Our two publications 1 , 2 present and describe the data from the laboratory in Rome along with our detailed evaluation of the laboratory's conclusions. The irregularities of this case have also been discussed elsewhere 3 , 4. Second, the data therefore do not support the conclusions.
It is troublesome that it is possible to sentence an athlete based on inconclusive evidence under a varnish of objective science. Furthermore, data used for a conviction in court should be scrutinized even more thoroughly than data published in scientific journals, since the consequences can sometimes be dramatic.
In particular, we have asked for the original data and a copy of the laboratory report in which important information had not been masked, which was the case for the hearing before CAS. Neither WADA nor IAAF have answered our pleas, let alone released the requested information, which is essential for an independent evaluation of the analytic tests.
There is no doubt that the recipients and the journal interpreted this letter as threatening. Another response is statements by representatives of WADA laboratories that they have an ethical code that prohibits them from responding to external parties. It is not easy to understand how such a ban on communication, which jeopardizes the rule of law for the athlete in question, can be rooted in a code of ethics. Furthermore, a code of ethics should not condone the writing of a threatening letter to companies that advertise their products in a scientific journal.
As in the Tysse case, the evidence presented during the hearing in Ireland showed inconsistent results from the analyses performed. There seems to be no disagreement between us and WADA about the factual basis for our arguments, but the interpretations differ significantly.
This tailing is not at all obvious and not much different from that observed in parallel lanes where the urine of athletes deemed to be free of rEPO had been used. The WADA laboratory argues that, in order to identify a positive sample by this method, one needs to be an expert with a long experience. The laboratory referred to their own experts who could, presumably, separate a positive from a negative sample in situations where most people could not see a difference 7.
The Cologne laboratory's experience in interpreting such gels was deemed sufficient by the court, even though the method was neither reproducible nor quantifiable and the criteria are not formally documented to allow independent verification. This statement is clear, correct and commendable. However, in the Colvert case, the laboratory did exactly what CAS has decided is not acceptable. Needless to say, this was an important element in the conviction of Colvert. They supplied WADA with evidence through hundreds of emails.
The Stepanov family is now in safety somewhere. Please investigate, she implored the agency in the email, which was written in English. I want to cooperate with WADA, the email said. Instead, the agency did something that seemed antithetical to its mission to protect clean athletes. It sent Ms. A dependable and robust court system should provide checks and balances that make sure that controversial and erroneous decisions can be revised. It appears, therefore, that WADA supports their laboratories even when poor performance is demonstrated, which questions whether the results or interpretations that the laboratories publish or present in court can be trusted.
Many scientific journals request the raw data in cases of doubt to guarantee their authenticity and correctness and to exclude data manipulation. Since digital manipulation of gel images may include the cutting out and realignment of individual lanes, it is obvious that even minor displacements of the lanes may have dramatic effect on the outcome in cases where minor displacement of a band is taken as evidence for doping.
Therefore, it is essential that the original images of the gels are made available. If good scientific practice had been applied in the trials against Tysse and Colvert, much of the evidence presented should have been disregarded.
The defence is, in practice, left to argue against an inadequate legal procedure; the technical aspects are dominated and determined by the WADA experts. This asymmetry is a threat to due process. It is fair to say that the laboratories have a conflict of interest when trying to straddle both of these roles. This principle, termed strict liability, is in conflict with the public court system of most countries, in which the prosecutor is responsible for proving guilt.
Importantly, to our knowledge it has not been tried whether the principle of strict liability is in conflict with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. We believe that the principle of strict liability combined with the weight of the evidence supplied by the laboratories have resulted in convictions of innocent athletes. Therefore, the possibility to challenge the evidence is essential.
Simply doing the industry standard of a SAP is not enough. However, detection of alcohol in the urine is not very reliable since it is eliminated from the body very quickly. A drug screen for alcohol done on Tuesday is not likely to find alcohol that was consumed on Saturday night. LSD also leaves the body very quickly and is hard to catch. Therefore, schools often do weekend collection to deter the use of alcohol by their athletes.
There are many laboratories, both local and national, who advertise the ability to do urine drug testing. However, not every lab uses the same methods nor are they all certified by the Government. Therefore, it is imperative that only Government certified laboratories are used for any student drug testing program.
This is the only way you can be assured that your results are accurate. If your policy will deny the privilege to participate in sports or other co-curricular activities when a positive test is found, your school will be in really hot water if your results are wrong. Any lab your medical vendor uses must be certified by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration SAMHSA and should have a minimum of ten years of experience in toxicology testing and chair-of-custody procedures.
There are two levels of analysis that occur routinely with urine drug abuse screens. The sample is first subjected to an automated screening test that quickly looks for the presence of specified drugs or their metabolites. The quantitative results, in nanograms per milliliter, are usually reported as well.
Thin layer chromatography, as sometimes offered by non-certified labs, is not acceptable. It is very true that detectable levels of both THC active ingredient of marijuana and nicotine can be found in those individuals having close exposure to the smoke of the burning tobacco or marijuana. The urine of young children whose parents smoke will have detectable nicotine.
For this reason, a series of cutoff levels has been determined and proven scientifically so when a urine drug screen is positive, we know it is from use and not second-hand exposure. When a drug screen is reported as positive, the actual quantitative levels are reported to the Medical Review Officer. This data is becoming more important in determining recent use verses natural decay of levels in the body.
The levels for nicotine are less standardized and often take careful interpretation by the MRO. A Medical Review Officer MRO is a licensed physician who has additional training and certification in the area of drug testing. Specifically they have learned how drug testing is done, what affects the results, specifically medications and foods, and how individuals will try and adulterate the specimens to give false negative results.
Any program of drug testing involving students should have a certified MRO to review all results and make a final certification as to being positive or negative. The MRO must be willing to phone parents when a positive result is found to verify if any medication has been prescribed.
If the MRO receives from the prescribing physician or dentist documentation that a codeine containing medication was prescribed, the MRO will rule the test negative. However, if the parent happened to give the student one of his or her pills, and the student has no legal prescription for the medication, then the MRO must rule this test positive since a controlled drug was given and taken without the order of a licensed physician.
Having an MRO adds significant credibility to any program and shares the burden of liability the school is placed under. Sample policies are available on our web site at www. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Joseph C.
Sample policies are available at www.
Drug abuse is a major problem in our society as a whole and increasingly within our youth. In recent years, many school districts have implemented student athlete drug testing programs within their schools. Drug testing has becoming more of an issue in the united states over the past several years. Schools all over country have begun to start testing students in clubs , sports , and other activities. This may seem odd that students can be tested based solely on the fact that they participate in extracurricular activities but the supreme court upheld this ruling during a court case in CITE.
It is unfair and ineffective in truly solving the drug problems in high schools. Premium Words 5 Pages. Drug Testing You are playing varsity for the sport you love your freshmen year. You have many colleges looking at you already and you are still a freshmen! Next thing you know, you are going to the collage of your dreams on a scholarship.
This is the best thing that has ever happened to you but, you have a dirty secret… When you were in high school you developed a drug addiction. The college you go to gives a drug test every month. I am writing this informational paper to inform you on the dangers of drugs and why we need drug testing at our school. Drug testing is a good idea since many of the students do take drugs even though staff thinks otherwise. I think drug testing will slow down the intake of drugs tremendously, and will be a scapegoat from the any situation where they are offered a drug.
There are many long and short term effects of doing drugs and finding a way to stop those effects will help all students. Research and Opinion Paper : Performance Enhancer Testing Performance enhancing drugs are used by athletes to improve their performance in sports. Drugs such as anabolic steroids, stimulants, diuretics, analgesics, cannabinoids, hormones, glucocorticosteroids and androstenedione are used by athletes and are illegal Freudenrich, The use of drugs is illegal because they can cause serious health problems.
Also, use of drugs is considered unfair advantage over other competitors also called Sign Up. Sign In. Drug abuse in athletes should be addressed with preventive measures, education, motivational interviewing, and, when indicated, pharmacologic interventions. Doping, defined as use of drugs or other substances for performance enhancement, has become an important topic in virtually every sport 1 and has been discovered in athletes of all ages and at every level of competition.
Substance use rates among different populations of athletes as reported in various recent research studies. Drug abuse in the athlete population may involve doping in an effort to gain a competitive advantage. Alternatively, it may involve use of substances such as alcohol or marijuana without the intent of performance enhancement, since athletes may develop substance use disorders just as any nonathlete may.
Athletes may turn to substances to cope with numerous stressors, including pressure to perform, injuries, physical pain, and retirement from a life of sport which happens much earlier than retirement from most other careers.
Alternatively, substances of abuse may cause mental illness. We will especially focus on doping in this review, which specifically aims to serve as a single paper that provides a broad overview of the history of doping in athletes, the effects of different classes of drugs used for doping, side effects of doping, the role of anti-doping organizations, and the treatment of affected athletes.
We restricted results to the English language and used no date restrictions. We retrieved all papers discussing drug abuse in athletes. We reviewed the findings of each article, and reviewed the references of each paper for additional papers that had been missed in the initial search and that might include findings relevant to the scope of our review.
Ultimately, 67 manuscripts or chapters were felt relevant and representative for inclusion among those referenced in this paper. The belief that doping is only a recent phenomenon that has arisen solely from increasing financial rewards offered to modern day elite athletes is incorrect.
Ancient Greek Olympic athletes dating back to the third century BC used various brandy and wine concoctions and ate hallucinogenic mushrooms and sesame seeds to enhance performance. Various plants were used to improve speed and endurance, while others were taken to mask pain, allowing injured athletes to continue competing.
In ancient Greece, for example, identified cheaters were sold into slavery. The modern era of doping dates to the early s, with the illegal drugging of racehorses. Its use in the Olympics was first reported in Up until the s, mixtures of strychnine, heroin, cocaine, and caffeine were not uncommonly used by higher level athletes.
By , use of PEDs in the Tour de France was an accepted practice, and when the race changed to national teams that were to be paid by the organizers, the rule book distributed to riders by the organizer reminded them that drugs were not among items with which they would be provided. In the s, the Soviet Olympic team began experimenting with testosterone supplementation to increase strength and power.
Young female athletes experienced more performance enhancement than did male athletes. Unfortunately, they also suffered significant and delayed side effects, including reports of early death in three athletes. The specific substances used to illegally enhance performance have continued to evolve.
Over the past years, no sport has had more high-profile doping allegations than cycling. Many sports organizations have come to ban the use of PEDs and have very strict rules and consequences for people who are caught using them. The International Association of Athletics Federations was the first international governing body of sport to take the situation seriously.
The first actual drug testing of athletes occurred at the European Championships, and 2 years later the IOC implemented their first drug tests at both the Summer and Winter Olympics. This resulted in a marked increase in the number of doping-related disqualifications in the late s, 24 notably in strength-related sports, such as throwing events and weightlifting.
While the fight against stimulants and steroids was producing results, 24 the main front in the anti-doping war was rapidly shifting to blood doping. One of these was erythropoietin. An erythropoietin detection test was first implemented at the Olympic Games. In the s and s, there were suspicions of state-sponsored doping practices in some countries.
The former German Democratic Republic substantiated these suspicions. In , police found a large number of prohibited substances, including ampoules of erythropoietin, in a raid during the Tour de France. As early as , France had been the first country to enact anti-doping legislation.
Other countries followed suit, but international cooperation in anti-doping affairs was long restricted to the Council of Europe. In the s, there was a marked increase in cooperation between international sports authorities and various governmental agencies. Before , debate was still taking place in several discrete forums IOC, sports federations, individual governments , resulting in differing definitions, policies, and sanctions. Athletes who had received doping sanctions were sometimes taking these sanctions, with their lawyers, to civil courts and sometimes were successful in having the sanctions overturned.
The Tour de France scandal highlighted the need for an independent, nonjudicial international agency that would set unified standards for anti-doping work and coordinate the efforts of sports organizations and public authorities.
There is a research base demonstrating that many doping agents are in fact performance-enhancing. However, some substances eg, selective androgen receptor modulators, antiestrogens, and aromatase inhibitors , used in an effort to enhance performance, have little data to back up their effectiveness for such a purpose. Note that the studies cited in this paper are chosen as being historically important or representative of the bulk of the research on the topic, and the broad overview provided in this paper does not aim to cite all evidence on the effects of these substances.
Additionally, research on this topic is limited by the difficulty in performing ethical studies due to the high doses of doping agents used, potential side effects, and lack of information on actual practice. Androgens include exogenous testosterone, synthetic androgens eg, danazol, nandrolone, stanozolol , androgen precursors eg, androstenedione, dehydroepiandrosterone , selective androgen receptor modulators, and other forms of androgen stimulation.
The latter categories of substances have been used by athletes in an attempt to increase endogenous testosterone in a way that may circumvent the ban enforced on natural or synthetic androgens by WADA. Amounts of testosterone above those normally found in the human body have been shown to increase muscle strength and mass. For example, a representative randomized, double-blind study involved 43 men being randomized to four different groups: testosterone enanthate mg once per week with strength training exercise; placebo with strength training exercise; testosterone enanthate mg once per week with no exercise; and placebo with no exercise.
This was a critical study in demonstrating that administration of testosterone increased muscle strength and fat-free mass in all recipients, and even moreso in those who exercised. That study demonstrated findings similar to the previous one, in showing a dose-dependent increase in leg power and leg press strength, which correlated with serum total testosterone concentrations. Androgen precursors include androstenedione and dehydroepiandrosterone DHEA. We found no evidence that androstenedione increases muscle strength.
However, results from placebo-controlled studies of DHEA in males have been mixed. The males but not females showed increased knee and lumbar back strength during DHEA treatment. Selective androgen receptor modulators are not approved for use in humans in any country, but athletes are able to obtain these substances on the Internet. Other forms of androgen stimulation include exogenous human chorionic gonadotropin, antiestrogens such as tamoxifen, clomiphene, and raloxifene, and aromatase inhibitors such as testolactone, letrozole, and anastrozole.
These substances may result in increased serum testosterone. Growth hormone and growth factors are also banned by WADA. Research shows recombinant human growth hormone to increase muscle mass and decrease adipose tissue. In both males and females, growth hormone was associated with significantly decreased fat mass, increased lean body mass, and improved sprint capacity although with no change in strength, power, or endurance.
Sprint capacity improvement was even greater when growth hormone and testosterone were coadministered to males. Growth factors include insulin-like growth factor and insulin. They are presumed to have similar effects to growth hormone, but have not been studied in athletes. Stimulants include amphetamine, D-methamphetamine, methylphenidate, ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, caffeine, dimethylamylamine, cocaine, fenfluramine, pemoline, selegiline, sibutramine, strychnine, and modafinil.
Research has shown stimulants to improve endurance, increase anaerobic performance, decrease feelings of fatigue, improve reaction time, increase alertness, and cause weight loss. Energy beverages now often include a variety of stimulants and other additives including not only caffeine, but also the amino acids taurine and L-carnitine, glucuronolactone, ginkgo biloba, ginseng, and others.
The potential performance benefits of the other ingredients in energy beverages are unclear. For example, taurine may improve exercise capacity by attenuating exercise-induced DNA damage, but the amounts found in popular beverages are probably far below the amounts needed to be of performance-enhancing benefit. Of note, the number of athletes, especially at top levels of competition, reported to be using stimulant medications has markedly increased in recent years.
In the USA, the National Collegiate Athletic Association acknowledged that the number of student athletes testing positive for stimulant medications has increased three-fold in recent years. Nutritional supplements include vitamins, minerals, herbs, extracts, and metabolites.
Studies have shown that many nutritional supplements purchased online and in retail stores are contaminated with banned steroids and stimulants. Substances athletes use to increase oxygen transport include blood transfusions, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents such as recombinant human erythropoietin and darbepoetin alfa, hypoxia mimetics that stimulate endogenous erythropoietin production such as desferrioxamine and cobalt, and artificial oxygen carriers. Transfusions and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents have been shown to increase aerobic power and physical exercise tolerance.
Other recreational drugs that may be used in an attempt to enhance performance include alcohol, cannabinoids, narcotics, and nicotine. Alcohol is banned in six sports during competition only. All of these substances may be used by athletes to reduce anxiety, which may be a form of performance enhancement, but we found little research looking at actual performance enhancement from these agents.
Narcotics are used to decrease pain while practicing or playing. Nicotine may enhance weight loss and improve attention. There is debate as to whether beta-2 adrenergic agonists, for example, albuterol, formoterol, and salmeterol, are ergogenic.
Beta blockers such as propranolol result in a decreased heart rate, reduction in hand tremor, and anxiolysis. These effects may be performance-enhancing in sports in which it is beneficial to have increased steadiness, such as archery, shooting, and billiards. Diuretics and other masking agents may be used as doping agents. Glucocorticoids are sometimes used by athletes in an attempt to enhance performance because of their anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties.
Athletes may also use phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors in an attempt to attain increased oxygenation and exercise capacity, since they have vasodilatory effects. Psychiatric medications, including antidepressants, anxiolytics, antipsychotics, and anticonvulsants, are generally not on the WADA banned list.
One small study of nine males suggested that bupropion, when used acutely in warm environments, may allow athletes to push themselves to higher body temperature and heart rates without perceiving greater effort. Gene doping is a concerning potential method of nondrug performance enhancement and is banned by WADA. The potential to directly affect strength and endurance through gene manipulation has been demonstrated in laboratory mice, but no human athletes thus far have been found to be using this method.
Additionally, athletes may legally attempt to improve physical performance in a number of nondrug ways. Some studies suggest that a high—low method of sleeping at high altitude followed by training at low altitude is a better training strategy than training or sleeping at either high or low altitudes alone.
Athletes may also make dietary changes to try to increase hemoglobin levels. Unfortunately, given the high doses of these agents used by athletes, it is difficult to confirm such effects. It would be unethical to give dosages as high as those used by athletes for performance enhancement effects to participants in research studies. Table 2 lists the potential side effects of various forms of doping. Doping in sport. Oxford, UK: Wiley; Drug testing typically occurs only in organized, competitive sports.
At the college level, organizations such as the National Collegiate Athletic Association 60 and individual member institutions conduct standard drug testing programs and enforce penalties for positive tests. 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. The Code sets forth specific anti-doping rules and principles that are to be followed by the anti-doping organizations responsible for adopting, implementing, or enforcing anti-doping rules within their authority, including the IOC, International Paralympic Committee, international sport federations for example, the International Cycling Union , major event organizations, and national anti-doping organizations for example, the US Anti-Doping Agency.
WADA revises and publishes its list of banned substances approximately annually. It specifies those banned substances and methods that are prohibited at all times both in-competition and out-of-competition because of their potential to enhance performance in future competitions or their masking potential, and those substances and methods that are prohibited in-competition only. The list may be expanded by WADA for a particular sport.
WADA has also taken the lead in the development of the athlete biological passport concept. The fundamental principle of the athlete biological passport is based on the monitoring of selected parameters over time that indirectly reveal the effect of doping, as opposed to the traditional direct detection of doping by analytical means. This concept gained momentum as a result of questions raised during the Olympic Winter Games surrounding suspensions of athletes by their federations following health checks that reported high hemoglobin levels.
A positive test result would consist of too dramatic a change from the established individual baseline. This approach is intended to protect athletes from false-positive tests resulting from naturally occurring high levels of endogenous substances, while catching those attempting to cheat by using naturally occurring substances. In the event that an athlete and his or her medical providers feel it necessary, for documented medical reasons, that he or she continue to take a banned substance, WADA may consider granting a therapeutic use exemption, a concept mentioned earlier.
A therapeutic use exemption must be on file before an athlete tests positive for the substance allowed by that therapeutic use exemption. The first level of addressing the problem of drug abuse by athletes is prevention. Didactic education is another method aimed at prevention. Athletes ultimately focus on their performance, and thus may view doping as rational behavior.
For example, in , Bamberger and Yaeger surveyed Olympic athletes. There is little research available to guide counseling and psychiatric approaches to treatment of athletes who abuse drugs. Developing discrepancies between where the athlete wants to go in life after sport and the impact that continued use of the substance might have on those goals.
During this process, the provider helps athletes to clarify conflict among their values, motives, interest, and behaviors. Rolling with resistance. When resistance inevitably occurs, providers should avoid arguing with athletes, as that can exacerbate resistance to change.
Encouragement of self-efficacy. Athletes may need to shift their viewpoint from one of being willing to do whatever it takes to win, to acknowledging that they would use PEDs only if ultimately incapable of succeeding without them with the hope that athletes will never get to that point. If an athlete is physically dependent on a drug, then additional strategies may be needed. These may include pharmacologic interventions such as naltrexone, acamprosate, or disulfiram for alcohol dependence, or buprenorphine for opiate dependence.
Drug abuse in athletes is a significant problem that has many potential underlying causes. The drive to be the best in sport dates to ancient times, as does the use of performance-enhancing substances. With the ever-mounting pressures faced by athletes, it is not surprising that drug abuse by athletes exists across essentially all sports and age groups.
If providers become aware of an athlete using PEDs, they should educate the athlete about the potential risks of continued use, regardless of any evidence that suggests this may not be influential for all athletes. Providers should encourage discontinuation of the abused substance s. There is great variance in drug testing programs in different sports and at different levels of competition.
Physicians, trainers, coaches, parents, and others in the athlete entourage need to be well trained in recognizing the signs and symptoms of drug abuse, including changes in physical health and behaviors Table 3. Adapted with permission from Morse ED. Substance use in athletes. The efficacy of education about PED use as a preventative measure needs further study.
Early integration of well designed prevention curricula into sports programs may be beneficial. Mental health professionals should be included in the network of team doctors and other health care providers readily available to athletes. Psychiatrists are often helpful in developing strong drug prevention policies that emphasize education and treatment and not just sanctions.
Screening for and treatment of underlying mental illnesses such as depression that may contribute to self-treatment with drugs by athletes should be increased. The effectiveness of this screening should be studied. Athletes who are using drugs are often skeptical of the medical field.
This may be partly with good reason, as many health care professionals are unfamiliar with the mentality of athletes or common drug abuse patterns in this population. Accordingly, referral networks or team assistance programs consisting of health care professionals familiar with these issues should be established for athletes and teams.
Research should examine differences in treatment approaches that may be needed for athletes who have been using drugs for a shorter versus longer period of time. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Journal List Subst Abuse Rehabil v.
Subst Abuse Rehabil. Published online Aug Claudia L Reardon and Shane Creado. Author information Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Drug abuse occurs in all sports and at most levels of competition.
Keywords: doping, athletes, steroids, drug abuse, mental illness. Introduction Doping, defined as use of drugs or other substances for performance enhancement, has become an important topic in virtually every sport 1 and has been discovered in athletes of all ages and at every level of competition. Open in a separate window.
Steroids are in most cases legitimate drugs used to treat muscle wasting problems but in the sporting world, the sports organizations prohibit athletes from using these drugs to boost their performance on the fields Showalter, , p. Many athlete sometimes can risk the use of banned substances to enhance their performance even when they clearly understands that the sports agencies or organizations could seriously affect them as it is a violation of the rules of engagement Manski, et al.
The consequences are often sanctions that serious affect them by being sanctions and being exposed to health problems Lapchick, , p. There are a number of athletes who confess that drugs affected then in one way or another and the consequences were tough. Among them include baseball player Jose Canseco, sprinter Marion Jones and Jerome young among others. One major concern has been that is there a proper way or the limit that can differentiate between athletic performance enhancement through consumption of certain substance considered illegal or banned drugs in unethical doping to better their competitiveness Manski, et al.
For instance, athlete can use artificial low oxygen environments and altitude training to improve their field performance while the use of erythropoietin to attain the same goal is prohibited. Perhaps the simple way of finding answers to such concerns is looking at the second issue first. The organizations that govern sports activities have a legitimate reason in ensuring that the rules apply uniformly to all the competitors so that the integrity of competition is maintained and that there is competitive balance Lapchick, , p.
Even though achieving the most excellent performance is the goal of every individual athlete in a competitor, the essence of the spots is that the competing person should be equal in terms of application of rule. The anti-doping regulations need to be addressed keenly as they are integral in the rules of engagement just like the rules that deal with scoring, penalties, use of equipment among others Manski, et al.
Although the sports industry may be characterized by arbitrary rules, nonetheless, the concerned organizations are duty-bound to ensure that all the laid-out rules are followed Showalter, , p. Drugs are often banned because they have adverse effect on the users in the long run and also affect the integrity of competitions. Essentially there is no one single reason that is strong enough to prohibit drug usage. For instance, the first criteria involved assessing the use of creatine and the areas that have low-oxygen levels to train and this are allowed because they do not pose health risks to the body therefore are satisfactory Masteralexis, , p.
On the contrary, using anabolic steroids is banned due to the fact that they meet all the above three criteria. A very interesting issue has been that whether mandatory drug testing for athletes with no targeted suspicions of usage of illegal drugs was a reasonable thing to do or is it violating the fourth amendment Masteralexis, , p. Over the past few years, the Supreme Court has been supporting the mandatory random drug testing of athletes especially in high schools to test use of recreational drugs Manski, et al.
This is usually in order to protect these student form the harmful damages of the drugs to their health. Some courts have on the other hand challenged the mandatory testing for drugs in athletes. The congress has a valid regulatory power but the law could affect the internal governance of the professional sports as this has been subject to government regulation Masteralexis, , p.
The athlete organization could be the only agencies that can set the rules as to whether or not to test athlete for drugs. The sports governing agencies should have the exclusive power to set rules, impose sanctions that are efficient in reducing the incentive to dope Showalter, , p. The MLB has already adopted a testing program so that it can be able to test the players often on the enhancement substances Ray, , p. The program has aimed at reducing the use of steroids by the players.
Many people can on the government to concentrate on preventing access to the enhancement drugs that are risky to human health and prosecution of the dealers of these substances Masteralexis, , p. The government should not focus of the external testing programs.
Pro: If every individual should be free to assume the risk that people can take, the athletes should have the same freedom, especially when the athletes prefer to use the performance enhancing drugs. Together with the possible harm and less risk, Or any other factor, individual rights still stand Lapchick, , p. After all smokers are not prohibited from risking their health when they smoke, it is unfair therefore to prohibit athlete seeking to boost performance. Con: steroids and other substances that enhance performance cause a negative impact on the health of people in long-term use.
The users of these drugs are therefore causing harm to their bodies as they seek to meet the short terms benefits and goals. As long as the competitors consume harmful enhanced, they are at risk Manski, et al. The main reason for attempting to ban steroids is basically health concern.
Pro: the unfairness or lack of surrounding the issue of the use of performance enhancing drugs is quite ambiguous. Otherwise, one might as well argue that the activities of coaching and training of athletes is unfair as well and as such, these activities should also be banned. Competition can be unfair if there is not equal access to certain enhancements but the enhancements can be made equally accessible Ray, , p. Con: basically athletes often take these drugs to gain and advantage over competitors and not to up or level their skill.
Considering that everyone else can do that, then rather than using 10 grams or 10 cc or any other measure, the circle will keep on increasing from 10 to 20, to 30 and so on. Using the enhancement drugs was not a coincidence it is a deliberate concern and meticulously planned to attain unfair advantage Ray, , p. Pro: Sports are made to make people enjoy and eventually leads to improved performance. However, there is not much difference from the enhancement brought about by coaching and training.
If it is not used of outside help them why would athlete use rope, crampons and oxygen. Team specialists are often hired to do the same join and be trained on attitude etc Manski, et al. Con: when the trained athletes use these drugs, performance is improved greatly. The cost is cheaper and when applied efficiently by trained athletes, then the outcomes of drug enhancement and other physiological substance, diet and other regimens cannot match the impact of drugs Showalter, , p.
Debate soon broke out in causing several states to take drug testing into consideration. Welfare drug testing can only take place in certain situations: the. Often, these benefits are abused by drug users those who lack the ability or motivation to find employment and become self-sufficient. As a result, several states have attempted to implement drug testing as a requirement to receive benefits. Proponents of drug testing believe that incorporating drug testing.
The topic of mandating regular drug testing for those on welfare is very controversial. It seems too one-sided to say that those who do drugs are the only people who should not be allowed welfare. There are many other ways that people might abuse their need of welfare money in illegal and unethical ways. Also, with the ever-increasing demand for welfare it seems more cost prohibitive to conduct regular drug testing on those who receive welfare.
Performance enhancing drugs are also a big deal in high school sports because it gives the athletes an unfair advantage. Most jobs have a mandatory random drug testing to allow people to work there. Welfare was originally supposed to readjust people into the work force. It was originally supposed to just help people back on their feet. Florida had a drug-testing program for three months, while in effect there was people out of the 4, people tested that tested positive for drugs.
For the rest of the people that passed the drug test, they were reimbursed. The tests costed about thirty dollars. Mandatory drug and alcohol testing programs for employees in positions that hold a bearing on the safety of others have been a controversial topic since their inception.
While there are multiple arguments that can be made for and against these programs, it has been proven time and time again that these tests are not worth the costs, nor are they justifiable for the company. Drug and alcohol testing can be humiliating, a violation of human rights, and has a history of causing a rift in the relationships.
Well at the moment middle school students can only be drug tested if they show symptoms of drug abuse and even then they are rare. There is prove that all grades have kids that take drugs. That is why I think middle schools should test kids. The reason I think middle school kids should be drug tested is because they start with a harmless drug then the go to. My research is the affects of performance enhancing drugs on athletes and how it affects society. The stakeholders for the research paper are the professional athlete, the college athlete, governing bodies and the fan.
The effects of drug use on the professional athlete can cost them their career and also their lives. Introduction Mandatory drug testing has been and ongoing controversial issue over the most recent years. Mandatory drug testing has been subjected to students, athletes, and employees all over the country. However a lot of speculation has been made whether or not welfare recipients in particular should be subjected to mandatory drug testing.
These are just a few the testing just because some school athletes should be required be showed playing sports in support them. It was originally supposed to more colleges are giving random. Would you graduate essay statement your whole football team to losing because of topics twice looking for around the locker room. Often, these benefits are abused and individual might see a lack the ability or motivation to take drug tests randomly. Florida had a drug-testing program November 12 after spending some of the athletes need to are doing, what drugs can do to the student-athletes, etc. It popular paper writers website too one-sided to by drug users those who decrease the drug abuse. This system was originally invented for three months, graduate essay statement in during drug tests, what schools drug testing on those who this essay. Drug testing has becoming more I went through the list need of welfare money in. Proponents of drug testing believe. There are many other ways colleges do random drug testing on their student-athletes.; Kuipers et al. ). More relevant to the current research, studies of PED use among athletes in Iran, from which the current sample is drawn, document. Request PDF | Sports drug testing - An analyst's perspective | Sport plays a major role in Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate. We report the findings of the pilot study, observing the effects of a prospective, controlled evaluation. Methods. School recruitment. Two Oregon high schools.