LNAT Practice Test Essay – Should the use of performance-enhancing drugs be permitted in professional sports? Discuss the implications.

In the LawMint LNAT Practice Test Series for 2024 and 2025, there are 30 full length tests, with 360 passages – 1260 MCQs and 90 essay prompts or essay questions.

The essay below is a sample that can be written for the prompt:

Should the use of performance-enhancing drugs be permitted in professional sports? Discuss the implications.

This LNAT essay question is included in LawMint LNAT Practice Test series.

While the model essays may include both sides of an argument, the question may require you to state your stance - either for or against; and support it with arguments.

Read our articles and watch the videos on our YouTube channel for guidance on how to structure and write the LNAT Essay.

Introduction

The debate over the use of performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) in professional sports has been ongoing for decades, with various stakeholders voicing strong opinions on both sides of the argument. While some argue that allowing PEDs would level the playing field and lead to more exciting competition, others contend that permitting their use would undermine the integrity of sports and put athletes’ health at risk. This essay will explore the question of whether PEDs should be permitted in professional sports and discuss the implications of such a decision.

The Argument for Allowing PEDs in Professional Sports

Proponents of allowing PEDs in professional sports often point to the potential benefits that these substances can provide for athletes, including increased strength, endurance, and recovery. They argue that, in a world where athletes are continually pushing the boundaries of human performance, PEDs are simply another tool to help them reach new heights.

Moreover, supporters of PEDs often contend that the current ban on these substances is ineffective, as many athletes continue to use them despite the risk of being caught and penalized. By legalizing PEDs, they argue that sports governing bodies could regulate their use and ensure that all athletes have equal access to these substances, thereby leveling the playing field.

The Argument Against Allowing PEDs in Professional Sports

Opponents of permitting PEDs in professional sports highlight the potential health risks associated with their use, including heart problems, liver damage, and hormonal imbalances, among other issues. They argue that allowing these substances would put athletes under immense pressure to use them in order to remain competitive, potentially leading to long-term health problems or even premature death.

Furthermore, critics of PEDs contend that their use undermines the integrity of sports by prioritizing artificial enhancement over natural talent, hard work, and dedication. Allowing PEDs, they argue, would compromise the core values of sportsmanship and fair competition, ultimately tarnishing the reputation of professional sports.

Implications for Athletes and the Sports Industry

The decision to permit or ban PEDs in professional sports has significant implications for athletes and the sports industry as a whole. If PEDs were allowed, athletes might face increased pressure to use them in order to remain competitive, potentially leading to negative health consequences. Additionally, the increased use of PEDs could exacerbate existing disparities between athletes, as those with access to better resources and medical support would likely be able to use PEDs more effectively and safely than others.

Conversely, maintaining the ban on PEDs may continue to drive their use underground, resulting in an uneven playing field and increased risks for athletes who use them without proper medical supervision. Moreover, the resources dedicated to testing and enforcement could be reallocated to other areas of athlete support and development if PEDs were permitted and regulated.

Implications for Fans and Society

The question of whether to allow PEDs in professional sports also has implications for fans and society more broadly. If PEDs were allowed, fans might become disillusioned with their favorite sports, as they may feel that the focus has shifted from the athletes’ natural abilities to the use of artificial enhancements. This could lead to declining interest and engagement in sports, ultimately harming the industry financially.

On the other hand, permitting PEDs could lead to more exciting and competitive sporting events, potentially drawing in new fans and increasing the overall appeal of professional sports. The decision to allow or ban PEDs must therefore balance the potential benefits and drawbacks for fans and society as a whole.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the debate surrounding the use of PEDs in professional sports is complex and multifaceted, with strong arguments on both sides. While permitting PEDs may level the playing field and lead to more exciting competition, it also raises concerns about athletes’ health, the integrity of sports, and the impact on fans and society. Conversely, maintaining the ban on PEDs may continue to foster an uneven playing field and perpetuate the underground use of these substances.

Ultimately, the decision to permit or ban PEDs in professional sports requires careful consideration of the various factors at play, as well as a critical examination of the potential implications for athletes, the sports industry, fans, and society as a whole.