The controversial Enhanced Games will allow athletes using performance enhancing drugs to compete next month.
With millions of dollars of prize money on the line, and the company behind the event selling their own supplements and drugs to the public, the Science Media Centre asked experts for their thoughts on the event’s safety and implications.
Dr Adam Storey, Senior Research Fellow, School of Sport & Recreation, Auckland University of Technology, comments:
What are your thoughts on performance enhancing drugs being used in sport?
“The use of performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) poses a major threat to both athlete health and also to the integrity of sport as a whole. Although they can artificially enhance a person’s strength, power, speed, and their recovery, this comes with a huge amount of risk involved. Evidence shows that cardiovascular disease and long-term hormonal disruptions are prominent with PED users. In addition, they also negatively impact the mental health of users both during and afterwards.
“The use of PEDs shifts sport away from being a test of pure human capability and moves it more towards a contest of pharmacology, which really undermines what sport is meant to represent. Sport should be about the reward of training, the development of skill and resilience, and the fun and enjoyment of what it means to compete. Athletes should not be tempted to compromise both their long-term health and these values for the sake of short-term gain.”
What effect might the Enhanced Games have on the wider world of sport, particularly the Olympics?
“The Enhanced Games fundamentally challenges the values that underpin events like the Olympic Games, which are built upon fairness, athlete welfare, and integrity. Having coached at the 2012 and 2016 Olympic Games, I understand the power that that these events have on promoting sport as a healthy and sustainable pursuit.
“By openly normalising drug use, the Enhanced Games will promote a damaging narrative that success at these events is only possible through pharmacological aid, rather than valuing dedicated preparation, discipline, and a genuine love of sport. This damaging narrative would be particularly harmful for young and aspiring athletes who may begin to see that drug use is absolutely necessary in order for them to compete and succeed at the highest levels, so they may be pressured into making decisions that they would regret for the rest of their lives. World records are definitely meant to be broken, but only under fair, consistent, and safe conditions.”
What performance enhancing drugs would you be most concerned about at the Enhanced Games?
“The substances of greatest concern are the use of anabolic steroids and emerging peptide or gene-based therapies. Although these substances can significantly enhance muscle mass, strength, power, and recovery, this comes at a serious cost by elevating the risk of heart disease, organ damage, hormonal dysfunction, and mental health issues among the users. Importantly, the vast majority of the research on these compounds has been conducted in animal models, meaning the long-term effects on human physiology remain largely unknown.
“In an environment that is encouraging artificial performance enhancement for the sake of entertainment, there is also the danger of escalation. Athletes may risk higher doses, they may begin to combine substances, and they may experiment with poorly understood compounds to find the additional edge, but this will further increase the associated health risks.”
What are the risks of the organisers selling their own supplements and hormones to the general public?
“Allowing organisers to sell supplements and hormones to the general public raises significant ethical and public health concerns, especially when it is linked to elite performance messaging from past and present athletes. Such actions risks legitimising the use of potent substances without appropriate medical oversight or regulation which can mislead people into underestimating the associated risks that these compounds bring.
“Promoting these substances not only blurs the line between the spirit of sport and commercial exploitation, it undermines trust in evidence-based coaching practice and promotes a dangerous view of what is required to succeed in sport.”
Conflict of interest statement: “I have no conflicts of interest to declare.”
Professor Holly Thorpe, sociologist of sport, University of Waikato, comments:
What performance enhancing drugs would you be most concerned about at the Enhanced Games?
“I am a sociologist rather than a medical expert, and thus my concerns would be for athlete physical and mental health and wellbeing, as well as some of the ethical and philosophical aspects of the Enhanced Games.
“Interestingly, because the use of performance enhancing drugs are allowed under ‘medical supervision’, athletes might actually have better medical support than in sporting events where performance enhancing drugs are illegal but continue to be widely used, often without proper medical support and in ways that can put athletes in very dangerous positions. Despite the efforts of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), performance enhancing drugs continue to be widespread in all elite competitive sport, and those athletes that can afford the products/science that help them go undetected are often advantaged.
“High performance sport is never a level playing field, and by making the use of performance enhancing drugs visible, transparent and with medical supervision, the Enhanced Games will offer a very different version of high performance sport. Most importantly, athletes must have opportunities to make fully informed decisions for their own health, wellbeing and performance, and must know the immediate and long-term health risks of any/all performance enhancing drugs.”
What are the risks of the organisers selling their own supplements and hormones to the general public?
“This is very dangerous as the general public are not high performance athletes and won’t have access to the ‘medical supervision’ that the athletes competing in the Enhanced Games will have access to.
“Audiences of the Enhanced Games must be highly critical of what they are watching, and the messages that the Enhanced Games may be endorsing (as well as the products they are selling). We know the young people around the world are particularly susceptible to new health, training and beauty ‘fads’ and trends via social media, some of which are very dangerous. As researchers, teachers, and parents, I think we need to be thinking critically about the impacts on younger audiences of the Enhanced Games.
What effect might the Enhanced Games have on the wider world of sport, particularly the Olympics?
“The motto of the Olympic Games has always been “Faster, Higher, Stronger” (Latin: “Citius, Altius, Fortius). Athletes have long used performance enhancing drugs in their efforts to go faster, higher and stronger. Some get caught, but many do not. It is a never ending struggle to keep up with the detection of new drugs and performance enhancing techniques and technologies, and I think these efforts will need to be intensified in this shifting landscape.
“While I personally don’t endorse the Enhanced Games, I can understand the context from which they have developed. The Olympic Games and mega sporting events are competing for audiences (and thus sponsors) amidst growing competition for people’s attention and leisure time (i.e., social media, streaming), and have been struggling over recent years to attract younger audiences to watch/consume mainstream sporting events.
“If no one watches the Enhanced Games, then that will send a strong message to the organizers. However, I anticipate that the Enhanced Games will attract audiences curious to see what is truly possible of the human body—where the different enhancements are transparent for all to see. Tuning into the Enhanced Games, however, will likely raise a lot of ethical and moral tensions for some viewers. The Enhanced Games also pose questions about the role of sport in our society, and what we believe sport is (and is not) and what it might become in a changing society with new medical and technological advancements that are constantly transforming our ideas of the human body, health and performance. The issues of equity, inclusion and fairness in sport continue to evolve in our changing society, and with new events such as the Enhanced Games, we should expect such issues to continue to be strongly contested and challenged.”
Conflict of interest statement: “No conflicts of interest.”
Associate Professor Matthew Barnes, School of Sport, Exercise and Nutrition, Massey University, comments:
What performance enhancing drugs would you be most concerned about at the Enhanced Games?
“Although the doping protocols and drugs being used by the athletes is unclear, the anabolic steroids, growth hormone, insulin, and blood‑doping strategies that may be used to enhance performance could create significant long‑term cardiovascular and metabolic risks for the athletes. Additionally, the greatest immediate dangers at the event itself may be caused by acute stimulant use, including amphetamines and ephedrine-like substances, insulin‑induced low blood sugar levels, increased thickening of the blood from blood doping and/or the use of erythropoietin, dehydration caused by diuretics, and the combined effects of stacked drugs under extreme competitive stress.
“The side effects of these drugs are relatively well known, however we do not know what combination of drugs and what doses are being taken. Despite oversight by an independent medical board, the financial incentives at the games may lead to athletes, and training staff, pushing the limits by trying higher doses and different combinations of drugs to get a competitive advantage.”
What are the risks of the organisers selling their own supplements and hormones to the general public?
“There’s little physical risk associated with the supplements they are promoting; these are no different to many other supplements claiming to increase strength and improve longevity. Whether they provide the benefits they claim is another story. The association with drug enhanced athletes may lead the consumer to think that these supplements have somehow contributed to the athlete’s success, which is almost certainly not the case.
“Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) has traditionally been used to address low hormone levels, and associated health problems, in males and females. However, selling it under the banner of “Enhancement” may contribute to the growing normalisation of supplemental hormone use for enhancing appearance, performance and anti-aging. Associating it with the “safe” use of performance enhancing drugs may downplay the risks associated with HRT.
“It’s worth noting that trying to purchase the HRT packages on the Enhanced website is only possible if you are based in the US. Its influence on the NZ audience may be quite different.”
What are your thoughts on performance enhancing drugs being used more broadly?
“It’s an individual’s personal choice to use performance enhancing drugs, however if they do so they should be honest about it. There are too many athletes and social media influencers claiming to be “natural”, which sets unrealistic performance and appearance expectations on young people, including aspiring athletes.”
Conflict of interest statement: “I have no conflicts of interest.”
Associate Professor Robert Townsend, School of Sport and Human Movement, University of Waikato, comments:
What performance enhancing drugs would you be most concerned about at the Enhanced Games?
“I don’t have any specific objections to any particular drug, despite the well-documented risks that the use of things like anabolic steroids or Human Growth Hormone (HGH) can carry.
“I think the danger is not what drugs are taken while ‘under supervision’, but how these practices are interpreted and copied by others outside of the controlled environment who do not have access to specialist supervision, medical support, or long-term screening.”
What are your thoughts on performance enhancing drugs being used in sport?
“The use of performance‑enhancing drugs is not just a medical issue; it is a social and ethical one. Sport captures our attention and admiration by rewarding effort, skill, and respect for human limits within agreed rules. The Enhanced Games subverts this by encouraging a “nothing is wrong here” narrative, as long as drug use occurs within this specific event. That moral reasoning allows athletes, coaches, and support staff to distance themselves from the broader values of clean sport, while still claiming credibility as elite performers. The fragile justifications of those involved should concern us as they threaten to undermine the very thing we celebrate and value about sport.”
What effect might the Enhanced Games have on the wider world of sport, particularly the Olympics?
“The Enhanced Games forces an uncomfortable public conversation about what sport is meant to reward. Is it fairness and respect for natural human limits, or performance at any cost? While organisers frame this as innovation, its likely impact is public mistrust in athletes and sport institutions, normalisation of pharmacological enhancement, and pressure on young athletes who may feel that “natural” sport is no longer competitive or valued. For the Olympics and Paralympics, the risk is not direct competition, but erosion of the ethical foundations that give meaning to athletic achievement.
What other thoughts do you have about the Enhanced Games?
“Perhaps the most troubling aspect is the role of coaches, doctors, and administrators who actively promote this event. Framing enhancement as “freedom” or “scientific curiosity” sidesteps deeper ethical responsibility. These are not neutral actors – they are authority figures whose choices shape athlete wellbeing and integrity. The Enhanced Games risks turning care, restraint, and integrity into obstacles to performance rather than virtues that we should celebrate in sport.
“It’s also important to acknowledge the position many of these athletes are in. For a significant number, participation in the Enhanced Games appears driven less by ideology and more by economic reality. Clean sport has very limited pathways to financial security, particularly for athletes who fall just outside medal positions, commercial markets, or well‑resourced systems. Some athletes are understandably frustrated that years of elite‑level training generates little or no sustainable income, and the Enhanced Games presents itself as a rare opportunity to monetise their physical capital while they can. That context deserves empathy — but it does not remove broader ethical concerns about how athletes’ bodies, identities, and futures are being leveraged and compromised for public spectacle and financial gain.
“Finally, it is also notable that they make no reference to para-athletes, and there is currently no para‑athlete representation within the Enhanced Games. In one sense, this is a good thing! Para sport already navigates complex boundaries between medical intervention, assistive technology, and bodily enhancement, and these distinctions are foundational to the legitimacy of the Paralympic movement. The Enhanced Games’ ‘free-for-all’ model risks collapsing those boundaries entirely.
“But, the fact that para sport is not represented may suggest that this model struggles to accommodate athletic bodies that challenge straightforward, commercially driven ideas of performance, and expose a really narrow and superficial set of values about what sport is about.”
Conflict of interest statement: “No conflict of interest.”
Dr Tracy Molloy, Senior Lecturer in Sport Leadership & Management, Auckland University of Technology, comments:
What are your thoughts on performance enhancing drugs being used in sport?
“It depends on what purpose/values you attach to sport – is the purpose of sport to ‘win’ (at all costs v winning ’well’?), to entertain, to make money, to help develop ‘social good’ outcomes, e.g., health, wellbeing, social cohesion, character building skills, etc?
“In the early days of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), which I assume continues, a ‘test’ for being on the ‘prohibited substance’ list included meeting two of the following three criteria – performance enhancing, injurious to health, damaging to the image/spirit of sport. The injurious to health element was presumably designed to protect athlete health but also as role modelling for young children – we don’t want young athletes to think they need to cheat/risk their health to succeed at the elite level.
“Applying a Western ethical decision-making framework would include considering the issue from teleology (ends justify the means), deontology (follow/don’t break the rules), and existential (walk the talk – know and live your values) perspectives. Applying a Māori ethical decision-making framework would include considering the issue from a values/practices perspective – Io, mauri, hau, mana, tapu, whanaungatanga, kaitiakitanga, wairuatanga and Kotahitanga.
“My personal (non-academic) perspective includes that the purpose of sport includes ‘winning well’, entertainment and making money (within reason), but importantly with an over-riding objective as a vehicle for social good (collective/individual holistic wellbeing) outcomes. From my perspective therefore, without knowing the actual rules/any limitations of the Enhanced Games, the use of WADA banned performance enhancing drugs (with the associated potential health/image harm) jeopardise my over-riding ‘sport for social good’ perspective – in particular are contrary to my personal values (existentialism) and a hauora/mauri (holistic wellbeing/life essence) approach.”
Conflict of interest statement: “No known CoIs.”