These sources also suggest that legalization of these drugs should aim to educate athletes instead of promoting public shaming and punishments so a safer method of using these drugs as to avoid extreme health risks. In a book by Jeri Freedman (2009) it is hypothesised that a removal of the prohibition of PED would lead to an overall decline in the number of athletes experiencing major health problems as the use of such drugs would be carefully monitored but athlete's perspective medical trainers as to attempt to avoid health issues (Miah, 2005; French, 2004). .
An online article by Thomas Murray (2008) expresses the reasons that PED should, under no circumstances be permitted in sport even with medical guidance for reasons such as: sport is a test of natural talent and the use of PED makes the meaning to competitive sport meaningless and void and the fact that previous records set by athletes without the use of PED would be shattered and the legacies of previous naturally talented sporting heroes who did no use PED would be left behind by unnaturally talented athletes whose performance is not a result of immense dedication as was that of the previous record holders (Connolly, 2000). Thomas Murray (2008) says that "we may lose whatever is most graceful, beautiful, and admirable about sport.".
The question that is "is the use of performance-enhancing drugs sporting" is next to be examined. A column by William Saletan (2006) in a newspaper expressed that the spirit of sport in highlighted through hard work and dedication towards the sport and that placing your own health on the line by using PED is showing immense perseverance to the sport. Saletan expresses his confusion as the WADA specifies that gene is on the prohibited list of banned substances, which infers that is violating a code of conducting within sport but carbo-loading does not. The WADA (2003) in their official report state, "Anti-doping programs seek to preserve what is intrinsically valuable about sport.