I guess you have to look at it this way: a lot of hitters used steroids during the last 20-30 years. So did a lot of pitchers. Statistics compiled during that time frame thus are perfectly valid, because either the hitter or the pitcher was likely to have been using steroids at the time. There is no way MLB can pick out individual hitters and say "You were a villain!" when that same villain might have been struck out 200 extra times by steroid-fueled pitchers.
The playing field was level - everyone was allowed to do it. Now the playing field is level again, with no one allowed to do it. As a result, historical stats are still valid and aren't going to be changed.
well, you do make a good point, although I do not believe their use in baseball was a s widespread as you imply. Sosa, Bonds, McGuire, Palmiero: sorry, but I do not believe their HRs should be seen in the same light as Mantle, Mays, Ruth, Foxx, Williams, Robinson, Musial, etc, etc.
Yes, but by choosing to use steroids, a player knew that he would be putting his health in danger. That's why many players chose not to use steroids even though it was legal (by MLB's rules at that time) to do so. So realistically, it wasn't a level playing field.