Why are steroids cheating?

[Bijou_Drains]

The example is in post 33

[Jas09]

There is also a specific prohibition against prescribing HGH for off-label use, as I understand it. There is no such prohibition for anabolic steroids, but you would potentially be subject to sanction if you prescribed it purely to improve athletic performance.

[Max_Torque]

@Alka_Seltzer

There are two issues, fairness and the health of players.

Exactly, steroid abuse can have very nasty side effects. If you allow steroids, you’re setting up a very nasty arms-race. People shouldn’t have to chose between their health and their ability to compete.

As I once put it, if steroids are allowed, then the person who wins will be the one with the most reckless disregard for his own long-term health, and that’s not something that sporting overseers want to encourage.

[kidchameleon]

@Bijou_Drains

The example is in post 33

It did show that the staff doctors provided prescription amphetamines, painkillers and cortisone shots, but not steroids. Try again.

[Munch]

@kidchameleon

Yeah, which is why I doubt he can prove his assertion. Still, I don’t think the dope is a place to expect to get a pass on questionable statements because its difficult to prove. Its really silly to pretend that tossing around steroids like they are candy is an above-board process in the US.

I think you’re misconstruing his point, as I don’t see anything that Bijou said that is anything close to this.

[Munch]

@kidchameleon

It did show that the staff doctors provided prescription amphetamines, painkillers and cortisone shots, but not steroids. Try again.

Uh - second paragraph:

Then the team doctor told Waters about pills that could “help you gain weight.” Dr. Lloyd Millburn, 49ers physician and surgeon, offered a sample pack of Dianabol, the anabolic steroid, in low-milligram tablets.

[kidchameleon]

@Munch

I think you’re misconstruing his point, as I don’t see anything that Bijou said that is anything close to this.

I have to head out, but I disagree. Anyone who thinks that today’s athletes are getting steroids in an above-board, legal manner is incredibly naive.

I shall concede the in the years prior to the addition of steroids to the controlled substances act that things were different, but I think such an argument is hardly germane to the OP.

[Alka_Seltzer]

@Max_Torque

As I once put it, if steroids are allowed, then the person who wins will be the one with the most reckless disregard for his own long-term health, and that’s not something that sporting overseers want to encourage.

Nicely and succinctly put.

[vinniepaz]

@storyteller0910

Because baseball says so.

I don’t mean that to be flip; it’s my real answer.

Why is it cheating to use sandpaper on the ball, but not to grip the ball in such a way as to cause it to travel deceptively when thrown? Why is it cheating to trip a runner going from first to second base? To climb into the stands and catch a home run while standing in Section 105L? To block first, second, or third base (but not to block home plate)?

Because those are the rules. It’s completely arbitrary, but sports are nothing but a series of completely arbitrary rules that we collectively agree to follow. All other concerns aside, that’s why steroids are against the rules: because they are. I don’t think there’s really going to be a more convincing explanation than that, and I don’t think there needs to be - any more than we need a reason why there are three strikes and four balls. There just are. That’s baseball.

I strongly disagree with this whole answer. Rules in baseball are not completely arbitrary, or arbitrary at all. They are designed for competitive balance, to maximize the entertainment value of the game, and to keep alive the traditions of the game. Calling them completely arbitrary is totally incorrect. What would it take for you to consider them non-arbitrary? Would they have to come down from on high engraved into stone tablets?

I don’t know for sure, but I would guess steroids are banned because they’re illegal and dangerous. Not only that, but the advantage they provide is so great that anyone who chose to abstain would be at a major disadvantage. So, to prevent people from feeling obligated to put their bodies at risk, they just banned them outright.

[John_DiFool]

My question: when, 100 years from now, genetic alterations, cyborg implants (both obvious and subtle) and the like are omnipresent in just about every sporting competition (as in, the majority of people in society will have taken advantage of such technologies-they are pretty omnipresent), will steroids seem rather quaint and primitive in hindsight?

[Ambivalid]

@vinniepaz

I would guess steroids are banned because they’re illegal and dangerous. Not only that, but the advantage they provide is so great that anyone who chose to abstain would be at a major disadvantage. So, to prevent people from feeling obligated to put their bodies at risk, they just banned them outright.

This sums it up fairly well, in my opinion.