Kinesiology

May the best (doped) athlete win!

More than half of Quebecers are more tolerant of doping (57%) than international regulatory bodies when it comes to the use of certain substances currently banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). This is the conclusion of a study conducted by Prof. Suzanne Laberge of the Department of Kinesiology at the Université de Montréal. The study was conducted in Quebec among 1006 respondents in July 2004, just a few weeks before the Olympic Games in Athens. The first of its kind, the study surveyed what Quebecers think about the fight against doping in sports. “Most studies focus on athletes. This is the first time we’ve taken the pulse of public opinion using a scientific approach,” states Prof. Laberge.

While 87% of respondents opposed the use of banned substances by athletes, the study revealed two opposing currents. In response to conservative supporters of current regulations, half of the respondents questioned the status of several products that are not harmful to the user’s health. Contrary to WADA’s position, medications like Extra Strength Tylenol and bronchodilators for asthma should be exempt as far as most Quebecers are concerned.

Prof. Laberge’s study also asked Quebecers what they thought about controversial advances in genetic doping, involving the insertion of a gene in athletes that produces a muscle performance-enhancing protein. This technique is much harder to detect and is the object of much closer monitoring. Once again, the sociologist was surprised by her findings: over half of the respondents agreed with the use of these discoveries in sports. Moreover, 42% of respondents did not consider the use of genetics as doping, even though they recognize that it may improve athletic performance. “What I see here is an openness among the public on this question,” states the researcher. “People’s mentalities have gradually changed on this issue, just as they have with regard to other controversial social activities, such as stem cell research.”

Quebecers also believe that it is not possible to top Olympic records without using performance-enhancing substances, and 47% of this group believe that over one-half of athletes use illicit products. Most of the population (60%) consider anti-doping tests to be an ineffective means of dissuading athletes from using drugs. “Less than 1% of the tests done on Canadian athletes between 1996 and 2001 were positive,” states Prof. Laberge. At the international level, Montreal-based WADA found abnormal results in 1.7% of the tests in 2004. Despite their reticence, close to nine out of 10 respondents stated that anti-doping tests should be continued.

Suzanne Laberge believes that the public still dreams of a drug-free sports world. We continue to cling to the ideal of excellence—not drugs—determining who stands on the podium. But we no longer really believe it’s possible. “Many no longer have any illusions about modern sports and have therefore developed a more liberal and pragmatic outlook. For the public, however, drug testing validates an important sports ethic.” Most of the respondents (64.8%) also support a minimum two-year suspension for athletes caught using performance-enhancing drugs, and one-third support a lifetime ban. Following intense negotiations among sports federations, WADA has opted for a two-year ban for a first violation. “There is no single trend on the issue of doping,” states Prof. Laberge. “The Quebec population is divided, which undoubtedly has an impact on athletes.”

Prof. Laberge’s study will include all of the players involved in doping. To achieve this, she has joined forces with the Université de Monpellier in France, where researchers are pursuing other components of the study. Professor Laberge will round out the study with a history of doping and perspectives from disabled athletes.