PDA

View Full Version : Juiced Up Edition


Bloggingheads
05-03-2008, 09:11 PM

David Thomson
05-03-2008, 10:14 PM
Steroids should have never been forbidden in the world of sports. Why not also penalize an athlete who seeks surgery to improve their eyesight? No, the only sensible demand is to require truthfulness. The fans should be able to compare the present day "juiced up" athletes with their predecessors.

bjkeefe
05-03-2008, 10:34 PM
DT:

The fans should be able to compare the present day "juiced up" athletes with their predecessors.

Given the advances of medical technology, whether drugs or surgery, how would you propose to make such comparisons?

graz
05-03-2008, 10:47 PM
DT:

Given the advances of medical technology, whether drugs or surgery, how would you propose to make such comparisons?

You can't make the comparisons, and have to retreat to the apples/oranges or "different eras" default.
Sports fans love to play that non definitive hypothetical game anyway. By comparing teams that couldn't possibly have competed against each other. Or refiguring team line-ups from competing teams and timeframes.
I think what Lipsyte is suggesting would require full disclosure. This would also counter the "cheating" or "level playing field argument.
But, what about the legality issue. I don't foresee steroids becoming legal if we can't even legalize pot.
I guess steroids would have to be re-branded. Maybe a whole catalogue of sports enhancement drugs would be waived from criminalization?

piscivorous
05-03-2008, 11:14 PM
While I agree that steroids should not be banned from any professional sports venue that problem gets sticky with where to draw the line. College athletes sure they are adults and it is a career choice that many are hoping leads to the pros or are dependent upon performance to maintain their scholarship to get the education. High school well sure why not as college players they will have to be competitive to get that scholarship or have a shot at the pros......

I coached youth soccer for 5 years. Some of the parents, I met would put their children on a steroid regime, at the peewee level, to insure that their child had that competitive edge.

So where and how do you draw the line?

graz
05-03-2008, 11:36 PM
"So where and how do you draw the line?"
Damned if I know.
And I agree that the malign influence of overzealous pee-wee parents could be a real threat.

bjkeefe
05-03-2008, 11:37 PM
pisc:

So where and how do you draw the line?

How about at the line between pro and amateur sports? (I am pretending that big-time college sports are "amateur" here.)

graz
05-03-2008, 11:39 PM
pisc:



How about at the line between pro and amateur sports? (I am pretending that big-time college sports are "amateur" here.)
You can draw it... would it be crossed?

bjkeefe
05-04-2008, 12:40 AM
You can draw it... would it be crossed?

Sure. No one ever stopped cheating completely. I was just proposing the line (or actually, asking Pisc what he thought of drawing the line there) if we stipulate that performance-enhancing drugs should not be completely banned.

I'm not sure I agree with that stipulation, mind. But if we do agree to it for purposes of discussion, then it seems to me that it's a lot easier to regulate the use for amateur athletes, since they don't have a players' union or the kind of money required to buy advanced (undetectable) drugs or masking agents. You'd have a problem with a school's own program being tempted to cheat if the testing were left up to the individual schools, so the NCAA or equivalent would probably have to oversee that.

Wonderment
05-04-2008, 04:05 AM
I coached youth soccer for 5 years. Some of the parents, I met would put their children on a steroid regime, at the peewee level, to insure that their child had that competitive edge.

Parents already put their kids on performance-enhancing drugs at the peewee level to ensure competitive edge. Ritalin, for example.

piscivorous
05-04-2008, 07:49 AM
I'm not sure where to draw the line or if we even should. As I generally don't believe in drug prohibition, except for antibiotics as they actually have health impacts that are pertinent to the general population, this one is sticky. In general there is an attitude, among parents towards their children, to discourage the use of drugs which will be absent in many cases when it comes to the use of steroids. In fact the pressures, much like Wonderments comment on Ritalin, will be in the opposite direction. Even today you will find parents that tacitly, if not explicitly, support the use of steroids by their children; so I think the genie is already out of the bottle and the underground nature of it worries me. If it were more open I believe that the side effects and dangers of steroid use would be more widely distributed and thus better understood; with the general underground nature of the problem contributing to abuse instead of use.

As one that, if I were a child today, would be heavily dosed with Ritalin or something much stronger if it were available, I believe that children should be allowed to be children and not some robo copy of the idealistic image we have of the perfect child.

eric
05-05-2008, 01:24 PM
Could Bryan be any more humorless?