Performance-Enhancing Drugs: Where Should the Line be Drawn and by Whom?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2695732/

In this piece Michael Lardon explores the medical implications of performance enhancing drugs. Lardon acknowledges that drugs can have negative health effects, however the key is in "understanding the evolving power of medical science." In other words it is necessary to really understand the new medical technology and regualting fair drugs in the sports world. The line between advantages and positive health imporvements in the way a person feels must be distinguished in order to understand drugs in sports. He points out the serious problem with drugs in the baseball culture, although there has never been any formal studies to prove the drugs really helped athletes with an unfair advantage. Also, some drugs have legal purposes outside sports, so he raises the question of when are these drugs allowed and should they prevent a person that takes them legally from participating in any sport? Lardon says that the judgement belongs to the health professionals and sports companies to decide what is fair.

I think this is a relevant aspect to this debate because the difference between an unfair advantage and a simple medical help is pretty blurry, and Lardon brings attention to this issue. I think that his point about the responsibility falls on the health professional to call waht is unfair makes sense as they continue to understand these medical technologies in greater details as more research is conducted.