Special supplements and their applications are widely researched by scholars. The implication of such artificial substances has been shown to be of significant importance for various scientific fields (Negro, Marzullo, Caso, Calanni, & D’Antona, 2018). My thesis statement for this research paper is that from a legal perspective, utilizing performance-enhancing drugs should be strictly forbidden. In this work, the general background of this topic will be presented, and arguments to support the opinion will be explained.
The proposed paper will first briefly explore the scientific knowledge behind the legality of artificial enhancements. Several authors have provided evidence of performance because of drugs’ positive influence on physical abilities (LaBotz & Griesemer, 2016). Such a drastic impact on the sportsmen’s capabilities presents them with an unfair advantage against other players, disrupting the competition’s flow (Al-Dafrawi, Abdullah, Zawawi, & Ismail, 2019). However, in order to fully ascertain the outcomes of supplements’ usage, it is essential to consider the legal effects of such actions (Al-Dafrawi et al., 2019). Altogether, the use of performance-enhancing drugs should be thoroughly regulated to create equal possibilities for all athletes.
Finally, I will defend my thesis by presenting scholarly evidence on the legal implications of nutritional enhancements. First of all, specific actions should be taken against individuals who utilize doping substances in order to increase their performance (Al-Dafrawi et al., 2019). Any person found guilty of using illegal supplements while participating in a sports event is bound to face legal consequences (Atienza-Macías, 2018). Moreover, various dangerous outcomes of drug use, such as addiction, can be avoided by supporting the laws against using performance-enhancing substances (Siebert, 2020). Lastly, artificial compounds significantly disrupt the health of people taking them, causing them to suffer from various well-being issues (LaBotz & Griesemer, 2016).
To conclude, overall, the prohibition of drug use in sports possesses multiple legal benefits. The disadvantages of utilizing performance-enhancing supplements are highly evident. In order to create an unbiased environment for the individuals competing, additional measures have to be implemented. Disallowing the implementation of dangerous substances in sporting events is a significant task for legal professionals. Furthermore, successful resolution of this issue can lead to various positive outcomes for the athletes’ community, such as tremendous health and well-being benefits.
Research Paper
In the last decade, young people and pre-teenagers have used drugs more and more, which improves their performance. Many people want to understand how medicines that enhance performance influence their bodies with all the information, attention, and debate about efficiencies. This topic is a crucial area of concern for athletes and the basis for investing their limited time and resources by scientists and other anti-doping agencies. Put simply, PEDs can or may have a drastic impact on humans’ body and biological functions, including their ability in certain situations to increase athletic performance significantly (LaBotz & Griesemer, 2016). However, in certain conditions, these drugs can be hazardous and fatal.
The public reaction to the use of sport-enhancing drugs has led to an intriguing division. Whereas some people perceive the consumption of such substances as illegal, others are not that certain about the argument, hence raising several objections. For instance, a section of society claims that athletes should be free to make their bodies whatever they want. From this perspective, each athlete is best placed to balance the risks and advantages of drug use.
The main flaw in this argument is that it is incomprehensible to all athletes choose to do. Specifically, The World Anti-Doping Code, the first serious attempt at international standardization of legal standards. This raises specific difficult legal issues concerning the traditional instruments used to implement the Code and whether those instruments comply with their justification (Ganson, Mitchison, Murray, & Nagata, 2020). The use of performance-enhancing stimulants from a legal point of view should be prohibited.
Road Map
This research document will begin by giving the background data about the legal aspects of the performance-enhancing substance. Subsequently, the information included in this educative piece’s content focuses on explaining the specific factors that motivate individuals to consider consuming controversial products. Finally, the paper will highlight supportive remarks on why policymakers need to illegalize the use of the controversial drug substances to enhance their physical performances.
Background
In the past, many issues related to defining drugs that improve performance were relatively clearly eliminated. However, the psychiatrist of sports needs to become an integral player in this complex social, moral, and medical drama by improving medicine and, in particular, psychotropic medications. To ensure the profession’s integrity, psychiatrists who work with professional sportspeople are confronted with unique challenges that must be identified, recognized, and work with the sport’s consent. The gravest athletes are obsessed with their desire to win. Athletes often dream of winning accolades for their country or a place in a professional team and satisfaction with personal achievement (Al Ghobain, 2017).
The use of efficient drugs has become increasingly common in such an environment. Yet, the use of drugs to improve performance (doping) presents risks. Thus, individuals need to take the time to learn about the potential benefits, health risks, and the many unknown effects of so-called drugs (LaBotz & Griesemer, 2016). However, other than the products’ health controversies, the introduction of legal arguments makes the topic exciting and significant to scrutinize.
Defense of Thesis
Legalizing substances to boost an individual’s physical performance has undesirable health consequences on their overall well-being. Doping threatens the health of sportsmen and women, health specialists stress. Some professionals argue, however, that steroids can be healthy with proper medical supervision. Although, in some cases, this argument might be actual, it is not appropriate in other cases. Steroid use can lead to many serious effects, such as liver disorder, a heart condition, and psychiatric symptoms, endocrine, reproductive functions, liver and kidney tumors (Negro et al., 2018). In addition, such people have increased likelihood of suffering undesirable secondary effects.
For example, most people consume more than the suggested prescription of controlled substances, with a market that comprises some counterfeit products that expose less fortunate people to adverse health consequences.
Allowing the use of steroids would threaten sports’ fairness and integrity, with the sportsmen claiming that the game is not about merely winning but rather ensuring that the enlightened parties uphold the integrity and the desired moral values. The establishment of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) aimed to provide assurance that sportspeople value veracity. The body banned the use of supplements to boost individuals’ performances. The games’ fairness and integrity would be threatened if steroids could be used with proper medical supervision. First, steroids are of unfair benefit to athletes – most of them will not be able to compete at the same level as steroids.
Secondly, the game’s integrity is affected because there is no longer the sportsman who has the unsurpassed talents or ability but the sporty athlete who has the finest steroid concoction or cash to purchase the quality steroids. Therefore, the use of steroids goes against the spirit of sport – fairness, respect, and solidarity (Al-Dafrawi et al., 2019). If one (or both) sportsperson ingests Steroids to develop performance rather than contest based on individual forte, competence, or gift, the notion of shared respect amongst challengers is disenchanted.
A serious anti-doping approach is a key strategy to reserve sports veracity and safeguard sportspersons’ health. Anti-doping is most effective in establishing clear and bright rules for when and what substances are prohibited under the policy. WADA has fashioned the world’s extensive anti-doping suite, although far from perfect (Ganson et al., 2020). American sports professionals must explore ways of modeling the WADA code in their specific guidelines (such as the US Anti-Doping Agency), not seek to apologize for steroid use or compromise the efforts made to fight the doping industry.
Restricting the use of add-ons maximizes their benefits while minimizing the adverse consequences associated. The PEDs such as creatine and anabolic drugs have nutrients that would help in boosting individuals’ well-being. For example, although creatine is a non-essential nutrient, it plays a role in enhancing a person’s performance, with reports indicating that about 75% of youths consider consuming the substance (Siebert, 2020). Similarly, the anabolic substances synthesize the much-needed testosterone hormone known to facilitate the production of proteins associated with muscle building and increased strengths.
Notably, people who advocate for using these controversial drugs argue that policymakers need to introduce restrictions on their consumption to guarantee the public’s possible health issues associated with the drugs. Many additives contain active ingredients that are likely to have a healthy body effect (Al Ghobain, 2019). Thus, individuals need to be alert to decreased reaction’s potential, mainly if you take a new product.
The consumption of legal PES helps in supporting a person’s body functioning. For instance, sportswomen and men often have higher requirements for macronutrients and electrolytes than ordinary people, but in certain conditions, such as during an event or between races, the challenge can be more significant. Sports foods can become a useful source of nutrients such as carbohydrates, protein, fat, or electrolytes that support or recover by refilling storehouses before, during, or after an event. Thus, failure to provide the essential elements puts the athletes at the risk of suffering from malnutrition, hence consuming the substances categorized under the legal PEDs.
Specifically boosting body size and muscle strength is the main goal of athletes and weight lifters. Research studies indicate that steroids promote stronger and larger muscles by stimulating testosterone hormones associated with the people who take part in strength training (Atienza-Macías, 2018). Therefore, it is wise and legally feasible for players to use the controversial appendages associated with better performances.
The use of debatable stuff promotes the users’ financial success. However, health specialists argue that the unregulated use of PEDs exposes people to detrimental health problems that make it difficult for them to perform optimally. Many sporting stakeholders have made a significant amount of profits from the controversial ingredients. For instance, many have benefited from the use of illegal steroids. It made a lot of owners and players rich in baseball. No one believed that the players who used steroids and PEDs were absurd (Negro et al., 2018). Everyone knew and chose to become wealthy instead of protecting the integrity of the sport.
Despite the controversies surrounding the use of PEDs, many riders also became rich in cycling doping. It created the modern monster of the midway in pro football and college football, but, unlike floundering baseball, the NFL did not have to show sportspeople full of medicines to popularize the amusement. The conspiracy of the NFL, therefore, flew under the radar but is just as guilty. Thus, contestants that support the illegal use of adjuncts end up boosting their economic well-being.
What Are the Latent Risk Dynamics Related to the Consumption of PDEs?
The youth is placed at increased risk for using performance-enhancing substances by various factors. Young people are especially susceptible to risk-taking habits and experiments. Teenagers often have no vision of long-term abnormalities and no idea. Among athletes who use PEDs, there is an increased risk for those playing soccer, baseball and basketball, wrestling, gymnastics, and weight training (LaBotz & Griesemer, 2016). Thus, the above-mentioned factors determine society members’ vulnerability to the adversities associated with the programs related to the controversial products.
Individuals preoccupied with their physical appearance are more at risk of consuming the PEDs. Many youths opt to weight lifting to help them gain and build muscles to secure their desired body shape (Cuff & LaBotz, 2020). In about five years, reports estimate that over 2,500 teenagers ingest the restricted substances to increase their likelihood of achieving their preferred body shape or general physical appearance (Siebert, 2020). However, the increased desire for essential nutrients and fast results motivate them to consider various stuff considered to boost their performance rate.
The media influences a person’s desire to utilize steroids and other merchandise to improve their likelihood of achieving their desired outcome swiftly. Entrusted specialists who care for teenagers must also consider media and their effects on teens who use substances that rally their act. Ganson et al. (2020) found that 8% of girls and 12% of boys had used some product to enhance the exterior, physique gains, or strength. Teenagers reporting that they would like to improve their somatic appearance are more likely to use substances that improve performance. Further, some kinds of PED were more common in girls who wanted to lose weight.
Studies show that men who have read men’s, teen fashion magazines, or health and fitness magazines use a performance improvement substance twice as often for improving strength. Women who want to look much more like women in the media would use products that improve their physicality more likely (Al-Dafrawi et al., 2019). Creatine, amino acids, dehydroepiandrosterone, growth hormone, or anabolic steroids were more commonly used by adolescents who lifted weights and played football.
The vulnerable society’s attitude towards doping determines their choices to consider consuming the scandalous constituent. Doping attitudes are thus not surprisingly capable of predicting doping intentions in elite athletes. Other than the significance of social media to influence the community’s perception of doping, people’s interaction within a zone determines whether they would consider using the medications associated with better performances (Tavares, Serpa, Horta, & Rosado, 2019). Consequently, the cognitive changes that arise from either somebody’s exposure to the controversial media contents or their peers with conflicting ideologies decide whether individuals will consider being victims of the undesirable consequences associated with PEDs.
Conclusion
In conclusion, legalizing the use of PEDs is a boost in society’s efforts to lead sustainable livelihoods. Although a section of the community maintains that steroids and other controversial PEDs are beneficial, health researchers associate the ingredients with specific health issues known to undermine the people’s overall performances depending on the medications for their particular reasons. For example, the need for fairness and integrity in the sporting field called for the need to introduce policies that confined the consumption of controversial prescriptions. Hence, this short and educative piece advocates for the positive benefits associated with legalizing PEDs. Additionally, the information herein identifies particular risk factors that expose the global community to the objectionable concerns linked with the goods.
References
Al Ghobain, M. (2017). The use of performance-enhancing substances (doping) by athletes in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Family & Community Medicine, 24(3), 151. Web.
Al Ghobain, M. (2019). Attitudes and behavior related to performance-enhancing substance use among elite Saudi football players. BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, 11(1), 1-8. Web.
Al-Dafrawi, A., Abdullah, M., Zawawi, M., & Ismail, Z. (2019). Performance-enhancing medicines in sports: Legal discussion. International Journal of Law Government and Communication, 4(17), 48–60. Web.
Atienza-Macías, E. (2018). Public health law perspectives: Nutritional supplements and doping in sports. International Journal of Law and Public Administration, 1(1), 1–7. Web.
Cuff, S., & LaBotz, M. (2020). Legal performance-enhancing substances in children and adolescents: Why should we care? Pediatrics, 146(3). Web.
Ganson, K. T., Mitchison, D., Murray, S. B., & Nagata, J. M. (2020). Legal performance-enhancing substances and substance use problems among young adults. Pediatrics, 146(3). Web.
LaBotz, M., & Griesemer, B. A. (2016). Use of performance-enhancing substances. Pediatrics, 138(1), 1-14. Web.
Negro, M., Marzullo, N., Caso, F., Calanni, L., & D’Antona, G. (2018). Opinion paper: Scientific, philosophical and legal consideration of doping in sports. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 118(4), 729–736. Web.
Siebert, D. M. (2020). Coping with Doping: Performance-Enhancing Drugs in the Athletic Culture. In Mental Health in the Athlete (pp. 115-126). Cham: Springer. Web.
Tavares, A. S., Serpa, S., Horta, L., & Rosado, A. (2019). Psychosocial factors and performance enhancing substances in gym users: A systematic review. Revista De Psicología Del Deporte, 28(1), 131-142.