As a baseball fan, I'm angry. As someone who believes in markets and risk/reward, I'm not shocked or suprised in the slightest and consider everyone else who is to be naive.

Successful athletes are very highly compensated. In addition to multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses, the most successful athletes become cultural icons and make millions more in endorsements. Why should anyone be surprised, therefore, that any of these performers don't do whatever is possible to enhance their performance? They absolutely will...and should be expected to do so. They'll eat special diets; push their training in ways the rest of us cionsider masochistic; hire dieticians, massage therapists, personal trainers, sports psychologists, agents, publicists, etc.; and take vitamins, supplements, and anything else that will make it more likely they'll perform better. And if these supplements aren't illegal, or if using them is hard to detect, or if the punishment is minimal, all of which were true in this case, it absolutely was likely that roids, HDH, and who knows what else were going to be used.

Unfortunately, expressing shock, surprise, and disapointment over something that is actually easy to understand when basic economic principles are added to the equation is fairly common these days and not just confined to major league baseball. For example, why is anyone ever surprised that some public officials and government workers take payments from contractors? Pay these people less than what they can get elsewhere and in so doing make it harder for them to have the things they want or need, and you virtually set up a situation where the temptation to take a payment is extreme.

Baseball now has a much tougher detection and enforcement policy, and public exposure will almost always eliminate the ability of an athlete to get corporate endorsements.  But given the rewards, does anyone really think that baseball players won't use the next performance enhancing supplement if its not specifically illegal?