Does the Ban on Drugs in Sport Improve Societal Welfare?

Abstract

The two major justifications for the ban on the use of drugs in sport are: (1) to create fair contests and (2) to protect the health of athletes. This article analyses these claims and concludes that the ban rather than improving societal welfare by creating fair sporting contests, in fact results in contests being unfair relative to an unregulated market. In addition, it is argued that rather than improving societal welfare by protecting the health of athletes, the ban, by denying athletes access to medical advice and treatment, in fact increases athletes' health risks. The majority of the deaths and impairment of the health of athletes that have occurred during the ban would not have occurred in the absence of the ban. Rather than the ban on drugs in sport improving societal welfare, it moves actual outcomes away from the social optimum. Removal of the ban would result in an improvement in societal welfare by creating fairer sporting contests and reducing health risks facing athletes.