In a nation committed to better living through chemistry—where Viagra-enabled men pursue silicone-contoured women—the national pastime has a problem of illicit chemical enhancement.

—George Will

1Many American writers have waxed poetic about baseball. Walt Whitman, the great nineteenth-century poet, sang its praises: “It’s our game—the American game.” “More than anything,” remarked Pete Hamill, the twentieth-century journalist and novelist, “it’s a game of innocence” (Andrijeski). The age of innocence in baseball seems to have ended in the 1990s when “the Steroid Era” began and players from Mark McGwire to Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, and Alex Rodriguez were identified as using performance enhancing drugs (PEDs). Such substances as anabolic steroids and human growth hormone are a concern in other sports as well, but the steroid scandal has been especially painful in baseball, possibly because of its special status as America’s national pastime. As Daniel de la Rosa put it: “Baseball is part of the soul and fabric of the United States” (“Steroids”).

2In 2006, the concern was so great that George Mitchell, the former Senate Majority Leader and peace negotiator, was enlisted to investigate. “The minority of players who used [performance enhancing] substances were wrong,” the Mitchell Report concludes. “They violated federal law and baseball policy, and they distorted the fairness of competition by trying to gain an unfair advantage over the majority of players who followed the law and the rules” (310).

3An opposing position has been presented by respected baseball authority Eric Walker on his Web site Steroids, Other “Drugs,” and Baseball. Walker concedes that using PEDs is against the law and against the rules of baseball. But he argues that the real issue is whether PEDs ought to be “illegal and banned” by Major League Baseball (MLB). He addresses many of Mitchell’s arguments, but I will focus here on two of Mitchell’s main reasons supporting the ban on PEDs: the health risk and fairness.

Should PEDs Be Banned from Baseball Because They Constitute a Significant Health Risk?

4The health risks of using PEDs would seem to be a question of fact on which everyone should be able to agree. Mitchell and Walker do agree, but not on everything. They agree that the medical evidence is inconclusive. More importantly, they agree that there is a risk of side effects from PEDs. They agree that the medical risks to adolescents are, as Walker puts it, “substantial and potentially grave.” But they disagree on the significance of the risks to adults, and they disagree on who should decide whether the risks are worth taking.

5Mitchell and Walker consider the medical evidence for a variety of PEDs. They each cite reputable scientists and research studies. While Walker concludes that “PEDs are by no means guaranteed harmless,” he argues that the side effects tend to be mild and reversible. Mitchell takes a more negative view, arguing that there is “sufficient data to conclude that there is an association between steroid abuse and significant adverse side effects” (6). Nevertheless, it is notable that when discussing each of the possible side effects, he is careful to use hedging words like can and may and to acknowledge that clinical trial data is limited. So it’s possible that Mitchell and Walker are closer on the health risks than their arguments suggest.

6However, Mitchell and Walker seem to be miles apart when it comes to the question of who should decide whether the risks are worth taking. Walker argues that adults ought to have the responsibility to decide for themselves. To support this ethical argument, Walker cites authorities such as Dr. Norman Fost, Director of the Program in Medical Ethics at the University of Wisconsin. Fost asserts in “Steroid Hysteria: Unpacking the Claims” that “even if steroids did have . . . dire effects, it wouldn’t follow that a competent adult should be prohibited from assuming those risks in exchange for the possible benefits. We allow adults to do things that are far riskier than even the most extreme claims about steroids, such as race car driving, and even playing football.”

7Although Mitchell does not address this ethical question directly, he clearly thinks Major League Baseball should make the decision for the players by banning PEDs. While Mitchell expresses other ethical concerns (discussed in the sections below), he seems not to have considered the ethics of who should decide whether the risks are worth taking. Perhaps he and Walker would be able to find common ground if they discussed this question directly and if the players themselves made their opinions known.

Should PEDs Be Banned from Baseball Because They Give an Unfair Advantage to Athletes Willing to Take the Risk?

8You’d think anyone interested in sports would value fairness. But fairness turns out to be rather complicated, at least for Walker. For Mitchell, it’s pretty straightforward. As I explained earlier, Mitchell claims performance enhancing substances are wrong simply because they give some players an “unfair advantage” over those who play by the rules (310). Walker concedes this point. In fact, he says “that is why PEDs are banned.”

9However, Walker disagrees with Mitchell’s way of defining “a level playing field” as one where “success and advancement . . . is the result of ability and hard work” (Mitchell 5). According to Walker, Mitchell makes a false distinction between what is natural and unnatural. Whereas certain aids to performance—such as better bats, chemical-filled drinks like Gatorade, Tommy John and Lasik surgery—are considered natural and therefore allowable, other aids—particularly PEDs—are deemed unnatural and banned. To support his argument, Walker cites Fost again. “Here’s what Fost wrote in ‘Steroid Hysteria’: ‘There is no coherent argument to support the view that enhancing performance is unfair. If it were, we should ban coaching and training. Competition can be unfair if there is unequal access to such enhancements.’”

10In other words, unequal access is the key to the unfairness argument. On this point, Mitchell and Walker seem to agree. The argument is really about making sure that there is a level playing field. Mitchell puts his finger on it when he explains that

Ethicists call this a coercion argument. “Steroids are coercive,” Fost explains, because “if your opponents use them, you have to” as well or you risk losing. Walker has a simple solution: allow PEDs to be “equally available to any who might want them.” He argues that there are lots of requirements or expectations that athletes regularly make choices about. He sees “no logical or ethical distinction between—just for example—killer workouts and PEDs.” Therefore, Walker concludes, each athlete has to decide for him- or herself what’s “appropriate or necessary.”

11Mitchell, on the other hand, assumes it should be the responsibility of Major League Baseball to set rules that protect the athletes and protect the sport. He acknowledges that players “are responsible for their actions” (311). But he insists that “Commissioners, club officials, the Players Association, and players” should share “responsibility for the steroids era” and “should join in” the “effort to bring the era of steroids and human growth hormone to an end” (311). To initiate a new era, the Baseball Hall of Fame has launched a national education outreach program that encourages individuals to sign a pledge to remain free of performance enhancing substances (National). By saying that everyone involved in Major League Baseball shares some responsibility for its future well being, Mitchell appears also to be reaching out to critics like Walker who share a common love of the sport. It seems that they may not really be that far apart after all.

Works Cited

Andrijeski, Peter. Pete’s Baseball Quotes. Peter Andrijeski, n.d. Web. 24 Apr. 2009.

de la Rosa, Daniel. “Steroids in Baseball: The Detritus of a Dark Era.” Bleacher Report. Bleacher Report, 14 Jan. 2012. Web. 23 Apr. 2012.

Fost, Norman. “Steroid Hysteria: Unpacking the Claims.” Virtual Mentor 7.11 (Nov. 2005): n. pag. Web. 24 Apr. 2009.

Mitchell, George J. Report to the Commissioner of Baseball of an Independent Investigation into the Illegal Use of Steroids and Other Performance Enhancing Substances by Players in Major League Baseball. Office of the Commissioner of Baseball, 2007. Web. 25 Apr. 2009.

National Baseball Hall of Fame. “‘Be a Superior Example’ Encourages Individuals of All Ages to Sign Pledge.” National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. National Baseball Hall of Fame, 8 Feb. 2012. Web. 23 Apr. 2012.

Walker, Eric. Steroids, Other “Drugs,” and Baseball. The Owlcroft Company, 2008. Web. 23 Apr. 2009.

Will, George. “George Will Quotes.” The Baseball Almanac. Baseball Almanac, 2009. Web. 25 Apr. 2009.