This week’s article by George Galanis in The Punch was an interesting read. But, I’m afraid to say, it mistakenly perpetuated the myth that somehow it is medically safe to use performance enhancing substances in sport. 

Marion Jones: one of a long line of athletes who tried it on. Pic: AFP / File

Doping has been around as long as competitive sport itself. However, in modern history one of the major catalysts for the prevention of doping in sport was the deaths of athletes resulting directly from doping.

The reality is that athletes have indeed died during and straight after competition because they have doped. The death of Danish cyclist Knud Enemark Jensen during competition at the 1960 Olympic Games in Rome (the autopsy revealed traces of amphetamine) increased the pressure for sports authorities to introduce drug testing.

In 1967, the urgency of anti-doping work had been highlighted by another tragic death, that of cyclist Tom Simpson during the 13th stage of the Tour de France. The post mortem found that he had taken amphetamines and alcohol, a diuretic combination which proved fatal when combined with the heat.

So one thing is for sure – before doping control, the lives of athletes were not only at risk, but on occasion, were sacrificed for a win.

In George’s article, he suggests that it is possible to use steroids in a safe way and that athletes should be able to do this.

In part, George is correct.

It is possible for athletes to use prohibited substances (such as steroids) for legitimate medical reasons. In fact, the World Anti-Doping Code actually allows for this.

However, athletes can only use prohibited substances following approval from a group of medical experts who grant the athlete what’s called a Therapeutic Use Exemption, or TUE.

What’s important to note from this process is that a group of doctors must approve the TUE. These doctors must be absolutely sure that the use of the substance will not be detrimental to an athlete’s health.

In this way, the World Anti-Doping Code recognises that sometimes athletes do need to use prohibited substances. But, it only allows athletes to use these substances for medical reasons.

There have been recent examples of athletes who have reportedly had major health scares and even died as a result of cheating through doping. These athletes have faced these health problems because they’ve tried to step outside of the World Anti-Doping Code rules, which exposes them to the dangerous risks of doping. 

We can’t possibly stand by and let this occur.

That’s why I’m proud to lead an organisation that aims to develop a sporting culture free from doping in which performance is based on an athlete’s talent, determination, courage and honesty.

13 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • De Coubertin says:

      07:43am | 16/09/10

      Didn’t Flo-Jo die young?

    • Austin 3:16 says:

      07:56am | 16/09/10

      People have died while playing sport. Should sport then also be banned, or simply made as safe as possible ?

    • Mike says:

      08:17am | 16/09/10

      @ Austin. People also die driving cars, eating peanuts and going fishing. Should we ban all these things as well?

      To me, doping is just another word for cheating. And cheating that can result in death. It should be banned.

    • Austin 3:16 says:

      05:21pm | 16/09/10

      Hey Mike, doping is only cheating because that’s what the rules of the game state. Building an institute of sport isn’t cheating is it ? Spending millions of tax-payer dollars on athletes preparing isn’t cheating either, Making sure your swimmers have the latest fast suite technology isn’t cheating. But they all give competitors and advantage of those who aren’t lucky enough to have them.

      I do agree with your first point though we shouldn’t ban something just because it’s dangerous. Why don’t you include performance enhancers in that ? Your’re kinda contradicting yourself.

    • CVS says:

      08:22pm | 16/09/10

      Austin, the rules are what make sport what it is!  If we chuck out the rules sport is just a bunch of people standing around. 

      And no its not cheating to use your resources to get better at your sport/s - that is like saying its cheating to choose tall players for a bsketball team.  The facts are in sport it is based on your natural abilities, how hard you work and yes a bit of luck to be in a country that has the opportuitites to develop your talents.  But in the end it should be done to the sports person.  NOT their chemist.

    • acotrel says:

      08:24am | 16/09/10

      Doping should never be allowed in Aussie Rules Football.  If the players were any more dopey, it’d be like watching parliament!

    • hot tub political machine says:

      10:30am | 16/09/10

      Yeah I asked a mate who was a doctor about this, why don’t they just market some of the performance enhancing drugs to everyone? Some of the anti-fatigue/concentration enhancers would be useful for our everyday life. If we all did performance enhancer we would be supermen…...

      Short answer Dr. Mate of mine gave is…...side effects. This stuff does a number on your system long term

    • nosthow says:

      11:51am | 16/09/10

      Marion Jones - yes thats who I was trying to think of yesterday - broke heaps of records in the Sydney Olympics then we found out she was running on “Super Beans” - took a lot of the gloss off her career. Doping or any drug use in sports should be wiped out totally I say. Whats the point of achieving a record in a sport knowing that you only achieved that with the aid of some chemicals ? Defeats the purpose I reckon. Life ban for anyone caught with drugs in sport.

    • dave says:

      01:02pm | 16/09/10

      Part of the cocktail that killed the cyclist was alcohol. Perhaps a ban on that should be included in the rules.

      Perhaps to eradicate any unfair advantages in sport (cheating) all athletes would be compelled to follow the same dietary and training regimen. It is against the spirit of fair play that some athletes have access to performance enhancing knowledge, equipment and advice.

      If steroids are cheating - so are dietary nutrient supplements, high altitude training and any improvement in equipment that enhances a faster time. If we wanted to have a true time comparison - Usain Bolt should be running in 1930’s shoes on a cinder track being timed with a hand held watch.

      It will get interesting when a performance enhancing drug evolves that has no side effects or long term problems - what to do then.

    • GreekSnake says:

      02:22pm | 16/09/10

      @dave: Some of the same idiotic comments were made by George yesterday. Comparing nutritional supplements to performance enhancing, illegal drugs is just ludicrous.

      Nutritional supplements offer dosages of necessary vitamins and minerals found in regular foodstuffs, without the added macro nutrients found in those foods. For example, an athlete consuming a protein shake after a workout could have got that same amount of protein from 6 eggs. However, with his shake he is not getting the fat and cholesterol that comes with the eggs. How you can confuse that with steroids is beyond me.

      I’m not even going to go near your comment about high altitude training, that is so stupid it’s borderline trolling.

      The long term damage to ones liver, kidneys and brain should be the obvious reason to NOT allow these drugs into our sports. Followed by the fact that junior athletes copy what they see in the professional arena and think about the effect of a surge in testosterone in an already testosterone abundant body. Roid rage isn’t pretty, even uglier when a 15 year old is losing it.

    • acotrel says:

      10:27pm | 16/09/10

      Dave, have a look at the list of prohibited pharmaceuticals and drugs, issued by the AIS. In various forms it applies to every sport, even auto racing.

    • dave says:

      04:08pm | 16/09/10

      Hi GreekSnake!

      Sorry to cause offence.

      I am not arguing that steroids are not harmful - only that there are inconsistencies in the policies of sporting bodies.

      In the example that you use, the athlete wants the protein without the fat. He has used the technology of a protein drink to get it. It’s the same mindset as one who would use steroids. One is arbitrarily legal while the other is banned.

      Would you think that he has cheated if protein drinks were suddenly banned?

      The health risk argument is inconsistent as well. Steroids are harmful - but so is alcohol. To follow that to it’s logical conclusion would mean that alcohol would need to be banned for all athletes because there are proven significant health risks associated with it - including death.

      As well, impressionable children see alcohol associated with every off field AFL event (Brownlow, Grand Final celebrations etc). Alco-rage in a 15 year old are not pretty either. So for the sake of the kids, and the athletes, should alcohol be banned? My guess is that you would say yes. So shy isn’t it?

      Sports can’t have it both ways - unless of course there is a sponsorship deal in the mix.

    • stephen says:

      08:31pm | 16/09/10

      A sport with the least variables is the best.
      Doping in sport is a variable. (so are performance-enhancing swimsuits.)

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

RT @gregprichard: The Victorian Sports Minister has just sent the New Zealand Prime Minister a commiserative email. #stateoforigin

Anthony Sharwood

@VanillathunderV fair comeback. But seriously, if that was a try then I'll book my skiing in Queensland this year

Anthony Sharwood

@BrettS69 the loveliest thing about post-origin is the sledges from gloating qlders #ratherbeagoodloserthanapoorwinner

Anthony Sharwood

That is the video referee howler to end all howlers to end all howlers to end all howlers to end all howlers #stateoforigin

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Need someone to do your dirty work? Try God.

Need someone to do your dirty work? Try God.

Punishing the baddies is only fun in the movies. In real life it’s messy, expensive, and fraught…

Gina Rinehart’s the least interesting thing on this list

Gina Rinehart’s the least interesting thing on this list

BRW’s Rich 200 list is out for another year and Gina Rinehart, Frank Lowy and Anthony Pratt have…

I’ve rocked out of my generation’s la-la-loop

I’ve rocked out of my generation’s la-la-loop

Earlier this week - having heard three consecutive songs on the radio that I didn’t recognise -…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

242 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter