• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why should steroids be illegal in professional sports?

N

notfred

Lifer
Working out to improve performance is legal. Eating healthy to improve performance is legal. Taking prescription drugs to cure sickness or injury (and improve performance) is legal.

Every other possible method of increasing performance is legal, so why not steroids?

Everywhere else in life, it's perfectly acceptable for someone to improve themselves with drugs, as long as a doctor says it's ok.You certainly wouldn't say someone taking arthritis medication daily was giving himself some kind of unnatural competitive advantage in life, and you wouldn't say someone was cheating at sports if they were taking pain killers for a previous injury, even though they perform better while taking them. Why not?

What is it that makes steroids a form of cheating where every other method to improve performance is legal? What is it we're trying to measure in sports? Is it natural ability? What constitutes "natural"?

Please realize I'm not trying to say that steroids are healthy or anything, I'm just trying to distinguish them from every other way athletes try to improve themselves, especially prescription drugs. That being said, I know that some people will read jsut the title, skip the body of the post, and flame me anyway.
 
It think it boils down to the fact that 'roids (and most other performance-enhancers) endanger the lives of the athletes using them.

That, and it cheapens the competition since it's not solely "who wants to win the most" any more.
 
If perscriptions are used to cure sickness and injury, that is okay. If foods or vitamins are used to improve performance, that's okay. But when you use a drug for no other reason than to improve performance, you're essentially turning from man to machine. It's like saying why can't we give a runningback robotic legs that go 100 mph on the field.
 
Originally posted by: Fausto
It think it boils down to the fact that 'roids (and most other performance-enhancers) endanger the lives of the athletes using them.

That, and it cheapens the competition since it's not solely "who wants to win the most" any more.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that taking them without prescription (ie for a legit medical reason) is ILLEGAL.

All this news steroids are getting is not simply because of baseball.

There will likely be real criminal charges brought against the people who provided the drugs (now that the players have all been given immunity).

Viper GTS
 
In the long run it harms the person who uses them, but I wouldn't oppose drug use in sports. What other people do to their bodies is their business. Don't we want more home-runs, goals, crashes, fights, carnage in our sports? Thats why we watch them. Although I have been watching less sports thanks to the internet, so I don't really care.
 
Originally posted by: chrisms
If perscriptions are used to cure sickness and injury, that is okay. If foods or vitamins are used to improve performance, that's okay. But when you use a drug for no other reason than to improve performance, you're essentially turning from man to machine. It's like saying why can't we give a runningback robotic legs that go 100 mph on the field.
Click to expand...
What's wrong with turning man to machine? I'd pay a lot of money to see a robotic running back. 😀
 
I've often wondered why NO is considered ok in "street races". I guess when all the cars have them, it's even ground again.

In sports, they're all on "even ground" as it is. Would you like to put them all on performance enhancing drugs to see how they perform ? What would be the point then ?
 
I can see what Notfred is saying. If the athlete roids and screws themselves up, that's their fault and no one elses.
 
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: chrisms
If perscriptions are used to cure sickness and injury, that is okay. If foods or vitamins are used to improve performance, that's okay. But when you use a drug for no other reason than to improve performance, you're essentially turning from man to machine. It's like saying why can't we give a runningback robotic legs that go 100 mph on the field.
Click to expand...
What's wrong with turning man to machine? I'd pay a lot of money to see a robotic running back. 😀
Click to expand...

Me too, but it'll never happen. What I really want to see is a running back who wears a layer of very acidic material that burns the skin off of anyone who tries to tackle him. By the time they found out he'd have got at least a couple touchdowns.
 
Sports == rules. Steroids are against the rules. Period.

Its like asking why we can't have football helmets with razor blades welded onto them, or any other form of cheating.
 
Originally posted by: Fausto
It think it boils down to the fact that 'roids (and most other performance-enhancers) endanger the lives of the athletes using them.

That, and it cheapens the competition since it's not solely "who wants to win the most" any more.
Click to expand...

Many sports themselves (see: auto racing) endanger the lives of those participating. And sports has never been about who wants it the most. I could very well want to be the best sprinter in the world more than anyone else, but it simply wouldn't happen. I have to have the ability to actually do so.
 
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Originally posted by: Fausto
It think it boils down to the fact that 'roids (and most other performance-enhancers) endanger the lives of the athletes using them.

That, and it cheapens the competition since it's not solely "who wants to win the most" any more.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that taking them without prescription (ie for a legit medical reason) is ILLEGAL.

All this news steroids are getting is not simply because of baseball.

There will likely be real criminal charges brought against the people who provided the drugs (now that the players have all been given immunity).

Viper GTS
Click to expand...

Another thing I believe is that you can get protein, vitamins, minerals, etc naturally through your diet. It's just easier to take a supplement or protein shake. On the other hand, there is nothing natural about introducing abnormal amounts of steroids and hGH into your system. Unless you go through all sorts of means to get and introduce these substances in your body, you would not have them at all. Whey protein, Vitamin C, B12, can all be consumed through diet.

As far as prescription drugs to cure sickness or injury, these are allowing the players to perform at their normal levels. It's not allowing them to surpass their natural capabilities.
 
Originally posted by: HamSupLo
I can see what Notfred is saying. If the athlete roids and screws themselves up, that's their fault and no one elses.
Click to expand...
True, but I as a fan don't want to see that. I want real competition, not a chemistry contest.

 
Originally posted by: yellowfiero
Sports == rules. Steroids are against the rules. Period.

Its like asking why we can't have football helmets with razor blades welded onto them, or any other form of cheating.
Click to expand...

I'm asking why the rule exists, and you give me the answer, "because it does". Very insightful :roll:
 
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
What are the negative aspects of the Human Growth Hormone if it is administered properly?
Click to expand...

I'm actually glad you asked this. Side effects of hGH can be, but are not limited to the following:

EDIT: And the list expands

Diabetes
Enlarged Heart
Heart Disease
Arthritis
Abnormal Skeletal Growth
Osteoperois
Myopathy
Carpel Tunnel Syndrome
Increased Blood Pressure

It has been hypothesized to promote the onset and spread of cancer.

Let me see if I can find some more side effects
 
Originally posted by: notfred
Originally posted by: Fausto
It think it boils down to the fact that 'roids (and most other performance-enhancers) endanger the lives of the athletes using them.

That, and it cheapens the competition since it's not solely "who wants to win the most" any more.
Click to expand...

Many sports themselves (see: auto racing) endanger the lives of those participating. And sports has never been about who wants it the most. q]
I think you're kinda going apples/oranges with the auto-racing argument. I'm talking about the Lyle Alzado's of the world who end up with brain tumors after 'roiding up for years.

I could very well want to be the best sprinter in the world more than anyone else, but it simply wouldn't happen. I have to have the ability to actually do so.
Click to expand...
Of course, but I'm talking about the pros of the world who have already spent a lifetime becoming the best at their event. Some may have slight genetic advantages over the others, but they still have to train their asses off to win. Lance Armstrong sure as hell doesn't sit around eating Krispy Kremes the other 11 months of the year.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: HamSupLo
I can see what Notfred is saying. If the athlete roids and screws themselves up, that's their fault and no one elses.
Click to expand...

it puts athletes that don't use drugs at a disadvantage. you're basically forcing them to use drugs to stay competitve. therein lies the problem.
 
because it is unfair to have to compete with people who are willing to die just to win. the last thing we need are sports where those most willing to die win. it defeats the purpose of what an athlete is.
 
Originally posted by: Hammer
Originally posted by: HamSupLo
I can see what Notfred is saying. If the athlete roids and screws themselves up, that's their fault and no one elses.
Click to expand...

it puts athletes that don't use drugs at a disadvantage. you're basically forcing them to use drugs to stay competitve. therein lies the problem.
Click to expand...

I was about to say "well, athletes that don't work out as much as at a disadvantage now, what's the difference?" But then I thought about it for a minute, and it IS unfair to essentially require that someone put themselves at unnecesary risk to be competetive. No one runs the risk of disease or death by working out more to keep up eith the other athletes, but they would run that risk ifd they were forced to take steroids to keep up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top