In the spirit of competition, athletes will always try anything to get ahead of their peers.

However, is it ethical to take illegal supplements to get ahead? The sheer fact of the numerous amounts of different types of supplements doesnt make it any easier. The use of any kind of nutritional supplement for that matter has sparked heated debates. Who has the right to make supplements illegal or legal? Should certain supplements be off-limits if they are taken just in the bounds of the competition realm? How can this be monitored in better ways? Most can agree that its ok that a drug be considered illegal if it is seriously detrimental to ones health, such as in the case of steroids, (which have seriously harmful side-effects). Regarding the use of nutritional supplements, (according to the American Journal of Sports Medicine), scientific reviews have stated that they are not even necessary unless an athlete is on a specific diet for a weight loss plan or attempting to control their weight, (Tscholl et al. 134). Also, 12.5% of track and field athletes were found to use NSAIDs, which are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, (Tscholl et al. 133). However, studies have shown that even the athletes that have a large intake of these legal drugs are relatively healthy, (Pappa and Kennedy, (279). It is still alarming that large amounts of drugs are consumed by so many athletes, but should they be banned if the users are relatively healthy? In competition, people will try to be as healthy as possible and take as much nutritional intake as possible, so why are nutritional supplements banned if the users are healthy? This is the reason that this debate has been going on for so long. According to the International Review for the Sociology of Sport, people have different ideas about what is off-limits in the spirit of competition. There are groups that attempt to regulate the use of nutritional supplements such as the International Olympic Committee, (the IOC), (Pappa and Kennedy 289). The IOC generally bans hormonal substances and the like that give unfair advantages to athletes. However, what is

considered an unfair advantage? This idea is debatable. Even as more and more substances are banned, many other types of herbal remedies, (that are considered legal at that moment) arise. However, some of these herbal remedies arent exactly as healthy as they seem. There have been reports of neurological and cardiovascular damage as harmful side effects from these supplements. So maybe these should be deemed illegal for the safety of the athletes? The regulation of the nutritional supplementation industry is relatively weak in the United States and most other countries. The Food and Drug Administration used to regulate the industry to keep people away from unsafe supplemental practices. They were in effect until 1994, when the Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act, changed their jurisdiction to only being able to regulate after harmful health effects have already occurred. As many interviews were conducted on athletes that used nutritional supplements, a lot of their attitudes toward supplements were different from the norm, (Pappa and Kennedy 279). They seemed to speak about it as a normal part of competitive athletics. They also said that coaching staff were involved, which contradicts with the third theme of the athletes insisting that they alone were responsible for the use of nutritional supplements. The study seemed to have more evidence that indicated the use of nutritional supplements with successful socially networked athletes rather than athletes using them in an individualistic manner. It is pretty clear that athletes use supplements to exploit the limitations of human strength, coordination, and flexibility. Doping has a widespread condemnation around the world and several organizations have voiced their opinions, such as the World Anti-Doping Agency, (WADA). However, the actual use of these supplements seems to still be widespread and strong. In professional athletics, the participants can simply be put into either a win category or a loss category with the obvious goal being the former option for all athletes. However, the

pressure to use supplements doesnt only stem from the fact that winning will give an athlete a great sense of personal success. These athletes are under pressure from many other places. In recent times, winning can bring several other benefits, including socioeconomic gains. This puts even more pressure on not only the athletes, but the coaches as well. Coaches are under pressure as it is their job to create a winning athlete as well. They are rewarded if their athlete is successful, so this may transfer some more pressure onto the athlete as well, whether the coaches directly recommend this to them or not. Factors that pressure athletes include cultural norms, social pressure, fear of failure, and also the availability of certain drugs (Pappa and Kennedy 281). For example, if an athlete trains in a particular area which is known for high availability of a certain drug, they might be under more pressure to pursue it. On the other hand social pressure from the athletes peers and/or parents might prevent the athlete from using supplements. A coach might tell an athlete that there are no negative consequences to a certain drug, and it would improve their performance significantly. This would definitely pressure the athlete to use drugs. Not to mention the fact that the whole world is watching, so losing can be really stressful on the mind of the athlete. As we can see, the use of nutritional supplements doesnt just boil down to winning and losing for personal accomplishment in the spirit of competition. Industry and money are involved as well, (as is with everything these days), so much more is at stake. First-hand accounts of athletes that have used supplements have wrote about their experiences in books (according to the International Review for the Sociology of Sport), warning against drugs, but at the same time, pointing out that they are an essential part of track and field. Some of these athletes include: the British sprinter Dwain Chambers, (2009), and the Australian shot putter Werner Reiterer(2000), (Pappa and Kennedy 279). The authors mentioned that many

other forces were at work than people know of, such as groups of medical professionals and lots of coaches were involved as well. Dwain Chambers also went as far as criticizing the professional sports industry for keeping this information from people, (Pappa and Kennedy 279). Reiterer explained that drugs were essential in professional athletics. It is shocking of how they incorporate this into their athletic life. He says that drugs along with professional athletic training make the athlete succeed. As we can see there are complex networks at work with different agents, including parents, coaches, and drug providers. These specific combinations are at work within the professional athletics industry similar to the way corruptive forces are in national governments. Many consider doping an integral part of sport rather than a destructive force. Sometimes, however, athletes are given a pass to use doping substances in some cases, (Moller 7). With this pass certain athletes are not guilty of doping offences. The athletes that are given these passes include high endurance sports, in which a lot of athletes suffer from exertioninduced asthma, (Moller 7). WADA has tightened up the rules in recent years and now a TUE certificate is mandatory, (Therapeutic Use Exemption). In the past, the nature of sport has been about the struggle for perfection, and not necessarily, winning. It was a character-building tool, and ethics was a crucial part of it, (Moller 13). WADA has put emphasis on values such as Ethics, Fair Play, Honesty, health, Respect for Rules and Laws, etc. (Moller 13-14). There have been many cases of doping in the industry where the media has covered many athletes that have cheated. Some of the athletes dont consider this to be cheating, as it was merely a drive towards perfection. The field of Athletic Trainers has slowly been gaining respect in the United States, as their skills in interaction with athletes are crucial, (Murray, Maschke, and Wasunna 89). They

assist athletes in personal problems, as well as training, and recovery from injury, (Murray, Maschke, and Wasunna 90). They are different from personal trainers, as personal trainers are not exactly required to have formal training and licensure requirements. Athletic trainers are becoming big in high school, collegiate, and professional athletics. These trainers may report to an institution that employs them, for example, in collegiate sports, they report to the universitys institutions. As they are very closely connected to their athletes, they may know if they are using drugs or not. They may even be ok with this, but it is their responsibility to make sure the athlete stays in compliance with the rules. If an athlete is on supplemental drugs, it puts their trainer in an uncomfortable position. No trainer wants to report their athlete, with whom they work with every day, for drug use. Another great influence on the athlete is none other than their coach. Although coaches have lots of influence on an athletes playing time, as well as leisure activities, they actually dont take that much time to address substance abuse, (Murray, Maschke, and Wasunna 93). Assistant coaches are even more involved with the athletes life. Sometimes, if the assistant coach had been a former player that used drugs, they might even encourage drug use. With trainers, coaches, assistant coaches, and institutions involved, the athlete is caught up with pressure from all angles. There is also a debate about how drug testing cant be justified simply by saying it is for the good of the athletes, (Wilson and Derse 129). They are an invasion of privacy. Urine testing of athletes actually violates their civil rights, (Wilson and Derse 130). Wayne Wilson and Edward Derse argue that that sort of intrusive intervention in peoples lives could only be warranted by the need to protect others from serious harm, (Wilson and Derse 130). Even though, this is considered a violation of privacy, to be fair, athletes do underhanded things to get

away from positive drug testing, such as tampering with urine samples, or using others urine samples. Some argue that doping also affects society in a negative way, especially with children looking up to their favorite athletes, only to find out that they used illegal substance to cheat their way to victory, (Wilson and Derse 141). Why are athletes considered role models and why should be held to higher standards? In the words of Paul Weiss, (1969), sport is one of the first fields of experience for young people and if their athletic heroes are immoral, it will be a huge negative influence on the youth, (Wilson and Derse 141). Why is taking supplemental drugs even recognized as solely a bad thing, if athletes need them to stay focused and achieve more? This is a good question. For example, is there a negative perception for a dancer that takes painkillers to get through a performance? Why are fashion models allowed to use diuretics to lose weight to appear beautiful? (Wilson and Derse 141). What is the difference with athletes and drug supplements? According to Wayne Wilson and Edward Derse, the reason for this is that athletes are supposed to be role models for children, (Wilson and Derse 141). This is a solid argument. These negative influences on children can be detrimental, and athletes should keep that in mind.

Works Cited
1. Wilson, Wayne and Derse, Edward. Doping in Elite Sport: The Politics of Drugs in the Olympic Movement. Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc. 2001. Print. 2. Murray, Thomas H., Maschke, Karen J., and Wasunna, Angela, A. PerformanceEnhancing Technologies in Sports. The John Hopkins University Press. 2009. Print. 3. Moller, Verner. The Ethics of Doping and Anti-Doping. Routledge, 2010. Print. 4. Tscholle, http://ajs.sagepub.com.librarylink.uncc.edu/content/38/1/133.full.pdf+html The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 11/11/13 5. Pappa and Kennedy http://irs.sagepub.com.librarylink.uncc.edu/content/48/3/277.full.pdf+html International Review for the Sociology of Sport. 11/11/13