In a move that has sent shockwaves through the sporting world, the recently announced Enhanced Games series, now backed by Series B funding from a private equity firm linked to Donald Trump Jr., has raised significant ethical questions about the future of competitive athletics. At its core, the Enhanced Games is a competition where athletes will be encouraged to use performance-enhancing substances (PES) in the quest for victory, with the promise that these drugs are “safe.” But what does this mean for the ethics of sport and the core values in athletics that have long governed them? Lord Coe recently called it moronic!
For decades, governing bodies like the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and other sports federations have worked tirelessly to combat doping. Anti-doping regulations have been put in place not just to ensure a level playing field, but to protect the health of athletes. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), for example, has been pivotal in creating regulations designed to prevent athletes from gaining an unfair advantage through substances that could harm their bodies. This fight against doping has been about fairness and safety, principles that many believe are fundamental to the ethics in sport.
However, the Enhanced Games aim to upend this tradition, making performance-enhancing drugs a central competition feature. At first glance, the concept promises a new era in sports, one where the limits of human performance can be tested with cutting-edge science and technology. However, the ethical implications are far-reaching and troubling.
One of the key concerns is the impact on the athletes’ health. While proponents of the Enhanced Games argue that the substances involved are “safe,” this is far from a guarantee. As history has shown, the long-term effects of performance-enhancing drugs are often unknown, with athletes suffering from health issues years after their careers have ended. Take, for example, anabolic steroids, which were once touted as safe for athletes but have since been linked to serious health conditions like heart disease, liver damage, and psychological issues such as aggression and depression.
Moreover, the concept of fairness in competition is inherently compromised. Rather than competing on natural talent and training alone, athletes will now need to have access to the best scientists, the most cutting-edge drugs, and substantial financial backing to succeed. This creates a stark divide between those with the resources to enhance their bodies and those without. The sport will no longer be about who has the best training regimen or the most skill – it will be about who has the money to pay for the most advanced substances. This is a stark departure from the fundamental ideals of sport, where every athlete is supposed to have an equal opportunity to succeed, regardless of their financial standing.
In addition, the potential for brands to align with the Enhanced Games raises serious concerns. Brands have long been a significant part of the sports world, but aligning with an event that promotes the use of drugs to gain an advantage sends a dangerous message to the public. It undermines the integrity of sports, potentially leading young athletes to believe that doping is an acceptable shortcut to success. Companies that sponsor such events may face backlash from consumers who view this as a dangerous endorsement of substance abuse. How will ethical sports brands take the games on?
From a broader perspective, the rise of the Enhanced Games could be seen as the intersection of sport, capital, and technology. Venture capitalists and private equity firms already have their sights set on this burgeoning market, viewing it as a potential goldmine. However, the ethical cost of this “progress” is immense. We are heading into an era where winning at all costs, including the health of athletes, could become normalised.
While the Enhanced Games may promise a thrilling spectacle of human achievement, it raises serious ethical questions about the nature of sports and the values we hold dear. The financial interests backing the event may drive its success, but at what cost to the athletes and the future of competitive sport? The debate over whether this is a step forward or a dangerous precedent will undoubtedly continue, but one thing is clear, the ethics of sports are being tested in ways we have never seen before.
