The War on Doping

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78743-753-120181004
• Published date: 28 September 2018
• Pages: 71-114
• Date: 28 September 2018
• Author: Helen Jefferson Lenskyj University of Toronto, Canada

CHAPTER 3

THE WAR ON DOPING

Doping is universally viewed as the most serious problem

confronting high performance sport and a major threat to its

global reputation and integrity. Arguably more important is

the threat that doping poses to sport’s credibility and appeal

to commercial sponsors, and the subsequent damage to

Olympic industry brands. In sport circles, the demonization

of doping and those who dope is taken as a self-evident truth,

and it is not surprising to find that more CAS appeals involve

doping than the other major categories of eligibility, contract,

transfer, discipline, nationality and governance.

For decades, the broad subject of doping in sport has

attracted an extensive body of scholarly and popular litera-

ture that far exceeds most other sport-related topics. In addi-

tion to reviewing relevant analyses in law and sport sciences

literature, the following discussion will challenge the widely

accepted premise that the ‘fight against doping’is fully justi-

fied. The threat that over-zealous anti-doping campaigns and

subsequent CAS decisions pose to athletes’rights will be

exposed, with a particular focus on the ways in which the

variables of gender and ‘race’/ethnicity are played out.

71

Although generally considered to be underestimations of

doping prevalence, statistics provided by WADA’s annual

Anti-Doping Rule Violations Reports (ADRV) show that a

clear majority of ADRVs come from male athletes. Figures for

2013 showed about 80% of the 1,287 ADRV samples were

from men, and in 2014 and 2015, 79% were from male ath-

letes. Possible explanations for the dramatic gender differ-

ences include greater media attention, enhanced career

opportunities, and more lucrative sponsorships flowing from

international sporting success. In short, men may risk more to

gain more. In terms of detection, men have an advantage,

since the physical changes that testosterone derivatives pro-

duce are compatible with hegemonic masculinities, whereas

similar changes in women are likely to attract more scrutiny.

The few research studies that examine gender differences

in doping identified a number of psychological as well as

physiological factors that had a greater deterrent effect on

women than on men. These included a guilty conscience,

unfairness to other athletes, illegality, suspension, unnatural

physical changes, reduced fertility, and the risk of media

exposure and embarrassment (Overbye, Knudsen, & Pfister,

2013). Reviewing research on gender differences dating back

to 2011, Mazanov (2016) found that the use of supplements

and illicit drugs was higher among male than female athletes,

while prescription drugs and supplements for diet or health

reasons were more likely to be used by females.

3.1. NATIONALISM

Sport has long been termed a war without weapons, and

Olympic sport lends itself to wars of rhetoric as well as highly

symbolic, internationally televised victories in the sporting

arena. It is difficult for politicians and sports leaders to win

72 Gender, Athletes’Rights, and CAS

this war if their country’s sporting achievements are tainted

by allegations of doping. Not only should doping be exposed

and punished, according to this reasoning, but it must also be

seen to be exposed and punished. Mainstream media play a

key role in these processes, often with a cavalier disregard for

the facts.

In specific historical contexts the Cold War, China’seco-

nomic ascendancy, and Putin’s Russia, for example interna-

tional posturing about doping in sport serves to shame and

blame ‘other’nations’athletes for their ‘unbelievable’(drug-

assisted) performances. In the 1970s, the German Democratic

Republic’s state-ordered doping program was widely viewed

as evidence of the evils of Communism. Similarly, in the

1980s and 1990s, China became the subject of scrutiny

following the unexpected winning performances of Chinese

athletes, especially swimmers, in international competition,

while, since 2016, Russian athletes have been the focus of

global attention and censure. Meanwhile, athletes from pur-

portedly ‘clean’countries may evade detection.

At the 2012 London Olympics, as doping suspicions con-

tinued to target Chinese swimmers, 16-year-old Ye Shiwen

won the 200 m and 400 m individual medley (IM) events. In

the final freestyle lap of the 400 m event, she swam faster

than the top male swimmer, American Ryan Lochte. Veteran

American swim coach John Leonard called Shiwen’s perfor-

mance ‘unbelievable,’‘an outrageous performance,’and ‘sus-

picious,’while other coaches and swimmers added their own

allegations. Claiming that Shiwen had failed to demonstrate

‘a normal improvement curve,’Leonard pronounced: ‘[…]a

woman does not out-swim the fastest man in the world in the

back quarter of a 400m IM that is otherwise quite ordinary.

It just doesn’t happen’(quoted in Bull, 2012). In other words,

Shiwen was guilty of doping or she was not a ‘real’woman.

73The War on Doping