However, it is argued that drugs should be panned in sports because they will affect people 's health and it may lead them to death. In the article, "Illegal substances," Roman (2011) writer Drugs usage in sports should be panned at any cost for many reasons. The first reason why drugs should be panned is because drugs can cause death. Many people think that if they took drugs or hormones they will be stronger, faster and much more better than the other, will this is true, but it will cause sudden death and then being better or stronger won 't matter. For example, there are some people who takes winning at competitions really seriously, so they do whatever it takes even if they took drugs or use any other illegal steroids to win.
To conclude this essay, The counterpoint article is more powerful than the point article because of the facts,evidence, and the statement it makes.It strongly supports the professional sports teams that process respected for these cultures.Next, it verity that it will cost a lot of money for these teams to change their team name. Last but not least, the article shows that sport teams do not stereotype against these cultures, but is a privilege to have their
Evan Argintar, an orthopedic surgeon at MedStar Washington Hospital Center, had this to say about performance enhancing drugs. “Performance-enhancing drugs absolutely give athletes advantages in strength and endurance, which helps them both in the preparation for their sport as well as the actual implementation of the skills needed in many ways for the different sports.” (Argintar) Anything that can make an athlete better in an unfair way that can not be done by all athletes should not be allowed, especially something this harmful. Anything that is not worked for and earned should not be given in the form of a pill. This also lessens the actual wonder of an amazing athlete that is not doping, because due to the amount of people doping today we just tend to assume they are using something they should not be using to be that athletic or
Performance Enhancing Drugs Introduction Performance enhancing drugs have become almost an established part of sports activities in our society, and allows the athletes to reach lengths they could never have dreamed of reaching without these drugs. However the ethical question of whether performance enhancing drugs are highly unfair and even dangerous, or if they are no worse than more traditional ways of enhancing performances, stands unanswered. Taking my point of departure in the points presented by the three authors, Travis Track, David Van Mill and Richard Taite, I will discuss the benefits and disadvantages of performance enhancing drugs. Outline In his article “The Inside Dope: Professional Athletes and Performance Enhancing Drugs”, Travis Track is discussing the view on doping in the past as opposed to the view on doping now. He claims, that before the 70’s, people did not care if athletes used performance enhancing drugs (PED’s), but today they do.
The validity and even humanity in animal testing is something on the margins of morale, it is not something done out of joy, it is not pleasurable for the testers or the tested themselves. So there, we are given a reason to submit the simple question of whether animal testing should be permitted at all. Why not simply cut our losses and move on to greener pastures, after all it is indeed the definition of grotesque to experiment on living beings and people may have been right to protest and raise awareness for such cruel misconducts. There must be something that can be done. However, that line of thinking quickly clashes with the fact that with the help of exactly such testing, with the sacrifice of those animal lives, human lives are saved in return.
The research showed that limb salvage is the first option, unless osteomyelitis is developed, in which case amputation is required. It is also more cost effective to amputate and it requires inpatient rehabilitation. Their findings also included that successful correction allows patients more independence, leading to longer survival and improved quality of life. Many detractors also suggested that surgery is not justified given the risks associated with
Although performance enhancing drugs can help an athlete do better, performance enhancing drugs should not be allowed to be used because they are a form of cheating and are unhealthy. Some critics argue that athletes should use performance enhancing drugs believe that they would cause the athlete to do better. They postulate that , “...the rewards for winning are too great, the penalties for cheating too light, and the chances of being caught too vanishingly small. Put in their position, most sane people would do the same, for the simple reason that doping pays the bills and feeds the family” (Reilly). Taking PED’s would then cause them to play better which then would lead to them winning and then making a lot of money.
They believe that messing with Gods will is erroneous and this will cause problems to arise between different groups who oppose the opinion therefore stem cell transplants are better off avoided and only tested in the laboratories but not performed on humans. In conclusion, stem cell research does have lots of disadvantages that outweigh the advantages and it is a good reason to not use it as an approved procedure currently but attempt to study it more, develop and it improve it so that at one point in the future it may become more ethical and acceptable than it is at this
Because many medical practices that are currently used were tested in this fashion, may believe that it is the most effective and practical way to obtain the desired information. However, those opposed to use animals for such experiments argue that the data obtained from them is often ambiguous, and the cruelty inflicted on these creatures does not justify any positive outcome that may result, in addition, the fact that other more accurate and cost-effective methods are available to test new medications and procedures further bolsters the argument that the continuation of this practice is
Imagine finally having the sport you are most passionate about available for you to participate in, yet not being able to compete in it simply because you are not of the correct gender. Nowadays, this is a fairly common issue. Whether it is because of both gender differences or due to the common belief that “boys are stronger than girls”, coeducation exercise is not exceedingly popular. Although many people believe males are stronger than females and think that coed sports are unfair, this type of athletics can benefit all athletes in multiple ways because it will allow both genders to work together more efficiently, allow the participants and sponsors to pay less, and help create connections with others that would not originally be made. Some will say that coed sports are not constructive when it comes to males and females working together; however, this is not true because it allows both genders to work together more efficiently.