Ask this guy... Oh wait, you can't.
What's wrong with it is that I don't want to cheer for the "best" chemist or most efficient drug manufacturer at athletic and sporting events. I want great performances on a gridiron, a baseball diamond, or an athletic field to come from the heart of the athlete, not the bottle of pills or the syringes in their locker. I would find it jarring and weird to cheer for Hoffman-Roche or Eli Lilly.
BUT, if Major League Baseball wants me and my kids as fans, they have to clean it up.
This article is one non sequitur. Hell, let's attach bionic legs and arms and see if that enhances performance. Remember the bionic man? How does the use of caffeine equate to steriods?
Ask this guy... Oh wait, you can't.
On the other hand, the article claims that steroids have had no effect on the health of these players; this may be technically correct, but since steroids appear to be a fairly recent phenomenon in baseball (since the early 1990s) compared to football, the long-term effects on players cannot be accurately determined right now. The most accurate indicator of long-term effects will be when retired players start having unusual health problems starting in their mid-40s.
I wonder how many of the health problems that Jason Giambi has had over the last year are related to his use of steroid and other performance-enhancing drugs.
So should we have two Olympics? One on juice and one clean?
Gee, using her "logic", why not let boxers and other athletes use PCP? It would allow them to put on some really impressive performances...
Long-term answer: You can try to change the rules and the laws.
The current row over steroids is because the current use of steroids is improper. That seems very simple to me. Barry Bonds was MVP -- because he cheated. There's probably another player out there who could have surpassed Bonds, but he failed to do so, simply because he didn't cheat the way Bonds cheated.
Given the current rules and laws, steroid use comes down to cheating. And MLB suffers when players are allowed to cheat.
Like 'Dirk Diggler' on Viagra.
What's wrong with players on steroids?
Ask Derek Sanderson, formerly of the Boston Bruins and the NY Rangers.
Steroids are illegal - caffeine and Ritalin are not. End of discussion...
I don't have a problem with athletes who want to use performance drugs. I have a problem with athletes who pretend that they don't.
Owners or sponsors should require testing all the time. Drugged athletes should be labeled as "enhanced" (or whatever).
Eventually the natural athletes will compete against each other and the drugged athletes will have their own competitions.
This has already happened in bodybuilding.
So you want to force people to risk their lives just so they can compete?
Bonds (last month):
"I'm not trying to prove anything being over 40," said Bonds. "Maybe I'm just getting better with age."
"I can't explain it," he said. "I don't have an answer and don't understand why God has blessed me. I'm grateful and excited and happy about it. When I play, a light goes on and everything changes inside of me. I can't understand it."
"Performance Enhancing" drugs have made a mockery of the sport. The statistics are meaningless now. Henry Aaron would have hit 900 homeruns if he'd been juiced like Sammy, McGuire and Bonds. The users have defiled the game, but I don't expect this ditzy writer to understand that.
But the freaking FedGov sticking its nose in here goes BEYOND a simple power grab in to outright Nanny Statism. People can hurt themselves by drinking too much water or eating too many Twinkies. GET OFF OUR BACKS!!! There is NO AUTHORITY writen into the Constitution to even come close to this crap they are pulling.
WE assume the risks. WE are adults perfectly capable of making our OWN decisions. If we end up croaking from brain cancer or an enlarged heart, WE knew the risks and were willing to accept them. That's just more resources for the rest of you guys to leech from each other.
Same goes for smoking, drinking, and not wearing a seat belt. And don't give us that lame assed "insurance cost" BS either. Its a circular argument for socialism and you damn well know it...
Sorry... but I really felt that need to rant. None of the above is necessarily directed at anyone here, but should be taken generally...
I think there should be mandatory and random drug testing in the House and Senate also.
The problem is clear. (Agreed, the government should stay out of it. ) We place restraints on the things we do in the name of competition so that no body gets injured, even if the risk is voluntarily undertaken. Say there was an exilir that allowed you to hit .459 with 76 home runs, but if you took it, you'd be dead at 29. Some 28 year old would take it. The rules of competition should not allow it, for obvious reasons.
Another example is "demoltion derby". You could sell more tickets (maybe) if each car were required to carry a 55 gallon drum of gasoline on the roof. And participation would be voluntary, but is this a good idea?