Messages

I can see the agrument against forcing people out of the game. But I don't see any argument about providing free screening, so people can at least know if there's a risk and decide for themselves.

Here's a good article on this issue:
http://www.uchc.edu/ocomm/features/stories/stories06/feature_italianstudycardiacdeaths.html

---------
Upside:
"In 1982, Italy implemented a program to try and reduce SCDs by performing screening on all 12- to 35-year-olds who planned to participate in any strenuous competitive sport......
Initially young athletes were five times more likely to suffer from SCD than nonathletes. Now they are half as likely, suggesting that the program may benefit all young people"

Downside:
There is also concern about young athletes that will not be able to participate because of false findings.  "How many athletes were prevented from competitive athletics by the screening?" ...... "Who didn't need to be excluded and thus had an unnecessary lifestyle change?"
-----------

Seems like the upside agrument wins for me.