They have more little impact because they are renewable
This is a issue of morality and ethics. So the answer to the first question depends on the perspective of the person. Personally I don't agree with performance enhancing drug use but I do think some of the expectations of athletes who perform in Olympic events increase the pressure to have to use them. So do I think people who use these drugs should be elected into the Hall of Fame. That is hard to answer. But I do not think using drugs takes away all of the achievement an athlete has made. It just proves that the athlete couldn't achieve the rigid sport performance without manipulation. But it doesn't mean they haven't worked hard or trained.
I do think rules should be made for athletes. These rules would definitely weave through most of the athletes we see doing these out of the world sport records every day. That is because many of them have been proven to have used these performance enhancing drugs.
Please vote my answer brainliest. thanks!
When a single copy of a disease allele doesn't result in a disease but instead is good for the person or organism that carries it, we say that allele has a heterozygote advantage. In other words this occurs when heterozyhotes have increased fitness over both homozygotes. A good example is sickcle cell trait, which protects against malaria in heterozygotes, but causes a deadly disease in homozygotes.
Sorry it would not let me nothing else
