Bioethicist, sports CEO debate drug use

The C.E.O. of the national governing body for track and field competition clashed with an Oxford bioethicist Wednesday in a McCormick Auditorium debate over the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sports.

Craig Masback '77, the chief executive of USA Track & Field, responded to arguments by Julian Savulescu that there is no ethical basis for banning drugs that are performance-enhancing but safe.

"We're not like horses," said Savulescu, the Uehiro Professor of Applied Ethics at Oxford. "The human spirit strives to be better. Altering ourselves to perform better is part of sport."

Savulescu argued that natural talent has never been seen as the only legitimate component of athletic performance.

He cited caffeine, which can mobilize the fat deposits of athletes into usable energy, as one example of a performance-enhancing drug that is not banned.

But Masback, who in 1980 became the U.S. champion for the indoor mile run, disagreed, arguing, "it's not acceptable to make up for your deficiencies by taking a pill."

Masback said he believed hard work, discipline and "making the most of natural ability" were the core values of competitive sports — and that most spectators, as well as athletes, agreed.

Masback, who once ranked as the sixth-fastest man in the world for his mile time of 3 minutes, 52.02 seconds, also cited the role of athletes in modeling good behavior for children and teenagers.

Support nonprofit student journalism. Donate to the ‘Prince.’ Donate now »

"While the current anti-doping system is far from perfect, society's efforts should be spent on improving drug testing, not sending the signal — particularly to young athletes — that cheating is OK," he said.

Several University athletes who attended the debate voiced agreement with Masback.

"Everyone has different levels of natural ability, but people should only be rewarded for their hard work and effort, not for supplemental or performance-enhancing drugs," said Regina Yang '08, a member of the varsity soccer team.

"If drugs were legalized, sports would become a contest of who could take the most drugs," said varsity track athlete Matthew Sanders '09.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered to your doorstep or inbox. Subscribe now »

A few students, though, took Savulescu's side.

"People are always doing things to enhance their performance, like eating pasta the night before a race," said a freshman in the audience who asked not to be named. "Drugs would just be taking it one step further. If someone is really passionate about doing their best, then it should be that individual's right to take drugs."

Or, as Savulescu put it, "There is nothing intrinsically wrong with performance-enhancing drugs."

He added that legalizing drug use would promote the development of safer drugs and reduce the advantage of athletes who now take performance-enhancing drugs despite the rules.

The debate was moderated by Princeton ethics professor Peter Singer, who described Savulescu as "a lively and provocative speaker." The two met as graduate students in Australia.

The event, sponsored by the University Center for Human Values, was the most recent in a series of talks designed to foster public discussions of practical ethics.