ban the use of performance enhancing drugs. The first country to ban the use of PEDS was France in 1963 then Belgium in 1965. These countries ensured this was successful by educating people on reasons for banning PEDs, majorly the risks involved in using steroids. Steroids use has a number of risks that include increased cholesterol level, high chances of acquiring a heart disease, addiction, liver damages, and other behavioral changes. According to Fred Bowen, steroids have a great impact on players sporting life since after some years their tendons and ligaments tear up due to bulked up muscles that have become too large. This is the reason athletes or other sports individuals with a history of using PEDs always end up dying young. Most of them are active for a period of ten years and their activity diminishes. However, up until now sports men still use drugs to enhance their performance. Despite having achieved success during a certain short period, their deaths are not always honorable since they commit suicide; an act blamed on the use of steroids. In addition, they end up disappointing their fans and other people who believed in their talent. Although people still use drugs for activity enhancement during sports, it is essential to understand the negative consequences related to this action. Most people have ignored facts provided about the effects of PEDs when used in sports. The effects are even more severe and damaging when the PEDs are bought from untrained personnel. It has been identified that individuals in sports buy drugs from people lacking pharmaceuticals knowledge or sports medicine qualifications. For instance, most athletes buy drugs from dealers like Victor Conte who as stated above lack credentials and do illegal business in locker room stalls. The buyers do not acquire proper information about the drugs. For this reason, the risks related to the use of PEDs in sports are increased. It is important to understand that the drugs could be of great importance in the sporting world if they were produced in selected labs and by qualified personnel. In these labs, the PEDs would be tested and given for the right purposes, and then perhaps, the amount of risks could be minimized. Some people have argued that the production of drugs in selected labs would be a great reason to legalize performance-enhancing drugs in sports. Their argument is based on the changes occurring in the society whereby everyone has become involved in a pill popping and tummy tucking culture. This culture has resulted to the acceptance of medicinal usage to make healthy people better. All the same, if production of PEDs was legalized, it would turn sports competitions into a competition between pharmaceutical experts. Pharmacologists would always seek to produce better drugs that can enhance performance. Technology can be a stabling block towards the fight against the use of performance enhancing drugs. Actually, it has been stipulated that in the future, detection of PEDs in a person’s body might almost be impossible. This can be attributed to continued technological inventions that might lead to the invention of non –detectable drugs. Pharmacologists are believed to be working on PEDs that are made in an almost natural manner whereby the drugs effects mimic natural processes. For instance, PEDs like EPO and commonly known growth hormone are a combination of natural chemicals that are almost impossible to detect. Athletics is facing the greatest danger since players have resulted to donation of their blood during the tests then gaining it back during the competition. These technological adaptations are posing the greatest challenge on the fight against doping. Although this is a great threat to this fight, the committees, and groups involved need to develop ways that can counter this invention. This will ensure that the use of PEDs remains minimal and almost non-existing. A sport is considered to be of quality if transparency and honesty are practiced. In my opinion, the use of performance enhancement drugs is cheating and a contribution to a dirty sport. Legalizing performance enhancing drugs would limit the chances of having fair competitions and a leveled playing field. In fact legalizing PEDs would cause even unwilling players to indulge in drug taking to cope with other players’ ability. This would seem like effectively making PEDs uptake mandatory for all competitors, which can be termed as unworthy. In addition, it would be irresponsible for sports authorities to legalize drugs knowing their effects. However, a number of people have chosen to gain popularity by using PEDs; a move that is bound to bring destruction in sports. For this reason, it is important to ensure that measures are put in place to prevent professional sport from distancing itself from the magical undertaking it was originally recognized. According to Frank Deport, PEDs are to sports what terrorism is to states. Proponents to PEDs usage claim that over the years harmful effects have been overstated and that it is upon an individual to make a decision. They claim that the use of these drugs can be understood as a technological evolution and an improved training idea. However, it would be agreeable to argue that even if individuals have the chance of making decisions, the use of PEDs remains harmful and fatal. Legalizing performance enhancement would cause a shift between players since drugs are very expensive. In addition, they would turn sporting into meaningless and unworthy competitions of people with bigger muscles and unrealistic speed. Sporting is done for people to try to break already existing records. Most of the records set were genuinely acquired and breaking of these records with the assistance of PEDs would be unfair. If legalization of PEDs is to take place, then it is important to follow the set rules. The old category of records should be left out and a new set of records established. It would be better if use of drugs was not legalized since sporting can be fun even without having to add some drugs. Conclusion The fight against PEDs has been ongoing for a long time and people still believe in different arguments. Participants in different sports need to acquire information that buying enhancement drugs from unqualified people is considerably foolish. In my opinion, it would be wise to have a realistic intake of the legalized drugs. These legal drugs are to improve the performance ability to an acceptable level and also keep the players healthy. It would be considered unwise to continue using drugs that are already confirmed harmful yet there are available unharmful substitutes that provide similar actions. The rules set to govern sports are not final but they are available for reasons that are primarily to provide safety. They are bound to provide similar conditions in the playing field, hence, a fair competition. The safe use of drugs minimizes challenges such as having to use a drug without understanding the spirit in the intended sport and the type of drug consistent with the sport speed. It is better if players chose to remain faithful since performance enhancement does not correlate with the spirit of a sport because it is the spirit required in the sport. Work cited Holowchak, M. Andrew. Philosophy of Sport: Critical Readings, Crucial Issues . New York: Prentice Hall, 2002. Print. Read More