Why are steroids considered cheating and not an evolution of sports?
 

I don't think there is a right answer, but I am interested in your opinions.

Why are steroids considered cheating and not an evolution of sports? What is the essence of steroids that is fundamentally different that separates it from other changes in sports.

For example, in baseball we have better gloves, lighter bats, etc. We use turbo chargers, nitro-methane fuel in auto racing. Bigger tennis racquets are used now. Heck, we even have Viagra for use in bed! You don't hear controversy with this. I'm sure weight training caused some controversy 100 years ago. "He's cheating because he is lifting weights!"

I even bet a million years ago controversy surrounded the annual Caveman Chili Contest when caveman Krog was caught using fire to prepare his entry!

Why are steroids different?! I always hear in discussion they are "bad" for sports, but really have never heard a good reason why.

What are your thoughts?

They're bad for sports because they aren't uniform with every player. If every player were using steroids as they are with better gloves and bats, etc., then I don't think steroids would be that big a deal.

genetic doping is next, steroids are just small potatoes compared to that.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-04-14-genetic-doping_x.htm

wow very interesting reading.

We need a Steroid/Genetically Altered Games. Interesting to see what the human body would be capable of after it is "Pimped". 100 m in < 5sec? Lift 20k lbs?

Using an aluminum bat won't make you sterile.

Stuff can cause permanent side effects. Sports are supposed to celebrate human skill and abilities, not lead to ruin.

rjp

Honestly, I don't know if celebration of human skill and abilities has ever been the true motivator between winning and losing. Even gladiators "ruined" each other.

Or better yet, remember "North Dallas Forty"?

Artificial performance enhancement is to sports as watercooling is to Porsches.

Undesireable yet inevitable.

If the baseball commision and goverment "outlawed" it and players used it then they are cheaters. Simple as that. Who ever used it should have their records adjusted for that period of time.

I think we'll see more and more ex pro football players with liver cancer, leukemia, and other related steriod side effect diseases dropping off. Sprinters, jumpers, and throwers in track have gone for the roids for over 40 years. The newest thing for distance runners was EPO until they cooked a test up for it. Some people don't want to cheat to win. Some will do anything to win. Human nature.

Wouldn't it be more like running super advanced timing (or 1,5 bar spring in a stock 930), regardless of the side effects (gross detonation)?

Some do it, but they're fools.

My .02
Skip

Well, you really don't hear about 996's running for 300k miles like an SC, do you? And then there's the 944 timing belt...

There have actually been some pro bodybuilders that have said they would like to see an open, "untested" level of competition. There is at least one powerlifting federation that will not test. The feeling is that as long as everyone is on the same page, and anything goes, there can be no such thing as "cheating". The bobybuilding thing, as far as I know, has not become reality. They still like to pretend their competitors are "natural" and simply use Weider products. It has happened in powerlifting. These guys are putting up some amazing totals these days. They feel like as long as it is understood what you are getting into, it's up to you if you want to play. No applogies.

So where is the line drawn between acceptable suppliments, such as creatine and the like, and steroids? Either way substances that can be consumed naturally, and that occur naturally in the body, are simply introduced in unnatural quantities. Some are "good", some are "bad". Why? Steroid use has a lot of parallels to illegal drug use. Many of the dangers associated with it are due to the fact that it is illegal. When administered by a doctor that knows what he is doing, and when the subject is properly monitored, the dangers are pretty minimal. It's the guys that self-administer the illegal stuff that are at the greatest risk. Let's face it; modern sports have become an over-hyped freak show as it is, with obcenely overpaid actors. If they want to enhance their performance in this manner, maybe just being honest about it is a better approach. That way kids aspiring to get there some day can make a better informed decision. It would sure beat pretending nobody does it and acting shocked when we catch the "cheaters". I'll bet the vast majority of pro athletes use something illegal, the particular variety varying with the sport.

Re: Why are steroids considered cheating and not an evolution of sports?
 

I think you bring up a perfectly valid and interesting argument. There may come a day where unlimited sports involves full bio-mechnaics and genetic engineering. We may see ten foot tall Olympic athletes or something crazy like that. I'm sure this will bring up some moral and ethical issues to consider, especially when it comes to genetic engineering of humans. But it seems inevitable.

I have to tell you guys that while I am not surprised at the replies to this topic, I am deeply disappointed. Too many people just don’t get it. There are so many levels where this is wrong I am not sure where to begin.

First, let’s address the heath issues. The individual is ingesting chemicals where we only fully understand one aspect of their effect. Yes, they allow an athlete to train longer and harder thereby increasing performance. But we do not know the full story on the other side. They clearly affect the liver and testicle. Users are also prone to hair loss and shingles. We know it is bad, we just don’t know how bad. I don’t know of a definitive long term study on this. Anyone know of one?

Second, we cannot limit this conversation to professional athletes. There are numerous stories of kids as young as junior high taking them. These children know the pros are doing it and they are going to copy their heroes. And let’s not forget that the “Clear” was a cocktail that not only included steroids but human growth hormone too. Want your kids taking this stuff so they can get a college scholarship? Not me.

Finally, if not legally, it is morally wrong. Can you imagine being an athlete training your entire life for competition and then lose to a dopper? How about working hard and smart to build the perfect and legal race car only to have your doors blown off by a clever cheater? How would you feel about that? Ben Johnson got what he deserved for doping at the Olympics. Any athlete that cheats deserves the same treatment, regardless of sport.

Be very clear about this: Steroids enhance performance. They allow you to become stronger, more agile and faster than nature intended for your body. They give the marginal athlete an advantage over a clean athlete. And that is the issue: An unnatural advantage.

It's a complex issue that can't be solved by saying, "it's cheating because the rulebook says it's cheating." We have to examine why the rulebook claims it's cheating.

First and foremost, anabolic steroids are outlawed because they are very unhealthy. Sport is about being active and competitive and (ideally) healthy.

As for "untested" weightlifting leagues, it's morally wrong for a rulebook to condone something that so obviously terrible for our bodies.

A much more difficult problem are other more natural forms of doping, like red blood cell doping on distance runners, or the use of substances are are found naturally in our bodies. If one athlete has X natural levels of some hormone, why can't another athlete be allowed to correct for that? That's leveling the playing field, not creating an unnatural advantage.

There is outrage in the track community. It highly likely that the majority of all records with the exception of possibly some of the mens distance events are dirty.

"Highly likely"? Is that as far as they are willing to go? I would be surprised if any modern records of human performance that are measured objectively (timed, weighed, measured for distance, etc.) are still "clean", including men's distance events. This has been so pervasive for so long that I just can't believe there are any clean records left in sport.

What's so complicated about the issue? The reason the rulebook states it's cheating is by taking into account all the negative points you and eveyone else bring up.

Well, I did bring up one complicating issue, and there are more out there.

But to just say that it's cheating because it creates an unnaturaly advantage or "because the rulebook says so" is a circular argument. Essentially you're saying, it's cheating because no one else is allowed to do it and no one else is allowed to do it because it's cheating.

I'm not advocating the use of unhealthy performance enhancing drugs, but the rules need to be looked at with a clear and objective mind.

For example, if a olympic athlete takes a Sudafed before a competition and then is drug tested, he or she will be DQ'ed because pseudoephedrine has been declared illegal. However, drinking coffee before a distance running event is accepted and normal (and quite common). A few cups of coffee or a couple Sudafed have roughly the same effect, but the use of one will cause you to be stripped of your medal and the coffee may give you that extra edge to win the medal - legally.

The most ludicrous example of the drug rules being cock-eyed is the inclusion of THC on the list of "performance enhancing drugs." I know guys who smoke pot, and their perfomance (at anything) is not being enhanced.