Use of anabolic steroids, like use of multi-vitamins, does not enable one to become a “Superathlete”. These drugs work, to the extent that they do, only when combined with hard work, dedication, persistence, and the exercise of other athletic virtues (Rosenthal, 2005). But if the nature of sports is that it is a competition to determine which athlete has developed his or her skills to the utmost, perhaps use of anabolic steroids frustrates such a determination, since the user/hard worker may have an unfair advantage over the mere hard worker (Quinn, 2005). Let's call this argument against the use of anabolic steroids the “Argument from Unfair Advantage”. The general form of this argument is the following: use of anabolic steroids gives the user an unfair advantage over non-users; therefore, use of them ought to be prohibited. A different reason to think that the premise is true is that, if use of anabolic steroids were allowed, athletes who would use them would have an advantage over those who would not. This might be true, but it does not itself tell us why that would be an unfair advantage. It is permissible in professional baseball for a pitcher to get daily massages in order to help his pitching arm muscles recover more quickly, and this pitcher has an advantage over another pitcher who, because of a lack of time, location or finances, cannot receive daily massages. But it is not clear why this fact alone means that the first athlete…