eMJA     The Medical Journal of Australia

Home | Issues | eMJA shop | My account | Classifieds | Contact | More... | Topics | Search   

Letters

Drugs, sport and the Olympics 2000-2004

MJA 2004; 181 (10): 584

Anthony P Millar

Director of Research, Lewisham Sports Medicine Clinic, 1 West Street, Petersham, NSW 2049.
tmillarATitlite.com.au

To the Editor: Pseudoephedrine is no longer a banned substance in sport.1 It was originally banned to protect athletes from overuse and its dangers. Has it become harmless or are athletes more intelligent?

This highlights much of the confusion in drug testing. Athletes with diabetes are permitted to use insulin for therapy, but those with hypertension are not allowed to take β-blockers. Both drugs are popularly believed in athletic circles to improve performance. What is to stop an athlete with diabetes from taking extra insulin for performance enhancement? Why do we discriminate against those with hypertension?

There is a ban on oxygen-transport drugs and on physical environment enhancers such as hypobaric chambers. Both are alleged to produce the same result, but only use of the drug can be tested. The penalty for the drug user is disqualification, but for the hypobaric enthusiast a rousing cheer for a drug-free effort. The crime is the same, so why vary the penalty?

There is never likely to be a level playing field under the present system, in which one reads of positive test results being swept under the table. How will drug testing eliminate the genetic inequalities between athletes? How will testing improve the availability of top-level coaches and training facilities to all? How can it eliminate the inequality in financial incentives, allowing some athletes to train for 6 hours daily while others have to work to enable them to train for even 2 hours daily? We have swimming costumes that decrease drag in the water,1 resulting in faster times. These are not universally available, giving their owners an advantage. A level playing field will never exist in our present system. It is incongruous that in all this mess, only drugs are available to all.

The current frenzy to test blood has ethical problems which have not been addressed.2 What is to happen to an athlete who develops an infection from a dirty needle? Who is responsible for the tester who has a needlestick injury from an HIV-positive athlete? It is worth remembering that this diagnosis will only be made 3 months after the Games, when everyone has dispersed.

The whole area needs to be reviewed by an outside body with no vested interest in the outcome.

  1. World Anti-Doping Agency. Code and standards. Available at: www.wada-ama.org (accessed Aug 2004).
  2. Browne A, Lachance V, Pipe A. The ethics of blood testing as an element of doping control in sport. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1999; 31: 497-501

©The Medical Journal of Australia 2004 www.mja.com.au ISSN: 0025-729X

Home | Issues | eMJA shop | My account | Classifieds | More... | Contact | Topics | Search

The Medical Journal of Australia    eMJA