The Doping Dilemma

Analytical Summary Paper The Doping Dilemma In The Doping Dilemma, Michael Shermer writes about the consequences and the ethics behind performance enhancing substances in paid sports. He begins with an anecdote, which describes the feeling of getting dropped by your competitors on a ascent (4202). As described by the reference in the development of the story, every athlete has a genetic limitation that regular training cannot exceed (4214). correspond to Shermer, the only thing to be d oneness is to dope.Arguing that, in rescript for an individual to stay competitive nowadays, he needs to make custom of performance enhancing substances. Shermer concludes that todays drugs ar better, harder to test, and the incentives usually favor them (4218/4229). The author effectively argues that there should be a direct paper bag on the incentives regarding sports doping. His experience read as a reflective fib to young competitors who are now starting, and to those who are already veter ans.He believes that sports should return to the root word of celebrating those rewarded by excellence, aided only by their determination to succeed. Shermer points out the scenario overlord athletes substantiate been facing since the 1990s. Making performance enhancing drugs part of the teams medical program, team members are bound to embrace ineligible substances in their preparation before they are cut from the team (4216). According to Shermer, his reasons for competing did not match the principles behind doping.He was a thirty-year-old academic with a travel to return to, cycling just to test his physical limitations. However, he could stir to the young, amateur athletes who earn their living by dint of sports and have no another(prenominal) ambitions in life, other than compete and win. These same athletes, who are convinced that everyone else dopes therefore, they should do it too (4217). Even though we rather deceive our minds from even considering that such competi tors use drugs, we are lead to believe that they are left without resource and support from athletic departments, teams, and confederations.From my perspective, it is clear why, many times, our idols end up giving in to illicit substances. First of all, receivable to the evolution of drugs the industry for these products has go through an unpredictable growth in demand, making researchers and developers work harder on the lowest product to be more effective. Second, the competition between takers and testers has been consistently won by those guilty of the cause. Consequently, emphasizing the scientists advantage whose work is forever and solely dedicated to mislead testers to over perform them in their receive game.In addition to that, I believe that amateur athletes begin their journey as sportsman at a relatively young age. Uneducated and immature, without beaten(prenominal) and technical support to back them up, they might end up on the wrong track towards success. Ver y early the doping chain reaches them professionals dope in order to stay competitive, and, before they know, they are doping too however, simply to compete. sequence Shermer asserts that the third reason for the success of doping is the incentive behind it, he provides eight-fold concrete ideas to shift the incentive back to competing in compliance.Ideas such as immunity to athletes for past doping improve the interrogation methods by doing it more often, through independent agencies right after competitions reward the development of unknown testing methods increase the competitors penalty and make the appeal body fair and trustful and finally, disqualify the team even if only one member is under use of drugs. According to the author, Nash equilibrium needs to be reached in sports. This means that, in sports, the appeal to cheating needs to be reverted so that it has a lower utility cost than playing by the book (42211/42312).From his suggestions, I believe that readers might s tart to aline that sports are not as ethical, truthful and fair as they have erstwhile judged to be. Essentially, the publics disbelief to professional sports is rather due to their shock with reality, than because of the actual cheating taking place. Since the issue with incentives is so acute, Shermer provides a very truthful and transparent outline in his recommendations to grant once again belief to the spectators that sports could possibly become about honor, and not dishonesty.Given that the author is a competitor himself, it makes the reader more likely to consider his spoken communication of wisdom, especially because he offers examples of true accounts and events. To emphasize his recommendation analysis and to drive a deeper ensureing, he uses the mathematician, John Forbes Nash, to persuade the reader towards his ideology. After adaptation this, spectators testament have a better understanding of the false ride force behind the sports industry. However, they wi ll be more incisive when making onesty have a greater utility cost than cheating. Shermers analysis not only reveals what has been unknown, but it also raises public pressure on confederations to reward those who really deserve to compete. According to the facts mentioned above, I believe a major change in attitude from big decision makers is postulate in order to achieve transparency in sports. Young athletes should be under constant super mint and support, so that they are correctly direct towards professionalism.The right people should consistently check competitors at high-levels, making their will to cheat decrease by escalating the risk of doing so. Finally, I believe that my ideas hassle a deeper understanding of what is behind the publics superficial vision of sports competition. They emphasize the lack of respect by those who dope, the obvious absence of ethics, and the inadequate structure and support to incoming athletes, making us view and understand that what drives people is not being the best, but coming first which are two completely different things.