Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Annotated Bibliography

Kayser, Bengt, and Thomas H. Murray. "Should the Use of Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sports Be Legalized?" Sports and Drugs - ProCon.org. 15 Dec. 2008. Web. 31 Oct. 2011. <http://sportsanddrugs.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001226>.

            This article is a summation of other articles laying out the pros and cons to legalizing performance enhancing drugs in sports. Bengt believes the pros to legalizing drugs in performance enhancing drugs outweigh the cons as long as they are distributed by medical staff accordingly. This would in turn help to encourage a more sensible use of the performance enhancing drugs. While on the other hand the cons in Murray’s eyes far outweigh the pros because they change multiple aspects of the sporting world. He believes they tarnish the respect for the games and cut out people’s natural talent. Both sides of the argument seem to be the more prototypical sounding arguments. This will be useful in showing two perspectives to my argument but finding a third party, new perspective on performance enhancing drugs is my ultimate goal.

Balko, Radley. "Should We Allow Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sports?" Reason Magazine. 23 Jan. 2008. Web. 01 Nov. 2011.<http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/23/should-we-allow-performance-en/singlepage>.

            Balko takes an interesting perspective on the allowance of performance enhancing drugs in our sports world. He argues that as times change, society needs to go with those times. As medical practices are enhanced Balko believes that sports should go hand in hand and these enhancing drugs are the way to go. A very pertain ate argument in Balko’s article is the numbers behind health issues from these drugs versus just actually playing the sport. For instance, the NFL has been in serious talks with the players union on keeping health after players retire because it has become such a huge issue. I tend to agree with Balko’s argument, that if the times are changing and the athletes want to take these drugs then it should be allowed. This article will help to give a slightly different viewpoint on why these drugs should be legal or allowed to be used in sports for my exploratory essay.

Jost, Kenneth. "Performance Enhancing Drugs: An Overview." Proxy Login – University  Libraries – USC.2008. Web. 07 Nov. 2011.    <http://ic.galegroup.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDe            tailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints>.

                        This article has reasons for anti-doping through many medical stand points. Jost says that anti-doping officials like Norman Fost believe generally healthy people don’t benefit from these performance enhancers. Fost is against anyone under 18 years old using these drugs because it is all the kids that think these drugs will make them look like Arnold Schwarzenegger when in fact the effects of these drugs are widely exaggerated. Fost goes on to say any sport involves health consequences as it is so that shouldn’t be such a huge factor. I agree with the fact that the side effects of all these drugs are widely exaggerated but Jost seems to have a very casual outlook on all the side effects.           

GuĂ©nette, Jasmin. "The Decision to Use Performance-Enhancing Drugs Should Be Personal."       Proxy Login - University Libraries - USC. 18 June 2006. Web. 07 Nov. 2011.            <http://ic.galegroup.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsDe   tailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints>.

Guenette takes performance enhancing drugs to a personal level. She believes that performance enhancers are a personal choice and compares them to something like eating a hamburger or choosing to go to the movies. It is your choice and you should not be held accountable by anybody but yourself for it. Using the example of Greg Valentino she shows how this is a one in a million case of steroids going that badly and someone abusing them that badly. She turns choosing to use steroids into a respect factor that no one should have someone make the decisions for them but themselves. I learned that not everyone is against making the choice for themselves. I completely agree with this article because the choice is always yours and shouldn’t be regulated by anyone but a medical staff.  

“ENHANCED PLAYERS WOULD GIVE US BETTER GAMES." Proxy Login – University    Libraries - USC. St. Petersburg Times, 16 Dec. 2007. Web. 07 Nov. 2011.            <http://ic.galegroup.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/ic/ovic/NewsDetailsPage/NewsDetailsWind      ow?displayGroupName=News>.

                        This is the most interesting article I have found so far. It has a rebel tone because it compares steroids to the things that people “probably” did back in the day like spit balls, corked bats, and cocaine. They say just to legalize performance enhancers so we can have some good baseball again. It ends by saying we use them for injuries so what’s the difference. I agree with some of the points of this article but it goes to an extreme comparing steroid to other miniscule things.

Dickey, Glenn. "Looking for an Edge Is Part of Sports." Proxy Login - University Libraries          USC. 16 Feb. 2007. Web. 08 Nov. 2011.            <http://ic.galegroup.com.pallas2.tcl.sc.edu/ic/ovic/ViewpointsDetailsPage/ViewpointsD    etailsWindow?displayGroupName=Viewpoints>.

Dickey makes an interesting claim that government money would be better on more important issues than steroids. He claims that the use of steroids is just athletes trying to find another edge on their opponents. I completely agree that if everyone can just come to terms that athletes are always going to be trying to find alternatives and move on to more important issues. Even for sports fans there are more important issues to attend to. This will be another helpful article to my paper because it brings government spending into the issue.

"What Are Performance Enhancing Drugs?" WiseGEEK: Clear Answers for Common Questions.  WiseGeek. Web. 08 Nov. 2011. <http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-performance    enhancing-drugs.htm>.


This is a very informational article that I think will help to benefit exploring the straight up facts about performance enhancing drugs scientifically. I’m going to use it to help inform the reader in the beginning about the use of these drugs, good and bad. This is also interesting because it touches on how even musicians have started to use performance enhancing drugs to help distress themselves. This articles position is obviously on enforcing the ban of steroids and other drugs and informs that they are used to help increase a particular skill-set. I don’t agree that they should be completely banned but I enjoyed how informational this article is.

Katz, Jeffrey. "Should We Accept Steroid Use in Sports? : NPR." NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR. 23 Jan. 2008. Web. 08 Nov. 2011. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18299098>.

                        This article spiked my interest due to one fact. Near the end of Katz’s part of the article he says before the debate 18 percent were for using the drugs and 63 percent were opposed. While after the debate 37 percent were for and only 59 percent were against. I like what Julian Savulescu said during the debate that, “To say that we should reduce drugs in sport or eliminate them because they increase performance, is simply like saying that we should eliminate alcohol from parties because it increases sociability.” This will help to contribute because it has simple comparisons that are quite compelling.


No comments:

Post a Comment