Cyprus Mail
Guest ColumnistOpinion

Education, prevention, detection and deterrence key in combating doping in sports

Anti-doping (IAAF)

By  Richard W. Pound

All of the stakeholders in sport are fully aware of the high prevalence of doping and the dangers it presents, both to the health of athletes and to the integrity of competitions. Many of these stakeholders have a plan to deal with it. Unfortunately, their plan is to ignore the problem, pretend it does not exist, pretend to attack it vigorously, and ultimately hope that the public will get tired of hearing about it. They will then declare the sport to have been cured of the scourge, and the public will either accept the vanilla or become indifferent to the problem.

Doping is not, as apologists like to suggest, merely a way of leveling the playing field. Athletes do not dope to become as good as other athletes – they do it to beat them (even if it requires quantities of substances that may be harmful, or even lethal). In many cases, coaches, trainers, doctors, and scientists encourage and assist athletes in doping, even though they know they are corrupting them and the sports they participate in. The enablers are, in many respects, far more culpable than the athletes upon whom they experiment.

Anti-doping rules are not arbitrary. They are based on an overwhelming consensus among sport administrators, athletes, and medical and scientific personnel who are concerned with the health of athletes and the integrity of sport. The most recent version of these rules (contained in the World Anti-Doping Code) was adopted at the World Conference on Doping in Sport in November 2013.

The rules are clear and the measures they contain can be effectively applied, but they will only work if the people and organizations affected by them are committed to the fight against doping in sport.

Education, prevention, detection, and deterrence are key. Those involved must know the risks and consequences of doping, both at a personal and institutional level. They must be educated about the health of athletes, the essential morality of adhering to the agreed-upon rules of sport, and the risk that corruption of the essential elements of sport may eventually lead to its collapse.

It is far easier to prevent a problem than to solve one. Prevention of doping is preferable to permitting it to infect sport and then trying to cure that infection. Prevention requires energy and commitment and is difficult to measure – not unlike security measures, where success is measured by lack of incidents. Education is an important component of prevention, as is the existence of measures that may expose transgressions.

Human nature being what it is, there will always be some who care nothing about the rules of competition to which they promised to adhere. Such people will not be deterred from cheating by ethical appeals. They may, however, be deterred by the fear of getting caught.

The scientific basis of detection has become quite sophisticated (as has the science applied to active cheating). Almost all forms of doping can be scientifically identified through testing of urine and blood.

Deterrence is assisted by the imposition of sanctions. Athletes and officials who cheat should be removed from the sport they have corrupted. An escalating regime of sanctions has been adopted to protect clean athletes, and to provide a fair opportunity for anyone charged with a violation of the rules to put forward an informed defense.

This system will work if stakeholders want it to work, but it can also be sabotaged by those who prefer to ignore the problems of doping in sport or those who persist in the corruption of sport.

The stakes are enormous. If organized sport is unable to refind its moral compass, its future is in considerable jeopardy. Organized sport depends on support from the private sector. If the private sector loses interest in a corrupt system, it will withdraw its support, and the result will be the disappearance of international sport as we know it.

 

PDFFGGGRichard Pound is the Founding Chairman of the World Anti-Doping Agency (1999-2007). He also served, twice, as Vice-President to the International Olympic Committee.

This article first appeared in www.themarknews.com

 

Related Posts

Our View: State cannot be expected to bail out struggling Paralimni shops

CM: Our View

Coffee and politics: high drama at the coffee shop

Paul Lambis

Our View: Government right to promote vocational training

CM: Our View

Afghanistan: down the memory hole

Gwynne Dyer

Government, banks and employers depressing the economy

Les Manison

Concern over increase in crime in the north

CM Guest Columnist

4 comments

Comments are closed.