A Solution to the Problem of Performance-Enhancing Drugs
Performance-enhancing drugs in sports continues to be a hot topic. But the issue of PEDs may not be as black and white as you think. Adam Wagner weighs in.
It’s April and that means it’s my favorite time of year: The beginning of a new MLB season, the start of the NHL and NBA playoffs, the culmination of March Madness, and this year, the added bonus of day 1 of the NFL draft!
With all of this sports goodness happening, there is no better time to discuss the dicey issue of performance-enhancing drugs in sports.
While most people wax poetic on the subject, definitively making claims for one side or the other, the truth is there is a lot of grey area when it comes to this subject.
So what exactly are we referring to when we say PEDs?
What Are PEDs?
Performance-enhancing drugs are any substance that can be used to improve the body’s performance. This loose definition presents a significant problem. Broadly defined, caffeine could be considered a PED.
Imagine the headline:
Derek Jeter Uses PEDs as Part of His Morning Routine
This conjures images of steroid injections, shame, and cheating—a potential career destroyer. But what about this headline:
Wake Up and Smell the Coffee with Derek Jeter
Sounds like a great Clever Cookstr interview! I bet no one would have a problem if their favorite sports hero occasionally woke up to a cold brew and a bagel.
And therein lies the problem. Where do we draw the line with PED use? Coffee – fine, steroids – bad? (The fact is that steroids are actually used legally in sports all the time—more on that below). Protein and energy supplements – OK, illegal substances – no way, Jose?
For the sake of argument, we’ll focus on the more commonly banned PEDs. House Call Doctor’s great episode, The Controversy Over Performance-Enhancing Drugs (PEDs), outlined a pretty comprehensive list of common substances that are banned in sports. Make sure to check that out before you continue reading.
The Case Against PEDs
There are a lot of people in the “against PEDs” camp and for good reason. There is a litany of health risks associated with abusing most drugs and performance-enhancing drugs are, well, drugs.
In addition to the health risks, there is a certain morality clause here. Allowing athletes to take performance-enhancing drugs sets a dangerous precedent. The world of sports is highly competitive. Since the dawn of time, professional athletes have tried anything to get even the slightest edge on their competition. Eventually, some of these get written into rules, while others get marketed and sold as the newest way to win.
And while PEDs don’t give you that edge by themselves, they do allow you to train harder and recover faster. They could be the difference between a towering 3-run homerun to win the game and a lazy pop-fly to end it.
So, if you allow some athletes to take PEDS, it encourages—almost forces—everyone else to follow suit just to stay competitive.
Additionally, there is an understanding between fans and athletes: The athletes train and work hard to attain peak physical perfection and we admire them for it. When you introduce a substance that boosts their performance artificially, the relationship feels less sincere.
If anyone remembers the homerun race of ’98, you’ll remember the magic and anticipation you felt each time Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa inched closer to 61 with another moonshot.
And if anyone was as invested as I was (I’m an avid Cubs fan, as well as a baseball enthusiast), you’ll also remember the disappointment and anger you felt when you found out they were juicing (although Sosa was never actually caught red handed).
And that disappointment leads me to my next point. Not only does it make the game seem disingenuous, but these athletes are often role models to young children, which could go one of two ways.
- Soul crushing disappointment that your favorite player is a cheater.
- An attitude that PEDs are awesome and make you better at sports.
#2 is a scary proposition to consider. Especially when you think about how many parents try to live vicariously through their children and push them way too far in athletics. But I will leave this topic for the far more experienced Mighty Mommy to discuss.
After all of those negatives, it might seem daunting to make an argument for PEDs, but in fact it isn’t…..
The Case for PEDs
To be clear, I’m a baseball purist (although my attitude applies to all sports) and I don’t support the use of PEDs. However, the argument is not necessarily for PED use, per se. I think most in the “for PEDs” camp argue that the mishandling of said substances is what creates the problem.
Fact: Even the most rigorous testing programs will not catch every PED.
Fact: There will always be a new substance, a new therapy, a new way to get that edge.
So are PEDs really that detrimental that it makes sense to spends millions of dollars on a witch hunt that might catch a few cheaters, but will ultimately cast a large shadow of suspicion on anyone over 160 pounds?
Elite athletes players are already putting their bodies on the line for our entertainment (and millions of dollars, of course). We care about their safety and well-being off the field, but we collectively clap and cheer at every bone-crunching hit.
While House Call Doctor mentioned the banned substances list created and enforced by WADA (the World Anti-Doping Agency), she neglected to mention that every major American sport creates and monitors its own drug policy in house. That’s because each sports agency is its own business, free to conduct itself as it sees fit.
Which makes it much more difficult to create an overarching law or program in regards to drug use in sports. Even if there was, who would enforce it—and how? I think we all agree the government doesn’t need to get involved and use tax payer dollars to enforce rules in children’s games that adults play for our entertainment.
The Solution for the PED Problem
The best solution to the problem of PEDs in sports is to create programs that educate young athletes about the health risks (and moral failings) of taking these substances.
Second, I think the onus is on each respective league to create clear and objective legislation outlining exactly what substances are banned, the testing protocols, and the penalties for cheating. Objectivity and transparency are key here.
With all of the nutritionists and trainers working with professional athletes, it is possible that some of the athletes genuinely don’t understand or know exactly what they’re consuming and whether or not it is banned in their respective sport.
Which leads me to my next suggestion: League approved and monitored health specialists throughout the league. If the league monitored the administrators of the drugs, the PEDs might not even make it to the athletes to begin with.
This might also lead to a useful compromise—allow the use of certain PEDs under careful medical supervision for injury recovery only. After all, these drugs are developed and administered in the medical world for a myriad of different injuries, diseases, and deficiencies. The term “performance-enhancing drugs” doesn’t even exist outside the context of sport and competition.
For all of the negative connotations PEDs receive in the sports lexicon, they are actually used in sports all of the time. Cortisone (though not anabolic) is a steroid and shots of it are frequently administered in every major sport to relieve joint pain and muscle inflammation.
So why not allow players to complete a steroid treatment for serious injuries under the supervision and direction of a doctor? (A study in 2013 concluded that a third of all MLB starting pitchers have had Tommy John Ligament Replacement Surgery at least once in their career). After all, we know far more about steroids and their short-term and long-term effects than many other PEDs.
Steroid treatment is safe; it’s when it’s abused that it becomes a problem.
What do you think? Are PEDs a problem in sports? If so, how would you fix the problem? Be sure to leave your Comments below or share your insights with us on Facebook.com/quickdirtytips.