Open AccessSport and second chances? All drug cheats should be banned for life, here’s why.
Author(s) -
Philippe Crisp,
Jamie Sims
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
journal of emerging sport studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2562-3184
DOI - 10.26522/jess.v2i.3705
Subject(s) - athletes , competition (biology) , position (finance) , law and economics , natural (archaeology) , scientific evidence , public relations , psychology , political science , internet privacy , medicine , business , sociology , physical therapy , history , computer science , epistemology , biology , ecology , archaeology , finance , philosophy
The purpose of this critical commentary is to highlight the inconsistencies evident within the discourse of Performance Enhancing Drug (PED) use and Anti-Doping violations. Of most note, the issue related to proper rehabilitation and subsequent reintegration of athletes who have failed drugs tests is reliant on a notion that when athletes return to competition, fairness will prevail. We know that PEDS, in particular steroids and exogenous hormone treatment, confer an advantage even without concurrent training (see Bhasin et.al. 1996). That their effectiveness is not in doubt is consistent with current policy. However, the question of just how advantageous it is for athletes to use them, even just the once, and whether there are any permanent advantages to doing so, is not particularly evident in contemporary discourse. This paper takes the position, using emerging scientific evidence as well as the recollections of UK strength sports administrators, that any consideration of ‘clean’ sport needs to resolve policy with the evidence that permanent advantages accrued from PED use can only be combatted by promoting a ‘natural for life’ standard.