Art Caplan on steroids and sports
Over at Science Progress, Art looks at some of the arguments against -- and for -- the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sports. Here's a clip:
“Professional” wrestling has many fans in North America, Mexico, Asia and Europe. Its athletes can do impressive feats involving agility and strength. They are very strong certainly due to steroids. But no one seriously thinks that pro wrestling is a sport—despite having all the external accoutrements. It is a steroid-infused exhibition. [British bioethicist John] Harris might say “well redefine the sport—there is nothing intrinsically sacrosanct about effort leading to performance.” Except that there is. The definition of sport is human effort based on talent and training leading to performance. This is an activity that need not be preserved but if it is to be preserved—and most baseball, track and cycling fans have an exquisite sensitivity to history—then drugs, huge shifts in equipment, and competing in venues that distort the value of effort, e.g., very high altitudes, won’t work.
So at least in sports, if not on Wall Street or in the classroom, it is how the performance is achieved and not just the performance that is valued. That link between human effort and agency and output may be contingent. But it is surely definitive of what sport is.
contribute a comment
Your contributions to the conversation are very much appreciated. We do have a few simple guidelines, though. Be civil. Stay on topic. We reserve the right to remove comments that violate the aforementioned guidelines. One more thing: comments are moderated, so it may take a little while for your comment to be posted. Thanks.
comments
"Art Caplan on steroids"
What a thought...
- by emily on Mar 18, 2008 at 11:34 AM | link
I agree with the assessment that sports is based off of performance. If an athlete is not performing, then that certain athlete won't be playing very long. Steroids will definetly help the performance level. Unfortunately, it is cheating and is a cheap way to compete with other athletes. It is an unfair advantage to those athletes. I understand that sports is extremely competitive, but that does not mean that steroids are the answer. There are other ways to perform at an all star level. You can just work extremely hard and dedicate yourself to being the best athlete you can be. It is a shame to see all these doping scames with the Tour de France, baseball, football, track and field, and wrestling. A lot of people look up to these athletes and what kind of exmaple would they be leading for us? Steroids are clearly bad for your reputation and bad for your body, too.
- by ryan on Oct 27, 2008 at 12:01 AM | link
It is an unjust benefit to those athletes. I realise that sports is exceedingly comparable, but that does not signify that steroids are the answer. There are other ways to present at an all celebrity level. You can just work exceedingly hard and dedicate yourself to being the best athlete you can be.
- by HGH on Apr 9, 2010 at 7:12 AM | link