Drug testing: criminal injustice

The Anti-Doping in Sport (ADIS) movement is a remarkable institution: in its brief life, its dogma has swept the world. It has hoodwinked a non-discerning press (who should know better), UNESCO, governments, and the public. The media is full of less-than-qualified assessments and blog offerings commenting on individuals and their appropriate punishments, and features a level of vindictiveness that permeates the movement from its very head down to the lowest level of involvement.

But some of the proven, although unadvertised deficiencies of the ADIS movement, might awaken some to better critically assess this phenomenon, particularly its parent organization, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

WADA operates as an oligarchy that shrouds itself in a deceptive aura of being "scientific." It has always been a disappointment to see once-respected scientists sell their souls to this movement. In doing so, most have forgotten the basic tenets of science; two notable ones being the requirement for replicated objective evidence before making a definitive statement, and the limits upon creating generalizations solely on beliefs formed without proof.

The WADA propaganda machine, which has largely been lawyer-driven, has been particularly effective in swaying the opinions of the masses, governments, and international organizations. This has resulted in actions being popularly endorsed despite many of them being contrary to known evidence or having no basis in fact. There exist three false impressions entertained by the public.

The first fallacy is that the drugs and procedures listed and banned by WADA are performance enhancing. For most items, there is no scientific evidence to support this claim. For example, there are scientific studies that show unequivocally that human growth hormone does not enhance performance. The manner in which substances are included in the banned list is baffling. Even if an educated guess were made as to the likelihood of a substance improving performance, credibility in the inclusions is broken in many instances.

The case of American cyclist Jared Bunde illustrates this point. He was banned for two years for testing positive for the banned substance, clomiphene – a hormone used to induce ovulation (egg production) in women. Clomiphene is in a class of medications called ovulatory stimulants. How could this substance improve cycling performance in a male? That a punishment was meted out in an undiscerning manner should be cause for alarm. The usual question to this example is: "why did he test positive?" The answer is in the scientific literature: studies have shown that exogenous female hormones (e.g. clostebol) can be transferred to males during sexual intercourse, resulting in positive ADIS tests. The WADA banned list does not contain all substances and procedures that have been demonstrated to produce enhanced performances.

The second misconception is that ADIS testing is perfect; results cannot be disputed, and positive results are indicative of a conscious effort to cheat. Few people realize that if a positive test is declared by an ADIS organization, athletes have no rights to absolve themselves of the indictment. Criminals and war prisoners have more rights. Such a violation of human rights in other domains would yield protests, governmental sanctions, etc. But in sports, an opposite reaction occurs. Drug or substance testing is far from a precise science, hence why second opinions for important initial test results are sought in medicine or criminal justice, among other institutions. In the ADIS movement, however, many test results rely on interpretations by the technician. It is this writer's personal experience that when results have been assessed by competent judges, many test results claimed by ADIS agencies have been found to be unreliable and erroneous. Even WADA itself admits that its "evidence" and accusations would not be acceptable in employment, civil, or criminal courts. That appears to be why it has cleverly constructed its own deliberative and judgmental procedures that deny athletes access to socially valid judicial procedures.

The third fallacy is that ADIS activities are socially acceptable.

This misconception is promoted by society in general despite the basic social failing of athletes being charged, judged, sentenced, and ostracized by the same body. The United States Anti-Doping Agency on occasion appears to have taken steps to ensure that when an athlete appeals a charge of a positive test result, the appeal will be denied.

Appeals are limited to arguing for a reduction in sentence although occasionally a tribunal strays outside the machinations of ADIS's "kangaroo courts" and absolves athletes of charges, mostly because of a procedural transgression by the ADIS. In most democratic societies, the sorts of decision-making procedures from within ADIS would be reviled, but not in sport! There is no reasonable avenue for an athlete to recover from a false accusation. It is disturbing that the media and public generally embrace this form of "justice".

These three points are but a few of the many deficiencies in the ADIS movement.

The glib acceptance of ADIS institutions and behaviours should be interpreted as a notable and undesirable backward step in human development. At a minimum, two things should be demanded of the ADIS movement: it should display the objective evidence to support its claims, and should provide standards of procedures to ensure charged athletes are afforded normal standards of justice. More demands should be made; but at least those two demands should be met before an athlete is discredited and denied employment or participation, and the seamier sides of public behaviour encouraged.

0 comments on Drug testing: criminal injustice