• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Recreational drugs vs. Performance enhancing drugs

Recreational Drugs vs. Performance Enhancing Drugs


  • Total voters
    20

WI Crippler

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
15,427
Reaction score
9,577
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
In another thread, there was a discussion about the use of performance enhancing drugs in atheltic events. That brought to my mind a question.....

It seems that our society is leaning towards favoring the legalization of recreational drug use, however slowly. But with regards to the use of PEDs by professional(or amatuer) athletes, there seems to almost be immediate and universal disdain for such an action.

Where do you stand on the issue, and why?

Poll to follow shortly.....
 
The disdain for such an action is of course because of their usage in athletic competition, which obviously makes fans feel cheated. However, if they were legal, it obviously wouldn't be possible for a player to actually "cheat" by using them since every other player would have the same opportunity. Their status as "performance-enhancing" is irrelevant to me, as vitamins, legal supplements, and even training are "performance-enhancing in a sense"; the basis of athletic competition is centered around performance enhancement. I used to be an avid proponent of the "legalize and tax" perspective, but as I've become aware of more forms of market failure, I've become aware of more deficiencies with that. I'd say that I still broadly favor legalization, however.
 
Legalizing performance enhancing drugs in sports would mean that athletes who do not want to harm their bodies would be at a competitive disadvantage.
 
Legalizing performance enhancing drugs in sports would mean that athletes who do not want to harm their bodies would be at a competitive disadvantage.

The most significant effects of steroids (heart damage, "roid rage") are disputed and the latter seems to be a varying effect more than anything else, and while steroids can cause increased blood pressure and cholesterol levels, those are not deficiencies that could not be alleviated to some extent by a regularly exercising athlete anyway. The possible adverse effects of human growth hormone are even less apparent. All in all, users of these substances aren't comparable to "junkies," and often use them in a well-calibrated and researched manner.

As it is, athletes in particularly arduous sports place themselves at a higher risk of harming their bodies than the normal individual could be expected to be subject to anyway.
 
I say let em all be legal, but I would not pay any money to any league that allowed them.,
 
I say legalize them all,then the cops can worry about real criminals.

I mean look at what weed and steroids did for our governor,Arnold SwartzenKennedy,then again, on second thought maybe not.
It seems to have turned him into a real girlie man.
:Oopsie
 
The disdain for such an action is of course because of their usage in athletic competition, which obviously makes fans feel cheated. However, if they were legal, it obviously wouldn't be possible for a player to actually "cheat" by using them since every other player would have the same opportunity. I used to be an avid proponent of the "legalize and tax" perspective, but as I've become aware of more forms of market failure, I've become aware of more deficiencies with that. I'd say that I still broadly favor legalization, however.


There are so many holes in your argument, I don't know where to begin.

First fan feel cheated, because the athletes are cheating. Putting their health at risk for the sole purpose of making more money or breaking records. Is that what sports have become? Say you have a kid who's a great high school athlete and want to pursue it farther, but will not get anywhere without taking roids. Would you be okay with that? Especially considering the consequences of using (and this is only short-term effects):

Reports indicate that use of anabolic steroids produces increases in lean muscle mass, strength, and ability to train longer and harder. Many health hazards of short-term effects are reversible. The major effects of anabolic steroid use include liver tumors, jaundice, fluid retention, and high blood pressure. Additional side effects include the following: for men shrinking of the testicles, reduced sperm count, infertility, baldness, development of breasts; for women growth of facial hair, changes in or cessation of the menstrual cycle, deepened voice; for adolescents growth halted prematurely through premature skeletal maturation and accelerated puberty changes. Researchers report that users may suffer from paranoid jealousy, extreme irritability, delusions, and impaired judgment stemming from feelings of invincibility

Here's a lot more info on the ill-effects of steroids:

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroids]Anabolic steroid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]


So I ask again... would you want your kid to be pressured into taking this drug in order to pursue his athletic dream???

Their status as "performance-enhancing" is irrelevant to me, as vitamins, legal supplements, and even training are "performance-enhancing in a sense"; the basis of athletic competition is centered around performance enhancement.

You got to be kidding me, LOL. Vitamins??? :doh

It's like claiming an athlete is cheating because he eats all of his veggies, LOL. Give me a break.

They are legal, because taking extra vitamin C will not make you hit more homies.
 
The most significant effects of steroids (heart damage, "roid rage") are disputed and the latter seems to be a varying effect more than anything else, and while steroids can cause increased blood pressure and cholesterol levels, those are not deficiencies that could not be alleviated to some extent by a regularly exercising athlete anyway. The possible adverse effects of human growth hormone are even less apparent. All in all, users of these substances aren't comparable to "junkies," and often use them in a well-calibrated and researched manner.

As it is, athletes in particularly arduous sports place themselves at a higher risk of harming their bodies than the normal individual could be expected to be subject to anyway.

Please convince me of this with facts.
 
I think 60 minutes did an article on steroids years ago,and they said steroids is the most abused drug out there,something like 20 million kids between 14 and 18 were taking them,and a lot with their parents help.
 
In another thread, there was a discussion about the use of performance enhancing drugs in atheltic events. That brought to my mind a question.....

It seems that our society is leaning towards favoring the legalization of recreational drug use, however slowly. But with regards to the use of PEDs by professional(or amatuer) athletes, there seems to almost be immediate and universal disdain for such an action.

Where do you stand on the issue, and why?

Poll to follow shortly.....

I once heard Stallone quoted in support of HGH, claiming that unless it was abused, it had no lasting negative side effects.

Any truth to that?
 
There are so many holes in your argument, I don't know where to begin.

First fan feel cheated, because the athletes are cheating.

Athletes are "cheating" because of violation of presently existing rules. Obviously, rule modifications would render behaviors previously considered "cheating" permissible.

Putting their health at risk for the sole purpose of making more money or breaking records. Is that what sports have become? Say you have a kid who's a great high school athlete and want to pursue it farther, but will not get anywhere without taking roids. Would you be okay with that? Especially considering the consequences of using (and this is only short-term effects):

Does not professional athletic competition already result in various health risks and does not professional athletic competition already eliminate the majority of individuals as a result of their lack of sufficient skills or abilities?

Here's a lot more info on the ill-effects of steroids:

Anabolic steroid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia? I consulted Wikipedia quickly and I'll of course look at more links later, but can you immediately cite any peer-reviewed work that indicates that anabolic steroids have health risks significant enough to warrant their criminalization? The literature on HGH is even sparser, so if you can't find anything regarding the former, I don't have high hopes for the latter.

So I ask again... would you want your kid to be pressured into taking this drug in order to pursue his athletic dream???

We're going to need something more substantive than the "kids, drugs are BAD, mmkay?" talking point. It's simply not the case that all recreational drugs are massively harmful and it's certainly not the case that all performance enhancing substances result in inevitable health deficiencies. There is, however, significant exaggeration about the health effects of such substances from prohibitionist lobbies. :shrug:

You got to be kidding me, LOL. Vitamins??? :doh

It's like claiming an athlete is cheating because he eats all of his veggies, LOL. Give me a break.

We're merely referring to performance enhancement. Objections to artificial performance enhancement are of course rather inconsistent in that various vitamin tablets and supplements are permissible, but other performance enhancing supplements are not.

They are legal, because taking extra vitamin C will not make you hit more homies.

Again, can you cite a reliable empirical source that indicates the "roid rage" effect is indeed a general consequence of anabolic steroid use that is relatively widespread?
 
I once heard Stallone quoted in support of HGH, claiming that unless it was abused, it had no lasting negative side effects.

Any truth to that?

I think it remains to be seen. Its a relatively new PED(not really new, but new in its popularity amongst athletes) that not many athletic companies test for. I don't even know if they can test for it yet.
 
I think it remains to be seen. Its a relatively new PED(not really new, but new in its popularity amongst athletes) that not many athletic companies test for. I don't even know if they can test for it yet.

Does it make your dick shrink, give you testi-cancer of want to rip a baby in half, or what?
 
Does it make your dick shrink, give you testi-cancer of want to rip a baby in half, or what?

I have no personal experience with HGH, so I couldn't say. If it makes your penis smaller, just counter that with extenze. Ripping babies in half, you don't need steroids to feel like doing that.
 
I have no personal experience with HGH, so I couldn't say. If it makes your penis smaller, just counter that with extenze. Ripping babies in half, you don't need steroids to feel like doing that.

Spoken like a man with children, or everyone else in the theater when the infant starts crying.
 
Hey, it's not my body, let the athletes ruin their health if they want.
 
On recreational drugs I have expressed my opinion a few times. I tend to favor keeping them illegal, but don't feel strongly about it. I know from my drug problems first hand how damaging even supposedly soft drugs are.

On performance enhancing drugs, I am strongly against legalization. As a pro wrestling fan, rarely does a month go by without the death of another wrestler who died young from the results of these drugs. Pro Wrestler's Deaths This link contains a list of wrestler deaths. Note how long the list is, and how many died before age 50. Pro wrestling has long been a hotbed of PEDs, both for the improved look, and to help heal without surgery.
 
Actually, steroids themselves don't make your dick shrink. The androgenic effects make your balls shrink...if that makes you feel better. :rofl


Maybe I should take them then, since my balls are only ornamental anyways.
 
Voted to legalized both, and sports leagues may retain the prerogative to prohibit or allow performance enhancing drugs as they see fit.

If I am not competing in sports against unaugmented athletes, I should be able to use performance enhancing drugs in order to facilitate my self-improvement efforts. If a drug could reduce recovery time between workouts, reduce the effects of muscle fatigue, or strengthen muscle fibers, bones, and connective tissues I would take it in a heartbeat. When more effective noötropics are developed, I'll be first in line for experimental usage. Already, I am curious about the effects that off-label Aricept has on the memory functions of people without Alzheimer's. Only reasons I'm not taking Modafinil are I can't convince a local doctor I have narcolepsy and can't particularly afford the medicine, not to mention the dysfunctions I am currently experiencing in my sleep cycle and cognitive functioning.

Similar concerns keep me from inquiring seriously about anabolic steroids, especially since I know I'd have better luck on the black market than from scamming scrips. I don't trust professional criminals for my pharmaceutical problems unless I have no choice.

Personally, I'm waiting for the development of next-generation performance enhancers that directly stimulate muscle, bone, and neuron formation. I'd move to some horrible Third World country without pharmaceutical regulations and start making "energy drinks" immediately.
 
Would if I could. I'd like nothing more than to try HGH or an HGH/low-dose anabolic cocktail, but I wouldn't even know how to obtain such a thing.
 
Atleast doping have a very negative effect if you take it to the extremes. And even if the Soviet and DDR are long gone, their are still a lot of countries that are very poor and/or run by totalitarian regimes. So if doping was legal in international sport the athletes from rich western countries would be at disadvantage to athletes that either was forced by the regime or desperation to take the doping to the extreme. From locking at this study it would not only effect them but also their children.

Children suffer from systematic doping
 
Back
Top Bottom