A Change of Face for Steroids
The most significant accomplishment for any man who has devoted their whole life to baseball is induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame. To receive a plaque in the hall, a player must receive 75% of votes from the Baseball Writers’ Association of America. This percentage point has plagued players like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens from receiving their legacy for many years. Their suspected use of PEDs has led writers to criticize PED usage and demonize the players who take them.
In 2008 NPR reported on a debate in New York City where the use of steroids was the focal point, and 63% of polled audience members believed steroid use shouldn’t be allowed in sports. George Michael, a proponent for banning steroids in professional sports, stated that in 2002 17% of baseball’s payroll was allocated to players who didn’t even play due to muscle tears, tendon ruptures, and various injuries. Michael’s Source, Dr. James Andrews, correlated the increased injury rate to the prominent use of steroids; however, Michael states that there was no definitive proof that the increased injury rate was due to anabolic steroid use. Steroid testing in the MLB didn’t start until 2003, making it impossible to correlate the increased injuries in 2002 to anabolic steroid use.
Michael finished his two-minute argument by stating that many professional wrestlers died before the age of 40 and 50 due to their anabolic steroid use during their wrestling career. Michael provides that 110 wrestlers died because of steroid abuse, in which drug abuse can lead to side effects such as high blood pressure, heart attacks, strokes, and cancer. Yet, Michael states that there’s no clinical proof that’s why his friends died. With that, his argument only focuses on the abuse of steroids and not on what would happen if the users’ properly cycled their steroids with professional guidance. Testosterone replacement therapy utilizes synthetic testosterone, an anabolic steroid, to improve a patient’s cardiovascular health and lean muscle mass and even increase the recovery rate for injuries, all while under the guidance of a professional clinician.
Dale Murphy continued the argument against steroid use in professional sports by analogizing the use of steroids in baseball to smoking in public and players gambling on games within the league. Murphy explains how cigarette smoking was a healthy hobby when he was growing up, and now it’s illegal to smoke in public. I appreciate;’s Murphy’s sentiment, but to blankly state that smoking in public is illegal is false. Nicotine is a harmful drug, and it doesn’t belong in the same category as anabolic hormones, which are synthetic versions of what our body already produces.
Murphy’s ultimate argument was that Major League Baseball needs stricter testing mandates, and doing so, that will prevent players from using steroids. The contrary has happened; the MLB has the most stringent testing standard for steroids throughout all professional sports. Even with year-round tests, 26 players have served suspensions for steroids since 2017. Strict testing doesn’t stop players from using steroids but makes using steroids a dangerous grey area that could be much safer for the players.
“The use of performance-enhancing drugs is not accidental; it is planned and deliberate with the sole objective of getting an unfair advantage. I don’t want my kids, or your kids, or anybody’s kids to have to turn themselves into chemical stockpiles just because there are cheaters out there who don’t care what they promised when they started to participate. I don’t want my kids in the hands of a coach who would encourage, condone or allow the use of drugs among his or her athletes.”
Richard Pound, chairman of the World Anti-Doping Agency, whose quote above provides a profound argument, shares the sentiment of the anti-steroid panel. However, to state that using steroids breaks a promise not to cheat makes no sense. His opinion evokes an emotional toll where we are hard-pressed to imagine our children becoming “chemical stockpiles” who have no regard for the promise of the integrity of the sport. Yet, I’m left wondering the opposite; these players are doing everything they can to be the best player possible.
Being the best player they can be is the ultimate promise any professional baseball makes. MLB players have professional chefs to make healthy meals, strength coaches to improve their biomechanics, and high-tech tools such as compression boots and massage guns to improve recovery times. None of these tools receive the same profound regulations as steroids, but it is still the players’ choice to use these available tools, just as it should be for players to use steroids.
To quote Julian Savulescu, “As we’ve argued, performance enhancement is not against the spirit of sport; it’s been a part of sport through its whole history, and to be human is to be better, or at least to try to be better.” Players will always do whatever they can to improve their performance, and steroids must receive the same treatment as other performance-enhancing utilities. The notion that using steroids is cheating is a fallacy created by a population afraid to see the good proper steroid use can bring to players who choose to use the drug.
To combat steroid use in the MLB, we need to encourage and give players a safe outlet to use steroids if they choose to enhance their performance using synthetic drugs. It’s no secret that steroids improve performance for the user, but that shouldn’t be the focus; our focus needs to shift to utilizing professionals to help players properly cycle steroids to enhance their performance without the negatives steroid abuse can cause. TRT is a valuable anecdote that the MLB should use to reform its current drug policies to make a safer environment for the players of baseball. A litany of non-athletes uses TRT daily to help regulate their hormones and restore their bodies to enhanced homeostasis. Guidance by clinicians is key to helping the everyday person become their optimized self. TRT is the successful blueprint that can reshape steroid use within baseball and turn it from a drug of abuse to a drug that provides countless benefits.
References
6 Benefits of [TRT] Testosterone Replacement Therapy //. (n.d.). Spartan Medical Associates. https://www.spartanmedicalassociates.com/benefits-of-trt/
MLB Steroid Suspensions (2005-2022) | Baseball Almanac. (n.d.). https://www.baseball-almanac.com/legendary/steroids_baseball.shtml
Should We Accept Steroid Use in Sports? (2008, January 23). NPR.org. https://www.npr.org/2008/01/23/18299098/should-we-accept-steroid-use-in-sports
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
hollyp715
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
For feedback, I feel this is the paper that will need the most work. General feedback is always appreciated, but for specifics, I feel as if my rebuttals could’ve been stronger. Yet, I could be wrong. I appreciate any feedback!
If we were polishing the final draft today, I’d point out several ways your language confuses or misleads readers in the opening paragraph.
The most significant accomplishment for any man who has devoted THEIR whole life to baseball is induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame. To receive a plaque in the hall, a player must receive 75% of votes from the Baseball Writers’ Association of America. This percentage point has PLAGUED players like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens FROM RECEIVING their legacy for many years. Their suspected use of PEDs has led writers to criticize PED USAGE and demonize THE PLAYERS WHO TAKE THEM.
—You’ve identified the gender of the “man,” so there’s no reason to resort to “their.”
—The percentage point doesn’t cause anything. The requirement to reach it does.
—The requirement can plague players who chronically fall short, but not “plague them from receiving.” It can only “prevent them from receiving.”
—Their use of PEDs has certainly caused writers to criticize THEM.
—Writers criticize PED usage separately from criticizing the players.
—So, Bonds’ and Clemens’ use of PEDs doesn’t CAUSE writers to criticize players, the stigma of cheating causes criticism of the players.
—Whew—
The most significant accomplishment for any man who has devoted his whole life to baseball is induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame. To receive a plaque in the hall, a player must receive 75% of votes from the Baseball Writers’ Association of America. This steep requirement has prevented even the most deserving players, like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, from receiving their legacy for many years. Writers who demonize players for taking PEDs cite Bonds’ and Clemens’ suspected “juicing” as the reason for their “no” votes.
But the question was: “Could my rebuttals have been stronger?”
In 2008 NPR reported on a debate in New York City where the use of steroids was the focal point, and 63% of polled audience members believed steroid use shouldn’t be allowed in sports. George Michael, a proponent for banning steroids in professional sports, stated that in 2002 17% of baseball’s payroll was allocated to players who didn’t even play due to muscle tears, tendon ruptures, and various injuries. Michael’s Source, Dr. James Andrews, correlated the increased injury rate to the prominent use of steroids; however, Michael states that there was no definitive proof that the increased injury rate was due to anabolic steroid use. Steroid testing in the MLB didn’t start until 2003, making it impossible to correlate the increased injuries in 2002 to anabolic steroid use.
—I feel jerked around.
—Michael is described as wanting to ban steroids.
—Michael cites a percentage without any causal claim, just a percentage of injuries.
—We don’t know if it’s supposed to represent an outrageously high percentage or a reduction over previous years.
—His source, Andrews “correlates” injury to steroid use, notoriously NOT a causal proof, just a demonstration of a perhaps accidental relationship.
—So we’re led to believe Michael is thoughtlessly citing a correlation as a cause.
—But then you tell us Michael knows there’s no proof in correlation.
—And finally, YOU, I guess, inform us steroids CAN’T BE PROVED to have caused the injuries.
So, who are you refuting? Michael seems to have disavowed the causal connection himself. That’s an odd but honest-seeming admission from an advocate for a steroid ban. You have a beef with Andrews. But Michael is an ally in refuting Andrews.
Michael finished his two-minute argument by stating that many professional wrestlers died before the age of 40 and 50 due to their anabolic steroid use during their wrestling career. Michael provides that 110 wrestlers died because of steroid abuse, in which drug abuse can lead to side effects such as high blood pressure, heart attacks, strokes, and cancer. Yet, Michael states that there’s no clinical proof that’s why his friends died. With that, his argument only focuses on the abuse of steroids and not on what would happen if the users’ properly cycled their steroids with professional guidance. Testosterone replacement therapy utilizes synthetic testosterone, an anabolic steroid, to improve a patient’s cardiovascular health and lean muscle mass and even increase the recovery rate for injuries, all while under the guidance of a professional clinician.
—I think, having read both paragraphs now, that your rhetorical gambit should be: Even advocates for a steroid ban, like George Michael, admit there’s no clinical proof for their dire warnings about steroid ‘abuse.'”
—If you start that way, we can absorb the anecdote about the radio interview with a clearer focus.
—Then transition to even if steroids CAN be dangerously abused, they can also be safely used . . . . That will permit your editorializing about testosterone replacement under guidance.
Dale Murphy continued the argument against steroid use in professional sports by analogizing the use of steroids in baseball to smoking in public and players gambling on games within the league. Murphy explains how cigarette smoking was a healthy hobby when he was growing up, and now it’s illegal to smoke in public. I appreciate Murphy’s sentiment, but to blankly state that smoking in public is illegal is false. Nicotine is a harmful drug, and it doesn’t belong in the same category as anabolic hormones, which are synthetic versions of what our body already produces.
—Was Dale Murphy in the same interview?
—I’m following the clue that he “continued the argument . . . .”
—There’s a clever rebuttal in here, but you fouled it off.
—Leave out “gambling on games.” It’s a distraction here.
—Concentrate on the nicotine and the steroids.
—You’re poking gentle fun at Murphy here, not crucifying him, because he helps you.
—He says: We used to condone nicotine, but now we discourage it because it’s dangerous. AND we used to condone steroid, but now we discourage it because it’s dangerous.
—You criticize him for using the word “illegal” for cigarettes as if that’s what he got wrong. You don’t really have an argument with him so far. He seems to think we’re being too tough on both drugs.
Murphy’s ultimate argument was that Major League Baseball needs stricter testing mandates, and doing so, that will prevent players from using steroids.
—That’s not the way you made it sound. Maybe he did.
The contrary has happened; the MLB has the most stringent testing standard for steroids throughout all professional sports. Even with year-round tests, 26 players have served suspensions for steroids since 2017. Strict testing doesn’t stop players from using steroids but makes using steroids a dangerous grey area that could be much safer for the players.
—I see the logic here. It’s good. Driving steroid use underground by banning it prevents it from being utilized responsibly.
“The use of performance-enhancing drugs is not accidental; it is planned and deliberate with the sole objective of getting an unfair advantage. I don’t want my kids, or your kids, or anybody’s kids to have to turn themselves into chemical stockpiles just because there are cheaters out there who don’t care what they promised when they started to participate. I don’t want my kids in the hands of a coach who would encourage, condone or allow the use of drugs among his or her athletes.”
Richard Pound, chairman of the World Anti-Doping Agency, whose quote above provides a profound argument, shares the sentiment of the anti-steroid panel. However, to state that using steroids breaks a promise not to cheat makes no sense.
—You’ve done a nice job of giving Pound his credit, identifying him as a Worthy Opponent.
—The way to nail him is to honor his fear of unsanctioned, unregulated, underground doping, and then point out that he’s arguing a FALSE CHOICE.
—You don’t want that, either.
—You want sanctioned, regulated, above-board implementation of the best therapies medical science can provide, in the open where everyone knows what’s going on and players have the option of choosing to participate, or not, in a practice that can be safe and beneficial. After that transition, everything else you say is right on point.
You almost do call it a False Choice here: “The notion that using steroids is cheating is a fallacy created by a population afraid to see the good proper steroid use can bring to players who choose to use the drug.” Right now, it IS cheating by definition, because it’s banned. But the solution to that problem isn’t to punish cheaters; it’s to recharacterize proper steroid use as permitted and appropriate.
Provisionally graded. This post is always eligible for a Regrade following significant revision.