Title: Sports and Performance Enhancement drugs(PED) Debate
As news of athletes failing doping tests have been reported lately, the debate on whether to ban enhancement drugs aroused again. Just years before the scandal of Armstrong bought spotlight to the PED issue, and now the Olympic has rekindled the spark of debate. Critics of the ban conceive taking enhancement drugs is a means of pursuing excellence. While the supporter condemn that the act of taking PED is an insult to sportsmanship. Thus, in order to make a conclusion we will have to go through the pros and cons of the issue.
The critics claim that taking drugs are a means to pursue the success and to become higher, faster and stronger. This shows that the athletes are willing to do anything In order to outweigh their rivals. Thus there are no coherent agreement that taking PED is an unfair act, if so we should also bang training and coaching. And in some sports, PED are allowed, so why not extend to all sports?
In spite of the pursuing excellence aspects, the critics also focus on the health aspects. They claimed that on the assumption that we ought to bear the consequence of our choice, and athletes have the freedom to choose whether to take enhancers in exchange of a better performance. And it is their choice that we cannot interfere. Besides, it is noted that many athletes will buy enhancer in the black market. Hence, allowing PED reduce the health risk and are more convenience for monitoring and regulating.
Lastly, the critics doubt the effectiveness of the drug test. According to the IOC director general, François Carrard, the fact that only eight athletes out of 11,000 Olympic competitors tested positive is proof that "the war on doping is being won." However, the argument t...