The debate over the legalization of performance enhancing drugs also, known as PEDs, has been on the rise. Performance enhancing drugs are as the illegal drugs or substances that are taken by athletes to improve their performance. The term doping is used to describe the act of using PEDs. In the recent years many famous athletes have been convicted of PEDs abuse. Among these famous athletes is Lance Armstrong, a famous cyclist who won multiple titles of Tour de France. As the use of PEDs is becoming more common, controversy over the legalization has emerged.
Among the many different types of performance enhancing drugs out there; the common ones consist of: steroids, red blood cell doping, and human growth hormone. Lance Armstrong was convicted of red blood cell doping and has been stripped of his titles and banned from professional cycling. With the numerous amount of athletes convicted of PED abuse, one can question rather if it is a problem with the athletes or it is a problem with the state.
In all professional sports in the United States, the use of PEDs are prohibited. However, there is only one acceptation to that rule. If an athlete is injured, prescriptions to certain drugs which are used in recover are allowed. These drugs may consist of certain chemicals that enhance muscle grow. Some athletes have used this to their advantage and have got prescriptions to these drugs for their own personal benefits, will other athletes are using it for recreational purposes. This, however, is not the only way to obtain PEDs; there are also other ways such as buying them from an underground market. Athletes with the intention to cheat will take the risk of using PEDs, since if they are successful they will achieve fame and money.
The debate over the legalization of Performance Enhancing Drugs has sprung into many different parts of society. The two main perspective of this argument are those who are in favor of legalizing PEDs and those that are against it. Those who are in favor of legalizing PEDs base their argument among the following points: the vague definition of PEDs, the ability to make them safer for consumption, the ability to equalize the playing field, and the ability to promote economic growth. Those who argue against the legalization of PEDs support their argument with the following points: the playing field cannot be leveled, using PEDs is cheating so it is morally wrong, losing fans due to the promotion of PEDs use, and the dangerous side effects of using PEDs.
2. For Legalizing Performance Enhancing Drugs
The first argument made by the supporter of legalizing PEDs state that there is no clear definition of what a Performance Enhancing Drug is. It is hard to determine what is considered a PED and what is not. This point was made by Professor Bennet Foddy and Professor Julian Savulescu who work at Oxford University, in their June 2007 Principle of Health Care Ethics article “Ethics of Performance Enhancement in Sport: Drugs and...