INDR commentary, Olivier de Hon
Balance in anti-doping policies
Olivier de Hon, Manager Scientific Affairs at the Anti-Doping Authority of the Netherlands
Strangely enough, with the many doping related discussions that are being held, the issue of effectiveness of anti-doping policies is often overlooked in the academic field. At the core of this topic is the question how often doping use actually occurs. Obviously, the most accurate answer is ‘we just don’t know’ as it is virtually impossible to assess the exact prevalence of a prohibited act. But estimates exist, and current scientific knowledge points to a prevalence ranging from 4 to 39% of intentional use amongst elite competitive athletes (De Hon et al. 2015, Duiven & De Hon 2015). It is clear that the prevalence of doping is considerably different between types of sport, levels and nationalities. This issue needs to be studied far more often, as it is the prime parameter to evaluate anti-doping efforts and policies.
Next to intentional doping use, it is equally important to focus on unintentional doping use. In many ways this is a separate issue that requires specific attention. Regarding unintentional doping, it can be expected that in up to 40% of all anti-doping rule violations the juridical panels involved are not convinced that the athletes concerned were completely at fault, that mitigating circumstances were applicable, or that full responsibility of the suspected violation should not be held against them. This estimate is based on an analysis of the juridical database of the World Anti-Doping Agency (De Hon & Van Bottenburg 2016).
It is clear that the field of anti-doping needs to improve in various ways to bring down these percentages. But prevalence estimates alone will not suffice to fully evaluate anti-doping policies. It is also important to gain more insight into the factual capabilities of doping substances and methods to influence athletic performances and into the consequences of current policies on athletes, the people around them, and the general public.
Such evaluations can be performed as various tools exist to study these topic, but they must be performed far more often. With such information available it will be possible to openly discuss what the right balance would be between the main task of anti-doping (eradicating doping use) and the burdens placed on all athletes. This requires a multidisciplinary scientific approach, transparent discussions, and more focus on ‘true’ doping dilemmas. The voice of the athletes is essential in these efforts. With such a concerted effort it can be expected that meaningful policy evaluations, and consequently policy improvements, can be made. This is necessary as a system that fails too many athletes will ultimately implode, no matter how many good intentions have formed its basis. The issue of doping in sports is just too important to let that happen.
The content of this commentary is a summary of the PhD-thesis ‘Striking the Right Balance – Effectiveness of Anti-Doping Policies’ which was defended successfully at the Utrecht University in the Netherlands in November 2016.
Duiven, E. & De Hon, O. (2015). The Dutch elite athlete and the anti-doping policy 2014-2015. Retrieved 1 December 2016, from http://www.dopingautoriteit.nl/media/files/2015/The_Dutch_elite_athlete_and_the_anti-doping_policy_2014-2015_international_summary_DEF.pdf