Clitoral hypertrophy - Sample Essay

At these levels, raised PCV combined with hypertension would cause a steep increase in stroke risk. In endurance sports, dehydration causes an athlete’s blood to thicken, further raising blood viscosity and pressure (Adv Intern Med 1991; 36:399-424). Other performance enhancers used also pose serious health risks, and to permit the use of such substances would compel all athletes to consider using them. Athletes believe that they can gain popularity by improving their performance after trying such substances but this places them at danger of side effects.

The dangers of anabolic androgenic steroids lie in their hepatotoxicity, resulting in dreaded disease such as hepatitis, peliosis hepatitis and risk of tumor. They can also produce permanent squeal such as deepening of the voice, gonadal atrophy and clitoral hypertrophy (Conway, 2005). The IOC also denotes a list of drugs subject to definite restrictions. Alcohol, marijuana and beta blockers may be banned in certain sports because of specific pharmacological effects which may support performance. For example beta blockers control tremor and heart rate, so they may be functional in target sports, such as shooting.

Some beta-agonists include clenbuterol and fenoterol are anabolic and are banned. If these drugs are allowed to professional athletes, the wrong message will be sending out to young sports players and those who venerate their sporting heroes. The compromise at the end of 2004 continues that drugs and sport should not merge. The European 100m champion Dwain Chambers was the year’s first casualty of the skirmish against doping, getting a two-year deferral from all competition and a life-time Olympic ban after testing positive for the banned anabolic steroid THG.

Further, sporting dishonors Olympics to follow. The 33-year-old US sprinter Michelle Collins, who has never tested positive for drugs, was banned for eight years in a landmark case. While announcing that drug taking in the Olympics was predominant, Balco founder Victor Conte argued that it should no longer be seen as fraud. “It’s not cheating if everybody is doing it. And if you’ve got the knowledge that that’s what everyone is doing, and those are the real rules of the game, then you’re not cheating.

” This declaration was condemn by bulk of commentators, saying that any amalgamation of athletics and drugs is an assault on the spirit of sport (BBC, 2004) A performance-enhancing drug, used in sports is a lawful argument. None of athlete fans want to reward an athlete for taking shortcuts. Another point which raises objection is that no one wants to be played for a trick. Since many times, steroids became an issue, generations of major-league players were misusing amphetamines. And though greenies did not have the same impact as steroids, they were performance-enhancers.

The best way to measure a player’s performance is to compare it to the epoch in which he played (Romano, 2006). In a legal debate, promoters argue that performance enhancement is not in opposition to the spirit of sport; it is the spirit of sport. Athletes should be given this choice. Their wellbeing should be overriding. But using drugs is not basically deceitful. The legalization of drugs in sport may be reasonable and harmless. Black argued that the ban on the use of performance-enhancing drugs makes it difficult for users to get medical guidance and scrutinizing in relation to their use of drugs (Black, 1996).

This contemplation may not be relevant to drug-using elite athletes who work in collaboration with team physicians, but it is positively the case that at the non-elite level there is an unmet medical need from drug users for qualified, confidential and non-judgmental medical advice (Korkia and Stimson, 1993). Anthony Millar, Research Director at the Institute of Sports Medicine in Sydney, Australia, inscribed in 1996 of an ‘epidemic of drug usage’ in sport, and suggested that the use of performance-enhancing drugs is prevalent and growing not only in the athletic community but also among recreational athletes (Millar, 1996:107-108).

Coomber has clarified that many of the public health issues concerned in the use of drugs in sport are not unlike to those involved in the use of drugs in a non-sporting context. Thus athletes may be using hazardous ways of administering their drugs, using unsafe drugs in dangerous ways, and may even be unintentional spread routes into the non-sporting world of sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV (Coomber, 1996, Pg: 18). External to the sporting context, public health authorities in many countries have sought to tackle with problems of this kind by the expansion of harm reduction policies.

It is obviously acceptable for sport to outlaw treacherous practices. If performance enhancement drugs are risky or their protection is uncertain and suspect, it is advisable to discourage their use in order to guard the life of athletes. Sport should be protected as far as possible and this give explanations for not allowing athletes to add to their risk with a new set of perilous or potentially dangerous behavior, at the same time that the nature of the sport, as apparent in the rules, generates inherent dangers.

It is a crime to recommend a controlled substance for other than a lawful medical purpose and doctors have been acted against for prescribing them for use by athletes (State of Ohio v. Spencer, 1998). Using performance enhancing drugs to swindle in sport is not a modern phenomenon, but it is becoming more effectual. Drugs in sport are an alarm for medical practitioners because of the implicit threats to the health of the athlete. There are also moral concerns about cheating by unnaturally enhancing athletic performance.

The International Olympic Committee has prepared an Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code. By means of drugs to defraud in sport is just playing with the sentiments of sport fans and further losing their support. Health professionals must be attentive of the need to impede giving banned pills and should provide written warning when classified substances are needed.


1) House of Commons, Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport. 2004. Seventh Report of Session 2003-2004, UK Parliament, HC 499-1 2) Savulescu et al. 2004.

Why we should allow performance enhancing drugs in sport Br J Sports Med. New York Times 2004 Jan 20, ttp://bjsm. bmj. com/cgi/content/full/38/6/666Romano John. 2006. Times Sports Columnist. Published November 30, 2006. Cheated like many, hit like no one 3) Romano John. 2006. Times Sports Columnist. Published November 30, 2006. http://www. sptimes. com/2006/11/30/Sports/Cheated_like_many__hi. shtml. 4) Black, T. (1996). “Does the ban on drugs in sport improve societal welfare? ”. Int. Rev. for Soc. of Sport, 31(4), 367-384.