astonishing Drug cheats in the Olympics

A video of a few controversial drug cheats, just amazing to see some of these top level athletics who used performance enhancing drugs


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ch44xW7-hNM

Drugs in sport affecting future generations

In recent times we all know sports stars such as Lance Armstrong and sporting codes such as the NRL and AFL have been caught up with a variety of supplement scandals. The question at issue with this widespread use of these substances is the affect it is having on the younger generation of athletes coming through the ranks. Associate professor Stephen Moston from the university of Canberra said, “Even 12-year-olds were aware of performance enhancing drugs and why they were used, "They could start to say `if they are using it, why don't I ‘ (news Limited 2013). Along with the recent comments by professor Moston a study was taken place where children’s response’s to the issue of taking illicit substances where “it will greatly increase performance. This will increase renown and fame, leading to increased salary", "enhance performance to become famous, or a celebrity" and "makes a guy very cool" (news limited 2013). It is important to recognise that upcoming younger athletics are looking up to these individuals that have been undertaking in substance abuse and viewing it as morally correct thing to do, however it is important that coaches at grass root levels ensure they are informing younger athletics that success in the sport in determined by perseverance rather than doping.

The continual doping allegations are not only affecting future generations however it is causing issues for current athletics that are not doping, for example recently rugby league player Jonathon Thurston was randomly tested in the early hours of the morning then posted angrily on twitter claiming they woke up his young child and created and unnecessary ruckus. This however was a controversial issue, as many argued Thurston should have actually praised doping authorities as an example to younger athletics identifying that regular drug test at the top level are a common occurrence.

To conclude doping in sport needs to be strongly adhered to with organisations such as the world doping authority needing to implement some sort of structure or advisory seminars to ensure the future generations of athletics are not involved in doping. Stronger bans and name and same policies should also be implemented for those who conduct in illegal activity as doping at the top level is a bad reflection of the sport and athletics which could therefore encourage future generations to indulge in the same activity     

Drugs in sport: Study suggests children beginning to see them as normal | News.com.au. 2013. Drugs in sport: Study suggests children beginning to see them as normal | News.com.au. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/drugs-in-sport-study-suggests-children-beginning-to-see-them-as-normal/story-fneuz9ev-1226733413297. [Accessed 26 October  2013]

Should Drugs in Sport be Legalised?

Should Drugs in Sport be Legalised?


The use of drugs in sport to enhance performance is not a new concept and is constantly improving. The continued abuse of illegal drugs by athletes has made it clear they are willing to risk their future health, respect for themselves, other participants and their sport to be the best.  Since the illegalisation of performance enhancing drugs so that athletes do not have an ‘unfair’ advantage, organisations that do test for drugs in sport are fighting a losing battle as athletes and their trainers constantly devise new drugs and methods to beat drug testing (Bamberger & Yaeger 1997). For this reason, the question of controlled use of performance enhancing drugs in sport should be permitted has arisen.

It is no secret that performance enhancing drugs has been used by athletes for decades and those athletes will risk almost anything to gain a competitive edge. Bamberger & Yaeger (1997) reports of a scenario from a poll in 1995 where 198 athletes made up of US Olympians or aspiring Olympians were asked two questions: If they were offered a banned substance that comes with the guarantee that they would not be caught and they would win every competition they entered for the next five years, but then they would die from the side effects of the substance. Would they take it? More than half said yes. Research like this makes the notion of legalising performance enhancing drugs seem extremely immoral and unacceptable for sports organisations to expose their athletes to such risks, especially the athletes willingness to risk so much to win. Not to mention a violation of the ‘spirit of sport’ that has been created over the last century in elite and amateur competition.

However, Savulescu, Foddy & Clayton (2013) argues that if performance enhancing drugs were legalised and freely available, it would be the end of cheating. Moreover, if these drugs become legal and all athletes had access to the same enhancements does that violate the ‘spirit of sport’ any longer? Savulescu, Foddy & Clayton (2013, p. 667) uses the hypothetical example, “if all athletes responded to the approved doping measures in the same way and their performance improves in the same way, it that case, the results of the finishing order of a cyclist race would remain unchanged”. Therefore, there is no unfair advantage given; only the performance and the competiveness are increased.

Another argument is that with the advances is sports science and the high competitiveness of elite competition, sport discriminates against the genetically unfit and is only for the genetic elite” (Wiesing 2011). Savulescu, Foddy & Clayton (2013) states that nature is unfair, for example, Ian Thorpe has very large feet which gave him an advantage that no other swimmer can get, no matter how much they train or exercise. By allowing everyone to take performance enhancing drugs, we level the playing field and remove the effects of genetic inequality. Therefore, allowing performance enhancement promotes equality which indeed is a characteristic of the spirit of sport.

The argument for and against the legalisation of performance enhancing drugs in sport operates on different levels. There is the constant battle that organisations face with drug testing. Performance drugs and methods are continually improving to avoid detection and it is hard to justify the costs that are created from this as it is a losing battle. On another level, there is the argument that touches on the ‘spirit of sport’, the naturalist ideal with performance in sport and how legalising drugs would permanently damage the image of elite athletes and sport in general. Moreover, further studies are needed to investigate the pro’s and con’s of the concept of legalising performance enhancing drugs before any move to change laws and regulations can be acted on. 

By Jordan Reeve

Reference

Dudley, W (ed.) 2004, Drugs and Sport, Greenhaven Press, California  

Savulescu, J, Foddy, B & Clayton, M. (2013). Why we Should Allow Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sport. Journal of Sports Medicine, 38, 666-670

Wiesing, U (2011). Should Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sport be Legalised under Medical Supervision? Journal of Sports Medicine, 41(2), 167-176

The Physical and Psychological Effects of Anabolic Steroids on Athletes

The Physical and Psychological Effects of Anabolic Steroids on Athletes

The use of Anabolic steroids for performance enhancement in elite athletes has been evident for over half a century. The use of steroids has many physical and psychological effects on the individual both positive and negative and is used by both males and females. This use is not only found in elite professional athletes but also in amateur’s sportsman and sportswomen as the drug is surprisingly cheap and is readily available on the black market (Bowers, Clark & Shackleton 2009).

Anabolic Steroids are synthetic derivatives of the male hormone testosterone which when injected or taken orally can show strong effects on the human body that can benefit athletic performance (Hartgens & Kuipers 2004). The first recorded use of steroids to enhance athlete’s performance was in the early 1950’s by a doctor called John Ziegler. Dr Ziegler was a physician for the American weight lifting team and became interested in the use of steroids at the 1954 world championship when he learned of the benefits of steroids from the Russian team doctor (Bowers, Clark & Shackleton 2009). He then began trailing the drug on his athletes back in America in 1959 which in turn started a snow ball effect on the uncontrolled use of the drug by athletes. Once the weightlifters learned that this drug was the reason for their rapid increase in strength, demand grew and the regulation of the drug became uncontrollable. Bowers, Clark & Shackleton (2009, p.285) states that Dr Ziegler lost control of the “experiment” and due to the competitive nature of professional sport if ‘two tablets where good, four tablets would be better’ according to the athletes. Over the next decade, the use of steroids in American weightlifters, football players and strength athletes was estimated at 50% (Bowers, Clark & Shackleton 2009). 

For many years, the medical community argued that there was no proof that steroids enhanced athletic performance. It wasn’t until advances in medicine and drug testing that the adverse effects of steroids on the human body became clear; still it wasn’t until the late 1960’s that efforts were made to catch steroid cheats in sport (McBride & Williamson 1993).

The most appealing effect of the use of Anabolic steroids is the predicted increase in muscle mass and strength which far outweighs the increase without the use of the drug. Hartgens & Kuipers (2004) concluded that short term administration of anabolic steroids can increase strength about 5-20% of initial strength and an increase of 2-5kg in body weight. The same study found that there was no reduction of fat mass and no effect on endurance performance. However, George (2003) states that diet and intensive training are equally important in producing the significant increase in strength. Although, no matter how positive these results seem to be on performance, the negative physical and psychological effects, both short and long term, far outweigh the positive effects. Bahrke et al. (1992) found in a study done on weightlifters, that short term psychological effects of steroid use included extreme aggression, high irritability and insomnia. Apart from the increase in muscle mass and strength, the negative physical effects according to Hartgens & Kuipers (2004) include severe acne and the increased growth of body hair. However, it has been found that the short term physical and psychological can be reversed with discontinued use of the drug (George 2003).         

It is the long term effects of constant abuse of steroid use that cause permanent damage. Due to the physiological effect of the body retaining water and salt when exposed to steroid abuse, this has been proven to cause high blood pressure along with high cholesterol (Hartgens & Kuipers 2004). After long term use of steroids it has also been established that the body will begin to have a psychological dependency which in turn, causes further issues. Hartgens & Kuipers (2004) found that once a long term user stops using steroids, the dependence on the drug caused psychological dissatisfaction with their body which is now being called ‘reverse anorexia syndrome’. The discontinued use of long term abuse has also been linked to withdrawal effects which lead to depression and in some cases has lead to criminality and even suicide (George 2003). Also, constant use of steroids has also proven that it disturbs the natural production on testosterone in the body (George 2003). One long term physical effect that has become common among steroid users is the development of gynaecomastia which is an increase of breast tissue on the male and causes their chest to look feminine. This is caused by the steroids creating excess testosterone levels in the body and the bodies reaction to this is to turn the excess testosterone into the female hormone estrogen (George 2003); which also can go on to cause further psychological effects. Almost all studies on the effects of steroids have been conducted on males and there are very few done on the effects on women. One study done solely on women reported results very similar results as studies done on males. Interestingly, apart from finding an increase in muscle mass and masculinity in the subjects, the study predominantly found major psychological changes in the women. 76% of the subjects reported at least one adverse effect of the steroid use which included major depression, development of eating disorders and chronic dissatisfaction and obsession with their physiques (Gruber, A.J & Pope, H.G 2000). However, much more research must be done to further understand these changes in women.                                                                                                                                   

Solid medical research has proven that all these physical and psychological effects are linked to the use of anabolic steroids, but Bahrke, Yesalis & Wright (1990) show that these vary greatly from person to person.

The use of Anabolic steroids for performance enhancement has become a pressing issue in the sporting world. The studies done that have proven the effects of the drug on the human body show there is an appeal for all classes of athletes, from the elite to young men and women in youth development programs, no matter how severe the negative effects of the drug are. Thus, it is clear that more research must go into the use of steroids so that people can be better educated about its dangerous properties and the abuse of the drug to be controlled. However, in the foreseeable future, it’s evident that the misuse of the drug will continue.

By Jordan Reeve   

References

Bahrke, M.S, Wright, J.E, Strauss, R.H & Catlin, D.H (1992). Psychological Moods and Subjectively Percieved Behavioural and Somatic Changes Accompanying Anabolic-Androgenic Steroid use. Journal of Sports Medicine, 20(6), 717-724.

Bahrke, M.S, Yesalis III, C.E, Wright, J.E (1990). Psychological and Behavioural Effects of Endogenous Testosterone Levels and Anabolic-Androgenic Steroids among Males. Journal of Sports Medicine, 10, (5), 303-337.

Bowers, L.D, Clark, R.V & Shackleton, C.H.L (2009). Steriods:A Half Century of Anabolic Steroids in Sport. Detection of Anabolic Steroids Abuse in Sports, 74(3), 285-287.

George, J (2003). The Actions and Side Effects of Anabolic Steroids in Sport and Social Abuse. Journal of Andrologie, 13(4), 354-366.

Gruber, A.J, Pope, H.G (2000). Psychiatric and Medical Effects of Anabolic-Androgenic Steroid use in Women. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 69 (1), 19-26.

Hartgens, F & Kuipers, H (2004). Effects of Androgenic-Anabolic Steroids in Athletes. Journal of Sports Medicine, 34(8), 513-554.

Mcbride, A & Williamson, K (1993). Anabolic Steroids in Sport. British Medical Journal, 307(6897), 204.

The Essendon Supplement Scandal

The Essendon Supplement Scandal

The events that unfolded early February 2013 involving the Essendon Football club were shocking as they were complex.  Following a 12 month investigation by the Australian Crime Commission which particularly targeted Drugs in The National Rugby League and the Australian Football league; revelations from the Essendon club and former players prompted the AFL and ASADA (Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority) to begin an investigation into the clubs supplement programme during the 2012 season. The findings shocked both the AFL and the Australian sporting community labelling 2012 as “the darkest year in AFL history” (The Australian 28 August 2013, p.36).

The issue came to a head when the Essendon Football Club’s dealings with sport scientist Stephen Dank came under investigation and were considered suspicious. The Essendon club invited ASADA and the AFL to investigate their sport science program in 2012 which was over seen by Mr Dank. The investigation prompted Essendon to stand down their High performance coach Dean Robinson almost immediately (Herald Sun 2013).                                                                                                                                     

The shocking findings of the investigation revealed that the Club’s players were urged to have approximately 40 injections during the 2012 AFL season. Possibly the most shocking part of the findings was that Mr Dank accused the clubs head coach, James Hird, was also administered with these injections (Herald Sun 2013). Mr Dank stated that all involved where completely aware of what was happening “I’m certainly very surprised given how much time we spent discussing it with them (Players and coaching staff)” (The Age 6 February 2013, p.2). Further allegations were raised when Mr Dank told the Essendon club that he received a letter from WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) which stated that the drugs he wished to administer where cleared as legal. However, it became apparent that this was not true when an email from WADA to Mr Dank prompted him to contact ASADA as “drug preparation may vary between countries” (Jane Kuersch Journalism 2013). It was then revealed that the Essendon players did sign consent forms that prescribed weekly injections of an illegal substance. However, According to Essendon, this doesn’t prove that they were administered with the injections (Herald Sun 2013). ASADA then commenced interviews with Essendon players, quizzing them on around 35 substances linked to the Club and their former sport scientist Mr Dank. This revealed that at least of 6 of these substances were banned for athletes (Herald Sun 2013). The nail in the coffin was in June when star player for Essendon, Jobe Watson on national television admitted to have been injected with one of these illegal substances. He declared that “I signed that consent form” and “I believed it was legal at the time” (Herald Sun 2013).   

                                                                                                                           

The events that have occurred over the past year have been a long, grueling and painful process for all involved. It has forced the governing bodies to react in a shift and severe way to protect the image and reputation of the AFL and indeed Australian sport as a whole. The Penalties handed down by the AFL and ASADA were the most severe in the AFL’s history and has caused controversy itself. The penalties included large fines, loss of draft picks and several members of the club being fined, banned or they have stood down in disgrace.                                                       

In May, Ian Robinson stood down as Essendon’s CEO as he felt a strong responsibility for the scandal saying he is accountable for everything that happens to the club, even there supplement programs even though he played no part in it or knew anything about it “We let down our players and their families, I sit here today saying that our club let those people down and there is no excuse in not knowing” (Herald Sun 2013). Chairman David Evans also resigned in June for quiet puzzling reasons. Although playing no part in the scandal, the night after Essendon lost a game against Hawthorn, he suffered a physical breakdown.  Mr Evans complained of breathlessness, lighted headedness and struggling vision (Herald Sun 2013).              

However, it was members of the coaching staff that were involuntarily penalized as they did play a role in the scandal. Despite strong support from Essendon fans, Head coach James Hird has been banned for 12 months from the club and a decision will be made over the next couple of weeks who his temporary replacement will be (The Age 17 September 2013, p.40). Although, there have been strong claims that it is no longer whether Mr Hird should couch Essendon again; it is whether he should ever couch again. “A man with such flawed judgement, so disconnected from what is actually happening about him, is surely a permanent risk” (The Weekend Australian 24 August 2013, p.41).  Mr Hird has been humble about his ban stating he is “deeply sorry and does take a level of responsibility for what happened” (The Herald 28 August 2013, p.81). Assistant coach Mark Thompson has been fined $30,000 and the club manager, Danny Corrora has been banned for 6 months for their role in the scandal (AFL 2013). It is also the clubs it’s self that has been punished both in the short term and long term. The clubs had been fined a total of 2 million dollars for bringing the game into disrepute and also ejected from the 2013 finals (AFL 2013). This ejection would have been a major blow for the club and the players as they were big contenders in the completion in the lead up to the finals. In the long term, the club has also been stripped of draft picks for the coming 2014 season (AFL 2013). This will obviously affect their team and the club in not only next season but seasons following as well.  

The Essendon supplement scandal has both shocked and negatively affected the AFL, ASADA, The Essendon football club, their fans and the Australian sporting community. The investigation that revealed the controversy has indeed put a stain on the AFL’s and Essendon’s reputation as both professional organisations and role models for their great game. However, this will be a wake up call for all sporting codes in Australia and will hopefully bring positive changes in to avoid any further event that further damage professional sport in Australia and the world.

By Jordan Reeve

Reference

Denham, G 2013, ‘Bombers bracing for more penalties’, The Australian, 29 August, p.36.

Fairfax, J 2013, ‘Dark days cast shadow over field of dreams’, Sydney Morning Herald, 31 August, p.9

Gleeson, M. Nial, J 2013, ‘Essendon engulfed by drug controversy’, The Age, 6 February, p.2

Herald Sun 2013, ‘Essendon drug scandal: The story so far’, Herald Sun Sport, viewed 14 September, http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-scandal-the-story-so-far/story-fni5f6kv-1226635822954

Hogan, J 2013, ‘Essendon reveals panel to find Hird replacement’, The Age, 17 September, p.40

Kuerschner, J 2013 ‘Public Relations Austrlian Sports Investigation’ Viewed 20 September,  http://janekuerschjournalism.wordpress.com/2013/06/10/public-relations-essay-australian-sports-investigation/

Le Grand, C 2013, ‘AFL to drop case against doctor’, The Australian, 13 September, p.1-2.

Minear, T 2013, ‘Essendon booted from finals’, The Herald Sun, 28 August, p.81

Phelan, J 2013 ‘Essendon punished: as it happened’, Viewed 19 September, http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/live-updates-dons-at-afl-house

Smith, P 2013, ‘Couch must answer for arrogance’, The Weekend Australian, 24 August, p.41

Smith, P 2013, ‘Hard lessons to be learned from year of chemical chaos’, The Australian, 28 August, p. 36.

Overview of Drugs in Sport Throughout History

Overview of Drugs in sport throughout history

The topic of Drugs in sport has been an ongoing issue in Australian and world sport since the ability for athletes to have access to these banned substances began. This concept of “ doping” began as early as Ancient Greek times when early Olympians used extract of mushrooms and plants seeds to enhance their sporting performance, even as early as the Roman period mix drugs where fed to horses and even gladiators doped during the vigorous fights which where held during this time (Turfman, S.T, 2004).

The use of drugs in sport however has transformed dramatically since it began with new forms of doping methods developing as agencies such as the world anti doping agency (WADA) have continued to crack down on these illicit substances being used to increased sporting performance the elite level. The types doping mechanisms that have been used in recent times include anabolic steroids such as erythropoietin, human growth hormones, beta agonists and diuretics. This use of drugs has transformed into other methods of doping such as blood doping, gene doping and chemical and physical manipulation through tampering with samples and infusing different bloods and genes (S, Patil 2012). 1976 was the first major step towards abolishing the use of banned substances on the world stage when The International Olympic Committee (IOC) banned the use of steroids, however high profile and disgraced athletes such as the ex women’s 100 meters world record holder Marion Jones and US home Run record holder Barry bonds used steroids such Tetrahydrogestrinone that weren’t traceable by world doping agencies, nevertheless these doping cheats where caught and sanctioned accordingly (Shermer, M 2008).

As more athletics continued being caught doping, individual countries began setting up their own Anti doping agencies as increasing number of “dopers” around the world made it difficult for one main agency to monitor this ongoing and current issues in sport today. Therefore agencies such as (ASADA) Australian sport anti doping agency, (UKAD) UK anti doping agencies and (USADA) Us anti doping agency where set up as global counter act the ongoing abuse of illicit substances in sport today (Barroso, O, & Rabin, O 2011).

Drugs in sport today however still has a long way to go in controlling the use and supply at the elite level, there are always new ways individuals using to cheat the system for example when metandienone was finally being able to be detected many people where found using the banned substance (Thevis, M. M. 2013). This use is a widespread and complex issue around the world, for example in smaller countries with less control world wide rules and regulations are often not adhered for example in Malta the issue of drugs use among athletics has been considered an underground phenomenon with poor testing programs therefore drug use in widespread and in fact common among these athletics (Attard, L. 2011). This is a problematic situation in many developing nations as in comparison western nations due to technological advancements have continued to crack down on this issue for example in cycling the use of a biological passport which tracks biological variables in a cyclist's blood and urine over time, monitoring for fluctuations that are thought to indirectly reveal the effects of doping (Hailey, N. 2011). Controversially this year Kenya faced doping issues  According to the BBC Kenya faces strict emposements from WADA  “Since January 2012, 17 Kenyan athletes have been suspended for using performance enhancing drugs compared with only two between 2010 and 2012” ( Telegraph sport 2013). Wada’s director David Howman listed Kenya as one on the major problems for the organisation (Kamga J, P. 2003).

In totality the issue of drugs in sport is and always will be an issue for world doping authorities and clean athletics as drug cheats are finding new and innovative ways to beat the system in this technological advanced world. It is important to consider that doping has been around for centuries however as sport continues to become a part of culture and sporting people becoming idols for children and individuals in many countries the continual crackdown is essential for sport itself.

Reference List

Turfman, S.T, 2004. Drugs in sport: a brief history. The Guardian, 8 February 2004. 7

K., R, S., N, S., S, Patil, N, R., R, & A., V 2012, 'Drug abuse in sports', Journal Of Pharmacy Research, 5, 1, pp. 593-603, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 16 September 2013.

Shermer, M 2008, 'The Doping Dilemma', Scientific American, 298, 4, pp. 82-89, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 18 September 2013.

Mazzoni, I, Barroso, O, & Rabin, O 2011, 'The list of Prohibited Substances and Methods in Sport: Structure and Review Process by the World Anti-Doping Agency', Journal Of Analytical Toxicology, 35, 9, pp. 608-612, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 21 September 2013

Guddat, S. S., Fußhöller, G. G., Beuck, S. S., Thomas, A. A., Geyer, H. H., Rydevik, A. A., & ... Thevis, M. M. (2013). Synthesis, characterization, and detection of new oxandrolone metabolites as long-term markers in sports drug testing. Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, 405(25), 8285-8294. doi:10.1007/s00216-013-7218-1

Mifsud, J., Attard, D., & Attard, L. (2011). Drug doping in sports: an overview and recommendations for the Maltese context. Malta Medical Journal, 23(1), 16-21.

Hailey, N. (2011). A FALSE START IN THE RACE AGAINST DOPING IN SPORT: CONCERNS WITH CYCLING'S BIOLOGICAL PASSPORT. Duke Law Journal, 61(2), 393-432.

Telegraph sport, T.L, 2013. Kenya under fire from Wada after alarming increase in number of athletes testing positive for drugs. The Telegraph , 30 October. 6

Ama P F, M., Betnga, B., Ama Moor V, J., & Kamga J, P. (2003). Football and doping: study of African amateur footballers. British Journal Of Sports Medicine, 37(4), 307.