THG a formally undetectable steroid has recently been found to have been used by 4 US Track & Field athletes as well as at least 1 top European sprinter. It seems a shame to me that when one hears of record breaking scores/lifts/times etc. today that you have to wonder whether they were done authentically (without the use of drugs).

Quote from Fighting Drugs a Tough Task:


The question I would like to pose for debate is what should the tolerance level for this be? Should athletes testing positive be banned from competition for a set number of years (say 2 years)? games? or for life? Also, is there a need for an overarching agency, as suggested in the above quote, or should individual sports leagues make their own rules?

some useful links:
FDA Formally Rules THG Steroid As An ILLEGAL Drug
Zero-Tolerance Plan Proposed In Steroid Scandal
Dangers of Sports Supplements
Fighting Drugs, A Tough Task

edited for clarity

I think that perhaps there should be two worldwide leagues of athletics - like maybe NFL/AFL, or even two separate codes akin to Rugby union and League.

One where you can take whatever you like and it's your own problem if it causes you any long-term health problems. And one where only athletes that have never used performance enhancing drugs are allowed in, and the burden of proof is with the athlete to demonstrate that they are and always have been "clean".

My expectation is that the money would drift towards the drug-fuelled athletes in individual sports, as they would be just a little faster or stronger.

I think in team sports, though, the use of all drugs should be banned, but again, it should be for the athletes to demonstrate that they have not taken anything to enhance their performance. I don't think this is unfair, as nobody says that they can't play football or soccer or rugby or what-have-you, they just can't play professionally in the official competitions.

I found another link which explains the scandal more fully: (good ol' bbc)

The THG Scandal Explained

There are also a number of useful links on the sidebar of this page.



I wonder about that myself. My hope is that it would NOT drift toward the drug-fuelled sports.

*I'm sort of suprized/disappointed that there haven't been more replies on this topic, as a sports fan and athlete (though not of world or national proportions) I have strong feelings about the use of steroids. I would hope/think that more sports fans would care whether the sports events they witness are actual natural human stamina/strength/speed or created via the aid of drugs.

I don't understand how an athlete can be proud of their world record breaking accomplishments knowing that it was not done naturally, that they never would have reached that level without the aid of drugs....I don't understand how a fan (present or future) can not feel cheated.

I can see the benefits of allowing individual sports leagues to make up their own rules but I can also see the need for an overarching agency. I think that whether or not an athlete is taking steroid suppliments should be out on the table for all to know (especially on the professional level). With regards to record breaking scores I think an athlete should have to have been tested before their scores can be viewed as legitimately record breaking. What the individual league/competition chooses to allow or not with regards to competition would be a different thing. The knowledge that the accomplishments of a particular player are attributable to a drug should be made available to those fans paying to watch them. I think a minimum ban of a few years should be imposed on athletes in all "clean"/steroid free competitions found to have been using.

I think this is fighting a losing battle. Not that I'm in favor of athletes using these means, but it's just almost impossible to stop. There are always going to be new drugs out there, for which no test is currently available. There are current drugs (HGH) for which it is doubtful any test will ever be available. As the drugs get more and more arcane, the chances of athletes inadvertantly taking a banned substance get higher. So, it's just a big mess. Reminds me of the way the NCAA has tried to handle payments to student athletes--it's almost just a game to try and figure out how to beat the system. Sad, but I don't really see a way around it. If they really wanted to stop it, I think the only way would be to make punishment so harsh athletes wouldn't risk it. As such, it seems to me a lifetime ban would be the only solution. Besides, once you've taken the enhancement, who's to say you're ever really 'clean'?

I think the tolerance level should be set by independent sports commissions. For those sports with time trials and established records I imagine many fans would feel cheated by an athlete using any performance enhancing drugs. For other sports such as those professional sports popular in the United States, it seems commissions might benefit from less stringent policies regarding performance enhancers.

I support policies prohibiting the use of performance enhancers, but I would similarly approve if the NBA, NFL or MLBA decided to allow the use of certain products. Beyond the athletics involved professional sports are also competing for ratings and marketing. Allowing safe enhancers which might allow an athlete to increase their speed or size could very well help the marketing of both the individual athlete and the sport.

It is because of the potential benefits of allowing performance enhancers that I greatly admire the position of most (if not all) professional sports to continue their prohibition. As exciting as it may be to see bigger and faster athletes revolutionize their respective sports, it is still more impressive to me to consider the accomplishments of an athlete performing on hard work and talent alone.

I don't think there needs to be any agency which oversees everything. Individual nations should be free to set their own policies with the understanding that international competitions will be governed by the policies of the presiding commission. While each nation could continue to set their own policies, all athletes wishing to compete internationally would understand that participation is restricted for those athletes conforming to the specific policies of that international competition.