Debate over drugs increases

by Tim Pappa
Staff Writer

Dreaming of it is easy. Conditioning is harder. Injecting it is the hardest.

The sports world has become a coercive environment with the increasing use of performance-enhancing drugs. The use of these drugs has sprouted interest and concern, as well as debate from two noted philosophers of sport, Ohio University Sports Philosophy professor Mark Holowchak and W. Miller Brown, Dean of Faculty at Trinity College, on Jan. 17.

Holowchak said all types of drugs should be banned from competition, therefore leveling the playing field, allowing athletes to pursue their passion without the harm of a coercive environment urging them to use performance-enhancing drugs.

Alternatively, Brown said the question of whether a coercive environment exists to force athletes to make decisions concerning drugs is not at hand. He added that athletes should be treated as adults, not children. People acknowledge risks in all daily factions of life that could equally be dubbed coercive but still make decisions because it is their right as an individual.

"Having drugs before you to take is a hard choice, but is it free?" Holowchak said. "No - athletes get wrapped up in their consuming passion of being the best in the world. They think 'I don't want to take this, but I just want to see.' Then they never know if it's themselves or the drug that is propelling them to success. The important thing in sports is to get the most out of yourself possible."

Miller said a national hysteria has been whipped up because drugs such as cocaine, alcohol and other abusive substances are clouding the line between performance-enhancing and illegal substances.

"The thing that is escaping us is what is reasonable for us to do to enhance our lives," Miller said. "If that means using drugs for certain purposes, then I'm not adverse to improving our performance. I opt for a relatively open society."

Placing a ban on the drugs competitors are allowed to use has been a policy proposed to prevent ill effects of drug use. A ban on the drugs athletes can use could be seen as a restriction on the athlete's rights. From a different angle, placing a ban on drug use would level the playing field and destroy any type of pressure filled environment to take drugs, Holowchak said.

"It's not drugs that are at stake," Miller said. "These sports are already instinctively dangerous. I am inclined to think we would be bored if there were sports without any risks. But we want to improve safety and performance. I'm not advocating indulging and killing yourself, just doing it risk-free. To reduce gratuitous risk is a laudable goal, not to create a totally risk-free society."

Many risks are heaped upon athletes in the higher echelons of today's professional leagues. When an athlete has a knee injury, the result is expected. But when a fit athlete dies from a heart attack due to drug use, many blame the use of substances in the locker room.

Some philosophers have pointed out different types of training place just as much stress upon the body to expose yourself to risks. Drugs are not the only health risk. But the price of glory stands taller than the rest when decisions are made and careers launched or destroyed.

"It's a lose-lose situation," Holowchak said. "If I know other athletes are taking drugs, then I have to compromise something. If I don't, I am giving up my passion. If I do, I compromise my principles."