Sport’s future may well be at stake if the problem is not finally solved

THESE new allegations regarding doping in sport show two things: how far we have come in the fight against doping in sport and how far we have yet to go. Progress has been made, especially over the last couple of decades, in the capacity to detect drug usage and to create doping-specific rules that can stand up to legal scrutiny. There is general acknowledgement that doping continues, that its extent is greater than has been admitted and that the future of sport may well be at stake if the problem is not solved. It is, however, equally clear that there is no genuine commitment by many sport authorities, athletes, coaches and even governments to the eradication of doping. That doping may affect the top athletes in virtually every sport is no surprise. It is the top athletes whose lives are bound up in millimetres, grams and milliseconds. Those farther down the food chain may also be doping, but their results have little impact on the outcome of high-level competition. They may simply lack the talent, or be using the wrong methods.

Nor is it a surprise that perpetrators always have an initial advantage over those charged with administering sport and trying to ensure that all of the applicable rules, including those regarding doping, are followed. Until relatively recently, this advantage may have persisted for lengthy periods, but as science has improved and more experience gained by forensic investigators, that gap has narrowed significantly. Pharma companies are more willing to share their knowledge regarding new molecules with reliable organisations, such as the World Anti-doping Agency (Wada), to develop detection methods for the use of the substances, often well before the beginning of clinical trials. Whistle-blowers are ready to disclose usage and provide samples of drugs for analysis. While the building blocks of drugs used for performance enhancement remain the same (such as testosterone, anabolic steroids, hematocrit), many of them can be tweaked so that traditional detection methods cannot immediately identify them. This is a feature of the “designer” steroids, whose presence can be noted, but not immediately identified. It requires further research to identify the particular building block and the alterations to it that produce the previously indecipherable readings. It helps to have access to samples, to accelerate the detection.

The effects of drugs on drugs need to be further explored. One drug, perhaps not prohibited, may mask the use of a prohibited drug and the acknowledged use of “cocktails” of drugs can make detection of doping more difficult. They may also substantially increase the health risks to the users. There are, as noted, no clinical tests for them and the effects, particularly in the mid-to-long term, are not known. Some may be merely toxic. Some may be lethal.

Doping is generally well-organised. There is considerable money to be made from the supply of prohibited drugs and the performances of doped athletes. Much of the progress in the fight against doping has resulted from the efforts of investigative media. Very few sport organisations have the resources and expertise to undertake such investigations, but they do possess information that can supplement disclosures by the media or whistle-blowers. Those in possession of information should take advantage of either direct disclosure or whistle-blower opportunities provided by independent organisations such as Wada. One has only to look at the significant outcomes of the Wada investigations regarding drug use in Russia, which depended for much of their success on information supplied by investigative media and whistle-blowers. If you know, and you care, you can help.

Dick Pound was the first president of the World Anti-doping Agency and the vice-president of the International Olympic Committee