Research Journal Entry #1

Research Journal Entry #1

Citation

Lentillon-Kaestner, V. (2011), The development of doping use in high-level cycling: From team-organized doping to advances in the fight against doping. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 23: 189–197. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.proxy.library.vcu.edu/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2011.01370.x

1. Main Claim

   
   
   

   1. Our results highlight the fact that advances in the fight against doping in the last decade have produced positive changes toward these objectives, but anti-doping measures have also had unexpected effects. We will underline these two opposing effects of anti-doping measures and discuss some limits to the efficiency of those measures.
   2. Since the establishment of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and their fight against doping since 1999, major progress and improvements have been made towards a doping free sport. However, these anti-doping procedures have also raised questions regarding the privacy and human rights of the athletes and yielded negative and unexpected effects.

Summary of Source

Athletes have been using performance-enhancing drugs as early as the 1960s. This development can be connected to the “medicalisation of life” and the increasing competitiveness of sports during that time period. However, it took until 1998, when the so called Festival scandal at the Tour de France provided proof of widespread use of doping in professional cycling. This journal talks about how the fight against doping is still in its transition period and that it will take more time until doping is under control. The reason for this is the influence of the older cyclist from the “former generation” who were taught and have received  training during a time when doping was still a common practice among professional cyclists. Some of these “old school” cyclist are still among the current teams in form of teammates, coaches or team managers and have influence on the younger cyclists. The “former cyclists” still try to convince cyclists of the “new generation” that doping is necessary to win.
The “new generation” cyclists are mostly for a clean sport and don’t want to be involved with any sort of performance-enhancing drugs.
However, the fight against doping has unexpected effects as well. Because there was a lot media attention after the first big doping scandals in professional cycling, young or amateur cyclists now had a great foundation of knowledge about doping and were influenced by this information. Because the topic of doping has now reached the mass media market, a larger audience is informed about the existence of these substances. The problem is, that since team wide doping has been banned and as a result all physicians have been suspended from cycling teams, there is no supervision over the use of doping anymore. This can result in drug abuse and health risks if a cyclist does decides to use performance-enhancing drugs on their own. Another downside is, that with increasing numbers of doping tests, the privacy of the cyclists suffers and every cyclist who delivers good performances is seen as a suspect of doping. Furthermore, the ban of these substances let to the development of a black market to obtain drugs that were no longer easily available. In this article we learn more about the progress and effects of the fight against doping.

Important Quotations (and Screen Captures)

Waddington asserts in his journal Sport, health and drugs. A sociological perspective that “In 1998, the Festina scandal at the Tour de France provided the first proof of the widespread use of doping in professional cycling and the involvement of physicians in the organization of doping” (as cited in Lentillon-Kaestner, 2011, p. 189).

“During the period of team-organized doping, doping was a common practice among professional cyclists; drug use was a shared practice and contributed to the subculture of doping in cycling (Waddington, 2000; Kimmage, 2001; Lê-Germain & Leca, 2005; Schneider, 2006; Brissonneau, 2007, p. 189).

Schneider claims in his journal Cultural nuances: doping, cycling and the Tour De France that “At the Tour de France 2002, cyclists claimed that attitudes had changed in cycling and that doping was less common (as cited in Lentillon-Kaestner, 2011, p.190).

Gregory, former professional cyclist asserts that “I had some doping pressure on my team in Italy in the final year. First, the masseur wanted me to take doping substances, and when he saw that I was against doping, the team manager came to talk to me . . . In Italy, there was real pressure to win all the time . . . It was too much; I had signed in December and stopped in May of the following year” (as cited in Lentillon-Kaestner, 2011, p.190).

Chris, former professional cyclist claims that “Previously, a doped cyclist had a certain status on the team. Now they [the team staff] drag him through the mud; he is plague-stricken, and everybody is afraid of him . . . Today, the teams understand that a positive-tested cyclist who has good results achieved through doping can destroy the team” (as cited in Lentillon-Kaestner, 2011, p.191).

“Doping use was a part of cycling culture for the cyclists of the “former generation” but not for the cyclists of the “new generation,” who have a new attitude toward doping.” (Lentillon-Kaestner, 2011, p.191).

“Today’s cyclists are a little more afraid of doping tests, especially those outside of competitions. The cyclists do not know when the anti-doping controller will come, and they cannot use all of the strategies used in races to sidestep the doping test” (Lentillon-Kaestner, 2011, p.193).

“However, anti-doping measures also produce unexpected effects, including a decrease in medical supervision, an increase in health risks, the development of a black market to obtain doping substances, and a decrease in cyclists’ privacy. The fight against doping is still evolving” (Lentillon-Kaestner, 2011, p.196).

Bob, U23 cyclist says that “In cycling, apparently, the more you take some substances, the faster you go” (Lentillon-Kaestner, 2011, p.191).