As noted above, online doping forums may be seen as a form of user-led, ‘grassroots’ harm reduction communities, although such venues may focus on the maximisation of physical or performance benefits. Moreover, the very nature of the doping risk environments may limit the ability of individuals to effect harm reduction through mere behavioural change. The enabling processes and environments represented by systematic doping demonstrate a dynamic interplay with the multi-layered risk environment structured by anti-doping policies and cultural stigma. For example, where threshold values for banned substances have been set, athletes have ensured that they remain under the limit to avoid detection. Similarly, the introduction of the athlete biological passport meant that samples would be recorded over time to flag changes in biological values that might indicate doping not caught through testing single samples.
- The leagues tend to treat marijuana as a recreational drug; athletes, however, have cited it as a substance that helps with recovery and pain management.
- If an athlete tests positive for a banned substance, the consequences can include disqualification, sanctions, and/or suspension.
- Ostensibly, this is related to the perceived health risks of doping substances, though it is also related to broader war on drugs style policies and politics (Coomber, 2014; Dimeo, 2007).
- “Secret data revealing the extraordinary extent of cheating by athletes at the world’s most prestigious events can be disclosed for the first time today [Aug. 2, 2015], after the biggest leak of blood-test data in sporting history…
- Men may experience prominent breasts, baldness, shrunken testicles, infertility, and impotence, as well as acne, an increased risk of tendinitis, liver abnormalities, high blood pressure, aggressive behaviors, psychiatric disorders, and more.
Data Sources:
Some drugmakers and workout magazines claim that andro products help athletes train harder and recover faster. Sport Integrity Australia is Australia’s national anti-doping organisation. It aims to protect treatment and recovery national institute on drug abuse nida the integrity of sport and promote clean and fair competition. This is done by actioning anti-doping principles set out in Australian legislation and also meeting international requirements.
Is cooking food in an air fryer ‘healthier’?
Instead, they may continue using the opioids so they can handle the pain they’d otherwise be facing during games. Blood doping can present the athlete with the risk of diseases such as HIV, hepatitis B, and C. Even with the athlete’s blood, there are still risks, such as blood clots, stroke, and heart attack. However, it is essential to keep in mind that athletes may also use illicit drugs for recreational purposes in addition to their PEDs, similar to non-athletes.
Physical pressures
There is variable evidence for the performance-enhancing effects and side effects of the various substances that are used for doping. Drug abuse in athletes should be addressed with preventive measures, education, motivational interviewing, and, when indicated, pharmacologic interventions. As sport and anti-doping drive harsher policies, more invasive surveillance techniques, and liquid marijuana push the cultural narrative around ‘clean sport’, doping groups have responded with techniques for avoiding detection and keeping overall risk as low as possible. In order to understand how enabling environments are produced we must consider those instances where the environment has been altered in order to reduce the social, political, economic, and physical risks of doping.
Why are some drugs and substances banned in sports?
In sport groups or organisations where doping is accepted and employment is tenuous or performance based, PEDs may become a normal working condition (Aubel & Ohl, 2014). This directly relates to economic risks, as income or sponsorships tied to performance present a fertile atmosphere for pushing doping boundaries. Similarly, athletes who receive support from public entities may feel the need to provide a return on that investment through medals or other victories, leading to a willingness to take more risks. Taken together, anti-doping policies and culture set up an anomic environment in which athletes are incentivized to dope while also being at risk of a range of negative outcomes if they are caught. It then becomes imperative that athletes avoid detection, a situation that can be tricky for an individual athlete to manage on their own.
Rhodes (2002, 2009) saw the goal of understanding risk environments as the production of enabling environments in which harm reduction occurs. Enabling environments can be examined similarly to risk environments, as the interaction of various harm reducing factors across levels. As Duff (2010) observed, it is tempting to understand the two separately, or as the former leading to the latter. This, however, limits the extent to which we can understand how both risk and enabling factors and processes are intertwined with one another.
Elite athletes competing at international and national levels are subject to standardized anti-doping guidelines under the auspices of WADA and related national organizations. WADA is the international independent agency that publishes the World Anti-Doping Code, which is the document harmonizing anti-doping policies in all sports and all countries.61 The Code was 7 topics covered in group therapy for substance abuse first adopted in 2003 and became effective in 2004. The most commonly used substances are androgenic agents such as anabolic steroids. These allow athletes to train harder, recover more quickly and build more muscle, but they can lead to kidney damage and increased aggression. Studies suggest that 14% to 39% of adult elite athletes intentionally use doping.
While governments remain committed to drug policy approaches that emphasise prohibition, HAT stands out as a concession shaped by evidence, pragmatism, and humanism. Policy changes that seek to reduce harm among some athlete groups, such as recreational, youth, or elder sport participants, could provide a similar concession within the sport context. Harm reduction proposals for addressing doping have attempted to do so by advancing suggestions such as medically supervised doping, health checks, and threshold testing (Kayser et al., 2007; Kayser & Tollneer, 2017; Smith & Stewart, 2015). Utilising such strategies in a policy context may begin to help foster sport enabling environments that are so far available only through illicit doping systems.
The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), which regulates college sports in the US, even limits the caffeine consumption of college athletes. More drug testing among amateur sports people is a “waste of time”, according to one amateur cyclist who received a two-year ban for missing a post-race drugs test. Among sports club members aged 18-34, 13% say they have taken steroids to support performance or recovery while playing. Not one interviewee aged 55 or over said they had used anabolic steroids. Of the 79 people interviewed who had specifically taken anabolic steroids, 41% said improving performance was the main reason for taking them, followed by pain relief (40%) and improving how they look (34%). If an athlete tests positive for a banned substance, the consequences can include disqualification, sanctions, and/or suspension.
You can read more about performance-enhancing drugs at Australian Academy of Science. Sir Craig Reedie, Wada’s president, maintains more can be done, urging governments to criminalise doping and suggesting, external a blanket ban on countries whose athletes regularly dope could be introduced. Stricter punishments approved by Wada came into effect in January, doubling bans for athletes found guilty of doping from two years to four. Most testing for doping products uses a long-established technique called mass spectrometry. Anabolic steroids are usually taken either in tablet form or injected into muscles. In December last year, a German TV documentary alleged as many as 99% of Russian athletes were guilty of doping, although the Russian Athletics Federation described the allegations as “lies”.
