ECSS2006-07-05 Thursday



semi-structured interviews with key personnel

studyof texts and documents -    research reports and books -    WADA docs


lack of trust and coordinationb between NADOs and Ifs

ADOs not independent enough at operational level from sport and state

variable recruitment and educational programs for doping control officers

critical question in current anti-doping work -    lack of well functioning anti-doping organisations at national level and in the Ifs

about 8 Elite NADOs about 20 good NADOs 40 operative NADOs 90 registred NADOs 203 NOCs

antidoping work is progressing, but not clean sport yet. (with Sigmund Loland)

Questions and Answers

Turkish Athletes’ attitudes towards doping: why do they use?

interviews and content analysis



Hi tech in sport

Jans-Anders Manson Pierre-Etienne


despite technology, sports look similar

I wonder what is the relevant characteristics of comparison - the movement of the activity?

technology implementation 10 year to adapt then use for 20 years

the mystery of tennis

wood laminated wood 1960 AI + polymer 1960 AI and steel 1970 composite laminate 1980 composite sandwich 1990 advanced composite sandwich 1990 composite wide-body (bladder) 2000

stiffness increases

last 15 years, elite have not utilised composite wide-body

ie. the technology that federa uses is same as 10 years ago

because became too stiff, loss of interaction

‘feeling control’

learning process requires that begin training with wooden racquet (clarify)

piezoelectric fibres into handle to adjust dampening

image of athlete with one effective limb playing table tennis

‘sport and rehabilitation engineering’

athletes consider the racquet ‘a part of their body’

ME: If the racquet is part of the athlete’s body, should questions about technological change related to equipment fall within the realm of anti-doping? -    the point is that a piece of equipment raises the potential to transform the possibility of injury in the same way as a pharmacological substance, so why treat them separately?

Sigmund Loland

sport technology – ethical challenges

technology as value challenges

doping is a kind of biochemical technology


concern that was a reduction of the unique feeling of water

any reasonable way of distinguishing between valuable and nonvaluable technologies

concept of technology

philosophy of  technology

Jacques ellul -    technology invades life and overwhelm

technology as

human made means to realize human interests and goals

ME: to return to Ellul, he talks about la technique, which would include something like knowledge, perhaps in our case, the fosbury flop in highjump

bare foot running not technological

ME: no, it is, the moment of interaction with the running track is a technological encounter

body techniques -    body as subject (phenomenology) -    body as object (bio-mechanics) -    body movements as means (technology)

body as basic mode of movement in sport

fosbury flop, some people thought was not attractive or possibly harmful

in body techniques, seen as creative innovation

sport  equipment -    material means with which athletes perform -    equality of  opportunity – challenges fairness ideal -    winning because of technology is probc -    skiing complex: waxing critical debate

training technology -    means used outside of competition requiring athlete effort

expert-administered technology -    means used outside of competition wout athlete effort and control -    not clear cut empirically, but there is an ethical distinction -    intention is performance enhancement with expert admin -    does not require athlete insight or effort -    not identical ethical status -    they belong to a sphere of technologies that belong to this broad category that do not require insight and effort -    the role of science in sport

ME: how does Sigmund respond to piezoelectric dampening devices

ethical perspectives -    valuable, acceptable and unacceptable performance enhancing technologies in sport -    depends on goals of t practice -    three ideal-typical normative theories of sport and their implications

performance enhancing drugs are banned, why?

ME: because they are illegal substances in many relevant countries or more specifically they are non-medical interventions

non-theory -    sport as means -    pure instrumentalism -    any efficient technology is an acceptable technology -    sociologically interesting but ethically meaningless

implications for technology? my analysis is irrelevant

narrow theory -    sport has its own values -    diff from medicine and other practices -    maximise performance -    equal conditions -    no regulation outside of competition -    technological optimism – merging of organic and mechanical -    able to transcend -    transhumanism, marvin minsky -    technological naivism – eg lift ban on drugs does not mean athletes are mature indiv, not the real world. -    lifting ban on drugs would be a disaster o    ME: what about hypoxia, not having a ban does not seem to have been disastrous, yet your very same position might be around in a few years

wide theory -    sport and moral values -    equal conditions -    talent and effort -    athlete responsibility for performance -    paula radcliffe o    ME: but paula was espousing the value of hypoxic chambers for some years -    human freedom and possibility -    performance linked to development of human virtue

ME: what maeks these theories exclusive or is this a hierarchy of vales

wide theory and technology -    body techniques: diversity and creativity -    equip: standardisation and equal access -    harmless expert-admin technology: scepticism -    harmful expert-administered technology: ban o    ME: but this is not wada’s criteria, but I assume you mean performance enhancing technologies -    grey zones and real moral terrain

ME: relationship between these presentations, where should debates about the ethics of technology take place. in the technological presentation

concluding comments -    the challenge of performance enhancing technologies in sport -    need for normative theories in sport -    future challenges -    need for a general ethics of performance


World anti-doping code

International Standards for Laboratories

minimum required performance limits

IAAF man History

1976- anabolic steroids 1989 – peptide hormones

WADA List since 1 Jan 2004

2004 – Gene Doping

anabolic agents -    exogenous AAS -    endogenous AAS

not easy to detect autologous blood doping

Alain Garnier

TUE process

TUE Philosophy -    improve medical cover of athletes while avoiding inadvertenly doping risks -    recognition of the athletes’ right to the best medical treatment -    harmonized and medically coherent measure (common culture) -    more medical than disciplinary approach that will give responsibility for physician

who grants TUEs? -    Ifs

what is a TUE Committee -    3 independent physicians without conflict of interest -    expert in sport med -    expert in concerned field -    expert in disabled sport when needed

2 diff admin processes, but one philosophy

not a simple notification authorization rarely given immediately upon receipt



shows picture of people not using stairs and preferring to use escalator

terry wilkin

uk: raise take up of school sport from 25% in 2000 to 85% in 2010

the earlybird stuy -    southwest of uk -    300 chilren and parents -    perspective cohort design -    6m follow-up  age 5y to 16y

4 analyses - what children do all day consistency over time and place physical education in school transport to school

guielines for activity in children more than 60mins at 3 METs

5-6yr old children sedentary for 75% of their day

20 years ago we didn’t know what children did, so not clear that today is any worse

nearly an hour of high intensity – this is considerably more than most adults

no matter how long child awake unrelated to activity strongly related to high intensity

widely held belief but little evidence tha children do less activity today than before current activity levels might be normal

consistency over time and place

activity at weekend and weekday is exactly the same

but what is the correlation -    quite strong -    those who are least active during school week, also least active on weakneds

year after year, no different

nick wareham in Cambridge

what is it that is driving this consistency?

we also looked at distance, but was same – compared Plymouth and Glasgow – both the same

phys ed in school ‘decline in P.E. curriculum time in primary schools wil ffect children from less well-ff backgrounds the most;’ (Sport England, 1999)

looked at 3 diff schools

1.    private schoool, €8,000 per term a.    9hrs scheduled phys ed per week 2.    village school, Activemark Gold Award a.    2hrs 3.    poorest in Plymouth and as poor as any in Europe a.    1.8hrs

compare phys activ in each school believed that physical activity in 1 would be greater and remain throughout the week


what happens after school? -    shool 1 much less, whereas 3 much more

so, in total, no difference between any of the schools

what is the variance of phys activ among children and opportunity -    variance 4 fold, 5 fold in provision, but didn’t explain each other. less than 1% explained by school

phys ed lessons by intensity -    high intense occupies about 12% -    low intensity 64%

same between earlybiard, the three schools and schools in Australia

so who is determining what happens in phys ed? teacher or hypothalamus of child?

can children do more”? -    those with no opp, do less -    an activitystat may be operating in young children

finally, transport to school -    uk: about 30% of children driven to school by car, even though avaerage is 800metres.

compare those taken by car and those by foot -    16% defiicty for those taken by car -    but not only part of day -    after school activity balances out -    with whole of week, ends up identical

energy cost of school run not detrimental to overall phys activity

Gene-Lifestyle interactions in children: a metabolic disease perspective Paul Franks

“genes are the gun, the environment is the finger on the trigger”

what is heritability?

not just genetics

familial/cultural environment

ME: we might find a future where my genetic profile reveals why I am good or not at something. So, if I do not exercise as much, I can say it is because of X. Or, we can at least say that getting fit is harder for certain kinds of people compared with others.