During my seventh grade speech class, I found myself engaged in a compelling debate on the topic of performance-enhancing drugs. Taking a strong stance against PEDs, it was something I truly believed in and felt confident arguing. Looking back, my stance on PEDs hasn’t changed.

Not knowing much about this topic, I remember researching all I could about PEDs and being disappointed that athletes would ever consider using them. I understood they were supposed to enhance athletic performance, but I couldn’t get past how incredibly harmful they were. From strokes to kidney and liver problems, blood clots and even cancer, the consequences are staggering.

I thought to myself: With so many repercussions, why do athletes risk using PEDs? A lot of it comes down to the pressure they feel. They are under constant pressure to be the best, keep improving, keep moving up. Athletes inevitably develop a “winning at all costs” mentality.

Daily headlines, sent straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to our newsletter to keep up with the latest at and around USC.

As I learned more about several doping scandals, I realized how PED use can look different for everyone. Those in favor of PED use offer different perspectives — pointing to how the steroids and stimulants can reduce muscle damage incurred during intense exercise, aiding athletes in recovering more swiftly. PEDs also allow athletes to engage in more vigorous and frequent workouts. Some argue that doping should be allowed considering that some athletes will resort to PED use despite regulations against them.

To this, all I have to say is: Any possible ‘positive’ short-term effects that PEDs may have aren’t worth jeopardizing an athlete’s long-term health, reputation or future.

For Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva, PED use may have compromised her reputation and future. In 2021, just months before the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing she tested positive for an endurance-boosting heart medication, trimetazidine. The crazy thing is she was only 15.

As a result, in January, it was announced that she would be banned for four years from figure skating. Valieva argued that the traces of trimetazidine came from her grandfather who used the same cutting board to make her a strawberry dessert as he did to crush his medication.

Whether this is true who knows, but the reality is that a 15-year-old girl had to suffer the consequences of PED use, showing the different scenarios in which PEDs can ruin an athlete’s career. The sad thing is that these issues are not new, doping scandals have occurred for years.

In 1995 doping culture was so prevalent that road racing cyclist Lance Armstrong saw the use of PEDs as a way to compete fairly within a sport already compromised by widespread drug use. This perspective drove his decision to resort to PEDs, leading to his seven Tour de France wins being taken away and a ban on his participation in the Olympics.

When the United States Anti-Doping Agency investigated Armstrong, it found that his involvement with doping went further than just his personal use. He actively pressured his teammates into using PEDs. Armstrong had developed an entire system to facilitate his and his teammates’ drug use, going as far as employing it as a means to intimidate them with the threat of replacing them on the team.

The consequences he faced were severe: millions of dollars lost in sponsorships and forced resignation from the board of his nonprofit organization. You’d think this would make him regret his actions, but surprisingly not. Years later, he came forward saying that if he were sent back to 1995, he would likely make the same choices again. He stands by his decision, blaming the prevalent drug use at that time.

The USADA labeled Armstrong’s program “the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.” The sad part is this isn’t the only doping scheme that has expanded to such an extent. There have been doping schemes of similar magnitude, some even being state-sponsored.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the East German government was actively providing PEDs and enforcing steroid use. Its reason was quite different from Armstrong’s: They believed that athletic victories would be a way of showcasing the supremacy of communism.

In the 1976 Montreal Olympics, out of 13 possible gold medals in the swim events, East Germany’s women’s swim team won 11 of those, just a fraction of Germany’s total 40 gold medals. These victories raised some red flags, but given the state-led nature of the program, East Germany used its resources to mask any concerns.

What is truly upsetting about this situation isn’t that steroid use brought East Germany victories but the immense harm inflicted upon the 9,000 athletes who were coerced into using them. Many of them were left with lifelong steroid use-related health problems, including hepatitis, heart disease, liver tumors, liver cancer and defects in their children.

These devastating long-term consequences highlight the harmful effects of PEDs and should serve as a reminder of the importance of ethical practices in competitive sports. It is imperative to uphold values of fair play and integrity not just to keep sports fair but for athletes’ well-being.