How Do WADA Decide...

Pross

....what gets put on the banned list? There appears to be double standards with numerous legal products such as creatine being widely marketed as performance enhancers and being openly promoted by sports people whilst other boosts of products that occur naturally in the body or methods to enhance natural processes are banned or have levels set. Then there are those items that were once banned but are now OK again such as pseudoephedrine (or has that been banned again now?). Is there a process that gets followed to make the decision?

schweiz

I remember reading somewhere about there having to be a risk to an athletes health.

As you say there's lots of products that can enhance performance legally.

For example, caffeine is a drug that has been on and off the list as it can have an obvious effect on heart function and if you drink a lot of coffee (like I do) then it is quite addictive. However caffeine is not seen as a drug to the populous and certain brands of energy drinks who pump a lot of money into sports sponsorship would be forbidden

Is pseudoephedrine off the list now? I know I did a TT a few years back a week or so after recovering from a cold and I must have had traces in my system. I knew I wasn't going to be win and the likelihood of being tested was so small, I didn't worry too much.

danlikesbikes

The simple answer to your question is that items are put on the list are published and voted on by WADA members & stakeholders.

With WADA acting as the overall body who publish verified results on those items currently banned and those put up for proposal by medical experts & WADA's own stakeholders, who are themselves made up from olympic members and others including governments.

As a scientist you can either apply directly to WADA for a grant to study and publish or most get published from their member country & passed back to WADA.

The problem with items such as creatine is in simple terms the jury is still out on its actual benefits, for every paper that says "it does this & that" there is another paper that says something different & does not back up the first.

Whilst others such as the items that occur naturally in the blood are easier to deal with such as EPO being the hot topic as really all the testing needs to do is determine a natural level & therefore anything above this must have been introduced. However the testing to do this is changing at a fantastic rate across the board & is not as simple as X is the limit anything over and you must have cheated, hence the introduction of the passport system.

JackPozzi

schweiz wrote:

Is pseudoephedrine off the list now?

It's still on the banned list but my understanding is that the threshold is high enough that you'd have to take way above the recommended dose of sudafed to test positive

Froomes Edgar

It is indeed rather arbitrary. Too much of anything will kill you, including water, so why include some and not others? Whereas caffeine is definitely performance enhancing and probably more potent than many of the things actually on the list, but because its so widely used it gets a pass.

In short, legalise everything and let Darwin decide.

danlikesbikes

That is a good point after all we hear about stories of riders being woken up in the night to exercise due blood thickening from taking banned substances & of those who have died.

I have every sympathy with anyone who has lost a family member or friend from drugs either recreational or sports related & mean no offence by my above statement. It was a drug with side effects & more than just those it was purchased for.

I guess the only difference is on the recreational side a large section of the population will not touch class A or B drugs partly because they are illegal but also that one side effect is you could well die from taking it. However would not bat an eyelid at taking alcohol or caffeine.

iainf72

WADA's position on caffeine here

http://www.wada-ama.org/en/Resources/Q- ... ited-List/

Which seems very sensible

ocdupalais

iainf72 wrote:

WADA's position on caffeine here

http://www.wada-ama.org/en/Resources/Q- ... ited-List/

Which seems very sensible

Also, glad to see WADA having taken alcohol off the banned list in competition ten-pin bowling...

Might start watching if there's a prospect of balls bouncing across neighbouring lanes, people doing a c*ck & balls on the scoring screens and fights breaking out. I thinking something like a combination of '70s darts and ice hockey...

LutherB

OCDuPalais wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

WADA's position on caffeine here

http://www.wada-ama.org/en/Resources/Q- ... ited-List/

Which seems very sensible

Also, glad to see WADA having taken alcohol off the banned list in competition ten-pin bowling...

Might start watching if there's a prospect of balls bouncing across neighbouring lanes, people doing a c*ck & balls on the scoring screens and fights breaking out. I thinking something like a combination of '70s darts and ice hockey...

That post hit all the pins

Murr X

Links from a man whom I regard to be an insightful and balanced individual who was formerly the Anti-doping Commissioner of the International Triathlon Union (ITU).
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/fitness- ... z2JlAeBiQu
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/should-w ... z2JlAeBiQu

I feel that this reply will likely be buried in a short space of time but with anti-doping all too often I think we get bogged down by seeing only black and white and not the larger picture especially in regard to long term health relating to doping and not just performance enhancement.

I would have every sympathy for an athlete wishing to protect his/her health by what would be considered "doping" during their career if it means better health post retirement. Now before anyone says anything obviously rushed haphazard hotel room blood transfusions may not be smart but some doping practices may be, and if I thought that there would be a way of taking a substance that I was sure would improve my health post career I would not hesitate to do so and that has not got a damn thing to do with performance enhancement or cheating in any way at all.

I like things to be as fair as anybody else but health is the most important thing and should not be ignored even if we have to face up to taboo topics. Not all methods of (WADA defined) "doping" are remotely similar and should not be viewed as such.

Murr X