An Article On The World Anti Doping Agency

Performance-enhancing drugs (PED 's) have been an issue for many decades now for the medical and sports field. Olympic and professional athletes have been using them to gain an upper hand on the competition, but some may ask if it 's really worth it? Studies show that performance-enhancing drugs have been proven to negatively affect the health of athletes who take them. Simply put, performance-enhancing drugs could either improve athletic performance or can be extremely dangerous, in certain situations, deadly. There have been strict rules and drug testing in the professional sporting organizations, as well as in world competitions. For example, in the summer of the 2016 Rio Olympic Games, in two of the

In the article, the author, Zach claims that suspensions will not deter PED users like Maria Sharapova. Zach reasons that although the highest-paid female athlete Sharapova received a suspension of about a year because of her use of PED, she still owns some sponsorships and aids, and her net worth is about $125 million a year. Sharapova’ reputation might be untarnished because of her play to the public. Zach states that the behaviors like Sharapova’s will cause a negative effect to the society and we need to find a way to solve this problem.

Doping in sport, is arguably, the most talked about and controversial issue today, with very little change on it. Although, there has been a substantial increase in the use of it, (Dimeo, 2013) states Anti-doping regulations were only established in the 1960’s, and serves as a useful reminder of an important but neglected fact about drug use. There is a consistent dispute against doping as, it fluctuates through all sports and have been demonised by society as it is considered as unethical. The International Association of Athletics (IAAF) was the first international sports federation, in 1928, to ban performance-enhancing drugs (IAAF, 2003). Followed by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and The International Olympic Committee (IOC). An athletes’ engagement in competing is very important. It is their desire to gain any possible advantage to have an edge on their opponents and will do anything in their power to be the best. Doping is discriminated due to, being an unequal playing field and being harmful. This study explores the strengths and weaknesses of these ethical objections and the sociological theories on the use of drugs in sport.

The Olympics now have various organizations and committees delegated to testing for and eliminating the use of performance enhancing drugs. The most recent Olympic committee for the Games in Vancouver was partnered with the World Anti-Doping Agency, the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport, L’Institut national de la recherche scientifique — Institut Armand-Frappier, the United States Anti-Doping Agency, and LifeLabs to collect and test approximately 2450 blood and urine samples (“Anti-Doping Initiatives”). Their meticulousness and commitment was most definitely justified. Olympic athletes implicitly agree to a social contract of fair competition. Those athletes who take steroids have an unfair advantage over those who do not, and therefore these athletes are breaking this social contract.

Do sport administrations know about performance enhanced drugs? These drugs affect athletes and the sport they’re playing tremendously. About the age of a middle school child compared to an adult can obtain these of drugs. These drugs are life threatening to athlete’s health. The use of performance enhancing drugs promotes that cheating is prohibited. It also provides a bad example for athletes to use. Research shows that these drugs have a negative effect to every sport. Performance enhancing drugs manipulate athletes emotionally and physically through their dangers, promoting cheating and providing bad role models.

Zach Petersel, in his essay, “Here's Why Suspensions Won't Deter PED users Like Maria Sharapova,” claims that the risk and rewards of using performing enhancing drugs (PEDs) is unbalanced and needs to change. He adopts a slight angry tone in order to appeal that big-name athletes caught using PEDs don’t face major consequences. He uses this tone to appeal to readers who might also want change in this topic. This feature should be printed in The Shorthorn because it will prompt students to look at this issue in a deeper sense and see exactly how important this issue affects an individual and sport. In this essay, I will talk about how Petersel talked about Sharapova use of PEDs, how Petersel responds to counterarguments, and how athletes should be punished for using PEDs.

Shirley Babashoff, is a female swimmer who participated in The 1976 Montreal Summer Olympic Games. She had won seven gold medals in total at the end of the games, but she was denied all seven of them as a result of a government-sponsored doping program. Consequently, she is in one of the worst clubs nobody would want to be in: athletes who were denied a medal at all because they got caught doping. It is important to make sure kids are looking up to these athletes as role models and not doing the wrong things. The health risks behind the drugs could possibly be anywhere from a cramp to a heart attack. Using performance enhancing drugs makes the game unfair and it kills the integrity of the game. Athletes in all levels of play should not be allowed to use performance enhancing drugs, they will affect the long term health of the player, damages the integrity and fairness of the game, and endangers others associated with the person who uses them.

IV. Conclusion: Performance enhancement causes health and social problems to track and field athletes, but some athletes use enhancement even though they know the risk.

Athletes should be drug tested before they are allowed to play because of athletes like Marion Jones. Did you know that Marion Jones an Olympic athlete that won five olympic medals admitted to using steroids? She won all five medals in one olympic game. She was sentenced to six months of prison, two years of probation, 800 hours of community service and her three gold medals and two bronze medals were stripped. All because she

Evidence suggests that despite comprehensive and ongoing deterrence and detection efforts by antidoping agencies (e.g., World Anti- Doping Agency [WADA]), the use of banned performance-enhancing substances among elite athletes remains pervasive in many sport disciplines (Alaranta et al., 2006; Backhouse, McKenna, Robinson, & Atkin, 2009; Laure & Binsinger, 2007). In addition to the moral and ethical issues arising from transgression of antidoping legislation, long-term use of many banned performance- enhancing substances confers serious side effects deleterious to the health of athletes (Lentillon-Kaestner, Hagger, & Hardcastle, 2012; Pipe & Ayotte, 2002) (Chan et al. 241-42).

In the 2016 Olympics, Russian swimmer Yulia Efimova wasn’t suspended along with fellow teammates even though she has taken performance enhancing drugs before and was a suspect. If the IOC (International Olympic Committee) didn’t suspend the whole Russian team, to start they might as well suspend an athlete who has been a suspect for years. Before the 2016 Olympics Russia’s whole national team didn’t get suspended despite a team wide doping program. Doping is a really big issue and is cheating. Not suspending the whole team could result in someone who took PEDs to go unseen into the Olympics and beat everybody because they cheated. Someone sneaking in and winning because they cheated isn’t fair to other competitors who tried really hard to let alone get in the Olympics, and lost in a race to a cheater. Taking performance enhancing drugs is not only bad for athletes health, but also unfair to other competitors who do not use PEDs. Some may think it will make sports more exciting but really in the long run they will be less exciting when all the players retire due to PED related

“The International Olympic Committee first instituted doping controls at the 1968 Winter Olympics in Grenoble, France and again at the Summer Olympics in Mexico City that same year. Anabolic steroids were added to the list of banned substances in 1975 and have reported more than 2,000 cases per year” (Asimor).The number of athletes tested positive for steroid intake is on the rise every year as well as the consequences of such action. Individual athletes or athletic teams are automatically disqualified and expelled from competition, forced to return titles, and kept in unchangeable record files.

"I received a letter from the ITF (International Tennis Federation) that I failed a drugs test at the Australian Open. I take full responsibility for it. For the past ten years I have been given a medicine called mildronate by my family doctor and a few days ago after I received the ITF letter I found out that it also has another name of meldonium which I did not know. It is very important for you to understand that for ten years this medicine was not on WADA's banned list and I had legally been taking the medicine for the past ten years. But on January 1st [2016] the rules had changed and meldonium became a prohibited substance which I had not known. I was given this medicine by my doctor for several health issues that I was having in 2006.”

The UFC has been forced to cancel a rematch between Lyoto Machida (22-7) and Dan Henderson (31-14) scheduled for Saturday’s UFC on FOX 19, after Machida admitted to taking a banned substance during a drug test last week.

Also, doping in sports would take away from the integrity of the game .For instance, as stated in the article “ Legalize Steroids in baseball, the Game will only get Better”,“There will obviously be moral concerns raised about cheating and being role models to children ” (University Wire). In other words, athletes taking performance enhancing substances affects or boost their performance, which will make them perform better. Therefore, this will be questioned as cheating due to the fact, it may make them better which will be a bad influence to children since their are going to consider doping in sport as appropriate and allowed. Moreover, Tannsjo explains in his article “The Moral case against Doping Bans“, “Being the winner takes on a moral