tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/wada-2965/articlesWADA – The Conversation2024-03-27T23:27:01Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2267352024-03-27T23:27:01Z2024-03-27T23:27:01ZProtection racket or fair medical model? Why the AFL’s illicit drugs policy is a necessary duty of care<p>Earlier this week, independent <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-27/afl-melbourne-demons-illicit-drug-tests-wilkie/103637056">MP Andrew Wilkie</a> accused the AFL of conducting “off the books” illicit drug testing to identify players using substances of abuse, then inappropriately withdrawing them from matches under false pretences. </p>
<p>His comments created a media storm, largely because he inferred a nefarious cover-up.</p>
<p>However, Wilkie may not understand how and why Australian sports are pressured into taking a responsibility for protecting athletes, which the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and Sports Integrity Australia (SIA) fail to do in regards to illicit drugs. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1772870211403735468"}"></div></p>
<h2>What is WADA’s position on illicit drugs?</h2>
<p>Australia is a signatory to the <a href="https://www.drugs.com/wada/">WADA Code</a>, which monitors performance integrity in respect of doping. This includes substances banned at all times, such as <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/td2018eaas_final_eng.pdf">anabolic steroids</a> and <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/lab-documents/td2022epo#resource-download">EPO</a>, as well as substances banned only in competition, notably cannabis, heroin, ecstasy, and cocaine. </p>
<p>The latter are deemed <a href="https://www.usada.org/spirit-of-sport/education/substances-of-abuse/">“substances of abuse”</a> and are associated with so-called recreational use in society. </p>
<p>Scientists do not consider these to be performance-enhancing – if anything they compromise <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.2165/00007256-200333060-00001">exercise</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/105687199390052G?via%3Dihub">endurance</a>.</p>
<p>However, according to WADA, these drugs contravene two pillars (<a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/2021_wada_code.pdf">Section 4.3</a>) of the anti-doping code: they are understood to be a “threat to athletes’ health” and their use contrary to the “spirit of sport”.</p>
<p>Despite this position, WADA, and by extension SIA, does not monitor substances of abuse outside of competition; it is only interested in their use on match day.</p>
<p>Indeed, WADA’s unwillingness to test for illicit substances out of competition (which it could do from the same urine sample that tests for performance-enhancing drugs) means sports are left to manage the risk of athletes engaging with substances of abuse and testing positive on match day.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fOUnIFnL1MI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The AFL’s illicit drugs policy has come under fire in recent days.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why does the AFL have an illicit drug policy?</h2>
<p>Since 2005, the AFL has operated an illicit drug policy with a core goal of monitoring substance abuse behaviour to <a href="https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/the-afl-has-been-conducting-its-own-drug-tests-since-2005-and-will-continue-to-keep-results-secret/news-story/db7ff426b7964ca9022af79d47e549ff">minimise the risk</a> of WADA’s match-day violations. </p>
<p>To do so, it pays a drug testing company to act on its behalf and report back to the league, which then communicates with club doctors.</p>
<p>It is a medical model where drug addiction personnel work with players to try to <a href="https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/46/13/943.short">change substance abuse behaviours</a>. </p>
<p>With three “strikes”, the emphasis is on rehabilitation rather than punishment, though a player with a second or third strike will be <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-28/afl-illicit-drug-policy-doping/103640388">named publicly, fined, and miss games.
</a></p>
<p>The illicit drug policy is made possible because the <a href="https://www.aflplayers.com.au/news-feed/stories/why-the-illicit-drugs-policy-works-pavlich">AFL Players Association</a> – like their equivalents in the NRL, cricket, and so on – have voluntarily consented to the process, provided it is driven by a medical model that protects players’ privacy up to the second strike, at which point there are consequences for repeat misconduct.</p>
<p>However, the confidential, medical nature of the illicit drug policy has triggered many critics, who are eager to learn which athletes have a substance abuse problem, especially when such information can be used to trigger media eyeballs or political capital.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/venture-capitalists-are-backing-a-steroid-olympics-to-find-out-what-happens-when-athletes-are-doped-to-the-gills-222869">Venture capitalists are backing a 'steroid Olympics' to find out what happens when athletes are doped to the gills</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Is the AFL’s illicit drugs policy working?</h2>
<p>Has the illicit drug policy helped athletes with substance abuse issues avoid the risk of positive tests on match day? </p>
<p>All we have to work with are raw numbers. There are some 800 players in the AFL men’s competition. In recent years, <a href="https://www.afl.com.au/news/148975/ex-pie-opens-up-on-drug-ban-family-tragedy-and-mental-health-battle">Sam Murray</a> (Collingwood, 2018), <a href="https://www.afl.com.au/news/391113/former-saint-slapped-with-two-year-ban-for-doping-violation">Sam Gilbert</a> (St Kilda, 2020) and <a href="https://www.afl.com.au/news/1054976/melbourne-demons-forward-joel-smith-tests-positive-to-cocaine-after-home-and-away-game">Joel Smith</a> (Melbourne, 2023) have been served with anti-doping violations for the presence of cocaine on match day. </p>
<p>Murray was given a four-year ban, but after appealing that the drug was not intended for match day, the penalty was reduced to 18 months. </p>
<p>Gilbert was not on the Saints’ playing list at the time of the infringement, but copped a two-year ban to end his career. Murray never played in the AFL again. Smith’s case is yet to be heard.</p>
<h2>Can the AFL’s illicit drugs policy be improved?</h2>
<p>A review into the policy is already been under way, but it seems unlikely the underlying foundation – a <a href="https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/a-medical-model-of-care-how-the-aflsupplied-drug-tests-work/news-story/03142c32180155b14451f911b0ed5737">medical model</a> – will change. </p>
<p>Just as importantly, the AFL’s role in working with drug testers to identify players at risk – and suspend them from play when it’s believed they could contravene anti-doping rules – is bound to continue.</p>
<p>However, the mechanism by which players are withdrawn from games might be finessed. </p>
<p>Athletes are unavailable for various reasons such as injury, illness, or personal circumstances. </p>
<p>The Wilkie speech to parliament suggested “faking” of injuries by players to “<a href="https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2024-bombshell-drug-test-claims-andrew-wilkie-speech-in-parliament-melbourne-demons-drug-problems-latest-news-updates-zeeshan-arain/news-story/dc41b18aadbf40681f85dd3e0895fce2">keep coaches in the dark</a>” about why a player was unavailable for selection.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/the-afl-has-been-conducting-its-own-drug-tests-since-2005-and-will-continue-to-keep-results-secret/news-story/db7ff426b7964ca9022af79d47e549ff">AFL Doctors Association (AFLDA)</a> disputed that claim, reiterating its commitment to truth and confidentiality in medical practice. </p>
<p>However, that still begs the question of what a player says to a coach about their inability to be available for selection. The AFLDA notes patients have the liberty to ask doctors to share information about their status and treatment with coaches, but without player permission, confidentiality remains.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-went-wrong-in-peter-bols-doping-case-a-sport-integrity-expert-explains-202957">What went wrong in Peter Bol's doping case? A sport integrity expert explains</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A broader issue than just sport</h2>
<p>According to a <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/illicit-use-of-drugs/cocaine-ndshs">2023 federal government report</a>, nearly three million Australians over the age of 14 years admitted to being lifetime users of cocaine, this making the country the <a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/australia-the-highest-per-capita-cocaine-user-in-the-world/news-story/c91869d4e2b2adeef266917d82f705e0">highest per capita user of the drug</a> in the world. </p>
<p>Given athletes are part of this culture of substance abuse, it is no wonder that the AFL, and other Australian sports, are trying, even if inelegantly, to manage the risk of WADA punishments from match-day violations.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/226735/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daryl Adair does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The confidential, medical nature of the AFL’s illicit drug policy has triggered critics – is the policy working, and how can it be improved?Daryl Adair, Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1638812021-07-19T20:11:04Z2021-07-19T20:11:04ZDoping has become inevitable at the Olympics. And who wins gold in Tokyo might not be certain until 2031<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/411785/original/file-20210719-25-z03tw0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=287%2C1010%2C3635%2C2256&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Razvan Martin of Romania was stripped of his bronze medal after testing positive for drugs eight years after the 2012 London Olympics.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Hassan Ammar/AP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Another Olympics is upon us, inexorable even in the face of COVID. With it comes the inevitable, salacious speculation around doping scandals.</p>
<p>There have been doping scandals at every Olympics in my lifetime and a few before, reaching back to the middle of the 20th century. Now, because of the lag between new drugs coming into sport and the development of reliable drug tests, there’s a 10-year retrospective testing window. This leaves the question of exactly who wins what an open question for a decade.</p>
<p>With the testing window used for the 2012 London Olympics now closed (it used to be eight years), we only now have a final account of both medals and doping at those games. </p>
<p>According to Olympics historian Bill Mallon, <a href="https://twitter.com/bambam1729/status/1331690225953869824">more than 140 athletes</a> were banned or disqualified, including 42 medallists (13 of which were gold). Nearly half <a href="https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1097290/london-2012-record-doping-cases">were caught</a> using retrospective testing. </p>
<p>Because doping has become so much a part of the Olympics, one wonders whether the inevitable doping scandals in Tokyo will be as earth-shattering as they once were, or whether the public will merely shrug. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1331690225953869824"}"></div></p>
<h2>How many positive tests come back every year</h2>
<p>The anti-doping industry has become a lot better at what it does since the establishment of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in 2000 and the introduction of the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/what-we-do/the-code">World Anti-Doping Code</a> (WADC) in 2001. Revisions to the WADC came into force in 2009, 2015 and 2021.</p>
<p>WADA has invested <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/what-we-do/science-medical/research">US$83 million</a> (A$112 million) in developing more advanced drug-testing capabilities since 2001, and US$3.6 million (A$4.8 million) on <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/social-science-research">doping prevention research</a> since 2005. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-drug-cheats-are-still-being-caught-seven-years-after-the-2012-london-olympics-121123">Why drug cheats are still being caught seven years after the 2012 London Olympics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>With the Tokyo Games expected to cost an official <a href="https://apnews.com/article/tokyo-coronavirus-pandemic-2020-tokyo-olympics-japan-olympic-games-3c46bce81928865d9aae0832b5ddd9e3">US$15.4 billion</a> (A$20.8 billion) to stage (with audits suggesting the true figure is at least US$25 billion or A$33.8 billion), however, the amount of money WADA has spent on research since 2001 seems modest. </p>
<p>Despite this investment, the rate of positive tests has remained fairly stable. </p>
<p>The most recent figures <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/laboratories/anti-doping-testing-figures-report">released by WADA in 2019</a> showed the proportion of “adverse analytical findings” (the technical term for positive drug tests) relative to the total number of tests conducted wobbling between 0.97% (2019) and 1.32% (2016). </p>
<p>Athletes and their support teams know the drug-testing game well. They can use the lag between a new performance-enhancing drug being developed, that drug being prohibited and a reliable test being developed to their advantage. It’s just one factor coaches and other support personnel take into account when <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Managing-Drugs-in-Sport/Mazanov/p/book/9781138595187">managing how their athletes use different drugs</a>. </p>
<p>Unless there is a complete game-changer in anti-doping efforts — like a fundamental shift in drug-testing technology — we can reasonably expect an Olympic year to result in the same level of “adverse analytical findings” as any other year. </p>
<p>That means athletes will most likely be caught doping in Tokyo. Just how many — or how long it will take — remains to be seen. With the retrospective testing window, the final medal and doping tallies will only be known in the second half of 2031. </p>
<h2>How sport has become more punitive</h2>
<p>While drug testing has become more sophisticated, most of the changes to the World Anti-Doping Code since 2001 have actually been to bolster penalties for acts indirectly related to the taking of performance-enhancing drugs (what are known as “non-analytical” rule violations). </p>
<p>There are only two anti-doping violations in the code directly related to drugs being found in an athlete’s body. </p>
<p>By comparison, there are now nine others that deal with indirect violations. These include not being where you said you would be three times for out-of-competition drug tests, associating with someone under sanction for violating an anti-doping rule, and discouraging someone from reporting potential violations to authorities.</p>
<p>In many cases, these types of violations have seen athletes and support personnel vilified and stigmatised as “drug cheats” despite no direct evidence they have ever used a prohibited substance or method. </p>
<p>Last year, for instance, the US sprinter Christian Coleman was given a two-year ban after missing three out-of-competition drug tests in a year. The Court of Arbitration for Sport reduced the ban to 18 months, noting it <a href="https://olympics.nbcsports.com/2021/04/16/christian-coleman-ban-suspension-appeal/">believed</a> Coleman did not dope and did not avoid being tested. Nonetheless, he will still miss the Tokyo Olympics as a “drug cheat”. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1177523524732407808"}"></div></p>
<p>All of these rules have made life much harder for athletes, but their impact appears to be fairly minimal in reducing interest in performance-enhancing drugs. </p>
<p>According to the most <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/general-anti-doping-information/anti-doping-rule-violations-adrvs-report">recent report by WADA</a> (which gives data only up to 2018), only 283 athletes were sanctioned for “non-analytical” rule violations that year, compared to 2,771 athletes for violations directly related to ingesting drugs. </p>
<h2>Learning to live with doping?</h2>
<p>The obvious question is whether we just have to live with a certain amount of doping in sport. Given the last time an Olympics was without a doping controversy was the middle of the 20th century, it would seem so. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/411789/original/file-20210719-21-28u5y6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/411789/original/file-20210719-21-28u5y6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/411789/original/file-20210719-21-28u5y6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/411789/original/file-20210719-21-28u5y6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/411789/original/file-20210719-21-28u5y6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1056&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/411789/original/file-20210719-21-28u5y6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1056&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/411789/original/file-20210719-21-28u5y6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1056&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Russia’s Tatyana Lebedeva was stripped of her two silver medals from the 2008 Beijing Olympics ten years later.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">David J. Phillip/AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That does not mean we should stop protecting the integrity of sport. Rather, it is a recognition that anti-doping is just one part of this effort.</p>
<p>As an international leader in anti-doping measures, Australia established <a href="https://www.sportintegrity.gov.au/about-us/who-we-are">Sport Integrity Australia</a> last year to replace the standalone Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority. This move explicitly recognises that doping is part of a much bigger picture that includes match fixing and abuse of athletes. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/banned-from-the-olympics-for-a-bad-burrito-anti-doping-efforts-shouldnt-start-from-a-position-of-guilt-163890">Banned from the Olympics for a bad burrito? Anti-doping efforts shouldn't start from a position of guilt</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The greater scandal is perhaps that so little money is invested in anti-doping and sport integrity. Sport Integrity Australia is budgeted to cost Australian taxpayers A$27.4 million (US$20.2 million) in <a href="https://www.transparency.gov.au/sites/default/files/budget-2020-21-health-portfolio-budget-statements.pdf">2020-21</a>, compared to the eye-watering amount of money that goes through Australian sport and recreation every year (<a href="https://www.statista.com/topics/5330/sport-industry-in-australia/">A$19.7 billion or US$14.5 billion for 2019</a>). </p>
<p>So, it remains to be seen exactly how much attention the inevitable doping scandals at the Tokyo Games will attract. My main worry is doping scandals have become business-as-usual, one-day dramas in the sporting spectacle that is the Olympics, and little else. As such, I suspect every positive COVID test will generate far more interest than a positive drug test in Tokyo.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/163881/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jason Mazanov has received funding from the Australian Anti-Doping Research Programme and the World Anti-Doping Agency Social Science Research Grants programme in the past. Jason also reviews anti-doping social science research grant applications for a number of international agencies. </span></em></p>Anti-doping efforts are not stopping cheating in sport. Unless there’s a game changer in technology, we might just have to live with a certain amount of doping in the Olympics.Jason Mazanov, Adjunct Senior Lecturer, School of Business, UNSW-Canberra, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1638902021-07-19T20:10:49Z2021-07-19T20:10:49ZBanned from the Olympics for a bad burrito? Anti-doping efforts shouldn’t start from a position of guilt<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/411801/original/file-20210719-27-1sxbdoo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=423%2C62%2C2988%2C2451&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Shelby Houlihan blames a pork burrito for her positive drug test that cost her a chance to compete in Tokyo.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Charlie Neibergall/AP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s been a tough year for doping control officers trying to access athletes before the COVID-disrupted Tokyo Olympics. Testing numbers dropped <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2021-06/wada-announces-further-rise-in-global-testing-figures-in-lead-up-to-tokyo-2020">dramatically</a> due to COVID restrictions, although the testing organisations claim to be operating at normal levels now. </p>
<p>Thrown into this mix are a number of suspected doping cases arising from increasingly sophisticated laboratory analysis methods that are detecting lower and lower levels of prohibited substances. </p>
<p>Rather than being evidence an athlete intentionally used a performance-enhancing substance to cheat, however, these results are more likely to be the result of contaminated foods, supplements or medicines. </p>
<p>Even more concerning is the evidence presented this week by German journalist Hajo Seppelt and the ARD documentary team in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM1lzGUJJN8">Doping Top Secret: GUILTY</a>, which showed how athletes can potentially be sabotaged through casual contact.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DM1lzGUJJN8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>All of this begs the question whether anti-doping bodies could achieve a better balance using an <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Restoring-Trust-in-Sport-Corruption-Cases-and-Solutions/Ordway/p/book/9780367473068">“ethics of care” approach</a>, which seeks to support “clean” athletes rather than automatically assuming guilt. </p>
<p>One suggestion we advocate is referring extremely low-level positive cases, which likely result from contamination, to an independent body. This body could then determine whether there had been an attempt to cheat, rather than placing the onus on athletes to prove their innocence.</p>
<h2>‘Eating pork can lead to a false positive’</h2>
<p>Last month, Shelby Houlihan, the American record holder in both the 1,500 and 5,000 metre track events, announced on <a href="https://www.instagram.com/shelbo800/?hl=en">Instagram</a> that the Court of Arbitration (CAS) had upheld a four-year suspension for testing positive for the anabolic steroid nandrolone.</p>
<p>The court rejected her assertion that the positive test in December could have been caused by eating a pork burrito hours before providing her urine sample. The finding denied her a chance to qualify for the Tokyo Games. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="InstagramEmbed" data-react-props="{"url":"https://www.instagram.com/p/CQHnnb5h6Ht/?hl=en","accessToken":"127105130696839|b4b75090c9688d81dfd245afe6052f20"}"></div></p>
<p>In <a href="https://www.sportresolutions.com/news/view/world-athletics-v-james-kibet">February</a>, Kenyan long distance runner James Kibet was also banned by the Athletics Integrity Unit for four years after testing positive for nandrolone and anabolic steroids. He <a href="https://www.athleticsintegrity.org/downloads/pdfs/disciplinary-process/en/210129-World-Athletics-v-James-Kibet-Decision.pdf">claimed</a> he had ingested pork fat from a Kenyan farmer who admitted feeding his animals supplements. </p>
<p>In contrast, the American long jumper, Jarrion Lawson, had his four-year ban for ingesting the banned anabolic steroid trenbolone <a href="https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Media_Release_6313.pdf">overturned</a> last March when he argued his positive test was probably caused by eating tainted beef at a restaurant.</p>
<p>Similarly, the Badminton World Federation doping hearing panel accepted it was highly likely that contaminated meat in Thailand was the cause of <a href="https://extranet.bwfbadminton.com/docs/document-system/81/210/382/BWF%2520v%2520%2520Ms%2520Ratchanok%2520Intanon%2520_%2520BWF%2520ID%252035642%2520_%2520Reasoned%2520Deision.pdf">Ratchanok Intanon</a>’s positive drug test in 2019.</p>
<p>While it is important to take the facts of each case on their merits, the application of the rules and athlete punishments in these circumstances can appear to be frustratingly inconsistent.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-shayna-jack-is-likely-to-successfully-defend-her-doping-ban-appeal-but-still-wont-be-at-the-tokyo-olympics-162427">Why Shayna Jack is likely to successfully defend her doping ban appeal — but still won't be at the Tokyo Olympics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Burden on athletes to prove innocence</h2>
<p>Although farming with steroids and hormones is illegal in most countries, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has been <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2011-11/athletes-must-show-caution-due-to-contaminated-meat-0">warning</a> athletes about the risk of contaminated meat, especially from China and Mexico, for more than a decade. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/science-medicine/excretion-of-19-nor-steroids-from-consumption-of-pork-meat-and-offal">2015 WADA study</a> also highlighted the risks of steroids found in pork. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/doping-has-become-inevitable-at-the-olympics-and-who-wins-gold-in-tokyo-might-not-be-certain-until-2031-163881">Doping has become inevitable at the Olympics. And who wins gold in Tokyo might not be certain until 2031</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>At the same time, <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/dta.2735">WADA laboratories</a> are increasingly detecting minuscule traces of prohibited substances. What a laboratory cannot tell from a sample is whether a positive result is from inadvertent contamination (from meat, for example) or is evidence of the tail end of a sophisticated micro-dosing regimen designed to cheat the system.</p>
<p>Much like a police alcohol breathalyser, athletes returning a “positive” test begin from a position of strict liability. The burden falls to them to prove the source of the prohibited substance. </p>
<p>Even when the amount of the substance could have had no performance benefit, athletes must salvage their reputation and careers through a proverbial “hunt for the needle in the haystack” to determine the origin of the contamination. </p>
<p>This can be extremely challenging for athletes to prove. As the case of Australian swimmer <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-shayna-jack-is-likely-to-successfully-defend-her-doping-ban-appeal-but-still-wont-be-at-the-tokyo-olympics-162427">Shayna Jack</a> demonstrates, the appeals processes, media hype and social media trolling take their toll. Jack <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-16/new-documentary-questions-fairness-of-sport-anti-doping-system/100298812">warned</a> anti-doping authorities that “one day someone’s not going to get through it”.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1416021817521704961"}"></div></p>
<h2>New reforms don’t fix all the problems</h2>
<p>Cases like these raise questions about the effectiveness of current anti-doping policies. </p>
<p>Recognising the challenge, the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/2021_code.pdf">latest WADA Code</a> still leaves the burden on the athlete to prove their innocence, but allows for the standard four-year ban to be reduced to a reprimand. </p>
<p>WADA has raised the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/item_6_1_3_attach_1_recommendations_mrls_diuretics_growthpromoters_final.pdf">reporting threshold</a> used by laboratories to determine a potential breach of the WADA Code. This would presumably reduce the number of cases from non-intentional contamination from meats or medicines.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/russian-olympic-doping-saga-shows-need-for-a-radically-different-approach-90850">Russian Olympic doping saga shows need for a radically different approach</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>From the start of June, WADA also <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2021-06/wada-publishes-stakeholder-notices-regarding-potential-contamination-cases">requires</a> laboratories to conduct additional investigations for positive tests resulting from a limited range of prohibited substances. What is not clear is whether all laboratories have the capacity to conduct these investigations, hence our call for an independent investigative body to assist. </p>
<p>However, former WADA Director-General <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sport-doping-idUSKCN1RS1DO">David Howman</a> says these changes do not go far enough. He supports forensic testing methods, such as hair and saliva testing, being used in anti-doping cases. (These might also provide additional evidence of long-term drug use instead of contamination.) </p>
<p>There are numerous heartbreaking examples of athletes who do not have the financial means, access to independent legal advice or sophisticated scientific knowledge to prove their innocence. Most are still suspended after a positive test, leaving them vulnerable to media speculation as they fight their corner. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1182272065325453312"}"></div></p>
<h2>A new ‘ethics of care’ approach</h2>
<p>While the first rule of cheating is deny, deny, deny, the vast majority of athletes are not cheats. Nonetheless, they can easily and inadvertently be tripped up by the rigidity of the anti-doping rules. </p>
<p>It is not by accident that many of the athletes who have fallen foul of the system also come from the most <a href="https://www.routledge.com/The-World-Anti-Doping-Code-Fit-for-Purpose/Dasgupta/p/book/9780367729561">disadvantaged countries</a>. </p>
<p>Rather than starting from a position of “guilt”, is it time for an athlete-centric, “ethics of care” approach? </p>
<p>Cases of extremely low levels of prohibited substances could be referred to an independent third party for investigation, rather than putting that financial burden and inevitable stress onto the athlete.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/banned-from-the-tokyo-olympics-for-pot-let-the-athletes-decide-what-drugs-should-be-allowed-163619">Banned from the Tokyo Olympics for pot? Let the athletes decide what drugs should be allowed</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>International sports federations already fund arms-length testing programs through bodies such as the <a href="https://ita.sport/">International Testing Agency (ITA)</a>. If all low-level positive cases were automatically referred to an independent review body, the focus could be on determining whether actual cheating took place — not a mere breach of the rules and arbitrary thresholds. </p>
<p>Would this give greater comfort to the arm-chair sport viewer AND restore athletes’ trust in the anti-doping system? Quite possibly.</p>
<p>Athletes are not the enemy. It is timely to recognise the central role of the athlete within the anti-doping system.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/163890/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Athletes are not the enemy. Cases of extremely low levels of prohibited substances could be referred to a third party for investigation, rather than putting the burden on the athlete.Catherine Ordway, Assistant Professor Sport Management and Sport Integrity Lead, University of CanberraMichele Verroken, Senior Lecturer, Law School, De Montfort UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1327382020-03-01T04:26:52Z2020-03-01T04:26:52ZSun Yang ban shows world swimming body must establish an integrity commission<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317900/original/file-20200301-24694-da46xd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/EPA/Patrick B. Kraemer</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With the announcement that China’s Sun Yang has been banned from swimming for eight years, <a href="http://www.fina.org/">FINA</a>, the world governing swimming body, must take stock of how it oversees one of the most popular and high-profile of the Olympic sports ahead of this year’s Tokyo games.</p>
<p>It would now seem obvious that, taking the lead from <a href="https://www.athleticsintegrity.org/">athletics</a> and <a href="https://www.tennisintegrityunit.com/">tennis</a>, FINA should establish an independent integrity unit to investigate and prosecute doping and similar offences.</p>
<p>In a decision announced Friday, the Court of Arbitration (CAS), sport’s self-styled world supreme court, confirmed that Sun would be banned from competitive swimming for <a href="https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/news-detail/article/sun-yang-is-found-guilty-of-a-doping-offense-and-sanctioned-with-an-8-year-period-of-ineligibility.html">eight years</a>. His swimming future now rests largely on one final avenue of appeal to the Swiss Federal Tribunal.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-drug-cheats-are-still-being-caught-seven-years-after-the-2012-london-olympics-121123">Why drug cheats are still being caught seven years after the 2012 London Olympics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This has always been a big global story: Sun is one of the most successful swimmers of all time, and one of China’s most beloved sports stars. A three-time Olympic gold medallist, he has 11 world championship golds, and is second only to the legendary US swimmer Michael Phelps in men’s individual events.</p>
<p>It was at last year’s world championships in Korea that silver medallist, Australia’s Mack Horton, <a href="https://theconversation.com/swimmer-protests-at-the-world-championships-renew-calls-for-urgent-anti-doping-reforms-120848">famously protested</a> against Sun, during the podium ceremony for the 400 meters freestyle.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317901/original/file-20200301-24672-pmxpjk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317901/original/file-20200301-24672-pmxpjk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317901/original/file-20200301-24672-pmxpjk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317901/original/file-20200301-24672-pmxpjk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317901/original/file-20200301-24672-pmxpjk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317901/original/file-20200301-24672-pmxpjk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317901/original/file-20200301-24672-pmxpjk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Mack Horton (left) protested Sun Yang’s win at the world championships in 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/EPA/Patrick B. Kraemer</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Horton’s protest related to the fact that Sun, having previously served a three-month ban <a href="https://theconversation.com/snubbing-chinese-swimmer-sun-yang-ignores-the-flaws-in-the-anti-doping-system-120895">for a doping infraction</a> in 2014, had been involved in an incident with doping control officers in September 2018.</p>
<p>Having given a sample to the testers at his home, Sun became concerned about their conduct and accreditation. This concern eventually led to the vial containing Sun sample being smashed by one of the swimmer’s entourage.</p>
<p>Initially, Sun’s behaviour in this case merely attracted a reprimand. <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-21/sun-yang-doping-case-more-complicated-than-it-seems/11328364">An investigation carried out by FINA</a> concluded that, although Sun’s actions were incautious, they could be justified given the testers’ grave procedural errors and misconduct.</p>
<p>The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), the global body for anti-doping standards, later took the view that FINA’s approach was overly lenient. WADA appealed to CAS and a <a href="https://vimeo.com/373204016">public hearing</a> was held in Switzerland in November.</p>
<p>Having deliberated on what they heard at that eleventh-hour hearing, which was initially marred by <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-16/translation-issues-mar-sun-yang-drug-test-appeal/11710736">poor translation</a>, the three arbitrators delivered a summary of their verdict last week.</p>
<p>Basically, CAS held that the procedural concerns Sun had about the testing process in September 2018 either did not occur or were not sufficiently compelling to justify tampering with the sample container. Given this was his second anti-doping infraction, an eight-year sanction applied.</p>
<p>It must be remembered the charge against Sun is that of tampering with a sample – it is not a charge or “conviction” relating to doping. Sun’s sample taken in September 2018 was never tested, and this seems to be the reason why the arbitrators have not decided to strip him of the medals he obtained at the world championships in 2019. In this, as with other aspects of the Sun decision, we must await the publication of the arbitrators’ <a href="https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Media_Release_6148_decision.pdf">full, reasoned award</a>.</p>
<p>Sun now has until the end of March to lodge an appeal at the Swiss Federal Tribunal (SFT) and <a href="https://7news.com.au/sport/olympics/chinese-swimmer-sun-yang-fumes-and-vows-to-appeal-eight-year-ban-c-721776">has already indicated</a> that he will take that option. As it happens, on various technical grounds – one relating to an unsubstantiated claim of bias against WADA’s chief lawyer – Sun’s lawyers have already been to the SFT <a href="http://sportlegis.com/2020/02/26/sun-yang-v-wada-fina-a-cas-letter-confirming-the-admissibility-of-the-appeal-is-not-an-appealable-decision-before-the-swiss-federal-tribunal/">on three separate occasions</a>. They will now likely go for a fourth time, and it is likely to end in disappointment.</p>
<p>He will not get a full re-hearing at the SFT, and the grounds of appeal will be limited to narrow procedural issues only. An example would be whether the CAS hearing in some way unfair – ironically, the fact that it was held in public at Sun’s request may tell against him here. Another consideration may be whether the sanction was disproportionate – given the eight-year ban is mandated in the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/what-we-do/the-code?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIx5Xy3qn45wIVjxWPCh3qSgrCEAAYASAAEgIHnfD_BwE">World Anti-Doping Code</a>, this ground would likely not succeed. One final consideration may be whether the poor translation service at the CAS hearing might be a ground of appeal – again, unlikely, given that it was Sun’s legal team that hired the translator.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/snubbing-chinese-swimmer-sun-yang-ignores-the-flaws-in-the-anti-doping-system-120895">Snubbing Chinese swimmer Sun Yang ignores the flaws in the anti-doping system</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Arguably, Sun’s strongest point has always been the general one, outlined in the seminal CAS case of <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/sport/swimming/fairness-at-core-of-sun-yang-case-despite-headline-hysteria-20191122-p53d4r.html">Quigley v UIT</a>. It is that, while the principle of strict liability applies to athletes in anti-doping control, it should equally apply to testers to strictly comply with all administrative aspects of the anti-doping process. Whether the SFT would entertain an argument that goes right to heart of the current anti-doping policy globally is unlikely.</p>
<p>While Sun grapples with an effective end to his career and <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2020-02/wada-statement-regarding-cas-public-hearing-wada-v-sun-yang-fina">WADA</a>, unsurprisingly, feels vindicated, FINA must now reflect on its governance of its sport.</p>
<p>Lately, it has had a fractious relationship with some of its leading participants who sought successfully, on threat of litigation, to compete in a privately funded <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympics/summer/aquatics/the-buzzer-international-swimming-league-explainer-1.5316563">international swimming league</a>. An integrity commission would seem a vital next step.</p>
<p>The reaction to the Sun ban <a href="https://au.news.yahoo.com/chinese-trolls-target-mack-horton-after-sun-yang-cas-ban-014543084.html">on social media from China</a> has been predictably ferocious. One knock-on effect of the Sun decision may be a greater focus from countries such as China and Russia on the fact that, in terms of the nationality of those appointed to hear cases, CAS, sport’s supreme court, appears to be systemically Eurocentric in nature.</p>
<p>It seems almost certain that Sun will not compete at Tokyo 2020. Attention now moves at CAS and on doping in sport to the case against <a href="https://www.tas-cas.org/en/general-information/news-detail/article/cas-procedure-between-the-world-anti-doping-agency-wada-and-the-russian-anti-doping-agency-rusada.html">Russia and its athletes</a>.</p>
<p>The reaction to the Sun verdict will be a mere ripple in a pool compared to that which will greet a similar verdict against Russia.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/132738/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jack Anderson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Following the Chinese swimmer’s eight-year ban, FINA must examine its governance and follow the example set by athletics and tennis to investigate and prosecute doping.Jack Anderson, Professor of Sports Law, Melbourne Law School, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1211232019-08-05T02:56:04Z2019-08-05T02:56:04ZWhy drug cheats are still being caught seven years after the 2012 London Olympics<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286849/original/file-20190805-117861-mfbc00.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Uzbek wrestler Artur Taymazov (centre) was recently stripped of his gold medal from the 2012 Olympics due to retrospective drug testing. He also lost his gold from the 2008 Olympics for doping.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dimitris Panagos/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>When two swimmers <a href="https://theconversation.com/swimmer-protests-at-the-world-championships-renew-calls-for-urgent-anti-doping-reforms-120848">refused to acknowledge victories</a> by Chinese swimmer Sun Yang at the last month’s world swimming championships, the very public protests riveted the swimming world and cast a spotlight (again) on suspected doping in sport.</p>
<p>But in the midst of the drama, a separate, failed drug test was slightly overshadowed. Uzbek wrestler Artur Taymazov became the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/49092020">60th athlete</a> – and seventh gold medallist – to retrospectively test positive for doping from samples taken at the 2012 London Olympics. </p>
<p>In addition to the nine athletes caught doping during the games themselves, that brings the <a href="https://www.olympic.org/-/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/IOC/Who-We-Are/Commissions/Disciplinary-Commission/2019/Antidoping-factsheet-retests-23-07-2019.pdf">total number of disqualified athletes from London to 69</a> – more than triple the number caught doping at the 2004 Athens Olympics. </p>
<h2>When did retrospective testing begin?</h2>
<p>That athletes from the 2012 Olympics are still being caught cheating might come as surprise. But the World Anti-Doping Code (<a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/the-code/world-anti-doping-code">WADC 2015</a>) provides for a 10-year window following a competition to test athletes’ samples for a possible doping violation. This is known as retrospective testing. </p>
<p>Under the old regime, authorities had eight years to test samples. This means that samples from the 2012 London Olympics <a href="https://www.olympic.org/news/ioc-sanctions-one-athlete-for-failing-anti-doping-tests-at-london-2012-3">can be tested until 2020</a>.</p>
<p>The WADC’s limitation period first came to prominence in 2010, with the release of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/books/review/Tanenhaus-t.html">Andre Agassi’s autobiography, Open</a>. In it, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/oct/28/andre-agassi-wada-doping">the tennis star admitted</a> to taking a banned drug, crystal methamphetamine, in 1997. He also revealed he avoided suspension by the tennis authorities, who, in confidence, accepted his plea that the positive test had resulted from a drink spiked by one of his entourage, known as “Slim”.</p>
<p>The then-head of WADA, John Fahey, wrote to the tennis authorities for an explanation of “Slim’s spiked soda”, but further investigation was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/oct/28/andre-agassi-wada-doping">barred because the WADC’s statute of limitations</a> had long since expired.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/russian-olympic-doping-saga-shows-need-for-a-radically-different-approach-90850">Russian Olympic doping saga shows need for a radically different approach</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In another prominent case in 2012, the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) <a href="http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/">argued</a> it should be able to expunge all of cyclist Lance Armstrong’s competitive results from 1998 onwards – including all seven of his Tour de France victories. This was due to evidence that Armstrong’s cycling team had run </p>
<blockquote>
<p>the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>USADA acknowledged this would be in breach of the WADC’s statute of limitations, but justified the move on the grounds that Armstrong had fraudulently concealed his doping for many years. The International Cycling Union <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/sports/cycling/armstrong-stripped-of-his-7-tour-de-france-titles.html">did not challenge</a> USADA’s interpretation of the time limitation rule and Armstrong’s results were subsequently erased. </p>
<p>Due to the level of doping in the sport at the time, no retrospective champion was declared for the seven Tours between <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cycling-armstrong/no-winner-for-1999-2005-tours-says-uci-idUSBRE89P0S620121026">1999-2005</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286858/original/file-20190805-117871-10qa5eu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286858/original/file-20190805-117871-10qa5eu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286858/original/file-20190805-117871-10qa5eu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286858/original/file-20190805-117871-10qa5eu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286858/original/file-20190805-117871-10qa5eu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286858/original/file-20190805-117871-10qa5eu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286858/original/file-20190805-117871-10qa5eu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">US cyclist Lance Armstrong was retrospectively stripped of his seven Tour de France titles despite the fact the statute of limitations had expired.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Olivier Hoslet/EPA</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How many athletes have been caught?</h2>
<p>The reason the 10-year window exists is because drug testing has failed to keep pace with cheating. There is a lag period between WADA both becoming aware of a new performance-enhancing substance that it needs to prohibit and developing a test that can, with scientific accuracy, detect it.</p>
<p>Put simply, the 10-year limitation period allows anti-doping authorities to retrospectively test samples of athletes after new methods allow them to do so, thus acting as a deterrent against doping in the future.</p>
<p>In 2017, WADA testing figures revealed that of the 322,050 samples taken in and out of competitions that year, only 1.43% led to an <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2018-07/wada-publishes-2017-testing-figures-report">adverse analytical finding</a>. But <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/aug/29/sport-doping-study-revealing-wider-usage-published-after-scandalous-delay">some research</a> indicates the prevalence of doping among athletes may be much higher than that.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-science-of-doping-and-how-cheating-athletes-pass-drug-tests-45602">The science of doping and how cheating athletes pass drug tests</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The hit rate of retrospective testing in the Olympics has increased in recent years. The International Olympic Committee <a href="https://www.olympic.org/news/ioc-sanctions-one-athlete-for-failing-anti-doping-tests-at-london-2012-3">began storing samples</a> and allowing retrospective testing from the Athens Olympics in 2004. <a href="https://www.olympic.org/-/media/Document%20Library/OlympicOrg/IOC/Who-We-Are/Commissions/Disciplinary-Commission/2019/Antidoping-factsheet-retests-23-07-2019.pdf">Five athletes</a> were caught retrospectively from those games, followed by 65 from the 2008 Beijing Olympics and now 60 (and counting) from London. </p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="b2rNJ" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/b2rNJ/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<p>And in theory, USADA’s interpretation in the Armstrong decision – which was supported by rulings in the Court of Arbitration for Sport - leaves open the possibility that the statute of limitations for drugs violations could be extended even beyond ten years. </p>
<p>In theory, this could allow the International Olympic Committee to revisit the results from the Olympics of the 1970s and 1980s, where there is documented evidence – <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/03/stasi-files-east-germany-archivists-losing-hope-solving-worlds-biggest-puzzle">from Stasi files</a>, for example – that countries such as East Germany engaged in a state-sponsored doping program to achieve sporting success.</p>
<p>Interestingly, one of the first former Australian Olympians to support Horton in his protest last month at the world swimming championships was <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/sport/swimming/taking-a-stance-or-overstepping-20190723-p52a14.html">Raelene Boyle</a>, who has long claimed she was denied two gold medals at the 1972 Olympics by East German athletes suspected of doping.</p>
<h2>Limitations of retrospective testing</h2>
<p>Although more cheats are being caught, this doesn’t mean the system of retrospective testing is working perfectly. </p>
<p>For starters, a decade-late public declaration that an athlete was the rightful winner of a championship offers some recompense, but the denial of immediate glory often has severe financial and even <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/01/sports/olympics/shirley-babashoff-swimming-montreal-olympics-medals.html">health consequences</a>. </p>
<p>Moreover, having to correct the result of races held years previously may be adding to a growing <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-argue-about-doping-in-sport-43600">public indifference</a> to doping in sport. The <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2017/10/26/olympic-weightlifting-class-notorious-for-positive-doping-tests-may-get-chopped/?utm_term=.fda76e8a8d5d">men’s 94-kilogram weightlifting event</a> from the 2012 Olympics shows just how little confidence remains in certain sports: all three medallists were disqualified for doping, as were the fourth-, sixth- and seventh-place finishers.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"847750628247879681"}"></div></p>
<p>Finally, there is one strange quirk within WADA’s system of retrospective testing. If, for example, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-02/shayna-jack-vows-to-clear-name-doping-swimmer-ligandrol-asada/11376924">Australian swimmer Shanya Jack</a> loses her appeal following her positive test for ligandrol, then her samples, <a href="https://www.independent.ie/au/sport/other-sports/athletics/ewan-mackenna-the-curious-case-of-sprinter-steven-colvert-the-positive-test-the-destroyed-sample-and-the-lurking-questions-37723196.html">as with all proven cases</a>, will be destroyed.</p>
<p>This is a questionable, unnecessary practice. Although the scientific integrity of the anti-doping testing regime has greatly improved thanks to WADA, the system still has flaws. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/more-olympic-drug-testing-than-ever-but-why-do-we-bother-7993">More Olympic drug testing than ever, but why do we bother?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Former Liverpool FC player Mamadou Sakho, for instance, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/jul/24/crystal-palace-mamadou-sakho-sues-wada-for-13m-over-drugs-test-error-liverpool">is suing WADA</a> for an alleged drug-test blunder. And Chinese swimmer Sun Yang was permitted to compete at last month’s world swimming championships <a href="https://theconversation.com/snubbing-chinese-swimmer-sun-yang-ignores-the-flaws-in-the-anti-doping-system-120895">after a tribunal ruled in his favour</a> over another questionable testing procedure. </p>
<p>WADA protocol could easily be changed to mandate that all samples be maintained for ten years to allow athletes who have been punished for a positive test to later challenge that sanction, with the aid of advancing technology. </p>
<p>The strength of any justice system lies not only in how often it closes cases against athletes rightly accused of doping, but how open it is to giving athletes the opportunity to the show that, on occasion, the system got it wrong.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121123/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jack Anderson disclosure_lightbox.blurb.statement_shares </span></em></p>Retrospective drug testing is meant to help deter doping in sport, but will the public become indifferent to drug taking as more and more cheaters are caught?Jack Anderson, Professor of Sports Law, Melbourne Law School, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1210972019-07-29T02:38:05Z2019-07-29T02:38:05ZWhat is Ligandrol, the drug swimmer Shayna Jack had in her system?<p>Australian freestyle swimmer Shayna Jack tested positive to the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/science-medicine/prohibited-list-documents">banned substance</a> Ligandrol in <a href="https://theconversation.com/drafts/121097/edit#">late June</a>, before competing at the <a href="http://www.fina.org/event/18th-fina-world-championships">world swimming championships</a> in South Korea this month. </p>
<p>Jack said she <a href="https://7news.com.au/sport/swimming/shayna-jack-issues-new-statement-over-failed-drug-test-c-370056">did not knowingly take Ligandrol</a> but noted it could be found in contaminated supplements. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="InstagramEmbed" data-react-props="{"url":"https://www.instagram.com/p/B0abPFnAmwW","accessToken":"127105130696839|b4b75090c9688d81dfd245afe6052f20"}"></div></p>
<p>Ligandrol can help repair and build muscles. While it has been studied as a treatment for cancer and other conditions where patients experience muscle weakness and wastage, it is banned for use by professional athletes. </p>
<p>So how long has this drug been around, and how does it work?</p>
<h2>History of Ligandrol</h2>
<p>Ligandrol, which is also known by the development codes LGD-4033 and VK5211 and the name Anabolicum, was initially developed by the company <a href="https://www.ligand.com/">Ligand Pharmaceuticals</a> in the United States. It was <a href="https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/19/a8/9e/13c920a3dad32f/WO2009082437A2.pdf">patented in 2009</a>. </p>
<p>The results of the first human clinical trial were published in 2013, where taking <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4111291/">Ligandrol was found to increase muscle mass</a> without also putting on fat.</p>
<p>The drug rights have since been licensed to the company <a href="https://www.vikingtherapeutics.com/">Viking Therapeutics</a>. In 2018, it completed a clinical trial which examined <a href="http://ir.vikingtherapeutics.com/2018-10-01-Viking-Therapeutics-Presents-Results-from-Phase-2-Study-of-VK5211-in-Patients-Recovering-from-Hip-Fracture-in-Plenary-Oral-Presentation-at-ASBMR-2018-Annual-Meeting">Ligandrol for people aged over 65 who were recovering from a hip fracture</a>. The results showed patients who took Ligandrol significantly increased their muscle mass and could walk further than patients not on the drug.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-is-doping-wrong-anyway-63057">Why is doping wrong anyway?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The drug has also been examined for <a href="https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S2050052118301100?token=DE618D928D8A7ECDEDBA37D3BB4BBB726AFD01C434FC7DE90430B108A4883C4E0EBE70D6B84A52B46128CE84B2FB4DE6">other conditions</a>, including as a possible treatment for cancer-related weight loss, enlarged prostates, for patients who have a diminished function of testes and ovaries, and as a potential cure for breast cancer.</p>
<p>Ligandrol is still considered an experimental drug, and as such, is not approved for sale by the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA).</p>
<h2>How Ligandrol works</h2>
<p>Ligandrol is taken orally as a tablet at doses between 0.5 and 2 milligrams. </p>
<p>The drug is what pharmacists call a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30503797">selective androgen receptor modulator</a> (SARM). These drugs bind at specific sites on skeletal muscles. There, they initiate a cascade of processes which change the expression of different genes in the DNA of muscle cells. The end effect is an increase in the repair and growth of muscle.</p>
<p>This means Ligandrol works in a similar way to testosterone and anabolic steroids, although SARMs typically have fewer side effects. The typical side effects of anabolic steriods can include short-term aggression and violence, acne, and sleeping difficulties, and long-term effects such as damage to the liver and kidneys, depression, and high blood pressure.</p>
<p>In contrast, in clinical trials of patients taking Ligandrol, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4111291/">the rate of side effects was similar to those in the placebo group</a> and included headache and dry mouth. While clinical trial participants on Ligandrol did have a higher rate of throat infections, it was concluded this was not due to the drug.</p>
<p>Ligandrol <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dta.2512">can be detected for up to 21 days</a> in the urine of those who take it.</p>
<h2>In the news</h2>
<p>Because Ligandrol can potentially be used to gain an advantage in competitive sports, the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/">World Anti-Doping Agency</a> (WADA) placed the drug on its <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/science-medicine/prohibited-list-documents">prohibited list</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/snubbing-chinese-swimmer-sun-yang-ignores-the-flaws-in-the-anti-doping-system-120895">Snubbing Chinese swimmer Sun Yang ignores the flaws in the anti-doping system</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Shayna Jack’s hypothesis that it must have entered her system through contaminated supplements is not without merit. The TGA regularly bans the import of supposedly natural supplements for <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/overseas-weight-loss-products">weight loss</a>, <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/alert/liangzern-dietary-supplements">erectile dysfunction</a>, and body building because they contain prescription-only medicines. </p>
<p>While there have been no instances of body building protein or sports supplements being adulterated with Ligandrol, there are reports of some <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1541-4337.12173">dietary supplements being spiked with anabolic steroids</a> and similar drugs.</p>
<p>For safety and security, athletes should only use supplements from reputable brands bought from reliable stores in their home country. The risk of accidentally taking a banned substance is significant if an athlete buys supplements online.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121097/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Associate Professor Wheate is a Fellow and Chartered Chemist of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute and a member of the Australasian Pharmaceutical Science Association.</span></em></p>Ligandrol is used to help repair and build mass and is banned for use by professional athletes because it can give a competitive advantage.Nial Wheate, Associate Professor | Program Director, Undergraduate Pharmacy, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1208952019-07-25T06:23:46Z2019-07-25T06:23:46ZSnubbing Chinese swimmer Sun Yang ignores the flaws in the anti-doping system<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/285660/original/file-20190725-136728-10xrzt0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australian swimmer Mack Horton (left) has long criticised his rival, Sun Yang (centre), and called him a 'drug cheat' during the 2016 Olympics.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Patrick B. Kraemer/EPA</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://www.fina.org/event/18th-fina-world-championships">world swimming championships</a> currently taking place in South Korea have been attracting global attention not so much for the performances in the pool as the protests over alleged doping taking place on the podium. </p>
<p>The target of these protests has been the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Sun-Yang">Chinese swimmer Sun Yang</a>. After Sun won his fourth straight world title in the 400-metre freestyle, his arch-rival, Australian Mack Horton, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-21/mack-horton-refuses-to-share-podium-with-sun-yang-after-final/11329842">refused to take the podium</a> to receive his silver medal.</p>
<p>Days later, Britain’s Duncan Scott, who finished third to Sun in the 200-metre freestyle event, also <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-23/british-swimmer-duncan-scott-refuses-to-shake-sun-yangs-hand/11340196">snubbed</a> Sun by refusing to take part in the medal winners’ group photo and shake the Chinese swimmer’s hand. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1153666308636127233"}"></div></p>
<p>The protests have again shed light on the problems with the system set up to prevent doping in elite sport. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.smh.com.au/sport/swimming/horton-shouldn-t-have-to-shake-the-hand-of-a-man-he-doesn-t-respect-20190722-p529hw.html">Many have heaped praise</a> on Horton and Scott for protesting the alleged misdeeds of a suspected drug cheat. But it’s important to look at the facts surrounding Sun’s case before vilifying him in such a public way. </p>
<h2>The facts of the case</h2>
<p>It is true that Sun has a dubious history when it comes to drug testing. In 2014, he served a three-month <a href="https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/sun-yang-doping-case/">suspension</a> after testing positive for the banned stimulant trimetazidine, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-swimming-sun-doping-idUSKCN0J80F120141124">which he said</a> was used to treat a heart condition.</p>
<p>More recently, one of Sun’s security guards <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/23/sports/sun-yang-swimming-doping.html">used a hammer</a> to smash a vial of his blood last year to prevent a doping test on the sample. While this action would certainly raise suspicions, digging deeper into the facts of the case reveals there is much more to the story.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-is-doping-wrong-anyway-63057">Why is doping wrong anyway?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>To make sense of the controversy, one must understand the anti-doping system and the <a href="https://www.asada.gov.au/anti-doping-programmes/testing">athletes’ rights</a> within the system. Central to an effective anti-doping program is a standard set of procedures designed to protect all athletes from malicious or inappropriate testing processes. </p>
<p>Sun’s sample was collected by three doping control officers, but only one of them had the appropriate accreditation to carry out the test. Acknowledging this fact, a doping tribunal with FINA (the International Swimming Federation) <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/olympics/read-the-explosive-fina-doping-panel-report-on-sun-yang/news-story/c901280dc9d5dddae3f8e4afb59d4216">concluded earlier this year</a> that </p>
<blockquote>
<p>the blood that was initially collected (and subsequently destroyed) was not collected with proper authorisation and thus was not properly a ‘sample’. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>As a result, the tribunal concluded that the sample collection was “invalid and void”.</p>
<p>In addition, one of the doping control officers breached athlete confidentiality by taking photos and videos of Sun during the collection process. This is an important procedural breach. In accordance with <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/guidelines-blood-sample-collection">World Anti-Doping Agency</a> (WADA) procedures, an athlete is guaranteed anonymity until a sanction for a doping violation is handed down.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/testimony-vs-testing-anti-doping-is-an-imperfect-science-11345">Testimony vs testing: anti-doping is an imperfect science</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There was also only one male doping control assistant to collect a urine sample, another violation of procedures outline by WADA. The tribunal noted:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Such facts, once established, are a compelling justification for the athlete to refuse to have any further personal and sensitive contact with the DCA [doping control assistant]. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ultimately, the FINA doping tribunal determined that the appropriate procedures for collecting Sun’s samples were not followed, <a href="https://www.foxsports.com.au/more-sports/china-swim-king-sun-yang-demands-open-hearing-in-doping-case-report/news-story/7e7c0157b3ac3a8df2e68edc07be367b">clearing the way</a> for him to compete at the world championships.</p>
<h2>A flawed system, but also fair</h2>
<p>This isn’t to say that Sun is without fault. There are procedures that athletes must follow to contest a flawed or faulty sample collection – and smashing a vial of blood is clearly not an appropriate response.</p>
<p>While the world swimming governing body accepted the doping tribunal’s findings, <a href="https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1076713/wada-appeals-decision-not-to-sanction-olympic-champion-sun-to-cas">WADA has appealed</a> the finding to the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/court-of-arbitration-for-sport">Court of Arbitration for Sport</a> (CAS). If the CAS verifies the procedural problems with the sample collection, it is very likely that Sun will be exonerated. </p>
<p>Sun’s case highlights the flaws in the anti-droping regime, but it’s also important to remember that the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/the-code/world-anti-doping-code">WADA Code</a> and urine and blood sample procedures are designed to ensure all athletes are treated fairly within a standardised process. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-science-of-doping-and-how-cheating-athletes-pass-drug-tests-45602">The science of doping and how cheating athletes pass drug tests</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This system is designed not only to protect the sport from drug cheats, but also to protect athletes from being falsely accused.</p>
<p>Being called a “doping cheat” is one of the worst accusations an athlete can face. So, while Sun is not blameless, his accusers should consider the possibility that it is the anti-doping system that is actually at fault in this case. </p>
<p>Richard Ings, the former Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) chief, came to Sun’s defence for this reason. Describing himself as “no fan of Sun Yang”, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/23/sports/sun-yang-swimming-doping.html">he nonetheless said</a> </p>
<blockquote>
<p>I do believe that athletes are treading a very treacherous path if they are making allegations against other individuals that they cannot substantiate. </p>
</blockquote>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1152940972839325698"}"></div></p>
<p>No matter the sport, be it swimming or any other, the fight against doping will always exist. But only once the doping control process has determined that an athlete has violated the rules can we safely label him or her a “drug cheat”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/120895/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>G. Gregory Haff does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The protests against Sun Yang at the world championships highlight the problems with the system set up to protect the sport from doping.G. Gregory Haff, Professor of Strength and Conditioning, Edith Cowan UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1036362018-09-24T10:56:32Z2018-09-24T10:56:32ZSports anti-doping bodies won’t reform themselves, but nation states can break the deadlock<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237711/original/file-20180924-85758-14jg4se.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Anti-doping control bodies are themselves in need of control.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.visitcampnou.com">visitcampnou</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Following the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/sports/russia-doping-sochi-olympics-2014.html?_r=0">extraordinary state-sponsored doping scandal</a> of the Russian Olympic team, the international sport’s anti-doping regime faces its worst credibility crisis in decades. The latest decision of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/sep/20/wada-crisis-lifts-russia-suspension-anti-doping">reinstate the Russian Anti Doping Agency</a> and its Moscow laboratory after their multi-year suspension has again focused attention on the viability of the regime to tackle cheating in sport.</p>
<p>The international anti-doping system, recognised as having longstanding inefficiencies, has responded inadequately to the Russian scandal. The sanctioning policy, directed by the International Olympic Committee (IOC), remains ad-hoc, as seen in the inconsistent, delayed, and many believe lenient measures against Russian teams in multiple sports. The regime’s accountability structure has not changed in a way that would create incentives for the IOC and WADA as the global anti-doping regulator to do better. Under the current structure there is no forum for these organisations to be held accountable for the outcomes of their policies. </p>
<p>The recent establishment of the <a href="https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1060521/independent-testing-authority-moves-closer-to-becoming-operational-after-first-meeting">Independent Testing Authority</a>, intended to take over the role of testing athletes from (conflicted) international sporting federations, national anti-doping organisations and laboratories, is a welcome step. But it was driven by the IOC, and hardly qualifies as revolutionary change. WADA has not been given the tools to effectively combat doping, nor has sanctioning policy been sufficiently tightened to deter future cheating. In fact, despite <a href="https://theconversation.com/athletics-doping-report-should-spark-radical-rethink-on-drugs-in-sport-50376">various reform proposals</a>, the system is steering away from meaningful change towards preserving the status quo. </p>
<p>So it’s unlikely that the international anti-doping system will reform from within, and the opportunities for those outside the Olympic institutions are very limited. Even though it is a hybrid regime that features both public and private regulation, the sports governance system is dominated by one private organisation: the IOC. Is the system doomed to stagnate in spite of calls for reform? Not necessarily. One way forward is through greater government involvement. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237712/original/file-20180924-85764-bwcgmm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237712/original/file-20180924-85764-bwcgmm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237712/original/file-20180924-85764-bwcgmm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237712/original/file-20180924-85764-bwcgmm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237712/original/file-20180924-85764-bwcgmm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237712/original/file-20180924-85764-bwcgmm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/237712/original/file-20180924-85764-bwcgmm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Anti-doping laboratories have historically been accurate, but the anti-doping organisations themselves lack oversight.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bartlomiej Zborowski/EPA</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Reform-minded states lead the way</h2>
<p>While not key players in international sports governance, national governments could spur on reform in several ways.</p>
<p>First, in the absence of robust international action to police and sanction cheating, anti-doping measures can be tightened at domestic level. Doping schemes can be criminalised, and international authorities can be assisted to prosecute their perpetrators abroad. </p>
<p>A notable effort is the recently proposed <a href="https://www.csce.gov/sites/helsinkicommission.house.gov/files/RADA%20signed.pdf">Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act</a> in the US, which would criminalise doping cartels and authorise state authorities to prosecute violations committed overseas, on the grounds that they have harmed US interests. While it is not certain whether this will become law, the more countries that introduce similar measures the greater potential there is for deterring and prosecuting organised doping schemes. </p>
<p>Second, states can enhance anti-doping regulation through international legislation. The current <a href="http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/anti-doping/international-convention-against-doping-in-sport/">UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport</a> harmonises global anti-doping standards, but does not regulate the workings of the anti-doping regime. There is scope for further regulation to strengthen anti-doping tools and to introduce accountability mechanisms for Olympic organisations.</p>
<p>Given the public interest and investment in sport and the need to protect the rights of athletes, using international law to update anti-doping policy could be readily justified. Just as states managed in the late 1990s to mobilise stakeholders to <a href="https://www.iilj.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Casini-Global-hybrid-public-private-bodies-2009.pdf">create the anti-doping regime</a>, with a new global regulator, they can similarly spearhead efforts now to break the deadlock. </p>
<p>Governments can also step up their involvement in WADA. Half the seats on WADA’s governing bodies are held by state delegates (representing states as co-funders of WADA). Even though these delegates have little power over the anti-doping regime, they can still have a larger impact. For example, the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/sport/44227689">recently announced candidacy for WADA president</a> of Linda Helleland, former Norwegian sports minister and current WADA vice-president, is significant for the 2019 elections. Were Helleland elected she could be the springboard for change for reform-minded governments. While the position lacks direct powers, the WADA presidency is an agenda-setting role that sets the direction of debate. This would add to the pressure on the IOC from within.</p>
<p>So, not only has the anti-doping regime been exposed as dysfunctional, but there seems little appetite for change. Despite the role of the state in the Russian doping scandal, we would argue that more, rather than less, state involvement could be a promising way to break the deadlock. It might seem paradoxical that the anti-doping system, having been “hacked” by those within governments, might also find that governments are their saviour. But the collaborative efforts of many states is the best way to address the disruptive role of a few and “keep them honest”. The alternative – that the same governing bodies that have failed sports so far will reinvent themselves without further oversight – seems vanishingly unlikely.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103636/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The initial research for this article was conducted while Slobodan Tomic was employed by sports governance consultancy I Trust Sport.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rebecca Schmidt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Anti-doping laboratories have historically worked well, but the anti-doping organisations themselves lack oversight.Slobodan Tomic, Post-Doctoral Marie Currie Fellow, University College DublinRebecca Schmidt, Assistant Professor in Law, Dublin City UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1005852018-07-30T06:39:18Z2018-07-30T06:39:18ZThe evidence suggests Serena Williams is not being discriminated against by drug testers<p>Serena Williams is a well-known advocate for “clean sport”. For any athlete to be effective in such a role, it is important to comprehend how anti-doping programs work. Misunderstandings of the drug-testing process can lead to misperceptions about fairness between different athletes or across sports.</p>
<p>Williams has been a part of this complex and evolving anti-doping process since turning professional back in 1995. Earlier this year, however, she became frustrated with what she regards as inequities in the system. Just before the French Open in May, Williams informed her Twitter followers: </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"998640535609987073"}"></div></p>
<p>At the time, Williams had recently returned to tennis after having a baby and suffering <a href="https://www.si.com/tennis/2018/01/10/serena-williams-post-birth-complications-blood-clots">post-birth health complications</a>. Her low ranking did not reflect a decline in ability – rather, she had been out of the game. In other words, Williams was hardly a typical low-ranked player.</p>
<p>Then, just before the start of Wimbledon in late June, an article in Deadspin revealed that Williams had been tested five times by the <a href="https://www.usada.org/">US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) </a> in 2018, which was <a href="https://deadspin.com/an-anti-doping-agent-occupied-serena-williams-s-propert-1826993294">more than twice that of other top American women players</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/higher-faster-cleaner-doping-and-the-winter-olympics-22742">Higher, faster ... cleaner? Doping and the Winter Olympics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Williams responded to the report at Wimbledon by saying that she didn’t know she had been tested “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/03/sports/tennis-doping.html">three times more — in some cases five times more — than everyone else”</a>, but emphasised she was fine with this amount of testing as long as the system was being equitably applied. A spokesperson later <a href="https://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/tennis/comment-serena-williams-soiling-her-legacy-by-slamming-drug-testers-37070031.html">released a statement</a> that made clear she felt she was being unfairly singled out:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…there is absolutely no reason for this kind of invasive and targeted treatment.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Then came another USADA drug test in late July and a further tweet by Williams, this time suggesting discrimination:</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1021925651815845888"}"></div></p>
<p>A few minutes later she posted an addendum to that message: </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1021927293827080193"}"></div></p>
<h2>Targeted, rather than random</h2>
<p>A key instrument in the World Anti-Doping Agency’s monitoring arsenal is longitudinal data provided through the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/guidelines_abp_v61_2018_jul_en.pdf">Athlete Biological Passport</a>, which began in 2009. This provides an analytical framework to detect unexpected changes in blood or steroid profiles among athletes. </p>
<p>Not surprisingly, drug testing of individual athletes remains core to anti-doping efforts, but there is now a more targeted approach to monitoring, with much less emphasis on random collecting of urine or blood samples. </p>
<p>It is indeed difficult to comprehend how drug-testing is carried out in tennis these days and why testing certain athletes is prioritised over others. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-so-many-tennis-players-go-pro-even-though-few-make-it-88243">Why so many tennis players go pro even though few 'make it'</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>By definition, a decision to target someone for a drug test is discriminatory. The key question is whether it is reasonable and proportionate to do so. In other words, what are the criteria by which drug testers are more likely to seek a urine or blood sample from one athlete over another? And when is it legitimate to discriminate in this way?</p>
<p>In its 121-page <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/2016-09-30_-_isti_final_january_2017.pdf">“Testing and Investigations”</a>guide (2017), WADA advises athletes that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Target Testing is a priority because random Testing, or even weighted random Testing, does not ensure that all of the appropriate Athletes will be tested enough.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, target testing is, in part, a strategy to allocate resources where they are most needed. Importantly, though, WADA insists that a focus on particular athletes is not intended to cast suspicion on anyone individually. These athletes just happen to be in a pool of competitors that WADA considers a priority to “target test” based on one or more criteria. </p>
<p>The WADA guide lists various factors that may influence target testing by national agencies like USADA. Several appear to apply to Williams: athletes at the highest level of a sport (23 Grand Slam singles titles), athletes recovering from injury (shoulder issue), athletes in the later stages of their career (36 years old), and athletes returning to active participation after retirement (in this case, an extended break related to maternity leave).</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/229769/original/file-20180730-106511-10a0gbi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/229769/original/file-20180730-106511-10a0gbi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229769/original/file-20180730-106511-10a0gbi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229769/original/file-20180730-106511-10a0gbi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229769/original/file-20180730-106511-10a0gbi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229769/original/file-20180730-106511-10a0gbi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/229769/original/file-20180730-106511-10a0gbi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Serena and Venus after the 2017 Australian Open final, which the younger Williams won while pregnant.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lukas Coch/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Evidence suggests that testing frequency is reasonable</h2>
<p>These factors suggest that USADA was target testing Williams in accordance with WADA standards. </p>
<p>While Williams has been <a href="https://www.usada.org/testing/results/athlete-test-history/">tested more</a> in 2018 than other top female players, including her sister Venus Williams (twice), Madison Keys (twice), and Sloane Stephens (once), a look back at the testing numbers in previous years is useful.</p>
<p>If we focus specifically on the Williams sisters, they were barely tested by USADA from 2001 (when records were provided to the public) to 2012, but that was also true for the majority of US tennis players. From 2013 onward, USADA became much more active in drug testing tennis players: over the next five years, Serena was tested 31 times and Venus 34 times. </p>
<p>Drug testing is not only the preserve of USADA. According to <a href="https://www.itftennis.com/media/281704/281704.pdf">drug-testing data</a> from the International Tennis Federation, Williams was tested 1-3 times in-competition (IC) and 1-3 times out-of-competition (OOC) through the ITF’s anti-doping program last year. This modest volume reflects the fact that she played just two tournaments and then took time off to have a baby. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-is-doping-wrong-anyway-63057">Why is doping wrong anyway?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The year 2016 <a href="https://www.itftennis.com/media/255005/255005.pdf">provides</a> a more reliable gauge: in that year, the ITF program tested Williams 4-6 times IC and 7+ times OOC, the same ratio as her sister. Among other highly ranked US players, Keys and CoCo Vandeweghe were tested 7+ times IC and 7+ times OOC, while Stephens was tested 4-6 times IC and 7+ times OOC.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.itftennis.com/media/222641/222641.pdf">The 2015 ITF testing numbers</a> and <a href="https://www.itftennis.com/media/199333/199333.pdf">2014 numbers</a> are much the same.</p>
<p>There is, in short, no evidence that Williams is being unfairly targeted by drug testers. Her perception that she is being discriminated against appears to stem from a lack of awareness about publicly available information on who has been tested by different anti-doping organisations. </p>
<p>This misunderstanding is unfortunate, because Williams has used her enormous public profile to clumsily question the integrity of those tasked with the role of monitoring “clean sport”. </p>
<p>Drug testing is hardly a panacea for doping in sports, but if athletes wish to question why they have been targeted for biological samples, social media is hardly conducive to generating expert responses.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100585/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daryl Adair does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>By using her public profile to suggest bias in drug-testing, Williams is calling into question the integrity of those tasked with the role of monitoring ‘clean sport’.Daryl Adair, Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/931062018-03-12T10:58:09Z2018-03-12T10:58:09ZThree radical steps to derail doping in elite sport<p>Elite British cycling outfit Team Sky “crossed an ethical line” by giving medicines to squad members which could be used to enhance performance, according to the <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcumeds/366/366.pdf">new UK parliamentary committee report</a> into doping in British cycling and athletics. </p>
<p>Though the report makes clear that the drug use was within <a href="https://www.usada.org/about/world-anti-doping-code/">global anti-doping rules</a>, it devotes much attention to eight-times cycling medallist Bradley Wiggins and several occasions on which he took medicines before major races – he and Team Sky strenuously deny any wrongdoing. </p>
<p>Champion distance runner Mo Farah is also named. The report heavily criticises his doctor, Robin Chakraverty, for not recording the dose size of a restricted substance he injected into the athlete before the London Marathon in 2014 – Farah and Chakraverty insist they were within the rules. The report refers to “acute failures” in both British cycling and athletics around medicine procedures that urgently need addressed. </p>
<p>It amounts to one more doping controversy for elite international sport – barely two weeks after several Russian athletes were <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/winter-olympics/43186278">caught cheating</a> at the Winter Olympics. It threatens to drag cycling even further through the mud, all the worse because British cycling’s apparent anti-doping respectability always seemed central to Team Sky’s success. </p>
<p>The global system for preventing doping is not working properly and needs reform. For defenders and critics alike, here are three radical options:</p>
<h2>1. More of the same, but better</h2>
<p>Currently <a href="https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1048181/anti-doping-claimed-to-cost-sport-300-million-each-year">there are</a> around 300,000 drug tests a year, <a href="https://www.asada.gov.au/about-asada/finance/fees">costing</a> approximately £700-£1,000 each. They <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/2016_anti-doping_testing_figures.pdf">catch less than</a> 2% of doping, much of it either recreational or innocuous. </p>
<p>It is <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-017-0792-1">possible that</a> up to 50% of athletes have doped. We need substantially more funding for more frequent tests to make participants really fear being caught. Obviously this would only address detectable drugs and not substances which tests cannot yet find, but this would be an improvement. </p>
<p>To achieve this, you could pay athletes less money. Rewards vary hugely of course, but for instance the winner of the Tour de France receives €500,000 in prize money – never mind the sponsorship opportunities. Cutting incomes would reduce the incentive to dope and free up cash for more testing. It would also address the problem in cycling, where the richest riders can afford the best doping doctors. </p>
<p>Second, reduce the list of banned substances to priority substances that either have the highest health risk or most potently enhance performance. Keep steroids on the list, for example, but take off cannabis. Third, raise money from sponsors and major event organisers and governments to pay for more testing.</p>
<h2>2. Monitor suppliers</h2>
<p>Despite the limited testing, one paradox with the current system is that it takes an extreme approach to keeping athletes under surveillance. Those on the registered testing pool must tell the authorities where they will be for at least an hour every day. </p>
<p>All athletes can be tested randomly at events, training facilities, their house or on holiday. When they are approached for a test, a drug control officer needs to chaperone them until they are ready to urinate. At that moment, the officer accompanies them to the bathroom to ensure the urine leaves the body and is not swapped for a prepared sample. </p>
<p>This unethical intrusion clearly does not work. Too much time and money is wasted on locating and observing athletes with little or no risk of doping. It makes clean athletes nervous that they have inadvertently used a doping substance, or that there might be a problem with the handling or laboratory processes. </p>
<p>One alternative option might be to spend less time on athletes and more on doctors and coaches. After all, it is very likely that they will be the conduit to doping. The recent history of cycling shows a small coterie of <a href="http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/lance-armstrong-doping-doctor-given-18-month-prison-sentence-323284">doctors</a> whose doping practices could have been stopped if the right systems had been in place. </p>
<p>In a more rigorous system, these personnel would be regularly checked, compelled to undertake anti-doping education, and face career-threatening sanctions if an athlete reported them to the authorities. </p>
<h2>3. Independent scrutiny</h2>
<p>Global anti-doping practices are overseen by the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org">World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)</a>, but there is no watchdog or auditor to ensure policies are fair, just and properly implemented. Governments could collectively fund such an agency. A key role would be to review anti-doping in all countries and sports to detect and prevent corruption of the testing system. </p>
<p>Perhaps each sport would even have its own agency. If that had been in place for cycling, some of the evidence released by the new UK parliamentary committee report would have been collected and WADA might have had a more hands-on role than it has had. </p>
<p>The new watchdog would also become a forum for whistleblowers and critics with new ideas for anti-doping. It would be independent enough to prevent the sorts of organisational and political conflicts of interest that <a href="http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/tackling-doping-sport-removal-conflicts-interest-central/">have plagued</a> the Olympics, cycling, football and other sports. </p>
<p>Another progressive step would be to support athletes <a href="https://www.balls.ie/newsnow/new-documentary-shines-light-irish-sprinters-controversial-doping-conviction-382087">who appeal</a> against high or unjust sanctions. Currently, it’s a long and expensive process in which they are very unlikely to succeed. This would give them more trust in the system, and make them more likely to proactively support it. </p>
<p>Which of these three options would I choose? I lean towards less surveillance of and more protection for athletes – shifting more of the testing burden to doctors and other support staff. </p>
<p>The risk is that less testing of athletes could lead to more doping, so there may be a balance to be struck. Meanwhile, a global doping watchdog enforcing the kind of standards that British procedures have failed to meet might have meant that athletes like Wiggins and Farah would not have found themselves under suspicion. </p>
<p>We might never be able to achieve “clean sport”. But if we can put core values at the heart of change and accept that incremental progress is better than nothing, options like the ones I’ve laid down might mitigate the current failings.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93106/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Dimeo has previously had funding from the British Academy, Wellcome Trust, Fulbright Commission and WADA, but not related to this article.</span></em></p>Doping controversy around British cycling and athletics is the latest sign that sports authorities need to do something drastic.Paul Dimeo, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/703652016-12-16T16:55:52Z2016-12-16T16:55:52ZFive questions for cycling chief Dave Brailsford<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150317/original/image-20161215-26027-15vbt5v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=73%2C202%2C1664%2C1045&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/cfeatherstone/8640434092/in/photolist-eawu2A-bxCkGb-AYRkj6-A1YKpK-AjUtud-AXSiCP-AjUb6K-AVz7DG-A1QDfY-8vAsxM-ffj5zP-ffj5yT-iFQYiv-iFSHDA-aqLt3U-8PVXWa-8PZ9yJ-8PZ5xf-bxCohf-bLwYxv-bLwXQH-bxCnbh-bxChEJ-bxCmL9-bLwZsX-bLx69Z-bxCkVE-bLwYiF-bxCnpb-bLx4ui-bxChrs-bxCjEw-bLx1en-bLwXbR-bxCg5U-bLx6nk-bxCmjA-bxCnNU-bxCkhY-bLwZV4-bLx32r-bxCi7N-bLwYMp-bxCitd-bLx5ac-bxCjr7-bxCjS9-bxCk3S-bLx3FZ-ADzbkT">@ruby_roubaix/Flickr</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In his role as boss of professional cycling team Team Sky and former performance director for British Cycling, Dave Brailsford has enjoyed extraordinary success. His oversight started the ball rolling on an impressive haul of Olympic medals for Team GB over three tournaments, while Chris Froome and Bradley Wiggins <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/36879128">have delivered four victories since 2012</a> in the pro-sport’s prestige event, the Tour de France.</p>
<p>Brailsford, who was knighted in 2013, <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/culture-media-and-sport-committee/">will give evidence</a> on Dec 19 before a British parliamentary select committee looking at doping in sport. His appearance involves no accusation that he ever allowed doping in his teams. However, he will face scrutiny over the fact that some highly successful riders have used medical products that could enhance their performance under the Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) system. </p>
<p>This issue of TUEs was brought to the fore after athletes’ private medical records, kept by anti-doping agencies, were <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/21/fancy-bears-leaks-athletes-doping-russia-cyber-hackers">hacked by a group called the Fancy Bears and publicised</a>, a move that prompted some athletes to justify their <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2016/09/13/us-superstars-serena-and-venus-williams-and-simone-biles-given-d/">use of medical products</a> as well as raising questions about the <a href="http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/fancy-bears-target-nados/">motivation behind the hack</a>. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.damiancollins.com/">Damian Collins</a>, chair of the Culture Media and Sport Select Committee, said <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/10/27/mps-want-answers-about-sir-bradley-wigginss-mystery-medical-parc/">MPs would focus attention</a> on “the ethics of the use of TUEs and the way this is policed by British Cycling”.</p>
<h2>Grey area</h2>
<p>Obtaining a TUE is far from unusual. Many elite athletes require medications that are banned under the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/what-we-do/the-code">World Anti-Doping Code</a>. If a doctor prescribes the drug for an identifiable condition, then it is perfectly acceptable. In that sense, there is no accusation that elite British riders and their doctors broke any rules, as confirmed by the <a href="http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/no-rules-broken-and-no-action-to-follow-in-wiggins-tue-case-says-cookson/">head of the sport’s governing body, Brian Cookson</a>.</p>
<p>However, the TUE application process could be <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/37382825">open to abuse</a> if an unscrupulous doctor and coach decide, for example, that an athlete might benefit from “inventing” an illness to obtain medical drugs. These might include painkillers designed to alleviate the stress on the body during competition, stimulants that give a short-term boost to the central nervous system, and asthma inhalers that improve air flow. There is no suggestion that this has happened at British Cycling or at Team Sky, but it is clearly a grey area for anti-doping. </p>
<p>Brailsford has been a high-profile campaigner against doping – he instituted a policy that no-one with a doping record be allowed in his organisations. However, he <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-3841622/Sir-Dave-Brailsford-admits-errors-Team-Sky-package-questions-denies-allegations-wrongdoing.html">drew criticism</a> for his less than forthcoming response to controversy surrounding a mystery package allegedly delivered to Team Sky in June 2011, which is currently the subject of a UK Anti-Doping investigation.</p>
<h2>Key questions</h2>
<p>Ahead of Brailsford’s select committee appearance, I propose five key questions that MPs should put to him:</p>
<p><strong>1.</strong> A great deal of attention has been focused on Wiggins’ use of drugs for allergies and asthma under a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE). There is nothing illegal in this. But banned drug triamcinolone (Kenalog), a synthetic corticosteroid used to treat allergies, was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/sep/30/bradley-wiggins-full-story-asthma-allergies-tues">used by Wiggins</a> under a TUE prior to his Tour de France campaigns in 2011 and 2012, and his Giro d’Italia ride in 2013.</p>
<p>If there was no breaking of any rules, why wasn’t this a matter of public record much earlier? And did his use of this medicine so close to competition have an effect?</p>
<p><strong>2.</strong> Brailsford has often spoken about the philosophy of marginal gains, whether <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34247629">those be achieved</a> through diet, technology, training methods, pre-emptive healthcare or even sleeping arrangements. Does the legal use of medicines that have a performance-enhancing effect also count towards marginal gains and would such an approach fit with WADA’s idea of the “<a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2013-02/the-spirit-of-sport-and-anti-doping-policy-an-ideal-worth-fighting-for">spirit of sport</a>”?</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gBY3q8TqoXY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p><strong>3.</strong> British cycling coach Simon Cope has said that he delivered a package in June 2011 ahead of the Criterium du Dauphiné stage race, flying in to hand this over to the team doctor. The circumstances surrounding this have been the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/oct/12/british-cycling-coach-pacackge-team-sky">subject of some debate</a> and Brailsford has admitted he could have handled the story better. The subject is under investigation by UK Anti-Doping and Team Sky said it is “confident” <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/oct/08/cycling-team-sky-bradley-wiggins">there was no wrongdoing</a>. Can Brailsford reveal what was in the package and why the contents have not already been explained?</p>
<p><strong>4.</strong> <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/37589241">Claims were made</a> in October that at the 2012 road world championships, Team GB riders used the legal but controversial painkiller tramadol. The cyclist Jonathan Tiernan-Locke alleged that the drug was “<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/10/10/sir-bradley-wiggins-tues-ethically-wrong-according-to-team-sky-t/">freely offered</a>”. Tramadol is not banned in sport but it can cause <a href="http://drugabuse.com/library/the-effects-of-tramadol-use/">nausea, dizziness and drowsiness</a> – and it has been suggested that the latter might be a factor in crashes. </p>
<p>While tramadol is legal, it is a highly powerful drug and is the subject of an an investigation by the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/10/19/olympic-chiefs-to-examine-painkiller-in-team-sky-controversy/">International Olympic Committee</a>. Does Tiernan-Locke’s claim have any substance? </p>
<p><strong>5.</strong> Brailsford has a reputation for promoting an anti-doping culture. However, Team Sky has refused to join the pro-active <a href="https://www.mpcc.fr/index.php/en/mpcc-uk">Movement for Credible Cycling (MPCC)</a> whose requirements are more rigorous than WADA’s and which has campaigned to have tramadol banned. Can he explain why they took this position towards an organisation which, on the face of it, is aligned with a strong anti-doping stance?</p>
<p>These questions can be answered. It could well be said that no rules have been broken, however, trust is gained through transparency and honesty – and it is far from clear why important aspects of this business have not been publicly resolved. The select committee has an opportunity to seek that transparency; to find out all the drugs that team doctors have ordered, match them to TUEs, and match them to specific races. The outcomes of this research might bring a more definitive outcome to a sorry saga.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70365/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Dimeo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Team Sky boss is due to give evidence to MP’s at parliament. Here’s what they should ask him.Paul Dimeo, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/675672016-10-28T06:27:17Z2016-10-28T06:27:17Z‘Juju’ and ‘jars’: how African athletes challenge Western notions of doping<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142976/original/image-20161024-28376-1veevxs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Young footballers dream of places far away and are ready to migrate at all costs. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Uroš Kovač</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has expanded the power of World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), making it a central authority in the “<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/09/sports/olympics/international-olympic-committee-antidoping-wada.html?_r=0">fight against cheating</a>”. WADA <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/general-anti-doping-information/at-a-glance-about-anti-doping">defines doping</a> as the use of prohibited substances and methods designed to enhance athletic performance. </p>
<p>But are prohibited substances defined only by their chemical makeup? Not according to West African athletes, many of whom take spiritual methods to enhance their performances very seriously.</p>
<p>Football in West Africa is often associated with <a href="http://www.upress.virginia.edu/title/2806">witchcraft</a>. In Nigeria and Cameroon, these practices are referred to as “jars” or “<a href="https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/12906">juju</a>”. Athletes use them to enhance their performance in ways that are similar to doping as WADA defines it, and even to sabotage opponents. The key to these practices, however, is not the chemical content of the substances, but the spiritual powers they carry.</p>
<h2>Spiritual doping</h2>
<p>According to Cameroonian footballers among whom <a href="http://global-sport.eu/football-dreams-pentecostalism-and-migration-in-southwest-cameroon">I conducted my fieldwork</a>, the spiritual world is superimposed on the material world, and actions in the former have direct and far-reaching consequences on the latter. </p>
<p>In West Africa, accusations of spiritual performance-enhancing practices can be much more serious than those involving materials and chemicals.</p>
<p>The concept of “jars” is difficult to pin down, largely because it is shrouded in secrecy and is constantly changing. Information about these practices can be extracted principally from rumours and accusations. Stories allude to small pieces of particular herbs, pieces of tree bark, or small threads that the players acquire from healers who imbue them with supernatural powers.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142978/original/image-20161024-28382-1at75is.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142978/original/image-20161024-28382-1at75is.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142978/original/image-20161024-28382-1at75is.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142978/original/image-20161024-28382-1at75is.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142978/original/image-20161024-28382-1at75is.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142978/original/image-20161024-28382-1at75is.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142978/original/image-20161024-28382-1at75is.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A boot reading ‘Holy Trinity’ shows how young footballers try to tap the power of the Holy Spirit to enhance their performance.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Photo courtesy Uroš Kovač.</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Aware of the fact that Cameroonian referees would sanction them if they were caught, the footballers hide them under their shin guards, in their boots, or in the rubber band sockets of their shorts. Others are concoctions of herbs prepared by healers that footballers drink, or wash their face, hands or feet in.</p>
<p>These objects and herbs are performance enhancers and allow the players to accomplish miraculous feats on the field. When some FIFA officials have <a href="http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/soccer/2010-02-21-1447701226_x.htm">expressed concerns</a> about these supposed African forms of doping, they have been suspicious of their chemical content, but neglected their more important spiritual properties.</p>
<p>One could simply discount “jars” as a psychological delusion or as superstition. But the fact that athletes regularly scrutinise and accuse other players of using it indicates that it means much more. When Cameroonian footballers demonstrate extraordinary skills on the field, their opponents and even teammates closely scrutinise them for any evidence of “jars”. </p>
<p>One player told me that, during a match, his opponents forced him to strip down to his underpants in the middle of the field, insisting that he was hiding a spiritual token. Users have also been detected because of the distinct smell of the potions they wash in. </p>
<p>Just as with doping, most footballers in Cameroon are very critical of the use of “jars”, arguing that athletes should do away with it once and for all.</p>
<h2>Age tampering</h2>
<p>Another form of “cheating”, a public secret in the world of international football, is players <a href="http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/26174252">lying about their age</a>. Athletes from different parts of the world produce documents to their future clubs that state they are no older than 19 years of age. </p>
<p>In Cameroon, preparation for trials in European football clubs often involves finding ways to obtain documents that show the player to be younger than he actually is.</p>
<p>While the football clubs and sporting bodies seek to catch and sanction the players, West African footballers do not consider the practice as cheating. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142977/original/image-20161024-28414-v5og8l.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/142977/original/image-20161024-28414-v5og8l.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142977/original/image-20161024-28414-v5og8l.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142977/original/image-20161024-28414-v5og8l.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142977/original/image-20161024-28414-v5og8l.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142977/original/image-20161024-28414-v5og8l.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/142977/original/image-20161024-28414-v5og8l.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Footballers in West Africa detest their poor training conditions, and lack of sporting infrastructure.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Photo courtesy Uroš Kovač.</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Athletes tamper with their age as a way of equalising the playing field. They attempt to compensate for the fact that aspiring athletes in the Global North, who from a young age have better access to good sports infrastructure and equipment, are in a privileged position to transform their athletic talent into a long-term career. </p>
<p>While international sporting bodies talk about athletes needing to take individual responsibility for different forms of “cheating”, young African footballers address large-scale power relations that they see as being turned against them.</p>
<p>By adjusting their age, the footballers challenge the moral high ground on which international sports institutions claim to stand, and demonstrate how “cheating” is not always cheating, but instead a challenge to unequal power relations.</p>
<h2>What is ‘cheating’ and who defines it?</h2>
<p>WADA’s anti-doping strategies are based on the separation of the body and the mind, the biological and the psychological, the physical and the spiritual. It consistently prioritises the physical, assuming that being a “clean” athlete means being free from prohibited chemicals. </p>
<p>While the kind of regulation that WADA seeks to apply on a global level is useful, it is at odds with the ideas of West African athletes, for whom the spiritual and the physical are deeply entangled.</p>
<p>Is “jars” a form of doping that WADA should attempt to regulate then? Should international sporting bodies clamp down on footballers’ age tampering? Absolutely not. </p>
<p>The importance of spirituality in sport is <a href="http://www.christianpost.com/news/tim-tebow-brings-in-a-new-wave-of-christian-athleticism-58871/">not</a> <a href="http://www.christianpost.com/news/i-belong-to-jesus-soccer-superstar-kaka-is-okay-being-second-if-121440/">exclusive</a> to Africa. The Thai owner of Leicester City famously <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/30/leicester-citys-good-karma-the-buddhist-monks-behind-the-foxes-d/">flew buddhist monks in from Thailand</a> to bless the players during the team’s miraculous 2015-2016 season. </p>
<p>The African game gives us a different insight into what “performance-enhancing” and “cheating” really mean. The shift in perspective allows us to avoid taking WADA’s and the IOC’s definitions for granted and stop regarding them as a universal truth. </p>
<p>Instead, we should see them for what they are – hegemonic notions constructed in a certain historical period, developed from a specific philosophical standpoint, and applied from a position of power.</p>
<p><em>This piece was written in collaboration with the <a href="http://global-sport.eu">GLOBALSPORT</a> team, a research project funded by the European Research Council.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/67567/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Uroš Kovač receives funding from the European Research Council.</span></em></p>What do the concepts like ‘cheating’ and ‘performance enhancing’ mean to young African footballers?Uroš Kovač, Doctoral student in Anthropology, University of AmsterdamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/654892016-09-15T13:06:04Z2016-09-15T13:06:04ZBlack and white anti-doping fight nears stalemate – here’s how to break it<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137931/original/image-20160915-30600-y3wtvw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=6%2C0%2C2041%2C1223&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/stopherjones/10112263173/in/photolist-gpzZx4-cTaJz1-d3meoQ-9DGVZJ-g6PoQF-e1vgCC-9V2Fgj-p28upM-6cRmvX-CgqbCR-dZiq1L-e1pDFg-9UYrbi-e1vf73-5ArQbY-cYDZqq-g6PRrL-9DHsM4-9UYW7e-5ABjKF-eSx1Uw-6EZwPq-c6CU7j-oZ6CY7-8y1fdt-e1pE2R-nqxymx-oKh3Xf-cez8xy-e1pAaK-9Vmbh3-p2Jkz9-9ViqEX-5Ao27P-gpzp7H-9cmyLT-e1vhpy-pctrc5-cYEhsJ-9V2LYh-4J8UfC-2A1d6Y-p2uQCB-4fr8L6-d3mhA3-grEjT8-9WF1pH-dPUWSC-CFjX-6y2gJY">Chris Jones/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The world of anti doping in sport sometimes feels like a battle between opposing forces on the same side. The debate has become polarised between those advocating zero tolerance and those who want to accept performance enhancement as a reality to be managed.</p>
<p>The latest leak claiming to reveal the banned substances cleared by sporting authorities for use on medical grounds <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/sep/15/chris-froome-and-bradley-wiggins-targeted-in-wada-hacking-scandal">by top athletes</a> might offer us one route to a middle way in all this. Perhaps total transparency about these so-called therapeutic use exemptions (TUEs) might work?</p>
<p>The past few months have witnessed a glut of scandals reminiscent of the crises of the 1990s that led to the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/who-we-are">creation of the World Anti Doping Authority (WADA)</a> in 1999. The increasing suspicion is that doping cannot be controlled and the organisations in charge have too many conflicts and vested interests. </p>
<p>The leaked information on alleged TUEs only serves to highlight how common it is for athletes and their doctors to request drugs that might enhance performance or aid recovery on the basis of medical conditions. The idealised level playing field is still a myth. There are of course entirely legitimate reasons for competitors to take the treatments they need and to get clearance to do so. No individual athlete can be assumed to have done anything wrong and there is no suggestion of that in the new leak. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137933/original/image-20160915-30619-o0kh2z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137933/original/image-20160915-30619-o0kh2z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137933/original/image-20160915-30619-o0kh2z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137933/original/image-20160915-30619-o0kh2z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137933/original/image-20160915-30619-o0kh2z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137933/original/image-20160915-30619-o0kh2z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137933/original/image-20160915-30619-o0kh2z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137933/original/image-20160915-30619-o0kh2z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Optimising the human.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-423492955/stock-photo-doctor-oversees-the-endurance-test-of-athlete.html?src=jOUuHsQOX7uBwKAqPP1U9Q-1-75">Photographee.eu/Flickr</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, the TUE system could be gamed by opportunistic and unscrupulous teams or athletes as a means to “legally” dope. A less obvious, but still urgent problem, faces those athletes who haven’t had enough anti-doping education or do not have sports medicine support who test positive for drugs they simply did not know were banned. The system can be irrationally punitive. </p>
<h2>Battle lines</h2>
<p>Anti-doping’s two schools of thought make a solution sometimes look impossible. First, we have the claims that sport should be clean and that we need a tougher regime in order to get to that outcome. We might define this as a law and order mentality. Supporters argue that deterrence only comes from meaningful sanctions. That might include <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/21/sport/russia-doping-ban-rio-2016-olympic-games/">banning whole countries</a> or sports from international competitions, or even criminalisation using the justice system to imprison those who commit doping “crimes”. In this view, the global leaders simply need to exercise more power.</p>
<p>Yet this does not really tackle the embedded attitudes that lead to doping. Sport is an opportunity for financial gain: for athletes, coaches, doctors, administrators. The motivational impulses point towards the search for performance enhancement, both legal and illegal. This is the nature of sport in a commercialised world. It does not solve the problem of athletes being able to beat the system through micro-dosing, avoiding the testers, using new and undetectable drugs, and the corrupt behaviour of officials in covering up positives. Nor does it address the potential abuse of the TUE process.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137935/original/image-20160915-30617-gmz9dz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137935/original/image-20160915-30617-gmz9dz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137935/original/image-20160915-30617-gmz9dz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137935/original/image-20160915-30617-gmz9dz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137935/original/image-20160915-30617-gmz9dz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137935/original/image-20160915-30617-gmz9dz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137935/original/image-20160915-30617-gmz9dz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137935/original/image-20160915-30617-gmz9dz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Testing times.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/azso/3610705965/in/photolist-6v4P68-dgLicC-h65GBk-8KjLfJ-4TLNLP-87DbTP-9NJhg3-9NJdLE-9NJfwE-aPr7pM-aPrxkv-aPrRZz-aPrpt4-aPrvPV-nCk13Q-eVpkrD-aPrdVt-aPrtLr-aPrnKB-aPruC6-aPrm6t-aProDk-aPrENe-aPrfsM-aPrmX6-fSmJne-PJSDX-aPreAR-66w5A6-aPrNyF-aPrLNv-aPrsGT-aPrrMR-aPrgdp-aPrSWg-aPrCg6-aPrqBT-aPrhvZ-aPrJ8z-aPrQuF-aPrBjH-aPrict-aPrJZv-aPrKSt-aPrFST-aPrGZ4-aPriTD-aPrDF2-bWNx49-aPrgTc">Zsolt Andrasi/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The second and opposing school of thought is that we should redefine clean sport and accept that performance enhancement is a part of sport. This includes arguments that all drugs should be allowed, and that genetic manipulation should be, too. A lighter version of the same position is that athletes can use drugs under medical supervision.</p>
<h2>Middle lane</h2>
<p>Neither of these are good solutions. An absolutist approach leads to unintended consequences: punishments handed out to athletes who are innocent or who have done very little wrong. It requires huge investment and excessive surveillance of all athletes. It can also lead to sanctions of non-elite athletes as doping controls get extended into localised competitions. Such athletes often don’t have enough anti-doping education but it is highly questionable if the rules for professionals should be imposed on amateurs. Mounting an appeal is costly and difficult under <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/questions-answers/strict-liability-in-anti-doping">the strict liability rule</a>. In other words, we risk unfair and disproportionate outcomes. </p>
<p>However, the liberalisation approach is quite simply not palatable for sports organisations, sponsors, and the media. The public perception seems to be that sport should be drug-free. Any loosening on the grip of anti-doping provokes fears that all athletes will feel compelled to dope, including young people just at the beginning of their careers. It is also seen as undermining the health and ethical virtues of sport. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137938/original/image-20160915-30617-24koqd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137938/original/image-20160915-30617-24koqd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/137938/original/image-20160915-30617-24koqd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137938/original/image-20160915-30617-24koqd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137938/original/image-20160915-30617-24koqd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137938/original/image-20160915-30617-24koqd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137938/original/image-20160915-30617-24koqd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/137938/original/image-20160915-30617-24koqd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Harsh treatment.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/124963567@N02/14334518830/in/photolist-nQGa3o-kDwgsV-kDzBmV-kDDmom-8xJcMB-dEQpbD-kDsf5c-akG7b9-bzLWBv-KM8Kp-ahaDwr-pZJ8XG-5tenR9-kDwHyR-kDtRkD-6jvhYG-4X3s2e-kDDft5-kD8Kc7-8rt4dW-nwzu2Y-nQRrDz-6Z6Uhq-9Ey5wZ-9Ey5va-bUo4ZY-fjGUT2-kDvrCr-9e3XKn-5NsxX1-5NsxEC-acdFXt-s8oBcu-5NsxuS-pFA4yP-acfcTZ-5ihecv-9EbLp7-9BsvEX-5JGsS-9mU5Y9-a1WZDm-in25L-bcQMYT-5PZPcz-q2zgAK-dyWeiJ-gfVgcQ-85VtnY-8EqjDk">houstondwiPhotos mp/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Frankly, the debate is so polarised that it might be tempting to give up. But we need some some sense of rationality and perspective to <a href="https://theconversation.com/seven-steps-to-reboot-the-fight-against-doping-in-sport-61587">map out a middle ground</a>. This might emphasise integrity in sporting cultures, put the athlete at the centre of the policy process, and direct resources to the most important doping issues. Yet, there is no platform for this debate, and no mechanism for re-orienting the direction of travel WADA has pursued since it was formed. The only real solution is a multi-stakeholder, open and transparent debate that comes to conclusions that WADA is obliged to accept and deliver. </p>
<p>The extensive debate on TUEs which this week’s news will reignite might accidentally provide a focal point for new options. If it was more transparent, we would know the drugs athletes used and why. Doctors and coaches would be made more accountable for the requests they make. Sports organisations would have more knowledge and control over what was being used. </p>
<p>Of course, the significant challenge is that this approach adds another layer to the already extensive surveillance of athletes: their bodies would be more public, and their privacy diminished further. However, the current crisis over TUEs neatly symbolises the ambivalences, problems and challenges facing WADA, as they aim to keep sport clean in an world that increasingly normalises medical drug use and enhancement therapies. Sport might be different to the rest of society, but athletes want to win and sometimes will use any method available to them. This unwinnable war needs a fresh approach.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/65489/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Dimeo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A new Russian hack has claimed to reveal the details of so-called therapeutic use exemptions. But could transparency in this area be a benchmark for the fight against drugs in sport?Paul Dimeo, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/627912016-07-26T19:53:22Z2016-07-26T19:53:22ZHow the Olympic cult of performance breeds doping<p>The Rio Olympics haven’t even opened yet and already athletes are embroiled in multiple cases of alleged doping, including competitors from <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/18/wada-report-russia-sochi-winter-olympics">Russia</a> and suspicions about others from several <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/13/kenya-escapes-rio-olympics-ban-doping-iaaf">African</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/oct/23/jamaica-olympics-threat-exclusion-drug-tests">Caribbean</a> countries. </p>
<p>This is nothing new – doping rumours and scandals have long been part of sporting competitions. In the 1904 Games, held in St Louis, US marathoner Thomas Hicks probably wouldn’t have won without <a href="http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-1904-olympic-marathon-may-have-been-the-strangest-ever-14910747/">liberal doses of strychnine</a> during the race. </p>
<p>The first proven case of doping dates to the <a href="http://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/athletes/li/hans-gunnar-liljenwall-1.html">1968 Mexico City Games</a>. Since then, significant advances have been made in the fight against doping, yet it shows no sign of receding. </p>
<p>How can we explain the persistence of doping in spite of concerted efforts to eradicate it? To understand this, we must explore what leads to doping and ask if current anti-doping efforts truly attack the root of the problem.</p>
<h2>Ever more tests</h2>
<p>The current fight against doping primarily consists of identifying athletes who use illicit performance-enhancing substances, and punishing them and their entourages – coaches, and technical and medical staff – if they are accomplices. </p>
<p>This policy of control is complemented by efforts to educate athletes, especially young people, about sports ethics and the health dangers of doping. But these prevention efforts remain diffuse and inconspicuous, while the repressive component, which targets the most successful athletes, is continuously strengthened.</p>
<p>Anti-doping efforts advanced significantly in 1999, when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) set up the independent <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/">World Anti-Doping Agency</a> (WADA). In 2004, a <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/what-we-do/the-code">World Anti-Doping Code</a> was adopted. </p>
<p>The code sets out standards in a range of areas: tests and laboratory procedures, the list of prohibited substances and methods, authorisations for therapeutic purposes, and so on. Since 2005, athletes have been required to provide information on their whereabouts to the centralised <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/adams">ADAMS database</a> so that they are permanently accessible to potential controls. </p>
<p><figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/131066/original/image-20160719-13851-13g0fqf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/131066/original/image-20160719-13851-13g0fqf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131066/original/image-20160719-13851-13g0fqf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131066/original/image-20160719-13851-13g0fqf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131066/original/image-20160719-13851-13g0fqf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131066/original/image-20160719-13851-13g0fqf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131066/original/image-20160719-13851-13g0fqf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">At the 2012 Olympic Games in London, 50% of participating athletes were tested.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/amsr1/7693753278/in/photolist-cHSuNA-cENn2f-cE76Ss-cQMhLs-cEzNtu-cLjGLU-cLk6qs-cLjvEb-cLjP9N-cR4gUQ-cLjQpq-cLjR3w-cLjKh1-cLjPKJ-cLk2rs-cLjHn5-cLjAtS-cLjEkC-cR4itf-cLjZuL-cLk1P9-cHSFF3-9KYoa-cHSUFd-bFaekL-cLjwfj-cHSHCm-cHSeRb-">Alistair Ross/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure></p>
<p>Tests are constantly being improved, allowing them to detect new substances or delivery methods. Urine and blood samples are stored to allow for <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/27/olympics-23-athletes-caught-out-london-2012-drug-retests">retrospective testing</a> using methods that didn’t exist when samples were originally taken.</p>
<h2>The doping race</h2>
<p>Currently, more than <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/laboratories/anti-doping-testing-figures">200,000 samples</a> are analysed each year under the auspices of WADA, of which approximately 1% are positive. </p>
<p>Since the introduction of drug tests, positive cases have been detected at every Olympics except the 1980 Moscow Olympics – an irony given they’ve been referred to as the <a href="https://books.google.fr/books?id=c4oQAR2G4OgC&pg=PA99&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false">“Chemists’ Games”</a>, when evidence of extensive state-sponsored doping was discovered after the fall of the Iron Curtain. </p>
<p>Monitoring of athletes has become tighter. During the 2012 London Olympics, more than half were tested and all were warned that controllers could burst into their rooms at any time.</p>
<p><figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/131218/original/image-20160720-31156-s0yqn4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/131218/original/image-20160720-31156-s0yqn4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=893&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131218/original/image-20160720-31156-s0yqn4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=893&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131218/original/image-20160720-31156-s0yqn4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=893&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131218/original/image-20160720-31156-s0yqn4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1122&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131218/original/image-20160720-31156-s0yqn4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1122&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/131218/original/image-20160720-31156-s0yqn4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1122&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ben Johnson ‘wins’ the gold medal in the 100-metre sprint at the Seoul 1988 Olympics.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">DPMS/Flickr</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure></p>
<p>Behind the drive to improve athletic performance – the Games’ Latin motto translates as “Faster, Higher, Stronger” after all – hides the race to improve doping. This involves constant improvements in substances and methods to sidestep controls that are increasingly powerful. </p>
<p>The key is innovation, which requires financial investment and involves (almost) undetectable doping among elite athletes, the only ones who can bear its economic costs.</p>
<p>EPO has become ever more advanced, for instance, as has the use of blood transfusions to boost performance. The steroids behind the <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SPORTS-AND-DRUGS-How-the-doping-scandal-2545661.php">Balco case</a>, which cost Marion Jones the five medals she won at the 2000 Sydney Olympics, were worlds away from those that led to the first big doping scandal – that of Ben Johnson, winner of the 100-metre sprint at the 1988 Games in Seoul.</p>
<h2>The cult of performance</h2>
<p>The roots of doping are deep; more structural and less individual, more systemic and less isolated. It is not a matter of deliberate choices made by a few cheaters; it is the direct consequence of the search for athletic perfection and all the work that it entails. </p>
<p>Doping is not simply a individual misdemeanour because athleticism at the highest level demands constant evaluation and, ultimately, results. To live such a life, an athlete must undertake rigorous training and coaching, suffer through pain and injury, go through performance slumps, overcome moments of doubt, and adhere to a rigorous lifestyle. </p>
<p>Athletes must overcome these constant tests to stay competitive in a world where the demand for performance is pervasive, where it is the measure of value and the condition of survival. </p>
<p>This cult of performance is as demanding as job conditions are fragile and contractual commitments precarious. Thus doping is not only a practice that improves physical performance, it is a response to a set of physical, psychological and contractual constraints.</p>
<p>In this regard, sport is not so different from many other professional communities where the pressures are strong, and where taking psychoactive substances (licit and illicit drugs, alcohol and others) allows individuals to be effective. The list is long, from financial traders to manual workers, through artistic circles and students at highly selective institutions. </p>
<p>The sociology of work teaches us that strong professional constraints favour the use of products that support high performance. Only in sports is this labelled doping.</p>
<p>None of this is to excuse or justify doping, particularly because it exposes athletes to serious health risks. But only by understanding why athletes dope can we improve what has been largely ineffective law enforcement up to now. </p>
<p>This requires us to abandon the individualistic and moralistic vision that portrays doped athletes as cynical cheats, and to better understand the demands of elite athletes’ lives. </p>
<hr>
<p><em>Translated from the French by Leighton Walter Kille.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62791/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Didier Demazière ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.</span></em></p>Only a better understanding of what drives doping can improve enforcement. To do so, we must break with the perception of doping as an individual or moral problem.Didier Demazière, Sociologue, directeur de recherche au CNRS (CSO), Sciences Po Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/629622016-07-25T04:22:39Z2016-07-25T04:22:39ZShould Russian athletes really be banned from competing in the Rio Olympics?<p>The audience vote is a resounding yes, all Russian track and field athletes should be banned from competing. But is the International Olympic Committee (IOC) justified in giving individual sports federations <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/25/sports/olympics/rio-russia-ban-doping.html?emc=edit_na_20160724&nlid=64524812&ref=cta&_r=0">the right to decide</a> whether athletes can participate in Rio 2016?</p>
<p>In the run-up to the IOC’s decision, anti-doping leaders from 14 countries <a href="http://www.athleticbusiness.com/drugs-alcohol/anti-doping-leaders-petition-ioc-boss-to-ban-russia.html">signed an open letter demanding the Russians’ exclusion</a>. A petition calling for the <a href="http://www.thepetitionsite.com/277/646/383/ban-russia-from-the-2016-olympics/">whole team to be banned</a> was closing in on its aim of 10,000 signatures, while another <a href="https://www.change.org/p/iaaf-allow-russia-s-athletics-team-to-compete-in-rio">arguing against a blanket ban</a> had just managed eight. </p>
<p>The IOC decided to face the mob and take a more nuanced approach; it will <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-25/russian-team-will-not-face-blanket-ban-in-rio:-ioc/7656416?WT.mc_id=newsmail">allow each sporting federation to decide</a> whether the evidence is sufficient to ban athletes in their discipline. Tennis players, who are regularly tested around the world, <a href="http://www.skysports.com/tennis/news/12110/10511558/tennis-first-sport-to-clear-russians-for-rio-olympic-games">are in the clear</a>, for instance, with cyclists set to follow. </p>
<p>But athletes in track and field are banned as a group, although <a href="http://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/36878983">individuals may compete as neutral athletes</a>. Is this kind of “collective responsibility” – or “collective punishment” <a href="http://www.sportsfeatures.com/olympicsnews/story/52300/olympics-mikhail-gorbachev-makes-plea-to-the-ioc-not-to-ban-russian-athletes-from-rio-2016">as Mikhail Gorbachev</a> described it – fair? </p>
<h2>Standards of evidence</h2>
<p>There’s a genuine dilemma here and the situation is not nearly as clear everyone appears to think – and as the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) pretends. </p>
<p>In law, there are two standards of proof to determine guilt before punishment is inflicted. </p>
<p>In criminal law, this standard is of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This is a very high standard with evidence specific to the act by the individual in question. It requires identifying biological information (such as DNA or blood evidence), for instance, reliable eyewitness testimony, or evidence of motive and opportunity, among other things. </p>
<p>The reason for this is that the punishment for criminal acts is typically severe: deprivation of basic liberties, such as freedom of movement and association. Imprisonment deprives a person of a number of basic liberties. </p>
<p>There’s no way the kind of collective punishment that’s being dished out to Russian track and field athletes would meet this standard.</p>
<p>The second standard of proof is used in civil action where punishment is often a lot less severe, involving fines or monetary compensation for negligence. This standard is the “balance of probabilities”; on the evidence available, it is more likely than not that the person performed the wrongful act in question. </p>
<p>Such a standard would admit the possibility of collective responsibility and punishment.</p>
<p>Those who demand the exclusion of the Russian track and field team are assuming a balance of probabilities standard that says, because there was a widespread state-sponsored doping program, it’s likely that individuals were doping.</p>
<h2>A delicate balance</h2>
<p>But is “balance of probabilities” the right standard of evidence for doping? There’s one good reason to think not. </p>
<p>When you deprive someone of a very basic liberty – such as the liberty to work – you need good reasons for it. Athletes spend their whole lives training for the Olympics; it’s their livelihood and the activity that often gives meaning to their lives. </p>
<p>To deprive them of the freedom to engage in that activity is a very significant deprivation, similar to a kind of imprisonment. To deprive an individual of such a freedom requires a beyond-reasonable-doubt standard of evidence. This is precisely what’s lacking in this case of collective punishment.</p>
<p>But there’s a good response to this. </p>
<p>Athletes who have not been doping can claim that dirty athletes are depriving <em>them</em> of a basic liberty: a reasonable chance of success at an activity that they have highly invested in and which gives meaning to <em>their</em> lives. </p>
<p>They’re effectively being excluded by the possibility of doping and the advantages it provides. So we should adopt the lower, balance-of-probabilities approach.</p>
<p>The beyond-reasonable-doubt standard risks being unfair to clean athletes while the balance-of-probabilities standard risks being unfair to athletes suspected of doping.</p>
<p>What, then, can we do? A philosophical thought experiment might help. </p>
<h2>Faulty testing machines</h2>
<p>Imagine that machines designed to pick up performance-enhancing substances are inherently unreliable to a significant degree. Let’s say that 10% of the time they give a false negative reading. </p>
<p>Let’s assume the US has been using such a machine in good faith, but just before the Olympics it’s revealed to be faulty. We now don’t know how many US athletes are clean and how many are dirty. </p>
<p>There are calls for the whole US team to excluded from the Olympics because of the unreliable testing machine. But would this be fair? </p>
<p>One could respond that some countries already have a very lax and infrequent testing regime (even if the testing itself is reliable). <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/2826070/Carl-Lewis-questions-Usain-Bolts-record-setting-performances.html">Carl Lewis famously drew attention</a> to differences in testing across nations in 2008, saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>countries like Jamaica do not have a random program, so they can go for months without being tested.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But the more important point is that it’s not the athletes’ fault that machine is faulty. Their job is to train and compete, not to supervise or take responsibility for the testing program. </p>
<p>If there’s collective responsibility in such a case, it falls on the bodies that make the rules around testing and how it’s conducted. That is, it’s the IOC – or some other relevant sporting regulatory body – that’s at fault.</p>
<p>It’s grossly unfair to hold athletes responsible for the mistakes of regulatory authorities. And, if there’s collective responsibility and collective punishment due, it’s due to the regulatory body.</p>
<h2>A better way</h2>
<p>What, then, would be an appropriate response in the faulty machines dilemma? </p>
<p>It would be to require the use of more reliable machines, or use a more expensive but independent and reliable testing machine rather than the cheap and unreliable one individual countries use.</p>
<p>Humans are like the faulty machines; we know they’re unreliable, they’ll cheat, they’ll try to get an advantage in competition. We know that of individuals and also of every body or institution that has flesh in the game. </p>
<p>As has been repeatedly shown since the London 2012 Olympics, doping is rife. <a href="http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/thedopingscandal/article1588427.ece?shareToken=5f8e49b5a553daf6f2d5d34a937aa58c">At least a third of medals in the Olympics and world championships 2001-12 involved suspicious samples</a>.</p>
<p>Retesting samples from the London 2012 and Beijing 2008 Games is <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/22/sport/olympics-rio-doping-london-beijing/index.html">yielding a gold mine of positives</a>; it’s not just the Russians, it’s athletes from all around the world.</p>
<p>It’s crazy to put testing in the hands of a group that has a positive incentive for a negative result, whether it’s individual nations or individual sporting bodies. Each has an interest in appearing clean.</p>
<p>What would be the appropriate response to the fiasco in Russia then? </p>
<p>An independent, open-minded panel should examine the profile and results of each athlete and impose a reasonable and consistent standard of evidence with past infringements.</p>
<p>And, in the future, there should be independent testing using reliable and enforceable parameters, using physiological endpoints that can periodically be reliably measured. </p>
<p>That would be the fairest system for all.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62962/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Julian Savulescu does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The International Olympic Committee will allow Russians wanting to compete in the Rio 2016 Olympics the chance to do so if they can prove they’re clean to their sports federation.Julian Savulescu, Sir Louis Matheson Distinguishing Visiting Professor at Monash University, Uehiro Professor of Practical Ethics, University of OxfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/626932016-07-20T02:12:42Z2016-07-20T02:12:42ZDon’t poke the Bear: what could Russia do next about drugs in sport?<p>The World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) release of <a href="https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/20160718_ip_report_final3.pdf">Richard McLaren’s independent report</a> on claims of systemic doping in Russia well and truly overshadows previous major sporting scandals such as the “<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-lance-bomb-has-blown-but-is-doping-really-cheating-10183">Lance Bomb</a>” (when Lance Armstrong’s doping was revealed) and the “blackest day in Australian sport” (when the Australian Crime Commission’s report on organised crime and doping was handed down, leading to years of political and <a href="https://theconversation.com/one-year-on-the-real-doping-scandals-of-2013-22871">sports controversies</a>). </p>
<p>Where Russia broke the cardinal rule of doping – don’t get caught – the anti-doping regime has broken a cardinal rule of nature: don’t poke the Russian Bear. </p>
<p>The International Olympic Committee (IOC) must act, probably by banning Russia as a non-compliant country. But it must also <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-20/ioc-delays-decision-on-russia-ban-from-rio-olympics/7643120?WT.mc_id=newsmail">move cautiously</a>, taking full account of the implications of doing so in terms of international politics, legal implications and financial implications (think broadcast rights in the Russian market). </p>
<p>The question then will be how Russia will respond – and the answer depends on what mood the Bear is in. Perhaps it’ll realise it’s beaten, offer a curmudgeonly whimper and seek redemption. That is, after all, how the anti-doping game is played. </p>
<p>Marketers shepherd athletes deemed worthy of protecting through the predictable “product harm crisis” management of an anti-doping rule violation – pleading <em>mea culpa</em>; reaffirming their allegiance to the anti-doping movement; and being welcomed back into the fold. </p>
<p>Russia tried this strategy this with WADA’s November 2015 <a href="https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/wada_independent_commission_report_1_en.pdf">independent commission report</a>, but still ended up getting smashed by the McLaren report a mere eight months later. </p>
<p>It may well be looking at other options now. And two choices come to mind – one plausible and one fanciful. </p>
<h2>The Bear gets even</h2>
<p>The plausible solution is for the Bear to prove it was just doing what everyone else was doing. The independent commission report led by former WADA president Richard W. Pound was very clear that it would be naïve to think doping was isolated to just athletics and it was just Russia. </p>
<p>Pound was right about doping going well beyond athletics; what needs to be proven now is that it goes beyond Russia. </p>
<p>The other country almost banned from the Rio Olympics for a range of problems with anti-doping governance was <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-banning-kenya-from-rio-presents-an-olympian-dilemma-59929">Kenya</a>. But what if it turns out that there’s systematic corruption of anti-doping governance and practices in Brazil, China, Iran, the United Kingdom or Australia? </p>
<p>Historically, the anti-doping movement has never gone beyond single sensational investigations; <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-doping-wada-reedie-idUKKCN0VF0L1">WADA</a> argues this is due to the massive gap between the resources it has and the resources it needs. </p>
<p>For the sake of confidence in the integrity of sport, the same depth of investigation is needed for other nations. Just like athletes who medal at the Olympics, for instance, perhaps the top-three summer and winter Olympic nations should be scrutinised to the same degree as Russia. </p>
<p>This line of argument suggests Russia fight back using the weapons of WADA to investigate the breadth and depth of doping internationally. Russia might do well to give WADA a special cash injection to enhance its capacity to investigate other countries. Alternatively, it might start helping investigative journalists nose around countries seeking to have it barred from the Rio Olympics. </p>
<p>It would be a rather bad look to have barred Russia from the Olympics if it was demonstrated that other prominent sporting countries had similar systemic problems. </p>
<h2>The Bear starts a different game</h2>
<p>Another – more fanciful – strategy is for the Bear to decide that being poked is no fun and it goes off to play elsewhere. Russia could perhaps use its incredible wealth to establish an alternative to the IOC. </p>
<p>It could declare it had lost confidence in the governance and management of international sport, and withdraw from the Olympic movement and the <a href="http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/anti-doping/international-convention-against-doping-in-sport">International Convention Against Doping in Sport</a> in favour of a new global sporting movement. </p>
<p>In doing so, Russia could champion 21st-century, best-practice governance, such as the <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/16138171.2015.11687954">democratisation of sport</a> by eliminating elite sports bureaucrats from decision-making boards in favour of <a href="https://theconversation.com/after-the-essendon-saga-any-reform-to-anti-doping-regimes-must-give-athletes-a-greater-say-53212">active athletes</a>. </p>
<p>Importantly, the new sporting institution could follow a different approach to drug control, such as a system that focuses on protecting the <a href="https://theconversation.com/afl-nrl-its-time-to-move-on-from-anti-doping-17310">integrity of athletes as human beings</a>. </p>
<p>It remains to be seen whether other peak sporting organisations and consumers would choose to stay with the IOC and the ongoing difficulties of anti-doping compliance or move to the Russian system.</p>
<p>International sport is a high-stakes industry that combines staggering levels of wealth with national reputation. The IOC and the anti-doping movement have made a huge investment in poking the Russian Bear – let’s just hope the Bear is in a good mood.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62693/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jason Mazanov has received grant funding from the World Anti-Doping Agency and Australian Anti-Doping Research Programme (a long time ago). </span></em></p>Where Russia broke the cardinal rule of doping – don’t get caught – the anti-doping regime has broken a cardinal rule of nature: don’t poke the Russian Bear.Jason Mazanov, Senior Lecturer, School of Business, UNSW-Canberra, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/624582016-07-18T19:53:58Z2016-07-18T19:53:58ZMedia-led investigations aren’t the way to beat doping in sport<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/130550/original/image-20160714-23342-1pqbtw4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Kenyan athletes exercise in the early morning near a high-altitude training camp.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters/Siegfried Modola</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>New <a href="http://www.itv.com/news/2016-07-10/investigation-gb-athletes-given-banned-drugs-in-kenya/">allegations</a> of doping in Kenya have surfaced just ahead of the <a href="https://www.rio2016.com/en">Rio Olympics</a>. They include athletes and coaches from other countries, making Kenya seem like a dopers’ paradise with little testing or concern about drug taking.</p>
<p>The most recent allegations followed a joint investigation by journalists from the British Sunday Times and German broadcaster ARD. This is not the first time that such accusations have been highlighted in the international media. For example, in November 2015 it was alleged that three Kenyan marathon runners <a href="http://www.si.com/more-sports/2015/11/16/iaaf-athletics-kenya-corruption-doping-scandal-marathoners">paid bribes</a> to the governing body, Kenya Athletics, for favourable, lenient bans. </p>
<p>A year earlier, 25 Kenyans were identified as having potentially <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/11285428/Revealed-how-Olympic-champions-three-Britons-and-39-countries-have-been-dragged-into-doping-scandal.html">suspicious blood data scores</a> when details were leaked of data collected by the International Association of Athletics Federation (IAAF). High <a href="http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/7-more-Kenyan-athletes-banned-for-doping">profile athletes</a> have been caught doping and there are <a href="http://www.runnersworld.com/performance-enhancing-drugs/world-anti-doping-officials-declare-kenya-non-compliant-with-policies">ongoing problems</a> with the integrity of the country’s anti-doping education and testing system. Moreover, an Italian sports agent working in Kenya has been charged with doping offences, and an <a href="https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/italian-agent-charged-kenya-over-alleged-doping-140019113--spt.html">Italian coach remains under suspicion</a>.</p>
<p>It seems unlikely that the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/">World Anti-Doping Agency</a> (WADA) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) will impose any further sanctions before the games. But the most recent allegations are grist to the mill for detractors who suspect Kenyan training camps are a hotbed of doping.</p>
<p>Are these allegations fair? Are they based on substantiated facts? The tougher question to ask is whether or not Kenya is being treated fairly. If Kenya is unduly the focus of such media interest, the ideal of the level playing field is paradoxically undermined by the unique treatment afforded to the East African nation. </p>
<p>This is not just about the selection of Kenya as a subject for investigation but also about methods. Secret filming is controversial: it potentially infringes <a href="https://strasbourgobservers.com/2015/03/12/ecthr-vindicates-hidden-cameras-role-in-watchdog-journalism/">rights to privacy</a>, can create artificial situations that provoke an abnormal response, and in this case the doctors <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/36756105">quickly denied</a> their apparent claims and intentions. A Scottish athlete training in Kenya denied claims he was involved in the media “sting” and a Kenyan athlete claims he was <a href="http://citizentv.co.ke/sports/scottish-runner-mcdonald-denies-he-was-part-of-ard-expose-133371/">“duped”</a> by the reporters. </p>
<p>Perhaps this story is not as straightforward as would first appear. Indeed it arguably undermines one of the central principles of anti-doping: fair play.</p>
<h2>So what do we know?</h2>
<p>The Sunday Times/ARD joint investigating team secretly filmed Kenyan doctors who claimed to have prescribed Erythropoietin (EPO) to more than 50 athletes, three of whom are British. EPO is an essential hormone for red blood cell production that has been widely linked to endurance sports. </p>
<p>The journalists also apparently found <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/09/uk-anti-doping-investigation-doctors-drugs-claim-kenya">evidence of doping</a> in waste bins at the high performance training centre training camp on the outskirts of Iten in the Rift Valley. The doctors are now <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/36756105">denying</a> those claims and local officials claim to be <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/10/kenya-doping-claims-testing-procedures-four-british-athletes-epo-athletics">working hard</a> to ensure the camp is clean through drug testing procedures. Indeed, the camp’s owners <a href="http://www.nation.co.ke/news/New-doping-scandal-hits-Kenya-Rio-bid/-/1056/3289468/-/i89n23z/-/index.html">strenuously denied</a> the accusation.</p>
<p>Ostensibly this is a significant story that helps support anti-doping. But it raises more questions than it answers. Even the specific details of this case are sketchy. The athletes in question have not been named. And as far as the doctors’ involvement is concerned, we are still waiting to see if any investigating authority can access patient records or prescriptions. Without that information, evidence is based solely on recorded conversations which can be denied.</p>
<p>Why Kenya continues to be the focus of investigations and accusations, <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-banning-kenya-from-rio-presents-an-olympian-dilemma-59929">is very unclear and potentially unfair</a>. Many other countries have problems with their anti-doping system, have athletes who dope and doctors who support them.</p>
<h2>No level playing field</h2>
<p>Questions of fairness extend beyond asking why Kenya is under so much scrutiny and how good the evidence is. The World Anti-Doping Code is based on the ideal of a level playing field and the right of athletes to participate in drug-free sport.</p>
<p>Yet, there is a lot of ambivalence over the anti-doping agency’s power and role in recent media-led investigations. It is unclear what responsibility WADA has, and how it <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3588604/WADA-chief-Sir-Craig-Reedie-vows-investigate-fresh-Sochi-doping-allegations.html">reacts to media stories</a>. The US Senator John Thune recently <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/21/sports/olympics/us-senate-committee-questions-for-wada-global-doping-watchdog.html?_r=0">wrote</a> to the WADA President, Sir Craig Reedie, asking why WADA is not more proactive in its approach to investigations.</p>
<p>It was in fact the Sunday Times and ARD that uncovered doping in <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-doping-russia-idUSKCN0W80YN%5D">Russia</a> and leaked details of more than 12,000 blood tests taken by the international athletics federation last summer that showed suspicious cases had not been followed up and doping was potentially as <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/33749208">serious</a> in athletics as it was in cycling. </p>
<p>If there was a level playing field, decisions over which sport or country to target using methods designed to deceive people into implicating themselves would be undertaken on the basis of some other criteria than just where to find a front page scandal. The same would apply to which individual athletes to target.</p>
<p>The right of athletes to participate in drug-free sport is arguably the best reason to support such intensive research methods. Maybe journalists can uncover more hotbeds of doping and root out the cheats. The problem is that this will always be a subjective exercise. It can never uncover all the doping that goes on even though we know for certain it is much higher than the 1%-2% of athletes whose samples test positive. </p>
<p>So we are no closer to drug-free sport in spite of these occasional forays into the field by journalists.</p>
<h2>Reputational damage</h2>
<p>There is the added factor of reputational damage. Athletes in most countries have not faced the same evidence-gathering processes. If they pass normal drug tests they are assumed to be clean. </p>
<p>But the reputation of Kenyans and Russians has been tainted. And many sports fans won’t accept that they are clean even if they have never tested positive.</p>
<p>Given these criticisms the reputational damage done to Kenyan athletes, and by implication anyone who has trained in Kenya, seems irrational. Any success in the Olympics will be tainted by the legacy of this story. </p>
<h2>The role of official agencies</h2>
<p>It will be interesting to see how WADA responds. The various scandals of the past two to three years have led to calls for more action, including criminalisation of doping. Yet, WADA’s foundational principles include harmonisation and standardisation: anti-doping should treat everyone equally. </p>
<p>WADA also depends upon national anti-doping organisations and local sports organisations to support anti-doping. In countries where there is a lack of commitment and resources there may be gaps in the system. </p>
<p>Also, WADA seems to assume all countries have the economic infrastructure to support anti-doping. But in areas of real poverty it might be hard to justify public expenditure on increasing testing. This is a first world policy with unrealistic expectations of developing countries.</p>
<p>Kenya may or may not be a hotbed of doping. It is unlikely to be worse than many other places as the motivation to dope crosses international boundaries and sports. Perhaps it would be fairer if consistency and rigour informed investigations rather than the editorial vigour of the Sunday Times and ARD.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62458/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Dimeo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>With weeks to go before the Olympics, it’s unlikely Kenya will be sanctioned over fresh doping claims. No matter what happens, a shadow will be cast over the integrity of the country’s athletes.Paul Dimeo, Senior Lecturer in Sport, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/615872016-07-01T12:12:38Z2016-07-01T12:12:38ZSeven steps to reboot the fight against doping in sport<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128974/original/image-20160701-18328-126ovrh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C2048%2C1364&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Using our heads. New ways to battle doping in Olympic year.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/thelastminute/7711916854/in/photolist-cKtAcG-cTQ6C9-cPfvXL-kgkCJV-7DqVnQ-7Coa1V-81ogs4-7Hkbks-cKF8SL-cGLmM3-bNCRuV-3SkZ1x-ez5EXV-7q6M3g-duoQXQ-onExzV-pef47-cGLgm5-81ofxt-cF5fVQ-7qwnnU-cH8RPj-cJKpUm-qHTJvh-cBeP9j-dFR75x-cJKpqC-ekm54b-3TPbzG-7q6MiZ-cx2tnG-cRvAYu-cmpWvu-8sPs4d-dAuFFu-6dATYw-cFjMhu-cL7YAu-cPiGS3-cf9Z5W-qz6PuH-bPTCEK-39XWRW-k9YhoU-cUzdKd-ddATwx-7LitJV-baJnbM-cb5wS1-4vMh8G">Duncan Rawlinson/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/sports/olympics/russia-olympic-ban-iaaf-track-and-field.html?_r=0">disqualification of Russia</a> from the Rio Olympics appears to be a triumph for anti-doping. The World Anti-Doping Agency’s independent commission produced enough evidence to justify support for a ban from the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Association of Athletics Federations. We might yet see other sports organisations imposing sanctions on athletes.</p>
<p>However, there is another side to anti-doping’s apparent success. It is unlikely that we are close to catching the real number of dopers, and there remain calls for <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/athletics/dick-pound-we-will-never-end-doping-despite-our-small-victories-a6747296.html">more investigations</a>. So amid all the grandstanding, its effectiveness has been <a href="http://espn.go.com/olympics/trackandfield/story/_/id/14571339/doping-scandal-wada-latest-commission-report-again-lacks-enough-punch-solve-bigger-problem">called into question</a>, alongside its politics. After all, the IOC was a close partner in WADA’s formation and provides half its funding. WADA’s first president and current president have held prominent positions in the IOC, and there is a <a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/14580348.Sir_Craig_and_Coe_are_symptomatic_of_a_more_dangerous_problem__the_old_boys____club/">close-knit culture across leading organisations</a>. </p>
<p>At the same time, decisions made about <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09523367.2013.826652">relatively minor cases</a> have prompted controversy due to both unnecessarily harsh outcomes and <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/09687637.2015.1029872">inconsistent sanctions</a>. It feels like a crucial moment, and a good one to propose some practical steps which can improve the current approach.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128980/original/image-20160701-18331-k2xdlp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128980/original/image-20160701-18331-k2xdlp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128980/original/image-20160701-18331-k2xdlp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128980/original/image-20160701-18331-k2xdlp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128980/original/image-20160701-18331-k2xdlp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128980/original/image-20160701-18331-k2xdlp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128980/original/image-20160701-18331-k2xdlp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128980/original/image-20160701-18331-k2xdlp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Should the architecture of anti-doping be rethought?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/gordonr/2809571698/in/photolist-bCjx4A-acyZAY-7jfqm2-jHUZb-5hgMMm-6v4P68-oo5xeE-5hcrsK-nCk13Q-eVpkrD-fSmJne-kQ7DAH-qajsHr-bWNhY9-bWNx49-cXCApq-dZ9dNh-68qcHY-68kZiZ-fUQCmF-a9KbCo">Gordon Ross/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>1. More effective use of resources</h2>
<p>Current policy involves regular testing of all elite athletes for a wide range of drugs. Were this approach to be rationalised, resources could be freed up to tackle the more significant problem of organised systematic doping in some countries. </p>
<p>One idea would be to give up testing for recreational, non-performance enhancing drugs. Another might be to define the drugs that are most likely to be used in each sport and test only for those. It might also be the case that some sports and countries simply run fewer tests if it can be established that the levels of doping risk are low.</p>
<p>Current policy assumes blanket testing to be the best deterrent. That might be so, but in order to catch the bigger fish, we might just have to let a few smaller ones go.</p>
<h2>2. Engage with new people</h2>
<p>Controlling drugs in sport needs international cooperation. Inspiration could come from progress on something like vaccination policies that have led to significant changes in immunisation <a href="http://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/en/">on a global scale</a>. We might invite advice from non-sports experts and researchers from business, health research or policy areas that have shown successful cooperation. </p>
<p>There are models that move away from an absolutist “war on drugs” approach, but which are still effective. Take the idea of “complex systems” which <a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/for-those-who-seek-to-strengthen-alcohol-regulation-the-experience-of-tobacco-control-shows-that-comprehensive-policy-change-is-neither-quick-nor-inevitable/">encourages a more flexible understanding</a> of rules and targets by people directly involved and who can better understand and adapt to rapidly-changing circumstances at local level.</p>
<h2>3. Support for whistleblowers</h2>
<p>Those who come forward with inside information need to know they will be taken seriously and protected. This requires an independent body that protects their identity and makes sure evidence is taken seriously. There needs to be financial support to encourage whistleblowing, which can help inform more efficient and effective investigations. Recent failures to follow up on information, engage with people who try to help, and reduce personal risk, has <a href="http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/16209580/doping-whistleblowers-such-stepanovs-kara-goucher-often-left-dangling-taking-sports-bodies-governing-bodies">shown this to be a major issue</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128984/original/image-20160701-18328-14ha8au.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128984/original/image-20160701-18328-14ha8au.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128984/original/image-20160701-18328-14ha8au.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128984/original/image-20160701-18328-14ha8au.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128984/original/image-20160701-18328-14ha8au.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128984/original/image-20160701-18328-14ha8au.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128984/original/image-20160701-18328-14ha8au.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128984/original/image-20160701-18328-14ha8au.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Protection for the brave.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/stevendepolo/3830805160/in/photolist-6QvSUQ-rCDhaM-AYF6f-aALM6K-b8ANZ6-fJYykX-j3PrXp-hA58Wf-jLXD1D-p9VZaF-7zCYFN-j6jQbq-na37Xb-gU4SpU-83VpGi-8VSGu1-j6eyEf-79Azik-dBzWTd-fMbrRY-djGCj6-4uNaMt-czx2aQ-5CCyTe-rg6oo3-e1eLng-bYry9m-cvr1gf-aqdvZr-cjTSP9-8H5tLu-cjTMfJ-quPoqA-4SLSBk-jp8uwr-jKSyjo-qNe58M-qeLwTU-qopQpM-9FKCXh-5qBpV2-pZZf3D-nGqW7x-ouMEvY-mW6Wzx-n7tKm6-pRctCG-CL1jUA-owKBJ6-owe2XD">Steven Depolo/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>4. Evaluation of WADA</h2>
<p>The paradox of setting up WADA as an independent agency is a lack of certainty regarding accountability and performance measures. There should be criteria by which success and failure are judged, transparency of decision-making, and regular review of policy implementation processes. Since governments provide <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/funding">half of WADA’s funding</a>, they are well positioned to request auditing information as part of the contract, and can influence policy methods. Currently, the organisation doesn’t appear to have a transparent reporting system to any external body.</p>
<h2>5. Easier and cheaper appeals</h2>
<p>Much of the criticism and <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19406940.2016.1170716?journalCode=risp20">concerns expressed by athletes</a> of the current system have emerged because some athletes who are completely innocent or who have made a genuine mistake are treated in the same way as deliberate doping cheats. The routes of appeal are limited. You can either go to a national anti-doping agency tribunal or take your case to the <a href="http://www.ukad.org.uk/what-we-do/results-management">Court of Arbitration for Sport</a>. One solution might be that each country has a corpus of trained volunteers who could be invited to decide upon ad hoc appeals. Decisions could be made quickly so that the athlete can return to their sport.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128985/original/image-20160701-18317-6uf2ia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128985/original/image-20160701-18317-6uf2ia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128985/original/image-20160701-18317-6uf2ia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=275&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128985/original/image-20160701-18317-6uf2ia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=275&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128985/original/image-20160701-18317-6uf2ia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=275&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128985/original/image-20160701-18317-6uf2ia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128985/original/image-20160701-18317-6uf2ia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/128985/original/image-20160701-18317-6uf2ia.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">To the point.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ad-vantage/456313094/in/photolist-GjHZ9-4m7ZyL-8mkoo3-9ygytn-LxzJe-gLGgp-93SgZZ-8mh8Mi-9ueWY6-ceFg2s-5Xd9Dd-oTLF7A-91J5-f2aq21-93SZ1B-9ygzd6-9ueWYX-ifM5NH-3K6Zu5-9yjxzW-8b7aZY-a7dZZ-KV1Vm-arpkGF-6YMxaQ-73qTx7-4BmV8e-5cUXKk-4m3WSB-5nPiDj-6wuZoV-8ZpZLJ-aeqNep-8mhe6F-6dm98k-cMuBgJ-61nWwh-6EZAr6-4VV4F9-9pW8cb-4VV4FJ-4VV4G3-4VV4Fo-523zAL-4VQZ24-2E9pk-4VQZ28-4VQZ2c-4VV4Fs-oZcRBq">agressti vanessa/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>6. Have critical friends</h2>
<p>Anti-doping agencies and other sports organisations should invite guidance from other fields of expertise. If critics were treated with respect and invited to share ideas and propose solutions, then some fresh thinking might lead to real improvements. I was <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/academic-is-sacked-over-doping-views-0k7b6hk7b">invited to leave</a> the US Cycling Anti-Doping Committee simply for expressing ideas that <a href="http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/opinion-issues-faced-by-critical-academics-in-anti-doping/">challenged existing policy ideas and practice</a>. </p>
<p>There are many people willing to help if the opportunity was presented to them. The first step could be as simple as an online forum for comments, criticisms and suggestions that are coordinated independently and presented to WADA. The present situation appears to be that if you are critical, you are not invited to join the discussion. Even media investigations have been attacked; witness <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/33784236">the response from Sebastian Coe</a> after blood doping revelations.</p>
<h2>7. Start again</h2>
<p>Everything above will have more chance of success if it is part of a completely fresh start to anti-doping that prioritises fairness and health in a more balanced way. Involving athletes at the heart of strategy and planning would help create values and processes that other athletes could buy into. Building trust by reducing systematic doping through targeted efforts would build confidence and a better sense of purpose. A more realistic and accepting attitude to accidental doping cases can avoid unethical and unfair impacts on athletes’ lives.</p>
<p>Anti-doping is facing a crisis, the resolution of which may just require a re-orientation of objectives and methods based on key principles, values and innovative strategies. At the very least it would help to bring different perspectives together for a conversation on what has gone wrong, what needs to change and how best to move forward towards a different future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/61587/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Dimeo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The ban on Russian athletes at the Rio Olympics feels like a victory, but it masks an insular system which is spread too thin.Paul Dimeo, Senior Lecturer in Sport, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/611992016-06-18T05:03:41Z2016-06-18T05:03:41ZOn track for the Rio Olympics? IAAF ban means Russian athletes may not compete<p>The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) has upheld its ban on the Russian Athletic Federation (RUSAF) from competing in the Rio 2016 Olympics. But the head of the IAAF, Sebastian Coe, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-18/russian-athletics-ban-upheld-ahead-of-rio/7522392?WT.mc_id=newsmail">said</a> “athletes who are not tested under the Russian system but in systems that have effective anti-doping programs will have their individual cases assessed”.</p>
<p>In November 2015, the IAAF <a href="http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/iaaf-votes-to-provisionally-suspend-russia/">suspended</a> RUSAF from competing in the wake of claims that Russian anti-doping officials, athletes and support personnel were engaged in conduct prejudicial to the interests of fairness in sport.</p>
<p>The ban stemmed from <a href="http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/a-timeline-allegations-against-the-russian-athletics-federation/">revelations</a> by Russian whistleblowers and the work of investigative journalists in Germany. Their allegations pointed to systemic – even state-sanctioned – doping. </p>
<p>After the ban, RUSAF was provided with a substantial list of “<a href="http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/araf-reinstatement-conditions-and-verification-criteria/">conditions</a>” it needed to meet for reinstatement, but the IAAF is now in unanimous agreement that these have <a href="http://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/iaaf-council-meeting-vienna">not been met</a>. </p>
<p>Now the body has extended the <a href="http://www.aipsmedia.com/2016/06/17/18951/iaaf-russia-ban-rio-2016">suspension of RUSAF</a>; its intended effect is that Russian track athletes and support personnel will not be eligible to take part in the 2016 Rio Olympics. </p>
<p>The IAAF move has been described by Richard Ings, former head of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority, as a “<a href="https://twitter.com/ringsau/status/743959511572975617">watershed moment in anti doping</a>”. It’s the first time a sport federation has suffered consequences for non-compliance to anti-doping. But will it mean Russian track-and-field athletes have no chance of competing at Rio?</p>
<h2>Starting blocks</h2>
<p>The ban on RUSAF imposes punishment on an organisation and, by extension, all of the athletes it represents. </p>
<p>The IAAF, anticipating that individuals may argue that it is unfair for them to be made responsible for the failings of a peak body, has already signalled that if athletes can “demonstrably prove” they are clean, then <a href="http://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/iaaf-council-meeting-vienna">appeals</a> can be made.</p>
<p>Any individual athlete who can clearly and convincingly show they are not tainted by the Russian system because they have been outside the country, and subject to other, effective anti-doping systems (including effective drug-testing), should be able to apply for permission to compete in international competitions, not for Russia but as a neutral athlete.</p>
<p>The proposition alters the normal burden of proof: for an athlete to be found guilty of doping, an adverse finding is needed by an anti-doping authority. In the IAAF’s case, this is not being claimed. Rather, athletes are suspended on suspicion of being complicit in doping, with the accused needing to demonstrate their innocence (or at least distance) from such influence. </p>
<p>This unprecedented situation is set to be a <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-sport-doping-russia-reaction-idUSKCN0Z32C3">legal and political</a> minefield.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is considering its response. It will meet in Lausanne on June 21, to <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3647027/Russias-athletics-ban-remains-following-unanimous-vote-IAAF-council.html">discuss the RUSAF saga</a>. </p>
<p>Intriguingly, the IOC has the power to either accept or reject the IAAF ruling: the Olympic Games are its event by invitation. The most likely scenario, according to <a href="http://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/36422629">Dan Roan of the BBC</a>, is that the IOC – with the co-operation of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) – will accelerate the appeal process for Russian athletes, while remaining true to the position that RUSAF is banned. </p>
<p>Indeed, CAS secretary-general <a href="http://isportconnect.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35249&catid=44&Itemid=50">Matthieu Reeb</a> said “the organisation was prepared to hear urgent cases right up to the opening ceremony in Rio”.</p>
<h2>Breaking the tape</h2>
<p>The RUSAF case is confounded by some extraordinary failures by the <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/">World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)</a> and the IAAF, all of which call into question the capacity – and indeed the independence – of organisations that are charged with the ethical management of anti-doping. </p>
<p>On April 30, 2015, WADA president Sir Craig Reedie sent an email to Russia’s most senior anti-doping official with a message of “comfort” that his organisation had no intention of instigating a “<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-3207651/WADA-president-Sir-Craig-Reedie-s-comfort-email-Russia-s-senior-drug-buster-reveals-toothless-clampdown-doping.html">clampdown on Russian doping</a>”. Incredibly, this correspondence took place after a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIkiC3iT0GA">German documentary</a> alleging systematic doping in Russia, and featuring athletes who admitted to being part of that regime, was aired.</p>
<p>The IAAF was no better. In January 2016, it expelled <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jan/07/iaaf-bans-four-officials-doping-papa-massata-diack">four senior officials</a> after it was revealed they conspired to extort money from an athlete who tested positive in return for hiding the adverse findings. The biggest scalp was Lamine Diack, who had been president of the IAAF from 1999 to 2011.</p>
<p>An <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/independent-commission-report-2">independent commission</a> established by WADA, headed by the renowned anti-doping advocate Dick Pound, concluded that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Lamine Diack was responsible for organizing and enabling the conspiracy and corruption that took place in the IAAF. He sanctioned and appears to have had personal knowledge of the fraud and the extortion of athletes carried out by the actions of the informal illegitimate governance structure he put in place.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These examples indicate that, while a focus of concern with RUSAF has been critical, it is also crucial to re-examine the efficacy and trustworthiness of sport officials charged with the management of anti-doping. Russia has serious doping issues, but it would be naïve to make it the scapegoat for global problems of competition integrity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/61199/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daryl Adair does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The International Association of Athletics Federations has upheld its ban on the Russian Athletic Federation from competing in the Rio 2016 Olympics.Daryl Adair, Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/594812016-05-19T15:19:20Z2016-05-19T15:19:20ZAnti-doping crackdown is unleashing an unnecessary glut of scandals<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/123032/original/image-20160518-13484-zji08b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=4%2C49%2C1016%2C582&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">On their knees. Scrutiny and stigma for athletes has ramped up.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/tabor-roeder/5746255229/in/photolist-9KM4u2-8vtJRX-mVTyN-eKSiYB-cmx7a7-831uxp-gpHCsf-86ti67-nPvzBA-EafdSj-pkPHe5-834yE7-fMRSA2-c4tChu-nuSMQe-8zGJdn-cN81yb-dHMZYj-nsEQEe-rh2Sur-btWFf5-8vw4mN-mnRNwi-nVVy8a-ft5rpD-eonsYx-iwvQWj-auYGX2-6NutL7-9pecT3-qUnkWT-8vt3Rn-nVCnEB-nxeRe7-9Sxiwt-eGCDjC-nQNRE3-s6gRrY-nPWZz-jYhhqB-82TVSs-fs7Qnf-4GDzou-ncjBu4-q6ngG7-p4kztr-pYLJvX-dVmbJX-k2Ud1V-rq5id5">Phil Roeder/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Anti-doping is in crisis. Russia has <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/russia-doping-scandal">created a real dilemma</a> as the World Anti Doping Authority (WADA) and the International Olympic Committee agonise over the extent and nature of sanctions after doping revelations. Kenya is struggling to meet the requirements that will allow it <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/13/kenya-escapes-rio-olympics-ban-doping-iaaf">to take part at the Olympics</a>. A <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/36034369">fiasco over recently banned substance meldonium</a> rumbles on, and the Chinese anti-doping laboratory <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-sport-doping-china-idUSKCN0XJ0CR">has had its accreditation withdrawn</a>. </p>
<p>It seems that the tougher WADA try to be, the more scandals emerge, the less trust the public have in athletes, scientists, doctors and sports leaders. The stories of complicity and corruption at the highest level are enough to make the most enthusiastic flag waver feel cynical and despondent.</p>
<p>The root of this crisis is in the 1960s: the time when anti-doping was given shape through new testing procedures and the <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211266912000072">first list of banned substances</a> was made. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) was the leader, based on its amateur sports principles and strong moral sense of sport’s purpose. There was also a latent sense that athletes should be “natural” and “pure”, competing without the interference of money or the seriousness of political ambitions. </p>
<p>But what made sense then is no longer viable: practically or idealistically. The pioneers of anti-doping focused on what athletes took in immediate preparation for a race; stimulants that would give short bursts of energy and concentration. By drug testing the top finishers, they could determine if someone had cheated their way to a medal. Anti-doping had an achievable ambition, focusing on the cheating aspects of short-term drug abuse. Idealists proclaimed the end of doping.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/123035/original/image-20160518-13484-1gmdbpd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/123035/original/image-20160518-13484-1gmdbpd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/123035/original/image-20160518-13484-1gmdbpd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=236&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123035/original/image-20160518-13484-1gmdbpd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=236&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123035/original/image-20160518-13484-1gmdbpd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=236&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123035/original/image-20160518-13484-1gmdbpd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=297&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123035/original/image-20160518-13484-1gmdbpd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=297&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123035/original/image-20160518-13484-1gmdbpd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=297&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Running can be its own stimulant.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/vesparado/8733654151/in/photolist-eiLg6Z-pLX3Xp-pFhkmC-qVXsQo-cBPiQf-feLwUg-kBfcyq-mWXp7G-d15SBy-c7hSAy-d15UkL-f8SbrB-re6MTK-mWW2Qg-c9ZryU-eiLg6x-eiLg5B-noS1Do-eDpN2-fiebgT-n4vpvr-mWV4Pt-bZdUGh-gEP2sG-i2SmMA-d15P7s-fNgMct-eJLvKQ-cJ34Xo-n4vwTK-f97sg9-kaEAGN-bx31Vc-n4p4De-n4wYB5-n69vYt-n4vn9T-rTqhBk-n69urF-fbhzFm-LJVH-D1agPS-oGkh9Q-gEQbNH-f4Gm1R-feLxaz-fYD82Y-c9ZsGo-cBPm2E-eNB58g">Scooter Lowrimore/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Genie out of the bottle</h2>
<p>By the 1970s, however, the widespread use of <a href="http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/ISS/ISS2401/ISS2401e.pdf">steroids during training periods</a> created two irresolvable problems. First, the only way to know if an athlete used steroids was to test them regularly in their home, training centre or workplace. This is expensive, impractical, easy to beat, and impinges on personal freedoms and privacy. The IOC did not have the finances to support this, so steroid use was uncontrollable. </p>
<p>Second, it is not possible to determine the exact cause and effect of using steroids as the direct impact on performance is part of a combination of other sports preparation and psychological strategies. </p>
<p>Over time the list has grown to overly complex proportions. There are now ten categories of banned substance or methods. Some are allowed out of competition but not in competition. Some are allowed up to a threshold level. The time a drug stays in the body varies. Some names of drugs vary depending on the manufacturer. Some have very complex names. </p>
<p><a href="http://list.wada-ama.org/prohibited-in-competition/prohibited-substances/">The list has further expanded</a> in response to athletes using masking agents (such as diuretics that disguise the presence of steroids in urine), inventing illnesses to use medical products, suppliers innovating with drugs that could not be tested for, and restrictions on recreational drugs. This approach to anti-doping policy has led to innocent athletes being banned and stigmatised: not because they cheated, but because they inadvertently broke the rules.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/123038/original/image-20160518-13484-xf1fmc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/123038/original/image-20160518-13484-xf1fmc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/123038/original/image-20160518-13484-xf1fmc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123038/original/image-20160518-13484-xf1fmc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123038/original/image-20160518-13484-xf1fmc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123038/original/image-20160518-13484-xf1fmc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123038/original/image-20160518-13484-xf1fmc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/123038/original/image-20160518-13484-xf1fmc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In the shadows: athletes can be left to fend for themselves.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/martin_thomas/4438068725/in/photolist-7Lbgdi-7Lffms-nF5coU-pWgLva-eYU7vt-dexYuo-9rAS2b-qsVLeZ-cjUfh9-7Xq5yG-8R9TB3-a1MR8k-nyq18U-c8FoV9-ouuo2D-hyTkm6-7e3wqG-r31cKU-gRW6Fo-5m8hG5-6m9Hu5-29M4Rp-od2pBm-b7SbL6-ax7QCy-nKAhQJ-6zorLf-8SJd2P-BSXJRA-o8x85L-2tNxP-bkzXbw-5rTwCg-6VCDmt-kMwV-fNtevZ-crejN3-8Eav4k-85g6hP-8Ld8Qu-4rQKQS-4JnxH1-3ZQac-dqv9Ww-ejbrcf-5EgXKA-cYSDPS-9dUX9T-f5Ax8U-5R7Jts">Martin Thomas/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The history of sport is littered with examples of innocent athletes caught up in the net of anti-doping. Those who get caught face alienation from their social networks and their only occupation, causing some to be so depressed as <a href="http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/breyne-attempts-suicide-after-positive-doping-test/">to attempt suicide</a>. There is a distinct lack of sympathy for drug cheats, disproportionate to other forms of cheating. </p>
<h2>Different era, same rules</h2>
<p>When WADA was created in 1999, the ideals, principles, practices, objectives and Utopian vision of drug-free sport – as laid out in the much simpler 1960s – should have been carefully dissected and reinvented for modern sport. Instead the IOC model was simply recycled and empowered in a global organisation. But we now live in a world of technology, commerce, and performance innovation; where drugs could be safely used for recovery and performance, if only the rules were relaxed. Of course, people <a href="http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2013/10/should-athletes-be-allowed-to-use-performance-enhancing-drugs/">react to such proposals with dismay</a>, arguing that open drug use would mean young people being forced to take unsafe drugs just to take part in sport. </p>
<p>I agree, that is an unwanted outcome. However, given the ongoing crisis caused by the intensity of current anti-doping policies, a rational response might be to stop, take stock, assess the positives and negatives, engage athletes and fans, and come up with some fresh ideas that (if nothing else) are achievable, don’t harm innocent athletes, and treat “sanctioned” athletes with humanity, dignity and a constructive route of rehabilitation.</p>
<p>A <a href="https://theconversation.com/athletics-doping-report-should-spark-radical-rethink-on-drugs-in-sport-50376">number of reform models</a> have been proposed by academics, yet we need a way to innovate. WADA has <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/independent-commission-report-1">set up independent commissions</a> to review specific issues, such as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/10/whistleblower-vitaly-stepanov-wada-russian-doping-athletics">the revelations by Russian whistleblowers</a>. Perhaps what is needed is a different type of independent commission, external to WADA that reviews existing strengths and weaknesses, rewrites the 60s vision of drug-free sport for the 21st century, and makes realistic proposals that protect the basic humanitarian values of sport.</p>
<p>At the heart of such proposals could be health protection, encouraging the athlete’s voice, evidence use in policy making, transparency of the scientific decisions, protection of whistleblowers, a reduced cost appeals process, and some action to engage sports audiences in a mature way that explains what it is like to be a high performance athlete. If we can agree some core shared values, then power could be devolved to allow local organisations to deal with the unique circumstances they face. This could target resources at the “problem” areas. But until we have a new platform for open debate and fresh ideas, the current crisis is unlikely to disappear soon.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59481/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Dimeo has received funding from the World Anti-Doping Agency, Wellcome Trust, British Academy and Fulbright Commission. This article is not associated with any of these projects.</span></em></p>The history of the fight against drug taking in sport shows us why we’re in such a mess right now.Paul Dimeo, Senior Lecturer in Sport, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/593462016-05-13T12:36:18Z2016-05-13T12:36:18ZTokyo 2020 facing allegations – but is clean world sport an impossible dream?<p>Say it ain’t so, Tokyo. Those were my thoughts when I saw <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/11/tokyo-olympics-payment-diack-2020-games">the Guardian’s allegations</a> over the Japanese capital’s winning bid for the 2020 Olympic Games: French police are reportedly investigating an alleged €1.3 million (£1m) payment to an account linked to the son of a disgraced former world athletics supremo who was a member of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) during the bidding process. The IOC <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/36270719">has declined</a> to comment, though Japan <a href="http://www.sportstarlive.com/other-sports/tokyo-says-2020-bid-clean-after-payment-report/article8589871.ece">has insisted</a> its bid was clean. </p>
<p>It is of course the latest in a very long line of stories questioning the ways in which cities and nations bid for prestigious events, even if the IOC has been relatively trouble free in recent years. After the Salt Lake City Olympics <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/1999/mar/17/ioc-expels-members-bribes-scandal">bribery scandal</a> of the late 1990s, it <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-soccer-fifa-ioc-idUSTRE7505J020110601">made some</a> significant changes to stop the worst abuses in a system that certainly needed fixing. Plenty of other international sporting organisations have been keeping journalists much more busy since then, not least <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2016/03/22/fifa-a-timeline-of-corruption---in-90-seconds/">FIFA</a> and the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/35348906">International Association of Athletics Federations</a> (IAAF). </p>
<p>The Guardian is not particularly gunning for the IOC over the story. As its journalist Sean Ingle <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/11/tokyo-olympic-games-2020-ioc-international-olympic-committee-corruption-bid-scandal">wrote</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>It would be churlish to not acknowledge the IOC’s attempts to improve its voting procedures in recent years. They have tried. What the Guardian’s story shows, however, is that it is hard to completely protect such a lucrative and prized event as Olympics from corruption.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yet it is hardly a revelation that elite sport often revolves entirely around money. Fictional sports agent <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116695/">Jerry Maguire</a> knew this, I know it, and you know it. Once the rewards become bigger, the kudos shinier and the accreditation badges even larger, corruption is always likely to kick in. We’ve been seeing the results for a long, long time. Sociologists John Sugden and Alan Tomlinson <a href="http://www.polity.co.uk/book.asp?ref=9780745616605">wrote about</a> bribery and corruption in FIFA some two decades ago. Their work showed how the power structures and hubris surrounding key figures in football reshaped the world game. Around the same time, author and investigative journalist Andrew Jennings <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/489102.The_New_Lords_of_the_Rings">made similar observations</a> with his important work on the Olympic Games. </p>
<h2>Why Tokyo matters</h2>
<p>If this is often the reality, it matters all the more to sports fans that Tokyo not be tainted by allegations of foul play. It is less than a year since Japan became <a href="https://theconversation.com/fairy-tale-expert-leicester-city-win-really-was-magical-58887">the Leicester City</a> of international rugby <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/34269878">when it defeated</a> South Africa on a truly memorable afternoon in Brighton during the Rugby Word Cup. It remains arguably the very best rugby story of all time, and the perfect prelude to the nation moving to the centre of the international sporting world. A year before the Olympics, it is to become the first nation <a href="http://www.worldrugby.org/rwc2019">to host</a> rugby’s premier event outside of the foundation unions. </p>
<p>It is also another major negative very close to the <a href="https://www.rio2016.com/en">Rio Olympics</a> – as if Brazil did not have <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/12/brazil-political-crisis-majority-indicate-vote-for-rousseff-impe/">enough problems</a> of its own right now. </p>
<p>It is important to stress that we are only talking about allegations at this stage and that nobody has been charged with any wrongdoing. The alleged payment was to an account linked to Papa Massata Diack, whose father Lamine was the former president of the IAAF. Diack Sr is under investigation over <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/independent-commission-report-2">bribery allegations</a> in <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/athletics/article4666117.ece">relation to</a> the Russian doping scandal, while Diack Jr is facing other <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/11/papa-massata-diack-allegations-tokyo-olympics">allegations</a> relating to voting for the 2020 games that do not involve Tokyo. </p>
<p>Whatever the outcome, there is clearly still much work to be done in the ongoing quest to clean up sport. I would argue that those fighting the good fight can only ever achieve so much anyway. Why should sport be any different to other areas of big business or politics where similar tales emerge regularly? </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/football/gallery/2016/may/02/leicester-city-players-party-at-jamie-vardys-house-as-the-foxes-win-the-premier-league-in-pictures">images of</a> Jamie Vardy and friends having a party as Leicester City picked up the English Premier League trophy should also remind us that sport can be a wonderful thing. Nowhere is this more apparent at the moment than in the sunny surrounds of the ESPN Wide World of Sports and Walt Disney Resort in Florida in the form of the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04hgs2m">Invictus Games</a>, Prince Harry’s Paralympics-style multiple sports event for armed services personnel and veterans. </p>
<p>As fans we need such images and stories. Far too much that is written about sport these days focuses on the bad things. It would be more of a story to find that a large event did not have a whiff of the smelly stuff surrounding it. That’s not meant to excuse everything that has been going on, but just a reminder about the wonderful action on the track, the courts and the fields of play. </p>
<p>Or if that’s too glib for you, it is also important to remember that there are still over four years to go until Tokyo 2020. There is the small matter of Rio 2016, the <a href="http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2016/zika-olympics/en/">Zika virus</a>, water quality <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/International/brazil-faces-slew-problems-ahead-olympics-opening-ceremony/story?id=39072617">at the sailing venue</a>, the jaw-dropping political backdrop and various other challenges for the IOC to navigate first.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59346/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Harris does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There are days when you just want to think about buttercups and Jamie Vardy.John Harris, Reader in Business Management, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/586602016-04-29T14:24:56Z2016-04-29T14:24:56ZTerbutaline: the drug at the heart of British Cycling’s week from hell<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120670/original/image-20160429-10493-17azsdw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Simon Yates at start of the British Mens Road Race Cycling Championships, Abergavenny, 2014</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/sumofmarc/14537451775/in/photolist-wpXNVp-o9CeWg-9ea8f6-9ea8ve-ogeFvX-fUNnP6-9ea8oK-fFufiL-9s2JU8-dc3vFj-o9K4Va-eWjyn3-rTzqV7-obwfYe-AdMWVg-nSfGRH-o9DMYh-nSgtrT-5ktcSS-rWLyXQ-rWJorL-rhyfSi-rWJi9b-se9S4h-nSg9Ee-6LtX9-nWk9fA-nSgayP-o9BasC-55rnX9-nXbeFt-dXVsCF-55rnPQ-73C77R-5GXwLe-73FEfb-74kQXV-argzLq-756ofQ-nSfdbh-o9JH1e-nSfcTy-o9rzmg-2pkXoV-uVTmnU-nV4tyU-G7ssY2-reaBVA-sb2fjo-uq4ouz">Marc/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It was a week British Cycling would rather forget. Accusations of discrimination <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/36153485">forced the resignation</a> of technical director Shane Sutton and then, it was reported that one of its brightest young stars <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/apr/29/orica-green-simon-yates-positive-test-administrative-error">had submitted</a> a positive drug test. Just 100 days before the Olympic Games kick off in Brazil, it is a gruelling time for a sport that has delivered national success for Britain like few others.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.greenedgecycling.com/team/simon-yates">Simon Yates</a>, who rides for Australian professional team Orica-Greenedge, was found to have a drug called terbutaline in his system during the March stage of the Paris-Nice. The team confirmed <a href="http://www.greenedgecycling.com/news/statement-regarding-simon-yates-adverse-analytical-finding.phps">the news in a statement</a> but said the positive result was for the drug’s use as an asthma treatment noted by the team doctor on a doping control form signed at the time of the test. </p>
<p>The UCI, cycling’s governing body, does allow the use of terbutaline under its programme of <a href="http://www.uci.ch/clean-sport/therapeutic-use-exemptions/">therapeutic-use exemptions</a> (TUEs), and Orica blamed one of the team’s doctors for failing to submit the relevant paperwork. It said it was “solely based on a human error that the doctor in question has taken full responsibility for”. The UCI said it <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/36169275">would not be suspending the 23-year-old rider</a> because use of this drug did not call for its imposition. </p>
<p>So what is terbutaline? How does it work? And why have anti-doping authorities required athletes to seek permission before using it?</p>
<h2>At the limit</h2>
<p>Many athletes have a form of asthma known as <a href="http://acaai.org/asthma/exercise-induced-asthma-eib">exercise induced bronchoconstriction</a>(EIB). In fact, the prevalence of asthma/EIB in elite athletes (21%) is reported to be <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1747493/">more than double</a> that of the UK general population (9%). Athletes are more susceptible to this form of asthma because they regularly expose themselves to a significant volume of asthma triggers (dry air, dust, pollution) as a result of long and intense hours of training on the road. In simple terms, increased exposure to those triggers equals greater chance of asthma/EIB. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.aafa.org/page/exercise-induced-asthma.aspx">Asthma/EIB</a> is an obstructive airway disease characterised by inflammation and muscle constriction around the airway. Any asthma sufferer will be able to relate to familiar symptoms such as tight chest, difficulty in breathing and wheezing. An athlete’s aerobic performance will obviously be compromised if they are unable to ventilate their lungs effectively so a group of drugs known as β2-Agonists can be used to reverse the muscle constriction, open up airways and reduce symptoms. These drugs allow athletes with asthma/EIB to train and compete without compromising their health and performance. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120679/original/image-20160429-10512-10u1xcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120679/original/image-20160429-10512-10u1xcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120679/original/image-20160429-10512-10u1xcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120679/original/image-20160429-10512-10u1xcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120679/original/image-20160429-10512-10u1xcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120679/original/image-20160429-10512-10u1xcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120679/original/image-20160429-10512-10u1xcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120679/original/image-20160429-10512-10u1xcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Performance enhancing?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/niaid/5950870440/in/photolist-a4RLsu-9ah9vn-6DtYim-cCnjkG-6DpPXX-5vMrJi-m5KpY4-6SM5dy-na51eJ-oH4rdU-osBKo-8pAw9q-5tz14g-3QDtwr-gMQcjo-29eQm-4URrnm-aMoZfn-eZjr3q-5Adove-7cNP1a-2XVWgL-9qMECF-99xZRa-su6i2z-9x67Q3-8DcgGt-8PeqeY-pZLdgL-8F3aBC-9x383K-2gtk5s-8x6gbV-9x387t-baD1Hx-ekYLQy-8CnCVQ-aBA6JJ-q34hzt-79dsDq-dSUcid-qtiDb1-ossFKs-9FoACn-9FrwSQ-9FrwXJ-9FrxSW-PWitQ-8j1Kom-dFZiox">NIAID/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>All but four forms of β2-Agonists are banned for athletes to use in and out of competition by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). <a href="https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/wada-2016-prohibited-list-en.pdf">Clenbuterol, for example, is banned</a> for enhancing strength and power performance as well as reducing body fat. Athletes can use salbutamol, salmeterol, formoterol and terbutaline – although terbutaline is the only one that requires an athlete to apply for a TUE certificate before they can use it. </p>
<p>Salbutamol and formoterol have limits on the amount you can use but do not require special permission. This is because it is possible to distinguish between whether a dose is inhaled (to treat asthma) or taken orally. But this is not possible for terbutaline (and there is no oral form of salmeterol). In other words, once you have an exemption for terbutaline you could in theory use an oral dose without specifically targeting asthma. </p>
<h2>Performance gains?</h2>
<p>But can terbutaline and the others make a difference in a cycling race? Well, there is evidence that oral doses of terbutaline improve <a href="http://jap.physiology.org/content/119/5/475.long">strength and power performance</a> and that high doses of inhaled terbutaline <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4270505/">may improve sprint and power</a> but not endurance. Strangely enough, the action behind the potential performance improvement is not linked to improved lung function. </p>
<p>Terbutaline and other treatments may improve performance by altering muscle function so that power production per muscle contraction is enhanced. Long-term use may also improve the energy producing pathways that do not require the presence of oxygen, hence a boost to anaerobic bursts of power. But to achieve these performance gains inhaled doses of terbutaline must be <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4270505/">well above the therapeutic dose</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120699/original/image-20160429-10518-306iz1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120699/original/image-20160429-10518-306iz1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120699/original/image-20160429-10518-306iz1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120699/original/image-20160429-10518-306iz1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120699/original/image-20160429-10518-306iz1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120699/original/image-20160429-10518-306iz1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120699/original/image-20160429-10518-306iz1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120699/original/image-20160429-10518-306iz1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">All a blur. Inhaler drugs may boost your sprint power.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/puliarfanita/8744956413/in/photolist-ejLbSz-cUJFKQ-eAxT5s-iENCPw-byZvwV-om4FKn-oPWnRN-puTcM3-y9954-4Qsfkc-y9wPt-9vj3T6-eie7wK-6tyif7-y994m-6NfiFv-iELjfQ-amqjaf-4Cbczy-nYwDYo-hdwBoS-otidut-iGRSu9-CMeLCH-iGRNwu-iGRQH3-iGRPmA-fdjrhc-fni3YD-6sxuPQ-iEKFwt-ajz8rL-afRCEV-8j1HMr-fmYi34-nGE59Y-fpCxcB-oVbA3B-fndtAw-y994Y-i5wYRZ-y8BUT-eAuFKr-5K11JA-iELiYN-fnbW1w-oPWnCw-admxQ9-619P9a-3xVkMq">Anita Ritenour/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So an athlete using terbutaline as prescribed therapeutically is not likely to benefit from a performance enhancement in their sprinting. However, once an athlete has a TUE for terbutaline they have licence to use as much as they like. So an unscrupulous athlete could seek to gain an advantage once they had the exemption. </p>
<p>There is no hint that climbing specialist Yates was using the asthma drug for anything other than his condition, or that the dose in his case was unusually high. </p>
<p>Fellow British rider Owain Doull also leapt to Yates’ defence on Twitter:</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"725973890221137920"}"></div></p>
<h2>Anti-doping retreat</h2>
<p>Because athletes need to apply for permission to use terbutaline, most athletes with asthma/EIB choose to use salbutamol – which is found in the commonly-seen blue inhaler. </p>
<p>Back in 2009 however, the World Anti Doping Authority (WADA) <a href="https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/WADA_Prohibited_List_2009_EN.pdf">had placed all four</a> β2-Agonists on the list of banned substances. The upside was that athletes had to prove they had asthma/EIB by producing a specific objective test as evidence of their condition, and there is <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1747493/">plenty of evidence</a> that this process improved diagnostic practices and the management of athletes with the condition. The downside was that it massively increased the administration burden on sports medics and governing bodies. </p>
<p>And so, by 2010 the decision was reversed for all but terbutaline. There was at the time limited evidence that inhaled β2-Agonists improved performance, and crucially, the costs and practicality of testing every athlete around the world with suspected asthma/EIB were deemed impractical. Given the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23834392">emerging evidence</a> that these treatments may improve strength and power performance, WADA may decide to revisit that position.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58660/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Dickinson has previous received funding from World Anti-Doping Agency. </span></em></p>Asthma medication can cause trouble for athletes but why are some inhalers alright while others need permission to use?John Dickinson, Head of the Respiratory Clinic and Senior Lecturer, University of KentLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/560062016-03-09T23:18:18Z2016-03-09T23:18:18ZSharapova, drugs and the nature bias<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/114525/original/image-20160309-13704-z0p1qc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Maria Sharapova's fundamental skill is the same whether she takes the banned substance meldonium or an allowed natural enhancer such as beetroot extract.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Filip Singer</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Tennis star Maria Sharapova <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/mar/07/maria-sharapova-failed-drugs-test-australian-open-2016-tennis">has admitted</a> taking the <a href="https://theconversation.com/maria-sharapovas-positive-drug-test-what-is-it-and-what-does-it-mean-for-her-55927">banned drug meldonium</a>.</p>
<p>Sharapova is an experienced professional. Strict liability applies. She doped. The more interesting question is: why was meldonium (also known as mildronate) placed on the banned list?</p>
<p>The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) <a href="http://list.wada-ama.org">bans drugs</a> that are either unsafe, performance-enhancing, or against the spirit of sport – or some combination of these.</p>
<p>Is meldonium unsafe? I have not gone into the safety profile in detail. But the question itself is not simple. How safe is too unsafe for a competent adult athlete to consent to before we need to create a blanket ban? </p>
<p>If we compare it to other practices that are permitted there would be a fairly wide scope for safety: ordinary sporting practices such as rugby, horse riding and football carry a risk of quadriplegia, for example. </p>
<p>Perhaps the safety bar for drugs should be lower. But even narrowed down to drugs, safety is applied inconsistently. Caffeine used to be on the prohibited list but was removed in 2004. Caffeine is a <a href="http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/723503">performance enhancer</a>. It <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19077738">increases time to exhaustion</a> in endurance athletes. </p>
<p>So, was caffeine removed from the prohibited list because although it is an enhancer, it is safe? There have been a number of deaths or near–misses reported worldwide with caffeine as a <a href="http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/jcr.2013.1226">primary or contributory factor</a>. </p>
<p>So, what is the difference between caffeine and other drugs? </p>
<p>I believe the answer lies partly in our broader values: we have a “nature bias”. Why is alcohol, one of the most <a href="http://dobrochan.ru/src/pdf/1109/lancetnorway.pdf">harmful and addictive substances</a> we consume, legal, yet we have recently banned any and every other psychoactive substance regardless of their harms or benefits? </p>
<p>In part, at least, caffeine and alcohol are so widely socially and legally accepted because they occur naturally, and are therefore seen as inherently safe. The poisonous subtext is that only the weak or greedy get addicted or hurt themselves. </p>
<p>Meldonium and other new drugs are seen as artificial – and therefore inherently dangerous at any dose even to us strong-minded folk. </p>
<p>This seems to be the basis for WADA’s approach to regulating how the oxygen-carrying capacity of blood is lifted by increasing haematocrit, a measure of how much of our blood is made up of cells. For example, injecting the hormone erythropoietin (more commonly known as EPO) unnaturally increases haematocrit and so is banned. But hypoxic air tents and altitude training both stimulate the body to naturally produce haematocrit, yet they are allowed.</p>
<p>So, although this is not stated, a hidden clause in WADA’s code is that something will be banned if it is both performance-enhancing and artificial, either in preparation or delivery.</p>
<p>“Natural” performance enhancers like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatine">creatine</a>, beetroot extract or caffeine are not banned. You can even purify these and dramatically increase their intensity – and in some cases their risks – in a pill form. But as long as you could take them naturally in your dinner, they are allowed.</p>
<p>The natural/artificial distinction is important to ordinary moral thought. </p>
<p>Nature sells. <a href="http://grist.org/food/is-the-natural-label-100-percent-misleading/">“All natural”</a> was the second-most-used claim on new American products in 2008, and the single most popular with purchasers. Despite being difficult to define, nature bias is used to advertise food, cosmetics, supplements and cleaning products as “100% natural”. As former WADA chair Dick Pound <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/07/magazine/07Antidoping.t.html">has said</a> with doping:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It’s like they used to say about pornography. You know it when you see it. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>But nature is itself a series of chemicals and chemical reactions. To be sure, artificial constructs often have greater risks and unpredictable effects. But it is the effects that matter, not the means of achieving them. Neither natural nor unnatural substances should be taken without first investigating their safety. </p>
<p>The nature bias is behind the “playing God” objection to new technologies. We make a mess when we interfere in nature. Sometimes this is true, but over time we have reaped enormous benefits from our interference. Smallpox, one of the greatest killers, was eradicated by vaccination. </p>
<p>Anti-vaxxers today have an extreme form of nature bias. One “anti-vax” website lists at number two in the list of “reasons” against vaccination:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>ALL vaccines are loaded with chemicals and other poisons. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Chemical here is synonymous with poison.</p>
<p>The distinction made in the sporting rules for drugs appears to go beyond safety and to moral grounds. But what moral difference does it make whether something is natural or artificial? Outside of drugs, sport is full of artificial enhancers: running shoes are artificial, aero helmets are artificial, chlorinated swimming pools are unnatural. </p>
<p>Instead of taking an intuitive approach of “knowing it when we see it”, we should ban substances or practices that are clearly or probably unsafe. And we should ban specific substances that corrupt the spirit of a particular sport – that is, that substantially reduce the human element, on a sport-by-sport basis.</p>
<p>That means removing the nature bias. Nature bias does not track harm. Heroin is a natural substance: it derives from the poppy. The humble – and natural – potato can (rarely) cause so–called “potato poisoning” due to <a href="https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002875.htm">solanine</a>, which is present naturally at variable levels. </p>
<p>Nor does nature bias track whether a product removes or substantially reduces the human element of a particular sport. Sharapova’s skill, co-ordination and dedication remain as intact whether she took beetroot supplement or meldonium to gain an advantage. The distinction simply appeals to our intuitions. </p>
<p>The nature bias may be partly behind the ever-growing list of banned substances. It can cause us to form irrational policies or engage in irrational practices. It can even be lethal. </p>
<p>Steve Jobs suffered from a form of pancreatic cancer that was initially curable by modern medicine. He chose natural therapies instead. By the time he realised this was a mistake, it was too late.</p>
<hr>
<p><em><strong>Further reading:</strong> <a href="https://theconversation.com/maria-sharapovas-positive-drug-test-what-is-it-and-what-does-it-mean-for-her-55927">Maria Sharapova’s positive drug test: what is it and what does it mean for her?</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/56006/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Julian Savulescu does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We have an intuitive bias against “artificial” drugs in favour of “natural” drugs, but that distinction is not only false, it is dangerous.Julian Savulescu, Sir Louis Matheson Distinguishing Visiting Professor at Monash University, Uehiro Professor of Practical Ethics, University of OxfordLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/559272016-03-08T04:41:51Z2016-03-08T04:41:51ZMaria Sharapova’s positive drug test: what is it and what does it mean for her?<p>Overnight, Maria Sharapova called a <a href="https://youtu.be/vWxoG3FrmlU">press conference</a> to announce she had tested positive for a banned substance (mildronate) during this year’s Australian Open.</p>
<p>Originally, speculation had been that the press conference was to announce her retirement from tennis, but a failed drugs test may amount to the same thing. At the age of 28, and plagued by injuries for much of her career, a mandatory two-year ban (for the unknowing use of a banned substance, which might become four if “knowing” use is established) may prove too high a barrier to overcome.</p>
<p>Sharapova is the latest high-profile sportsperson to test positive to mildronate in the last month, following one of the best-known Russian figure skaters, Ekaterina Bobrova, and veteran cyclist Eduard Vorganov.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vWxoG3FrmlU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Sharapova tells a press conference she didn’t know the medication was banned.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What is mildronate?</h2>
<p>Mildronate (also known as meldonium) has been a quiet secret in performance-enhancement circles for many years. This may be partly because most of the research on it was published in Russian and the drug is not commonly used outside Eastern Europe. After its development in Latvia in the 1970s, <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3765501">research</a> was first published around ten years later and focused largely on the drug’s therapeutic potential for patients with heart muscle damage.</p>
<p>Technically, mildronate inhibits carnitine, an amino acid derivative that transports fatty acids into mitochondria (the “power houses” of a cell). Less carnitine means less utilisation of those fatty acids for fuel, which forces the body to burn carbohydrates for fuel. This is a far more efficient process than fatty oxidation, which is very “expensive” in the amount of oxygen it requires.</p>
<p>Mildronate is typically prescribed for angina (when the heart muscle doesn’t receive enough oxygen from the blood), as it reduces the overall oxygen consumption necessary. For athletes, though, this reduction in oxygen demand translates into an increase in performance – for instance, increased endurance and aerobic properties, and faster recovery. While there isn’t a great deal of information available, the drug appears to be <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26850121">well tolerated</a> and has a favourable risk profile.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/114213/original/image-20160308-15288-192rehw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/114213/original/image-20160308-15288-192rehw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/114213/original/image-20160308-15288-192rehw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=447&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114213/original/image-20160308-15288-192rehw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=447&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114213/original/image-20160308-15288-192rehw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=447&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114213/original/image-20160308-15288-192rehw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=562&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114213/original/image-20160308-15288-192rehw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=562&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114213/original/image-20160308-15288-192rehw.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=562&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Sharapova says she has a legal prescription for this medication to treat a heart condition.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.google.com.au/search?q=mildronate&safe=active&espv=2&biw=1979&bih=1154&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-vt_UmLDLAhVGJJQKHUZrDCYQ_AUIBigB#q=mildronate&safe=active&tbm=isch&tbs=sur:fc&imgrc=n3RwI_AcYEh-AM%3A">Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Only on January 1 this year was mildronate added to the World Anti-Doping Agency’s <a href="http://list.wada-ama.org/">list of banned substances</a> after it was monitored for a year. The agency collected samples to determine if athletes regularly used the drug.</p>
<p>WADA found <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25847280">evidence</a> of widespread use – more than 180 positive results from a sample of 8,320, which is a positive rate of more than 2%. Most of these <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25847280">results</a> were from periods of competition (not breaks between competition seasons) and more than half were from the strength sport athletes.</p>
<p>WADA monitors substances, develops analytical tests for their detection and finally bans them. These substances are generally drugs that are developed for specific medical concerns. Anabolic steroids are the original template for this, as much of the original research from the 1930s was <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7817189">initially used to help</a> people with various muscle-wasting conditions (such as cancer and HIV/AIDS) or hormonal problems.</p>
<h2>Who’s to blame?</h2>
<p>Sharapova’s claim is that her prescription for the drug is ongoing, legal and had been maintained since 2006 to treat a magnesium deficiency, diabetes and a congenital heart problem. </p>
<p>So far, not enough information is available to evaluate the likelihood of this claim. </p>
<p>Certainly magnesium deficiency is common enough in sports people, to the extent it is one of the first conditions that would be checked if the athlete reports “unexpected fatigue”. Magnesium deficiency is straightforward to treat with supplemental magnesium. This can be administered by tablet, capsule, injection or even by inhaler in acute cases.</p>
<p>What might be possible at this point is to apply for a therapeutic use exemption, which is a request to use a controlled substance despite banned or restricted status. In this case, the therapeutic use exemption would have to apply <em>retroactively</em>. </p>
<p>The rules here are unclear, as WADA allows a retroactive therapeutic use exemption in cases of:</p>
<p>a) medical emergency</p>
<p>b) extraordinary circumstances, or – and this is very unclear –</p>
<p>c) if they feel it would be “fair” to allow such an exemption. </p>
<p>In other words, if a doctor prescribed mildronate (and that prescription is justified by good medical evidence), Sharapova may have a case.</p>
<p>Failing that, the WADA rules are very clear about banned substances – unless you can conclusively prove you were inadvertently contaminated, your positive test is regarded as the only evidence necessary.</p>
<p>It is possible that Sharapova’s drug use was just a bad oversight on her part, but this may not change the outcome. Professional athletes these days are usually scrupulously careful about their supplement and medication use. This goes doubly for athletes who have a public image or <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-08/nike-suspends-contract-with-maria-sharapova/7230146">endorsements to lose</a> in the face of drug use claims.</p>
<p>However, they are also often taking a dizzying array of vitamin and mineral support, legal and grey-market performance-enhancers and prescribed/approved medications for ongoing conditions. It could well be difficult to keep track of all of them.</p>
<p>More than anything else, this is a failure of management. A sportsperson is not a pharmacologist, and Sharapova cannot be expected to know the specific pharmacology behind the range of medical and supplemental support she is taking, especially if this is changed or elevated because of injury.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/55927/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>James Heathers does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Overnight, Maria Sharapova called a press conference to announce she had tested positive for a banned substance (mildronate) during this year’s Australian Open.James Heathers, Postdoctoral research fellow, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/547122016-02-14T20:08:01Z2016-02-14T20:08:01ZElementary Watson? The status of Jobe Watson’s Brownlow Medal<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/111406/original/image-20160214-29192-1ykqglq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/David Crosling</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruling that Essendon footballers were <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-pomp-in-circumstance-cas-rules-against-essendon-players-53043">knowingly guilty of doping</a> in 2012, there have been spirited arguments <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/jeffrey-browne-says-jobe-watson-should-be-allowed-to-keep-his-2012-brownlow-medal/news-story/aabec6e2b2b172d3683b11a60d6217ea">for</a> and <a href="http://www.3aw.com.au/news/dwayne-russell-hits-out-at-good-bloke-defence-for-jobe-watsons-brownlow-20160204-gmm2hs.html">against</a> Jobe Watson retaining his medal as the league’s best and fairest player in that AFL season. </p>
<p>This article will not survey those competing perspectives. Its broad purpose is to explore loss of symbolic rewards for athletes suspended for doping, and to ponder decisions about allowing or disallowing a suspended athlete to retain a symbolic reward.</p>
<h2>The Essendon 34</h2>
<p>WADA’s successful appeal to CAS has resulted in 34 past or present Essendon footballers being banned from participation in any competitive sport until November 2016. Under the <a href="https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0ahUKEwjB0qHJvuLKAhWJk5QKHYQ8AfEQFggoMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aflplayers.com.au%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F03%2FAFL-Anti-Doping-Code-2015-FINAL.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFeHKOU_cuHb9FwzW3sWrjX76zIrg&sig2=kygctBNlh_IDwuk30n1rcQ">AFL’s Anti-Doping Code</a>, which is in accord with the WADA Code, there are further constraints. Sanctioned players cannot be involved with Essendon or another sport club in any formal capacity, such as coaching or administration. </p>
<p>They can watch AFL games and other sport events, but must do so away from spaces where clubs and match officials congregate. If they step inside changerooms – even for an innocuous shake of hand or well-wishing – their suspension will wind back and start again. </p>
<p>These isolating conditions are typical for sanctioned athletes around the world.</p>
<h2>Further punishment?</h2>
<p>WADA does, however, give some leeway to sport bodies in terms of whether they apply additional penalties upon athletes who have been found guilty of doping. It cannot be a longer period of ineligibility; that is contrary to the WADA Code (as the <a href="http://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/28319312">British Olympic Association</a> found out when it tried to introduce life bans for doping).</p>
<p>Controversially, a handful of <a href="http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/german-dopers-face-three-year-jail-sentences-as-new-law-comes-into-force-205477">European countries</a> has taken steps to criminalise doping. Again <a href="http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1023869/exclusive-wada-chief-voices-reservations-about-proposed-new-german-law">WADA</a> opposes an additional layer of punishment, but in this instance is powerless to stop <a href="https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2015-10/wada-statement-on-the-criminalization-of-doping-in-sport">sovereign governments</a> from putting athletes behind bars should they be proven – <a href="http://www.inbrief.co.uk/sports-law/athletes-doping-and-criminal-law.htm">beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law</a> – to have cheated.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/ioc-strips-us-2012-relay-medal-tyson-gay/story?id=31020658">International Olympic Committee</a> has a policy of stripping the results of dopers and requiring them to return medals. This approach is consistent with the view that doping provides an unfair advantage over other competitors, and that symbolic rewards associated with victory are tainted by performance fraud.</p>
<p>From this perspective the legitimacy of medals and trophies, as well as prizes and money, are called into question. One way of righting this wrong is to ensure that dopers are made invisible in the record books, and for those who finished immediately behind them to be elevated onto the dais.</p>
<h2>Individual sports</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://www.intjudo.eu/editor_up/up/WADA_Anti-Doping_CODE_2009_EN.pdf">2009 WADA Code</a> (which was operational in 2012) states the following:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>An anti-doping rule violation in individual sports in connection with an in-competition test automatically leads to disqualification of the result obtained in that competition with all resulting consequences, including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the case of positive tests, this has led to the striking of numerous <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/16/olympics-drug-testing-medals-stripped_n_4789565.html">Olympic results</a> and records, as well as the stripping of medals from sanctioned athletes, with those <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/10796024/Russian-marathon-star-Liliya-Shobukhova-banned-for-two-years-and-stripped-of-medals-for-doping-violation.html">next in line being elevated</a> in terms of their finishing position and symbolic reward.</p>
<p>The timing of drug indiscretions is part of the decision making process. Russian heptathlete Tatyana Chernova had a 2009 urine sample re-tested in 2015; this showed the presence of an anabolic steroid. She was, however, able to retain her <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/11821640/Jessica-Ennis-Hill-frustrated-at-drug-cheat-retaining-2011-world-heptathlon-gold.html">title of 2011</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Chernova was banned and had two years of results wiped out by the Russian Anti-Doping Agency, but that period ended just 16 days before she won gold at the World Championships.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Some decisions do seem peculiar. After confessed doper Marion Jones was retrospectively disqualified in, among several events, the 100m sprint at the Sydney Olympics, the runner-up, <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/dec/14/katerina-thanou-100m-sydney-olympics">Katerina Thanou</a>, was given first place but not a gold medal. </p>
<p>Thanou retained her silver medal but – extraordinarily – was denied the 2000 Games gold medal because she missed several drug tests in the lead-up to the 2004 Games, where she eventually did not compete.</p>
<h2>Team sports</h2>
<p>WADA’s brief is to detect doping and to suspend sanctioned athletes, but it gives peak sport bodies leeway about how to deal with teams and their retention or otherwise of cups, premierships, medals and so on. </p>
<p>Thus, for team sports, there is some flexibility in the event of one or more player sanctions, with peak sport bodies having discretion to impose further punishments on a team (such as collective disqualification, fines and trade restrictions), and to pursue further punishments on individuals within a team (such as club-imposed fines and loss of salary).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.intjudo.eu/editor_up/up/WADA_Anti-Doping_CODE_2009_EN.pdf">WADA states</a> that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Disqualification or other disciplinary action against the team when one or more team members have committed an anti-doping rule violation shall be as provided in the applicable rules of the international federation.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Decisions by sport bodies about who keeps what medal and why are not always simple or predictable. After the 2012 Olympics the <a href="http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/mobile/latestnews/France-finally-reap-Olympic-medals-for-Tyson-Gay-doping">US men’s 4x100m relay team</a> was stripped of its second placing after one member tested positive to an out-of-competition test. </p>
<p>By contrast, when one of the <a href="http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1014467/exclusive-usa-allowed-to-keep-athens-2004-4x400m-relay-gold-medals-despite-drugs-admission">US women’s 4x400m relay team</a> admitted to drug use she was stripped of gold but her team mates retained first place and their medals.</p>
<p>WADA-compliant non-Olympic team sports, which are obviously not answerable to the IOC, have greater discretion about how and why the records and achievements of teams with sanctioned participants be stricken or remain. </p>
<p>Some are hardline. At the 2011 the International Surfing Association (ISA) <a href="http://www.surfermag.com/features/coming-down/#b7EytPv3PK2KoPk7.97">World Masters Championships</a>, the victor (and gold medallist), Australian Mark Richardson, tested positive in-competition for cannabis, after which he was disqualified for three months, his team docked points, and was stripped of individual honours. </p>
<p>According to ISA, a positive test meant they had an obligation to ban Richards (and to then consider ramifications for his team):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>While marijuana is not considered to be a performance-enhancing drug, it is a banned substance [in-competition] according to the World Anti Doping Association (WADA), of which the ISA is a signatory.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Unlike Richards and his team, Essendon had no championship to surrender, but there is consideration about the status of Jobe Watson’s 2012 Brownlow Medal. Here the AFL has the discretion to either allow Watson to retain that symbolic achievement or remove it from him (in which case it could be awarded to runners-up Trent Cotchin and Sam Mitchell, or given to no-one in that year). </p>
<p>As mentioned previously, WADA defers to peak sport bodies in terms of their “applicable rules” for disqualification or disciplinary action involving teams and members thereof. However, after looking through the anti-doping policies of several Australian sport organisations (as applicable to 2012), there is a general absence of specified “rules” about this. The reader is therefore left with the assumption that sports expected to consider situations on a case-by-case basis. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwj1vKjjxvbKAhVDjZQKHU34A2kQFggbMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aflcommunityclub.com.au%2Ffileadmin%2Fuser_upload%2FUmpire_AFL%2FLaws_of_the_Game%2FAFL_Anti-Doping_Code_2010_ASADA_FINAL.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFb9_3Bd_veIQtTI0sb7Y5ndwoTSw&sig2=Jl44HzxzT1CdEY4NJktH9w&bvm=bv.114195076,d.dGo">AFL Anti-Doping Code (2010)</a> is therefore typical in that respect.</p>
<h2>What should be done?</h2>
<p>In a last-ditch effort to clear their names, the Essendon players have appealed to the <a href="http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-11/the-essendon-34-appeal-frequently-asked-questions.mobileapp">Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland</a>. They will sit out 2016 as required of sanctioned athletes, but hope to convince the Swiss court that the not guilty verdict of the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal should stand. </p>
<p>This means that there is a delay in the AFL’s decision-making on whether Watson should retain or be stripped of his 2012 Brownlow Medal. </p>
<p>Given the global practice for athletes who are sanctioned for doping to lose individual symbolic rewards (their team may sometimes be spared), it is difficult to see a cogent case for why the AFL would not feel obligated to follow suit. Although ASADA saw the Essendon players as naïve victims in their submission to the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal, WADA subsequently won a case on appeal where the accused were depicted as willing accomplices in being administered a drug deemed to be performance enhancing.</p>
<p>Some athletes can be unlucky, such as the cannabis-smoking “doper” Mark Richardson. Pot luck indeed. </p>
<p>Other athletes can be lucky, such as Cameron Smith, who – despite his club being convicted of financial doping between 2006 and 2009 and the team stripped of premierships – was able to retain the Dally Messenger medal for the best NRL player in 2006 and the Golden Boot award for the best international rugby league player in 2007.</p>
<p>The NRL audit into the Melbourne Storm salary cap scandal ruled that the players <a href="https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjh6tu51PbKAhXEmZQKHT9fDrcQFggqMAM&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rugbyleague.com.au%2Fnrl%2F2011_storm_report.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGD0uODh7eR3edaLEczEwgKZu1PNg&sig2=uXBELBUCM-EM4zqp0nhXtg">“did not know”</a> they were part of a financial doping scam. No appeal on that verdict.</p>
<p>Watson has hardly been lucky, but when compared with Richardson he does not seem unlucky. Whether <a href="http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/42/7/549.full">intended or otherwise</a>, doping – as conceived by WADA and its prohibited list – has consequences that governments and sports sign up to. In the process there are numerous stories of athletes who have <a href="http://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1328&context=blr">inadvertently</a> put themselves at risk of an anti-doping rule violation. Some of the penalties end careers. All of them either damage or destroy reputations. </p>
<p>Even if the Essendon players win their case in Switzerland, which most pundits believe is highly unlikely, WADA can appeal that decision. It could be 2017 before this anti-doping saga is over.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/54712/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
With the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruling that Essendon footballers were knowingly guilty of doping in 2012, there have been spirited arguments for and against Jobe Watson retaining his medal…Daryl Adair, Associate Professor of Sport Management, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.