In the modern economy, it is hard to detect athletes who use performance-enhancing drugs (PED’s) such as blood doping, steroids or oxygen tanks to boost their performance due to the technological advancements. The drugs have adverse effects on the body because of the lead to hypertension and stroke. Some PED’s cause cardiac arrest because of the drugs because dehydration and blood thicken. When the governing athletics organization discovers that an athlete is using drugs, they are banned from participating for a specified duration. The athletes who take drugs are regarded as cheaters because the other athletes work hard to achieve their success. There are adverse health effects of performance-enhancing drugs including blood pressure, stroke and heart failure. Those who support it argue that people should be allowed to make free decisions and if an athlete wants to use drugs to improve his performance he should be free to do it. Although people should be given freedom to make decisions, using drugs to enhance the performance should be stopped because it results in long-term health risks.
My position on the performance-enhancing drugs by athletes is wrong and should be stopped by all means but the two arguments below support my argument.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Premise one. Performance-enhancing drugs such as blood doping and steroids create significant health risks both physical and psychological to the athletes.
Premise two. Performance enhancing drugs users may be banned from athletics participation, and they face a lot of pressure from the public.
Premise three. The positive impacts of using performance-enhancing drugs are short-term because, in the long run, the drugs have harmful long-term effects.
Conclusion: Athletes should be stopped from using performance-enhancing drugs such as steroids and other hormones to boost muscles results to severe health risks, and they are eliminated from participating in any form of sports. The athletes face pressure from the public and the sports organization because using enhancing drugs is a way of cheating in games. They are therefore eliminated from competitions for one year, or they are permanently banned from participating in sports. The health problems include heart problems, blood pressure, and kidney failure. These issues affect the users in the long-term, and it is difficult for doctors to fix them.
The first premise argues about the health risks of using performance-enhancing drugs. Many scientists and organizations across the world have concluded that the drugs have severe effects on the users. United States Anti-Doping Agency released a report on the performance enhancing drugs which indicated that the drugs could alter the biological functions of a human body (USADA, 2016). The effects of these drugs are drastic and immediate such as arrhythmias, blood pressure raising, neurological changes and sleep deprivation. Hypertension is caused by dehydration of the athlete blood which makes the blood to thicken and therefore it raises blood pressure and velocity (Savulescu, Creaney & Vondy, 2013). This health issue may lead to stroke or cardiac heart attack which could kill the athlete if he does not receive immediate medical attention.
The second premise argues about the legal actions taken by the sports organization on the athletes who use drugs. Using drugs to enhance performance is condemned to cheating, and those detected by the organization are given a ban for one year or six months from the competition (USADA, 2016). With the increased technology, drugs are hardly detected unlike in earlier days and this lure athlete to use them for a great success. Athletes who use drugs receive pressure from fans because they do not want to watch them cheat to win. The fans loos interest in athletes contests when they realize the use of a chemical to enhance skills and endurance especially during the marathon (Michael, 2004). Athletics like any other sport need strategy, skills, and handwork to be the winner PED’s play a very important role to make the body stronger in a race but the public expects athletics to be natural qualities and no one has to use drug to win because this would be cheating to the other athletes who do not use PED’s.
The third premise also argues about the short-term returns of using PED’s. In 2000 the Dutch cyclists used EPO doping to enhance their cycling performance, and they won the race. The drug had an immediate effect when the cyclist suffered from inexplicable heart failure, and they died (Michael, 2004). The effects of these drugs can be psychological, and they lead to depression and suicidal thoughts.
Argument: Athletes should be allowed to use performance-enhancing drugs
Premise four: Everyone has a right to make decisions concerning their health and lives.
Premise Five: The use of performance-enhancing drugs can improve muscle mass and body strength.
Conclusion: The argument demonstrates that people are free to do what they feel is best for their lives even if it has adverse effects on their health. The argument’s strength is the ability to improve body strength meaning that the person can run faster without getting tired. People should be allowed to use drugs if they are willing to do it.
The fourth argument is convincing because every human has rights to take the risks they think that they are worth considering and this right should not be denied to athletes. No one should interfere with others decisions because no one stops smokers from risking their health (Savulescu, Creaney & Vondy, 2013). If an athlete wants to win a race and gets a worthy reward, he/she should go ahead and take the PED’S to boost the body strength. When one is sick, he goes to the hospital and is given medicine to cure him, and the same case should apply to the athletes. If doping is wrong then coaching and should also be wrong because they enhance body ability just as doping. I believe that non-harmful PED’s should be allowed because they have the same effect as the equipment used during training. The new technology is meant to make things easier, and athletes have the right to utilize the available technology. The fifth argument outline the positive effects of using PED’s because the athlete is assured that his body will have enough strength for the race. They know that they will win the race and get millions of dollars which is a good reward. No one should be stopped from his success and denying the athletes PED’s is a way of preventing them from achieving their goals.
In conclusion, the first premise outlines the health risks of PED’s and the second shows the pressure athletes have to go through when the fans feel that they did not win fairly. The third premise indicates that the positive effects of using PED’s are short-term and the in the long term the consequences are severe. The fourth and the fifth arguments show reasons why athletes should be allowed to use PED’s because it is their right to choose their lives and it also gives them strength to win the race. I think that performance enhancing drugs should not be allowed because it is a way of teaching. Countries will also maximize on producing the most effective drugs rather than training its athletes. The developed countries would have the best athletes because they have the best technology to create the most efficient Performance-enhancing drugs. Athletes should show their body ability to endure racing and not on the body ability to react to performance-enhancing drugs.
References
Michael D. (2004). Steroids, Sports and the Ethics of Winning. Retrieved from:https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/bioethics/resources/steroids sports-and-the ethics-of-winning
Savulescu, J., Creaney, L., & Vondy, A. (2013). Should athletes be allowed to use performance-enhancing drugs? BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online), 347.
USADA. (2016) Effects of PEDs. Retrieved from: http://www.usada.org/substances/effects-of performance-enhancing-drugs/
