Performance Enhancing Drugs

Should the use of performance enhancing drugs in sports be legalized? PRO (yes) | CON (no) | Bengt Kayser, MD, PhD, Professor of Exercise Physiology, and Alexandre Mauron, PhD, Professor of Bioethics, both at the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Geneva, Switzerland, along with Andy Miah, PhD, Reader in New Media and Bioethics at the School of Media, Language, and Music at the University of the West of Scotland, UK, in their Dec. 2005The Lancet article "Viewpoint: Legalisation of Performance-Enhancing Drugs," wrote:"Antidoping policies exist, in theory, to encourage fair play. However, we believe they are unfounded, dangerous, and excessively costly...

We believe that rather than drive doping underground, use of drugs should be
Murray, PhD Carl Djerassi, PhD, Professor Emeritus in the Department of Chemistry at Stanford University, in his Oct. 7, 2007 San Francisco Chronicle article "Athletes and Steroids: Will Tomorrow's Game Involve Drug Advisers?," wrote:"Though logical, such acceptance or legalization of performance-enhancing aids has serious ramifications. I predict that a new subset of drugs - for which I propose the term 'lusuceuticals'...will arise. These new drugs will follow the model of commercially successful products labeled 'nutraceuticals' and 'cosmeceuticals' that have already crossed the sharply defined boundaries of standard pharmaceuticals designed to treat diseases...But will lusu-chemists...limit themselves to much safer anabolic drugs, now that detectability will be of no concern? Or will they head into much more questionable directions, such as growth hormone analogs that will lead to 71/2-foot-tall pole vaulters or basketball players?...Whatever we do in terms of legalizing drug abuse in athletics, we are heading in the direction of changing the Olympics from a competition of athletes to one of chemists, where the emphasis will shift abruptly from body to
7, 2007 - Carl Djerassi, PhD Joe Lindsey, Contributing Writer for Bicycling magazine, in his article "Why Legalizing Sports Doping Won't Work," published on July 27, 2007 in the New York Times column "Freakonomics" by Stephen J. Dubner, wrote:"One, not all cyclists dope, nor do they want to...The vast majority of cyclists who would prefer to race clean...are instead tempted to dope simply to keep up with the small minority who aggressively dope for a competitive advantage...Modern oxygen-vector doping is so effective, a rider has two choices: dope and keep up, or stay clean and fall behind...Second, not all doping techniques are created equal. The most effective regimens are also the most sophisticated and expensive...So if doping is legalized, the sport's richest riders and teams will have access to techniques that lesser lights don't. The playing field, never level, would be tilted permanently.Medical laws and medical ethics prevent us from letting athletes use these substances outside of a clinical trial. But athletes, who eagerly seek out anything that will give them a competitive edge, will still try and get them...Simply put, wherever you draw the line, something, some technique or substance, will always be off-limits. And so you've merely moved the line, not erased it...Finally, none of that addresses the moral problems involved in legalizing doping. Doping in sports isn't inherently wrong; it's wrong by the value system with which we judge sports. Sports