<p>The United States has a colossal steroid problem on its hands - and not just in bodybuilding. Young athletes everywhere are turning to performance enhancing drugs and playing steroid roulette with their lives, if you will, in hopes of surpassing all expectations in their respective sport and begin making millions on the professional level. The last dozen years have seen a flurry of steroid scandals throughout the world of sports, many of the victims deemed absolute sport superstars beforehand. Sport stars including seven-time track and field championship sprinter Marion Jones, sensational home-run king's in Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire, and nine-time cycling champion Lance Armstrong have all had their elite reputations bogged down quite considerably due to extremely firm steroid allegations within the last few years. Fans have been shaken and the world of sports has become suddenly weary: How many more professional athletes could possibly be using steroids? The answer could be many and Kate Schmidt of the Los Angeles Times suggests, in an article, an outrageous solution - let us simply allow steroids. In her perplexing editorial entitled, "Just Say Yes To Steroids", Schmidt, twice an Olympic javelin bronze medallist and a former world-record holder herself, proposes that it is impossible to stop the use of steroids in sports and that success in sports simply requires steroid use hence favoring the decriminalization of steroids once and for all. Approaching this editorial
with a moral analysis one may simply shudder at the decaying sense of ethics, morals and logic behind this opinion. It is a mind-boggling assertion indeed and one which lacks the simple notion that steroids is purely cheating.</p>
<p>Basically, I'm rebutting an editorial by this woman, Kate Schmidt, who says steroids should be legalized in sports.</p>
<p>I'm 18 years and a community college student. I've never been a great essay writer and I've never been too fond of writing introductions especially. Please any advice or tips to improve would be awesome.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
The answer could be many and Kate Schmidt of the Los Angeles Times suggests, in an article, an outrageous solution - let us simply allow steroids.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>I might be totally wrong, but I do not thing you have to include ",in an article".</p>
<p>IMO, so far so good. No huge blemishes stand out. I think, perhaps, phrases such as "bogged down" should be left out or changed to something like "significantly diminished". Other than that, good. Well structured.</p>
<p>The only thing I'm concerned for is whether or not it's a personal enough essay. I don't know if transfer essays are different (I'm still new to this too), but from opinions here I get the feeling the essay is where YOU come across to the admissions officer. Yes, the ethical/moral aspect is good, but it's an attitude most have. Does the rest of the essay become more about who you are and what your individual attitudes toward the issues are? Or is it just a standard, extended debate rebuttal?</p>
<p>SoCal, you write well, but your essay should definitely express who you are in a highly personal way. The admissions people want to hear your voice, not just your opinion, even if you write well on a topic. Unless steroids have had some kind of role in your own life, I would write about something else.This is obviously just an opinion, but I would check out some of the college websites on essays. UVA and Tufts had some good examples last fall. I'd check them out. Good luck!</p>