Self-study
Columnist: Support Banning performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) from sports will not stop their use. ████ ███████ ███ ███ █ ███████████ ██████████ ███ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ████████ ██ █████ ██ ████ █ ███ ███████████ ██████████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ████████ ███ ████ ██ ████████████ █████ █ ██████████ ████ ██ ████ ████ ████ ███ █████ ████ ██ ████ ██████ ████ ███████ ██ ████ ███████ ███ ██████ █████ ████ ████ ██████████
Summary
The author concludes that PEDs should be allowed, but only under a doctor’s care to make sure they’re taken in safe doses.
Why does the author believe this?
Because he thinks that if PEDs are administered only under a doctor’s care, then the health risks of PEDs disappear.
In addition, we can never stop the use of PEDs, because they provide a big competitive advantage. Top athletes will do whatever it takes to get a big competitive advantage.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that athletes will not take higher doses of PEDs than what the doctors prescribe. (This overlooks the possibility that athletes might still want to cheat by taking more PEDs, despite the doctors’ instructions.)
The author also assumes that the doctors involved in administering PEDs won’t prescribe more than safe doses. (This overlooks the possibility that doctors, either through incompetence or greed, might end up prescribing unsafe levels of PEDs to help athletes compete.)
13.
Which one of the following ██ ██ ██████████ ████████ ██ ███ ███████████ █████████
a
Spectators would not ████ ███████ ███ ████████ ███ ████ ████ ███ ██████ █████
Not necessary, because spectators’ level of respect for athletes is irrelevant. No part of the reasoning involves spectators’ reactions to athletes.
b
PEDs would not ███████ ███ ███████████ ██ ████ ████████ ████ ████ ███████
Not necessary, because even if PEDs can help some athletes more than others, that doesn’t change anything about the potential efficacy of the author’s proposed system for administering PEDs. Doctors can in theory still prescribe only safe doses, and this can still eliminate PED risks, even if some athletes are helped more than others.
c
Athletes do not ████ ████ ████████ ████ ████ ███████████ ██ █████ ██ █████ ████ ██ ███ █████
Not necessary, because even if some athletes DO take PEDs thinking they help performance in cases they don’t actually help, that doesn’t change anything about the potential efficacy of the author’s proposed system for administering PEDs. Doctors can in theory still prescribe only safe doses, and this can still eliminate PED risks, even if some athletes occasionally want PEDs in situations where it won’t help them.
d
Athletes currently using ████ ██████ ████ ███████ ███████ ██ █████████ █████
Not necessary, because even if athletes currently using PEDs CAN find doctors willing to prescribe them, that’s consistent with the author’s reasoning. The author’s proposed system in fact involves doctors who prescribe PEDs.
e
Using PEDs at ██████ ██████ ████ ███ ██████ █ ███ ███████████ █████████ ████ █████ ████ ██ ████ ███████
Necessary, because if this were not true — if using PEDs at unsafe levels DOES create a big competitive advantage over using them at safe levels — then top athletes will still use PEDs at unsafe levels (because we know that they will do “whatever it takes to gain a big competitive advantage”). The negation of (E) opens the possibility that even with the author’s proposed system for administering PEDs, it won’t eliminate the health risks of PEDs due to top athletes still taking unsafe levels of them.