I don't understand. steroids are illegal for the regular public, unless prescribed by doctor (for AIDS, etc). why should we make an exception for baseball players? other sports have stringent testing against it, why should we make an exception for baseball? baseball should have to conform to the standards of our society and the laws of the land.

I'm not sure how blog-ethical this is, but Paul commented on the whole "legalize steroids" issue with this comment of Alex's post:

As a physician, I find one view of the steroid issue to be particularly ludicrous -- namely, that we should "legalize" steroid use in sports and have them administered under a doctor's supervision. Bad idea!

Here are three (out of probably hundreds) of reasons why this won't work: 1) We MDs already have plenty of trouble managing side effects of legitimate medications that have undergone far more rigorous safety testing (look at the Vioxx story); 2) the history of professional sports is filled with MDs who have acted more in the best interest of the people paying their paychecks (i.e. the owners) than the players; and 3) no one knows the long term side effects of these drugs; for a recent example, look how long it took to learn that estrogen replacement was bad for women!

I think the argument is to legalize steroids for everyone, not just professional athletes. If the drugs hurt no one but the user, why stop a person from making a choice that sacrifices future health for a present increase in ability? After all, we do this in other areas of our lives (chugging coffee to stay up all night to finish a project can't be good for one's long term health).

I'm not sure if I agree with this argument, but I do find it hard to muster a convincing response.

'If the drugs hurt no one but the user, why stop a person from making a choice that sacrifices future health for a present increase in ability?'

Would you want your 13 year old son taking steroids because he wanted to make the big leagues?

Jack's point is right on the money. And I discussed this in a post below somewhere. The belief that a major leaguer taking steroids affects absolutely no one is extremely naïve - kids LOVE to emulate their favorite star. Do you want kids to be taking steroids? Maybe they should be taking them under a doctor's supervision, because according to pro-steroid people, they have no proven adverse affect. So let's just pump your kids full of them so they can become pro athletes.

And since EVERY athlete will have access to them, some of them will, inevitably, find black market steroids to give them and even GREATER advantage. Legalizing steroids will just perpetuate the cycle.

To think that everyone will stop taking illegal drugs just because you legalize some of them is a mistake.

A 13 year old is a different case. A child that young is still under his or her parents supervision. I wouldn't want a child of mine taking any drugs. Before they are 18, I can take action to stop them. After that, they're adults and on their own.

David, you're missing the point: 13 year old WILL be taking steroids (even more than do now) if steroids are legalized. Just saying that YOU don't want them to, or that YOU don't think they should, won't stop them from doing it.

To me steroid use is not victimless in that it forces all athletes who aspire to the major leagues to level the playing field by also using steroids. Its no longer a matter of the athlete with the best skills, who trains the hardest, or prepares the most, but the one who is willing to sacrafice their health and maybe their life to make it to the pros. Is that athletic competition or a circus freak show?

I wouldn't want my son playing Russian roulette with steroids because that's the only chance he'll have to make it to the pros.

When my son tells me he wants to grow up and play for the Red Sox I tell him he has to practice everyday. What if he figures out he can hit the ball farther and throw harder if he takes illegal substances that will make him stronger with less training? What if he figures out that the reason Billy is starting ahead of him on JV's is because he got the juice? What if Billy screws his life up and never gets to play beyond high school because every kid who got drafted was on the juice and got even bigger? Some kid from north of Boston who was the Marlins #1 pick 2 years ago is out of baseball now for prescription drug addiction. What makes you think if these kids can get oxycontin and weed they won't be able to get steroids, without a prescription!?!? I think you post the sign and have a zero tolerance policy - first time your banned for the year the second time for life.

I think this last comment by Jack Tanner points to a fallacy that people believe.

What if he figures out he can hit the ball farther and throw harder if he takes illegal substances that will make him stronger with less training?

David - not true

I hung around a lot of muscle head gyms and juiced guys grew faster with less training than they would have needed if they were clean. It builds muscle mass faster.

While I think there are problems with allowing players to use a helpful, damaging substance (as I will assume steroids are) because it forces those who would compete to damage themselves to do so, I think the argument about the 13-year old emulating the pro to be a red herring. I don't want want 13-year old throwing a curveball or screwball. I don't think major leaguers should be prevented from doing so. I don't want my 13 year old drinking; I think adults should be allowed to. I don't want my 13 year old picking up prostitutes in Denver; I think an adult player should be allowed to, unless he benefits from a bad gamble of a contract on the part of the club that employs him. In each case, I can't let the real threat that my child will foolishly and prematurely adopt adult behavior the reason I don't let adults make those choices.

But it's not just your theoretical 13-year-old. Under this "steroids are OK" situation, it's the college player or the minor leaguer who has a lot of skills and trains hard every day, but isn't going to get promoted unless he risks his health by taking steroids just to keep up with everybody else who is. "Hey kid, you've got a great swing, but that ball would travel 20 feet farther if you took steroids. Take my advice and you'll get called to the Show."

By allowing steroids in baseball, that is precisely what would happen... nearly every player you see would be risking their health to play. The ones who didn't would linger in the minors, no matter how skilled. "Risk your life or get out of baseball."

And mind you, I'm speaking as someone who believes steroids, like any drug, should not be illegal for society as a whole. That's on principle. But a responsible professional sports league should protect the health of its players and fair competition.

John Lott has every right to his opinion, but don't trust any statistics he produces for public consumption. He's pretty much destroyed his own reputation by falsifying data. The article below is the shortest one I found amplifying on that.

http://maroon.uchicago.edu/news/articles/2003/02/25/progun_primer_questi.php

This may be slightly OT, but did anyone elese find it interesting that the grand jury testimony was released to the media just days before the players association meeting? It's like... someone wanted to put pressure on them or something.

Linkmeister,

Thanks for pointing that out. I thought Lott's name sounded familiar. I should have looked into it more.

Capy -

It's not that they're emulating the stars. It's that you've got kids and parents at a young age picking what teams they're going to play on, what schools they're going to attend, what camps they're going to go to so they can get a pro contract. It's not pickup games at the sandlot and HS tryouts anymore. If the competition means taking steroids then that's what they're going to do. With guys signing $50 -100m contracts there's too much incentive to cheat. First round picks signing multimillion dollar contracts push it back to HS. Competing to play at the top HS pushes it back further.

I saw in the paper yesterday the NBA tests once in training camp and will test randomly thoughout the year. rookies get tested 3 additional times. That should be the minimum testing in baseball.

your comments have helped me in my research paper! thank you!!

i think steroids are a cheating device for baseball to get by. barry bonds should be suspended for the upcoming baseball season and should be put in a rehabilitation center. and so should all the other baseball players that hit 15 to 20 homeruns in a month of playing and should be checked for steroids!!!!!!
the mlb is going down because of baseball!!!! stop steroids from getting into the mlb!! the coaches from the teams should do a check up to all baseball players for steroids every other week!!!!

The truth is that the hypothetical 13 year old can get his hands on steroids whether steroids are legalized or not. If however, steroids were legalized, medical professionals would have a chance to study anabolic steroids and make a strain of steroid that doesn't have the side effects of present black market steroids. There should be an age limit for the use of steroids. 18, known as the age of accountability, might be the right age to allow them to use these performance enhancers. It might have been better that steroids had never been discovered so we wouldn't have to deal with this issue, but it's the same issue with the legalization of marijuana. No matter what, if someone wants it, they can get it.