Do you care whether or not professional athletes take performance enhancing drug

1. 76

   ParadigmEnactedposted 11 years ago

   Do you care whether or not professional athletes take performance enhancing drugs?
   
   I don't. It's supposed to be a larger than life spectacle.

   replyreport
2. 57

   Jared Milesposted 11 years ago

   I don't particularly care, but that might be because I'm not a professional athlete. I can certainly show empathy for people who try so hard throughout their entire lives to reach a professional standard cleanly, then be beaten by someone taking performance-enhancing drugs.
   
   If I was a pro athlete, I would definitely care if others around me were cheating. But I suppose this is sport in our days.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      ParadigmEnactedposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You know, I agree with that part, it does suck for the clean ones trying to be the best that they can be. Most sports don't require steroids. I was thinking more along the lines of prowrestling in my mind.

      replyreport
3. 76

   jlparkposted 11 years ago

   It's cheating. So yeah, I do care. If someone who has worked their butt off for years and years training for their sport legitamately then they deserve to be on a level playing field.
   As a New Zealander - it's some thing that has happened to one of our most prolific sportswoman - Valerie Adams who is a shot putter.
   
   Teal has won gold at several Olympics and Commonwealth games. Last Olmypics she was beaten by a Balarusian Nadsya Ostupck (sp?) - who was later found in the drugs test given to all gold medal winners to have been using prohibited drugs. Val was given the gold in a later date in NZ as it was stripped from her rival. This same rival has now been found to have been using the same drugs at a previous meet - on retrospective tests. She may be banned for life.
   
   If you cannot beat someone legitamately - practice practice practice or get out of the sport. Physical sports are supposed to show what you can get out of your body, not what you can put it to make it better.
   
   Perhaps have their own sport or competitions - the drug cheats games or something.
   
   Iwhy should we let people who cheat get away with it?

   replyreport
   1. 76

      ParadigmEnactedposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      From that premise you could argue that all training, conditioning, and nutritional regiments are cheating since it comes at the expense of the purity of one's natural athletic abilities.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      JPB0756posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Understand these rules are selectively enforced, meaning politics are dominant in pursuit of offenders. Realize how this simple fact of life destroys your postulate and be free.  I have been a competitor at world-class lvl.

      replyreport
4. 82

   Abby Campbellposted 11 years ago

   I'm a professional personal trainer and nutritionist with a great love for professional sports. I believe that all athletes should have the same rules and guidelines on performance enhancing drugs. There are some legal supplements that are a "no-no" when it comes to certain sports. They include certain protein powders due to growth hormones. I think this is silly as certain nutritious foods will allow growth just as much as these protein powders. However, athletes know what they may and may not take. So, they should abide by the rules.

   replyreport
5. 76

   ParadigmEnactedposted 11 years ago

   That's the thing, since it is so necessary for an athlete to train their body and follow a certain regiment to succeed, how are putting steroids in one's body any different than anything else just because they've been stigmatized by society? The notion of it undermining "natural" athletes doesn't hold water because all athletes supplement their natural abilities with training and specific regiments.
   
   They don't let shlubs perform at an elite level. Sports arenas are made up of men and woman who will go to superhuman feats to be the best. So why not steroids when the advantages are debatable anyway?

   replyreport
6. 0

   Lady_Eposted 11 years ago

   I think it's unfair on those who work and train very hard without the performance drugs. The others would have the edge.
   
   If all of them took the drugs together and it was allowed, then fine - that way everyone has the advantage.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      ParadigmEnactedposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      But then it wouldn't be an advantage, right?

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Lady_Eposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It would still be  an advantage because bodies react differently to drugs. Some people will be fast and some will be super fast - even though they all took drugs. (if permitted)

      replyreport
   3. 76

      ParadigmEnactedposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There's more to athletic excellence than size, right?

      replyreport
7. 61

   JPB0756posted 11 years ago

   Not at all.  In the N.C.A.A., Dianabol has been distributed since 1977.  Please, wake the fans up.

   replyreport
8. 38

   ud1093posted 11 years ago

   Unfair because you are just spoiling the name of the game and also you own name and you are also cheating on others who work hard and you are also lying to yourself

   replyreport
   1. 61

      JPB0756posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Please know ALL use steroids, well before getting to the "Bigs."  If u r an athlete, u have the capacity of understanding the political, not actual ramifications of population control, allowing selectivity among those in power. Wake up, billions of $

      replyreport
9. 60

   billypetty22posted 11 years ago

   Baseball is the main focus, when people look at players who have used performance enhancing drugs. We normally don't focus on football, basketball or any other sports. That being said, remember back in the days of Babe Ruth and Ted Williams. They never used anything to give them an advantage like players use today. As you may recall, the cliche used on Babe Ruth, was that he got it done on hot dogs and beer. Now since the late 1980's baseball he been plagued with performance enhancing drugs, and has made semi-mediocre players look better than greats back in the day. It inflates player's number to a status where they shouldn't be, and it really gives baseball historians problems when trying to compare players back in the day from players in the present back to thirty years ago. I know taking steroids out of the game is an impossible thing to do, but I believe baseball should keep at, and continue to emphasize being clean. They should enforce harsher punishments other than 50 game suspensions, because a player using steroids says its worth the risk to hit 50 home runs and only miss 50 games the next year. Major League Baseball needs to kick the player out for the entire next season and fine them at least 5 million dollars. Small, unworthy fines will do baseball's effort no good. Steroids taint the record book, kill players and it should kill their career.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      JPB0756posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The athlete on steroids works as hard or harder than whatever non-users exist;. rumors and lack of truthful, factual evidence of intelligent usage of same have polluted the uninformed and inactive critics fuel propaganda.  Experience the truth. Do.

      replyreport
10. 0

    jeffreymaskelposted 11 years ago

    To be honest, no I don't.
    Actually I would like it if the Olympic athletes were not allowed to used performance enhancing drugs. Pro athletes would be great though.  Allow them to get bigger and faster and make it interesting.  Maybe even if there were two leagues for dopers and non-dopers.  Then you could have a choice.  Just a thought.  I honestly wouldn't mind it either way.  I would still watch sports.

    replyreport