Eleazar Benson
FOR decades there have been several definitions of doping. Beckman’s sports dictionary describes doping as the use of performance-enhancing substances which would place the athlete on a superior position than that he would normally have obtained. The first official definition of doping was in 1963 and it was issued by the European committee council.
It said “Doping represents the use of substances or physiological mediators, which are not normally present in the human body, introduced as an external aid to increase the athletes performance during a competition.”
According to the Anti- doping convention of the European council:’’ Doping in sports means the administration or use of doping agents or doping methods by athletes. The doping agent or methods referred to are those doping agents which have been banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) which appear on a list of ineligible substances. Athletics are defined as those persons normally participating in organized sports activities.’’
Since 2004 and as mandated by the world Anti-Doping code, WADA has published an annual list of prohibited substances and methods list. The list which forms one of the six international standards identifies the substances and methods prohibited in and out of competition, in particular sports. The substance and methods on the list are classified by different categories (e.g. steroids, stimulants and gene-doping). WADA’s role through its list Expert Group and Health, Medical and Research Committee, is to facilitate a constitution period before preparing and publishing the list by October first in order to allow for its introduction at the start of the following year .
In ancient Greece, the use of prohibited substances was not discouraged because physicians offered athletes various ingredients in order to increase their physical performance. And this was considered absolutely normal. Those who offered such drugs “ being considered medical specialists in sports”
Doping was described in modern sports in the second half of the XIX century. At the saint Louis marathon in 1904, Tom Hicks reportedly died as a result of using a mixture of cognac and strychnine. Multiple of such incidents in competitions, forced in 1928, the international Athletics Federations (IAF) to ban doping in athletic competitions. It became the first international Federation to do so. Thirty two years later , anti-doping testing was implemented.
The Olympic games experienced its first official controls for drugs at the 1972 games in Munich. Anabolic steroids were the first substances controlled at the 1976 Olympics in Montreal and as a result many athletes were disqualified and lost their medals. This led to a decision by the international Olympic committee (IOC), which stated that the results of doping tests should be made public within the competition. Introducing anti-doping controls outside competition was a new milestone in the anti-doping campaign in 1989.
In modern professional sports, many athletes been tested positive with forbidden substances. The most publicized case being that of Canadian Ben Johnson, the famous 100 meters runner for the use of anabolic steroids.
It was the first doping scandal in the history of Olympic Games, which led to Johnson’s suspension for two years and then for life, because he tested positive again in 1993. More than a hundred Nigerian athletes tested positive for prohibited substances in 2002, and Nigeria was declared non-compliant to the WADA code in 2017. The repeated doping scandals involving the Tour de France, to take one example, have clearly demonstrated that there is an international medical doping culture that some observers could properly call Dopers Without Borders. At the congress of German sports physicians held in Freiburg in October 1976, the most prominent of the old West German sports physicians minimized the medical dangers of anabolic steroids and recommended that they be administered to athletes under medical supervision.
It is against this background that the sports community is appalled at the hypocrisy and politicization of WADA’S reinstatement of the Russian anti-doping agency (RUSADA) as compliant with the WADA code after it had served its three years suspension for alleged state-supported doping scheme for Russian athletes. The United States anti-doping agency (USADA) chief executive, Travis Tygart, accused WADA of being soft on Russia and for having concocted a secret deal to let Russia back in . The WADA president, Craig Reedie, quickly warned the US. anti-doping to address its own drug weaknesses instead of targeting Russia. Thomas Bach, president of the IOC, in his new year message equally affirmed that the Russian Olympic committee had already been punished enough, But the criticism led by the United states against Russian reinstatement have not abated.
It is expected that the US. will use misinterpreted facts on the Russian doping scandal in the forthcoming London conference from April 16-18 this year on partnership for clean competition to further prove the degradation of WADA and the I.O.C , and misinform the world on the real goals of the organizations. In fact the U.S. Anti-doping is widely believed to being used by vested interests to promote American sports pharmaceuticals. Its goal is to push for power distribution in the fight against doping and illicit drugs in sports at the global level in favour of USADA that promotes itself as the gold-standard for anti doping in sports.
This fight will be used as an instrument of pressure on opposition countries, especially African countries, for the creation of competitive advantage for American athletes. This is why many sports official are reportedly considering refraining from participating in the London conference due to the bias of the organisers and their self-serving goals.
Africans countries should stand against possible strengthening of the role of USADA in international sports. It is now crystal clear that the US. Anti-doping plans to transform this April conference on fair and honest sport into a battlefield for political and economic interests of the United States to the detriment of WADA and the international Olympic committee. We must not derail from the fact that sports play an important role in mental and physical education and in promoting international understanding and co-operation.
Benson writes from Awka