Risk and enabling environments in sport: Systematic doping as harm reduction

Abstract

Doping and the use of performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) are often considered and discussed as a separate issue from other types of substance use, by sporting bodies, politicians, the media, and athletes who use drugs themselves. However, perceptions and understandings of substance use in the sport and fitness world are directly related to those of substance use in the non-sport world. One way the gap between sport and non-sport substance use research can be bridged is to consider sport risk and enabling environments. Similar to non-sport contexts and drug use, it is important to analyse the environments in which doping occurs. This approach allows us to examine the dynamic interplay between risk and enabling factors, as the enabling environment shifts in response to changes produced in the risk environment, and vice versa. There are models of sport environments that have proven effective at both enabling doping by athletes and reducing harms to athletes: systematic doping. This article will use secondary literature in order to review and analyse known cases of systematic doping through the risk and enabling environment frameworks. We argue that these systems responded to anti-doping in ways that protected athletes from the risk factors established by anti-doping policy and that athletes suffered most when these systems were revealed, exposing athletes to the full range of doping harms. Further, we argue that risks within these systems (i.e. extortion, bullying) resulted from the broader prohibitive sport environment that forces doping underground and allows such abuses to occur.

Defining corruption and fraud in professional sport

“…The review of special literature evidences that in recent years a new direction -sports criminal law -has been actively developing in the criminal law science. However, most of the published works in this area address the issues that relate to the following: definition and disclosure of grounds for criminalisation of deeds related to doping [6][7][8][9][10]; study of illegal influence exerted on results of sports competitions [11,12]; criminal-law aspects of security of sporting events [13,14]. Analyzing the essays devoted to corruption and fraud in professional sport, we find confirmation of our hypothesis, as concerns terminological uncertainty.…”

The Meaning of “Clean” in Anti-doping Education and Decision Making: Moving Toward Integrity and Conceptual Clarity

“…Critiques based on whether athletes are sufficiently prepared and educated for their Code-mandated responsibilities consider the effectiveness of anti-doping education to prevent accidental as well as deliberate and motivated rule violations (e.g., Woolf, 2020;Qvarfordt et al, 2021). Taking a controversial position of allowing doping in sport, some authors argue that in comparison to an ill-fitted, ineffective and/or struggling anti-doping system, legalising doping at least would bring several benefits (e.g., Savulescu et al, 2004;Kayser et al, 2005;Henning et al, 2021). These include allowing for appropriate safety measures and medical control, bridging gaps between amateur, fitness, and competitive sport, and avoiding the awkward demarcation between sport and non-sport contexts for psychoactive drugs.…”

Harm reduction strategies for androgen users: providing appropriate support and improving engagement with healthcare

“…Improving access to reliable and evidence-informed advice and information on a wide range of androgen issues is a harm reduction priority, given the reliance on information from online sources or peers [10 ▪ ,11 ▪ ]. These resources can be an important source of information and advice given their accessibility and the discretion they provide [6 ▪ ], but may frequently be unreliable [5 ▪ ,8 ▪▪ ].…”