Because addictive drugs are physically harmful, their use by athletes is never justified.
Conclusion (therefore)
The use of nonaddictive drugs by athletes should not be prohibited.
rephrase: Athletes should be allowed to use nonaddictive drugs.
Evidence
People objecting that these drugs are unnatural forget that almost everything in sports is unnatural, such as high-tech running shoes and padded boxing gloves, yet none of these are prohibited for being unnatural.
We should be attending to more serious problems in sports that cause unnecessary deaths and injuries.
Evaluate
The final idea of, "What we SHOULD be talking about is X!" is logically trash. We can talk about whatever we want to talk about. Suppose someone says, We would say Yes, murder is more serious. But we don't have to choose. Right now we're talking about whether burglary should be okay.
So we should probably ignore that claim and focus on the issue at hand, whether athletes should be allowed to use nonaddictive drugs.
GIVEN THAT we let athletes use other unnatural things (like fancy shoes and gloves and equipment)
HOW CAN WE ARGUE THAT athletes should not be able to use unnatural nonaddictive drugs?
Well, the easiest argument would be,
The author was Assuming a Difference, that nonaddictive drugs aren't harmful.
Goal
Let's find an answer that provides a compelling reason to prohibit the use of nonaddictive drugs by athletes.