Poor Lance Armstrong. The seven-time Tour de France winner has been stripped of his famous victories by the United States Anti-Doping Agency, which claims he used illicit performance-enhancing drugs. Armstrong never tested positive for anything, but his decision to quit fighting the charges has been seen by some as tantamount to a confession. So why shouldn’t he be punished? Doping is, after all, widely considered the ultimate sin of professional athletes.
Dwain Chambers, the UK’s fastest sprinter in the 100 meters, was banned from competing in the Olympic Games after testing positive for the anabolic steroid tetrahydrogestrinone. He claimed in his autobiography that at least half of the U.S. racing team at the 2008 Summer Games used illegal substances. The battle to control drug use never, ever seems to end. Why don’t we accept doping will always happen and legalize it?
Related on the SLP
View the original article here: Genes and drugs: Would sports be better off legalizing doping?
