Ever since Alex Rodriguez and many other high-profile baseball players were linked to a clinic in Miami that supposedly distributed performance enhancing drugs, certain sectors of the sports media have once again fallen into P.E.D. mania. This cycle has become all too familiar by now, especially in baseball. Evidence emerges, circumstantial or otherwise, that a famous player is using drugs to enhance his performance, and a combination witch hunt and inflated outrage festival ensues. ESPN writers post articles like this one, and so on.
Normally I ignore the mania, to the best of my ability. These witch hunts distract me from what I actually enjoy: watching and talking about sports. The games will be played regardless of what talking heads on ESPN say about those playing them, and the talking heads are easy to ignore. I turn off the TV. However, Bill Simmons recently published his own opinions on P.E.D.’s just before the Super Bowl, and for the first time I felt a need to highlight something that a member of the sports media had written.
The end of the article caught my attention the most, specifically two paragraphs near the end that open “Really? You’re that fearful of what we’d find in your blood, NBA players?” and “Let’s see what’s in everyone’s body, once and for all.” These sentences take things too far. People’s bodies, even athlete’s bodies, are private. No one has a right to know what’s in another person’s body and anyone has every right to say, “Hey, don’t you think drawing my blood invades my privacy, just a little?”
The desire to have all professional athletes subject themselves to blood testing is understandable. It’s an invasive, highly effective means of detecting drugs. Just because it would be effective, however, doesn’t mean athletes owe anyone a blood sample. Mandating that to satisfy the public and the media removes a right to confidentiality that athletes deserve to be granted until they willingly choose to sacrifice it.
This is not to say that no one should ever be subjected to a blood test in order to play sports, or work anywhere for that matter. It is only to point out that it is over the top to suggest athletes owe anyone a blood sample. Blood samples contain a wealth of information about an individual, most of it not pertaining to illegal drugs. Athletes still have a lot in common with less public and successful individuals. They have a right to keep their blood private.
Many will accurately point out that there are already sporting events that test blood. That’s fine. There’s nothing wrong with testing blood. Athletes who want to compete in those events will be informed of the blood test. They can then make an informed decision to pursue the competition or not.
What goes too far is demanding that established rules be changed to include blood tests because some of us who don’t play professional sports feel we still don’t have enough information about professional athletes. Blood is very private, and specimen samples from athletes are leaked, often. For that reason it is perfectly understandable, even laudable for player’s unions to try to prevent blood testing. A leaked blood sample could do incredible harm, revealing information about far more than just cheating.
Ultimately, the protesting may prove fruitless. There may come a day when the collective bargaining agreements in all major sports require blood instead of urine tests. That’s fine. Those agreements are contracts negotiated between two informed sides. If the players ultimately decide to provide blood, so be it, that is their prerogative. But it remains their prerogative to maintain or decline. Consenting adults have a right to give up a privacy, but it shouldn’t be taken away so easily.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
6 Responses to It’s P.E.D. mania!
Leave a Reply
TIQ IQ
This is not a witch hunt. PED abusers exist. Calling it as such demeans the problem. Nobody wants personal privacy infringed upon anymore than necessary. Tests can be administered in a manner that protects unrelated medical conditions.
PED users gain unfair competitive advantage over players who don’t cheat. Ultimately, they tarnish the game. Cleaning up the sport will ensure it’s integrity and it’s longevity.
I don’t get cheering for cheaters either. You might as well cheer for Bernie Madoff because he made a lot of money.
Let’s just play ball; fair and square.
“People’s bodies, even athlete’s bodies, are private. No one has a right to know what’s in another person’s body”.
Wrong.
By law, employers are allowed to conduct random tests at work for illegal drugs.
Furthermore, teams already take routine bloodwork on their players for medical examinations, of which the results are held to strict confidentiality (i.e. HIPAA).
The law applies the same as it does for anyone in the workplace. If certain athletes feel their privacy is being invaded they can quit their jobs, and forfeit their tremendous salaries.
The players union agreed to it because there was pressure from within the organization to test. Believe it or not there were players that were pissed that Braun won his appeal. There are players that hate getting lumped in with PED users.
I know it’s chic to be laissez faire about PEDs, but this article misses the point that testing was agreed to by players and owners. It wasn’t a one way street. Some players care about the game and its image more than owners.
These players live in the public sphere and so they care about how they are perceived in that realm. Just because you think they shouldn’t be means nothing. They case about that image, they care about the game, and they care about the millions of kids that look up to them. You may want that to be trite and meaningless, but to some players if means something. That’s what matters.
Gotta agree with the 3 above.
“What goes too far is demanding that established rules be changed to include blood tests because some of us who don’t play professional sports feel we still don’t have enough information about professional athletes.”
You seem to think the testing, or the desire to catch PEDs users, it not for MLB, but instead just for the public that wants PEDs out of the sport?
I agree that MLB screwed this whole thing up. They (and the Players Union, and the MSM) enabled all drug usage for years/decades, and they only got ‘tough on drugs’ when there was public outcry. I certainly don’t like the way this who PEDs issue was handled. However, at this point, efforts by MLB to try and clean up the game are welcome.
The truth is one player should not ‘have’ to use PEDs in order to compete with other players. Because of this, they need to be outlawed. My main issue is that the effort to eliminate PEDs has been very half-assed. The financial incentive to use them is great. Look at Melky who went from almost being out of the game to looking at close to a $100m deal.
I am not a big law and order guy, but the ONLY way to get the game clean is with a ONE strike and you’re out rule. FIRST offense is a Lifetime ban from every aspect of the game. Since the incentives to use PEDs are so great, so do the consequences for getting caught need to be severe.
Here’s an idea:
Hall Of Fame voters can just not acknowledge all the homeruns hit if not ALL stats over a half-decade starting in 2014 (they have 2013 to think it over) and/or have a moratorium on voting players etc. into the HOF for that amount of time.
If they truly believe the game is tainted to the point where they cannot discern who is a Hall Of Famer, then they should just pay no mind to whatever whoever does and not vote in anyone 2014-19.
You know, when blood samples are tested they’re not tested for sexually transmitted diseases, cancer, etc. they’re treated for PEDs which is time consuming expensive process. Unless the samples are taken from the lab there’s no damaging embarrassing information that could be revealed, except of course, if the athlete is using a PED. In any case, the athletes themselves are responsible by using PEDs that can only be detected through blood tests. Athletes DO NOT have the right to keep their blood to themselves, not if want to be professional athletes. And no one has the right to be a professional athlete, either. It would be far more embarrassing for an entire sport if people were not caught. Imagine how much better professional cycling would look if Lance Armstrong had been caught long before he ever won a drug-assisted Tour de France.