Nowadays, sports is made up of more juicers than a months worth of late night infomercials. While some fruit juicers were endorsed by real athletes that naturally pushed the limits of the body, like the late Jack LaLanne, the sports world has been for a while now, turning against natural abilities in an effort to turn sport superstars into something more sinuous, and thereby more entertaining. All this accomplished not through athletic discipline, but through the use of performance enhancing drugs. This is a sad state of affairs (much like my own athletic ability), but lest my conclusion be thought to be superficial, I will explore just a few reasons why this is unsportsmanlike, dangerous, and even what it says about society today.
Within popular opinion, and even within the editorials and articles in publications like, ESPN, SI, or the Sporting News, one may come across the argument that people just don't care, shouldn't care, or that the pressures of a sportsman encourage that all athletes should, "bulk up." It is unfortunate that the idea of sportsmanship has reached such a low point, that this would even be encouraged, excused, or permitted. Giving someone an edge by a means that is unnatural, or opposed to the rules and the inherent ideas behind competition, is an idea that we most apply to sports like Football, Baseball, and its pop culture kin. Yet, to see the fallacy in these ideas and the overlooking of such trespasses against athleticism, it may be useful to reflect on what may happen when we apply these principles to other forms of sports, jobs, or competition. When we do this we find the fallacy of this kind of thinking to be more explicit, for it is applied in a sense which we can identify with a little better, than an impersonal sportsman we may see on television. To the general public those who participate in such sports, not only achieve the status of celebrity, but also one amounting to a kind of superhero who has developed their body, the means of which can be irrelevant, to do what most the rest of the spectators can't. Thus, there is a degree of awe when one watches two competing teams or individuals battle it out. To be able to identify with such sportsman or sportswoman can be quite the task indeed, for their skill is generally beyond the Standard of human capability, in not just strength, but also stamina, dexterity, discipline, endurance and all the like. Yet, again, when we take this principle of performance enhancing drugs down to the common man, we find sportsmanship, discipline and even skill to be on the decline when one permits the use of steroids. Furthermore, this may be just the tip of the proverbial iceberg.
One of the oldest "sports," is the hunting of game. The respectable nature of the hunt, is expressed even on bottles of Jaegermeister, and, in fact, quite eloquently. Jaegermeister, which means, "master hunter," states on the label, "It is the hunter's honor that he protects and preserves his game, hunts sportsmanlike, honors the Creator and His creatures." We see in this quote that sportsmanship, honor, and integrity are all emphasized.
Now when applying the principle of heightening one's abilities, through artificial or unfair means, and putting it into the context of hunting, the sportsmanship is profoundly degraded, as well as, in this case, gruesome. Instead of a hunter, pursuing prey with a rifle or compound bow, with heightened abilities, it would be much like going hunting with a bazooka, land mines, or painting a deer with a laser, and having the creature waxed by an air strike. In the same way, it would be like fishing with dynamite.
I think many of us would agree that such an elevation of ability and/or tools would be most unsportsmanlike indeed. What about bowling? What kind of sport would it be if one competitor had a ball half the width of the alley (though someone might point out a person would need to be athletic, superhuman or on steroids to handle such a ball, but thats beside the point - settle down!)? Let's not forget our southern friends, what about Nascar? How fair would it be if someone would have the use of a jet in the race? These examples may seem extreme and rather silly, but I use them to emphasize the point, that not only is the use of these controlled substances dishonest, but the decrease of honesty, by means of unnaturally enhancing skill, and thus providing one extra tools, is directly and adversely proportional to the sportsmanship these sports are supposedly founded on. Thus, if dishonesty and artificial enhancement are on the increase, in an equal degree, the sportsmanship is on the decrease.
One may point out some fault in my examples that since each "sporter" uses a tool, and it is these tools that are increased in ability, not the sportsman, these examples cannot be equated with steroid abuse. However, in such physical sports, which by the way I was never good at, and I "was" more a fan of "Dungeons and Dragons" anyway, the body is one of the greatest tools in all of sports, and it is this tool that is altered by juicing up. The principle of enhancing your gun or weapon in hunting, is one in the same with enhancing your "guns," or tools in the body. The examples might be different, but the principle is coherent without any absurdity. One not need apply some alteration to, "The Duke," to make these examples corollary.
Due to all this, we see that steroids equate to an advantage. An advantage in sports, produced by artificial means is cheating. Plain and simple. Even if you worked at McDonalds and a guy strung out on speed could do 30 more burgers than you an hour, and thereby gets a raise above you, would you not feel cheated? For your performance would be lowered by the juxtaposition the management may have between you and the strung out individual. Yet, even McDonalds doesn't allow such behavior and such a person would be immediately fired, but we don't even hold the standard of McDonalds in sports apparently, except within the possible example tailgating with fat encased treats roasting on a bar-b-cue, clogging arteries and shortening one's life span. (I believe there is a correlation between your life span and the decrease thereof according to how many tailgates you attend, and every time you indulge in grade "s" quality "beef" from the golden arches.)
Another popular argument for the use of steroids, is that sportsman are under a lot of pressure to perform. No doubt this is true, but this pressure has always been present in sports, since the earliest times. I believe it can be argued that the very concept of competition presupposes a pressure to outperform another. This pressure isn't just limited to sports, and you may have indeed experienced it in your own workplace or social life, but such pressures, do not equate to the permission of drugs. The pressures of life may not be pleasant, but they are ever present. They are mentioned and experienced throughout time, from the Bible to Queen and Bowie. Certainly, these pressures don't excuse inappropriate behavior.
David Bowie and Queen - Under Pressure by stevanhoggPressure in athletes is not a new thing. From to the first olympians to the jr. high athlete, pressure is apparent and a factor in their participation. Yet, they participate knowing full well this pressure exists, and if one cannot handle pressure, then they should cease to be an athlete. I have no sympathy for those who engage in an activity where pressure is so explicit, then later complain about it. When we put it in context, the pressure of being a sportsman and missing out on a trophy or national title, isn't so bad. Several ancient cultures engaged in sports where the loser was killed. Not only does Rome have a history of this, but also the Mayans. Now thats pressure. Again, pressure is presupposed and a necessary condition of competition. In all forms. Even the contestants on the Price is Right are subject to pressure, which must be excruciating when anyone ever bids one dollar.
Another argument goes that so many people in sports do steroids and it has been done for so long anyway, that enforcement now would be absurd. Well, performance enhancing drugs hasn't been done forever, rather athletes, like many in society, were once concerned and focused on honor. In fact, honor was sometimes the initial cause of competition. Honor is unfortunately an outdated ideal. Why have honor when you can have 5 million dollars? Yet, I ask why not have both, for there are great athletes of the past and today who never used performance enhancing drugs, and still had the ability to entertain in and through competition. This should be the case today in all examples, but we are far from it, for the idea of honor has been degraded by the pursuit of goods, pride, and the most carnal. Yet, it wasn't too long ago where honor was so important many would actually give their lives or sacrifice their health to achieve that ideal. Of course, one would argue that steroids can be the means to the end to that ideal, but the use of such drugs makes keeping that honor intact an impossibility.
The permitting of this and what it says about our society and culture as a whole, I feel is quite scary and, in fact, dangerous. For those who don't care about this issue, and many shrug it off, we see it fits a constant and current trend in pop culture, and that is the excusing of behavior for means of entertainment. This obviously goes beyond the sports world and one can indulge in any kind of activity they want, as long as they have the ability to entertain. Cash helps too. Not only is enforcement lax concerning such actions, but if one becomes privy to some consequence, this consequence is not as strict as would be directed at the majority of common the common man. This gives many celebrities, and sports figures a free pass to engage in things that the common man could not possibly get away with. While we conclude our politicians should be free of any mistake whatsoever, in entertainment and sports they are encouraged, for to the American, there is nothing more entertaining then a train wreck.
Steroids being present in sports, produces another question concerning the Hall of Fame and those that break records. Should the records stand equal and comparable to those included into the cathedrals of sports greats? I say no, for I feel it is disrespectful to have these inclusions, that they may be compared against, or along with those who have held sport to a higher standard and played the game naturally. Just as in my terribly poor McDonalds analogy, this comparison represents an unfair advantage, even among these monuments of likeness which extend at times beyond the life of the individual,, for there is an evident belittling of the greats by the inclusion of the fakes. If indeed one wants to build an edifice for those who are on steroids, may it be separated from the rest, that they may not be considered one in the same, for they are most certainly not. At least include a relief of a syringe on those who have altered their performance from these drugs.
Yet, there are bound to be mistakes for due to lack of enforcement, it can be difficult to identify those on these drugs. In fact, the chemists who produce these drugs are always trying to remain one step ahead of detection. Then how do we spot a juicer? Well, in football, its easy. When another player swats another on the rear end in the, "good game," or, "adda boy," fashion, and the recipient cringes, well they have more then likely recently had a large needle in their butt. With added enforcement of the principles behind sportsmanship, and a stricter no tolerance attitude, or at least some form of punishment which actually punishes the guilty, I believe sports can be saved, however it would be a long road, for the deterioration of sportsmanship is not just due to the use of steroids, but rather other behaviors that threaten the purity of these great games.
Some of these behaviors and lack of sportsmanship may in some cases be linked to the use of steroids, though this is according to some, not others, so since I am not a scientist, I can't claim it to be conclusive by any means. This element is kind of based on who you ask. However, there have been many studies done, in the lab, and outside the lab, which suggest there may be a relationship between steroid abuse and aggression. This was indeed tested outon monkeys and found to be the case in that example, but I believe monkeys have anger issues to begin with, especially when it comes to throwing feces.
To be fair, sports have always contained an inherent emotional nature, and "trash talk," on the playing field or court are common place. While one school holds this connection to aggression and steroid use to be true, another disputes the idea. All I know is if athletes start throwing feces, the results can be considered conclusive concerning the relationship between steroids and aggression.
The term, "steroids" is a colloquialism for "anabolic-androgenic steroids", or "AAS." What is undisputed about the use of these drugs is the physical effects that one may encounter after frequent use. Yet, as said before, the psychological effects are under current study and debate. The structure of the heart, liver problems and high blood pressure have all been associated with the use of AAS, and it goes without saying that these being in good condition are necessary conditions to be a successful athlete, especially if one considers the long term.. Though this is dangerous enough, we find if one gives credibility to the psychological aspects of steroid abuse, then the true danger and dark side of AAS becomes clearer and should negate any discussion into its allowance into sports whatsoever, for it in a sense the debate becomes ridiculous, for it becomes outweighed by the danger.
Some of the psychological charges against AAS make the claim that it may make the user, "hypomanic." In 2005, CNS Drugs quoted:
"Significant psychiatric symptoms including aggression and violence, mania, and less frequently psychosis and suicide have been associated with steroid abuse."
I know it may appear that given recent events regarding the Kansas City Chiefs' Devon Belcher, that I may be hinting, either implicitly or explicitly, at this particular tragedy, yet this is not the case at all. To editorialize and make connections that I have no proof of concerning the murder-suicide in regard to steroid abuse, would be very disrespectful to those involved, and even broader, to those who have been emotionally effected by the tragic events. So why write about this topic now? Simply because I started writing this particular entry before the Belcher tragedy. I am no way suggesting that Belcher used steroids or that the events and the substance have any relation to each other. Thus, again, these two topics are divorced from each other, but when we look at the list of possible psychological effects from steroids, we may come to find that such events are possible and induced by the substance if one is to adhere to the "inconclusive" conclusion of the aggression, violence, mania, psychosis and suicide cited by CNS Drugs, which may be (or may not be) onset by AAS.
If this is indeed the case then we can expect those personal fouls, or unnecessary roughness calls to increase in correlation to any increase in the abuse of AAS. These symptoms, of course will not be contained in the arena or stadium, but also outside the field of play. I rather recently had the opportunity to interview a therapist I met about his impressions concerning a possible connection between steroid abuse and violence. Specific details were of course omitted due to the patient-client confidentiality, but he did indicate he counseled several non-pro sports individuals whom used steroids and noted that there were examples of anger, abuse and aggression within the home that suggest, to him anyway, that a connection is apparent.
Another danger about the use of steroids in athletes, concerns not the athletes themselves, but those who look up to them, respect them, and consider them as role models. This is a huge responsibility that the athlete must be aware of, whether they like it or not.
The very fact that there are even fans indicates this role model element to be a necessary consequence of their participation and success in sports, despite the fact that some may want to deny it. A dangerous fact concerning the addition of steroids in a particular individual, or the disclosure of those who use of such substances, reflects not only on them, but also those who idolize them.
Now the truth is the responsibility of a young sportsman doing steroids doesn't necessarily rest fully upon the pro-athlete. Indeed, the responsibility rests with the budding athlete. Yet, it could be said that pro-athletes influence young minds that the use of steroids equates to greater success. Some statistics suggest, that up to three percent of all high school student athletes use steroids, and to a young athlete it is much more dangerous a prospect, than say that of an older pro-athlete. Why this is, is simply because their bodies are in a greater degree of development than that of an older athlete. In fact, AAS has the ability to change the structure of the heart, specifically the ventricles, which may cut short the athletic future of a young athlete or even his life.
It is for these reasons I feel a stricter approach by those in sport management, law enforcement and society as a whole needs to be adopted in order to curb the abundant use of performance enhancing drugs. Lives are at risk, not only in the sense of death, but also the quality of life. Again, one's ability to entertain should not reflect on the degree of punishment they receive for any trespass against law or regulations set by any authoritative organization. This, personally, hints to me a loss of character within our country and indeed the world, which can only be repaired when we understand and realize the dangers or consequences that can arise from our complacency for what is wrong, merely for the sake of entertainment.
