That's an interesting angle.

I've heard the argument for allowing athletes to take and do whatever they want to improve their physical performance. The best argument against that approach that I've heard is that if you allow a virtual free-for-all in terms of performance-enhancing drugs, then you're essentially requiring every participant to assume the risks associated with taking those drugs. Not doing so means they'll be unlikely to compete, which has all sorts of negative implications on their careers.

Obviously, the consequences of tweaking a car are different that tweaking the human body, and there's certainly banned performance-enhancing methods in sports that aren't currently thought to be damaging to the human body, but I think my point is clear.