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

They also reported a decrease in the concentrations of the essential amino acids, implicating incorporation into the muscle fiber. The investigators concluded that insulin promoted muscle anabolism primarily by stimulating protein synthesis independently of any effect on the transmembrane transport of glucose or amino acids. The administration of testosterone propionate has been shown to significantly increase aggressive behavior https://ecosoberhouse.com/ in cynomolgus monkeys (225); similar observations were later recorded in rodents. The type of aggression, which we record in our experimental animal models, is characterized as defensive aggression, measured by means of specific approaches to provoke the animals. Chronic exposure to testosterone has also been shown to increase male aggressive response patterns without altering the male sexual behavior or body weight (226).

The pressure to win leads some athletes to use drugs that might give them an edge. An Anti-Doping Rule Violation (ADRV) will have an impact on an athlete’s ability to train and compete. For coaches and other Athlete Support Personnel, a ban may mean that they are no longer able to practice their profession and work with athletes. A sanction resulting from an ADRV can range from a warning to a lifetime ban from all sport.It is important to note that individuals banned in one sport will also be prohibited from playing, coaching or working with athletes in any other capacity in a different sport. Using drugs may increase the risk of experiencing mental health issues for people with a history or family history of these conditions.

Doping risk and enabling environments

Doping substances and methods are those that will improve or enhance performance within sport or fitness contexts. Indeed, doping can be understood as a contextually specific substance use practice. Athletes have clear incentives to perform at an optimal level in their sport. Thus, some athletes will be tempted to use substances that have the potential to make them stronger and faster, thereby improving their athletic performance. Indeed several studies among athletes at varying competitive levels have shown that the primary reason athletes choose to use performance-enhancing substances is to improve their athletic performance (Miller, Barnes, Sabo, Melnick, & Farrell, 2002; Rexroat, 2014). Conversely, concerns about the impacts certain substances can have on athletic performance may serve as an important deterrent among athletes.

• Since 2004, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has annually updated their Code and related documents that outline the official international anti-doping standards.
• It then becomes imperative that athletes avoid detection, a situation that can be tricky for an individual athlete to manage on their own.
• In both cases, the supply and use are centrally managed in order to manage the risks of substance use for individuals who would be otherwise incapable of doing this effectively on their own.
• Most of these studies focus on alcohol use, but in some cases their findings may translate to other substances.

Patients who are deliberately using performance-enhancing drugs may not disclose use because of shame, legality concerns, or lack of trust. In fact, users of performance-enhancing drugs often are not candid with their physicians about their use of these drugs. Although our discussion has involved primarily field studies of illicit AAS users, some controlled laboratory studies have also examined the psychiatric effects of AAS.

Other prescription drugs

Research in the general population has established several effective individual and environmental intervention strategies, and there is emerging evidence for the efficacy of many of these interventions specifically among athletes. One recommendation for future research is to examine strategies for disseminating different types of empirically supported interventions to athletes, particularly those that are low cost (e.g., personalized feedback interventions delivered electronically). A second research direction could involve examining the efficacy of environmental interventions at more local levels, such as team-specific strategies designed to limit alcohol and drug use. A third direction involves more research focused on substances besides alcohol, particularly in terms of intervention studies. Finally, researchers could consider exploring strategies for targeting/tailoring existing interventions to be more efficacious specifically among athletes.

However, most of the doping agents exert serious side-effects, especially when used in combination, at high doses and for a long duration. The extent of long-term health consequences is difficult to predict, but likely to be substantial, especially when gene doping is considered. This review summarises the main groups of doping agents used by athletes, with the main focus on their effects on athletic performance and adverse effects. The sport risk environment is that in which various risk factors interact across micro and macro levels to increase the potential for harm to athletes engaging in doping (Hanley Santos & Coomber, 2017; Rhodes, 2002).

Doping enabling processes and environments

There are also indirect methods of detection, such as intelligence-led investigations into alleged doping. WADA takes a zero-tolerance approach under the principle of strict liability, which holds individual athletes responsible for any substance detected negative effects of drugs in sport in a urine or blood sample regardless of how it got there (WADA, 2019). Decisions regarding doping violations are made by sport governing bodies and appealed through the Court of Arbitration for Sport rather than through civil court systems.

These results have led to the hypothesis that AAS use may constitute a risk factor for disinhibitory behavior, partly by affecting the serotonergic system. An additional study on dominant behavior assessed pair-housed male rats for dominance status based on their behavior and alterations in body weights (228). Throughout the study, the rats had limited social interactions on a daily basis. After 1 week, rats received nandrolone or placebo, and their behavior was observed over 2 months. Dominant AAS-treated rats spent more time on highly aggressive behaviors than the dominant placebo-treated rats. In addition, the probability for highly aggressive behaviors was maintained for the AAS-treated rats throughout the study, whereas it was decreased for the placebo-treated rats.

VIII. The Interactive Effects of PEDs and Sports Injury

Another study by Doumas et al. (2010) found that a feedback-only intervention was effective among high-risk drinkers at reducing average weekly drinking, drinking to intoxication, and peak number of drinks consumed on a single occasion. Finally, a recent study by Cimini et al. (2015) provided similar support for the efficacy of a single-session in-person motivational enhancement intervention. Together, these findings suggest that brief, motivational enhancement interventions have considerable potential in reducing harmful alcohol consumption among athletes. The important role of athletic coaches, equally or even more than dieticians and physicians, in providing nutritional information should be also noted. Therefore, there is a considerable need for well-educated coaches in collaboration with dieticians and doctors to provide an adequate nutritional support for athletes. Regarding young athletes, it should be noted that paediatricians are the primary contact for most young athletes and paediatric cardiologists are in a position to develop long-lasting relationships with their patients.