Drugs, sport and the Olympics 2000-2004
Author: Anthony P Millar
Published online: 15 November 2004
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.
References
- World Anti-Doping Agency. Code and standards. Available at: www.wada-ama.org (accessed Aug 2004).
- 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 CHDIEDII
Mild traumatic brain injury and concussion and persisting post‐concussion symptoms: new guidelines to support evidence‐based assessment and management in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand
Karen M Barlow, Jennie L Ponsford, Alice Theodom, Gill Cowen, Gavin A Davis, Vicki Anderson, Franz E Babl, David Cole, Jennifer Cullen, Stuart R Dalziel, Melinda Fitzgerald, Howard Flavell, Caroline Yates, Rebecca Kimble, John H Olver, Rhonda Orr, Mark Ralfe, Michael Rose, Nick Rushworth, Julia Treleaven, Gary Browne, Nathan Delang, Sarah Harris, Gary Mitchell, Sean Tweedy
Physical activity interventions to prevent and manage type 2 diabetes in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people: a systematic review
Raymond J Kelly, Rona Macniven, Leonid Churilov, Margaret J Morris, David O'Neal, Elif I Ekinci
The economics of a national anterior cruciate ligament injury prevention program for amateur football players: a Markov model analysis
Andrew Ross, Joosup Kim, Marnee McKay, Evangelos Pappas, Natalie Hardaker, Matt Whalan, Kerry Peek
Concussion in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples: what is the true epidemiology?
Jonathan Bullen, Trish Hill‐Wall, Elizabeth Thomas, Richard Norman, Gill Cowen
Chronic traumatic encephalopathy in Australia: the first three years of the Australian Sports Brain Bank
Catherine M Suter, Andrew J Affleck, Maggie Lee, Alan J Pearce, Linda E Iles, Michael E Buckland