‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems

Petróczi, Andrea; Backhouse, Susan H; Boardley, Ian D; Saugy, Martial; Pitsiladis, Yannis; Viret, Marjolaine; Ioannidis, Gregory; Ohl, Fabien; Loland, Sigmund; McNamee, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.103030

Journal article 650 views 89 downloads

‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems

Andrea Petróczi, Susan H Backhouse, Ian D Boardley, Martial Saugy, Yannis Pitsiladis, Marjolaine Viret, Gregory Ioannidis, Fabien Ohl, Sigmund Loland, Michael McNamee

International Journal of Drug Policy, Volume: 93, Start page: 103030

Swansea University Author: Michael McNamee

PDF | Accepted Manuscript

©2020 All rights reserved. All article content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (CC-BY-NC-ND)
Download (637.19KB)

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.103030

Abstract

Athletes, sponsors and sport organisations all have a vested interest in upholding the values of clean sport. Despite the considerable and concerted efforts of the global anti-doping system over two decades, the present system is imperfect. Capitalising upon consequent frustrations of athletes, even...

Full description

Published in:	International Journal of Drug Policy
ISSN:	0955-3959
Published:	Elsevier BV 2021
Online Access:	Check full text
URI:	https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa55845
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

first_indexed	2020-12-07T12:08:20Z
last_indexed	2021-12-02T04:12:07Z
id	cronfa55845
recordtype	SURis
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2021-12-01T11:56:34.2288400</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>55845</id><entry>2020-12-07</entry><title>‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>85b0b1623e55d977378622a6aab7ee6e</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-5857-909X</ORCID><firstname>Michael</firstname><surname>McNamee</surname><name>Michael McNamee</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2020-12-07</date><deptcode>STSC</deptcode><abstract>Athletes, sponsors and sport organisations all have a vested interest in upholding the values of clean sport. Despite the considerable and concerted efforts of the global anti-doping system over two decades, the present system is imperfect. Capitalising upon consequent frustrations of athletes, event organisers and sponsors, alternative anti-doping systems have emerged outside the global regulatory framework. The operating principles of these systems raise several concerns, notably including accountability, legitimacy and fairness to athletes. In this paper, we scrutinise the Clean Protocol™, which is the most comprehensive alternative system, for its shortcomings through detailed analysis of its alleged logical and scientific merits. Specifically, we draw the attention of the anti-doping community – including researchers and practitioners – to the potential pitfalls of using assessment tools beyond the scope for which they have been validated, and implementing new approaches without validation. Further, we argue that whilst protecting clean sport is critically important to all stakeholders, protocols that put athletes in disadvantageous positions and/or pose risks to their professional and personal lives lack legitimacy. We criticise the use of anti-doping data and scientific research out of context, and highlight unintended harms that are likely to arise from the widespread implementation of such protocols in parallel with – or in place of – the existing global anti-doping framework.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>International Journal of Drug Policy</journal><volume>93</volume><journalNumber/><paginationStart>103030</paginationStart><paginationEnd/><publisher>Elsevier BV</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>0955-3959</issnPrint><issnElectronic/><keywords>Clean sport, Anti-doping, Athlete Biological Passport, Doping attitude, Whereabouts, Therapeutic Use Exemption, Testing, Athlete, Athlete support personnel, Athlete entourage</keywords><publishedDay>1</publishedDay><publishedMonth>7</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2021</publishedYear><publishedDate>2021-07-01</publishedDate><doi>10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.103030</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Sport and Exercise Sciences</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>STSC</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2021-12-01T11:56:34.2288400</lastEdited><Created>2020-12-07T12:04:20.2442939</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Science and Engineering</level><level id="2">School of Aerospace, Civil, Electrical, General and Mechanical Engineering - Sport and Exercise Sciences</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Andrea</firstname><surname>Petróczi</surname><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Susan H</firstname><surname>Backhouse</surname><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Ian D</firstname><surname>Boardley</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Martial</firstname><surname>Saugy</surname><order>4</order></author><author><firstname>Yannis</firstname><surname>Pitsiladis</surname><order>5</order></author><author><firstname>Marjolaine</firstname><surname>Viret</surname><order>6</order></author><author><firstname>Gregory</firstname><surname>Ioannidis</surname><order>7</order></author><author><firstname>Fabien</firstname><surname>Ohl</surname><order>8</order></author><author><firstname>Sigmund</firstname><surname>Loland</surname><order>9</order></author><author><firstname>Michael</firstname><surname>McNamee</surname><orcid>0000-0002-5857-909X</orcid><order>10</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>55845__18833__d2ccfc0348bf48cf96f79890db9c5883.pdf</filename><originalFilename>55845.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2020-12-07T12:33:37.7524929</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>652480</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Accepted Manuscript</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><embargoDate>2021-11-26T00:00:00.0000000</embargoDate><documentNotes>©2020 All rights reserved. All article content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (CC-BY-NC-ND)</documentNotes><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language><licence>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/</licence></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling	2021-12-01T11:56:34.2288400 v2 55845 2020-12-07 ‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems 85b0b1623e55d977378622a6aab7ee6e 0000-0002-5857-909X Michael McNamee Michael McNamee true false 2020-12-07 STSC Athletes, sponsors and sport organisations all have a vested interest in upholding the values of clean sport. Despite the considerable and concerted efforts of the global anti-doping system over two decades, the present system is imperfect. Capitalising upon consequent frustrations of athletes, event organisers and sponsors, alternative anti-doping systems have emerged outside the global regulatory framework. The operating principles of these systems raise several concerns, notably including accountability, legitimacy and fairness to athletes. In this paper, we scrutinise the Clean Protocol™, which is the most comprehensive alternative system, for its shortcomings through detailed analysis of its alleged logical and scientific merits. Specifically, we draw the attention of the anti-doping community – including researchers and practitioners – to the potential pitfalls of using assessment tools beyond the scope for which they have been validated, and implementing new approaches without validation. Further, we argue that whilst protecting clean sport is critically important to all stakeholders, protocols that put athletes in disadvantageous positions and/or pose risks to their professional and personal lives lack legitimacy. We criticise the use of anti-doping data and scientific research out of context, and highlight unintended harms that are likely to arise from the widespread implementation of such protocols in parallel with – or in place of – the existing global anti-doping framework. Journal Article International Journal of Drug Policy 93 103030 Elsevier BV 0955-3959 Clean sport, Anti-doping, Athlete Biological Passport, Doping attitude, Whereabouts, Therapeutic Use Exemption, Testing, Athlete, Athlete support personnel, Athlete entourage 1 7 2021 2021-07-01 10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.103030 COLLEGE NANME Sport and Exercise Sciences COLLEGE CODE STSC Swansea University 2021-12-01T11:56:34.2288400 2020-12-07T12:04:20.2442939 Faculty of Science and Engineering School of Aerospace, Civil, Electrical, General and Mechanical Engineering - Sport and Exercise Sciences Andrea Petróczi 1 Susan H Backhouse 2 Ian D Boardley 3 Martial Saugy 4 Yannis Pitsiladis 5 Marjolaine Viret 6 Gregory Ioannidis 7 Fabien Ohl 8 Sigmund Loland 9 Michael McNamee 0000-0002-5857-909X 10 55845__18833__d2ccfc0348bf48cf96f79890db9c5883.pdf 55845.pdf 2020-12-07T12:33:37.7524929 Output 652480 application/pdf Accepted Manuscript true 2021-11-26T00:00:00.0000000 ©2020 All rights reserved. All article content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License (CC-BY-NC-ND) true eng http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
title	‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems
spellingShingle	‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems Michael McNamee
title_short	‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems
title_full	‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems
title_fullStr	‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems
title_full_unstemmed	‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems
title_sort	‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems
author_id_str_mv	85b0b1623e55d977378622a6aab7ee6e
author_id_fullname_str_mv	85b0b1623e55d977378622a6aab7ee6e_***_Michael McNamee
author	Michael McNamee
author2	Andrea Petróczi Susan H Backhouse Ian D Boardley Martial Saugy Yannis Pitsiladis Marjolaine Viret Gregory Ioannidis Fabien Ohl Sigmund Loland Michael McNamee
format	Journal article
container_title	International Journal of Drug Policy
container_volume	93
container_start_page	103030
publishDate	2021
institution	Swansea University
issn	0955-3959
doi_str_mv	10.1016/j.drugpo.2020.103030
publisher	Elsevier BV
college_str	Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id	facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_top_title	Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchy_parent_id	facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_parent_title	Faculty of Science and Engineering
department_str	School of Aerospace, Civil, Electrical, General and Mechanical Engineering - Sport and Exercise Sciences{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Science and Engineering{{{_:::_}}}School of Aerospace, Civil, Electrical, General and Mechanical Engineering - Sport and Exercise Sciences
document_store_str	1
active_str	0
description	Athletes, sponsors and sport organisations all have a vested interest in upholding the values of clean sport. Despite the considerable and concerted efforts of the global anti-doping system over two decades, the present system is imperfect. Capitalising upon consequent frustrations of athletes, event organisers and sponsors, alternative anti-doping systems have emerged outside the global regulatory framework. The operating principles of these systems raise several concerns, notably including accountability, legitimacy and fairness to athletes. In this paper, we scrutinise the Clean Protocol™, which is the most comprehensive alternative system, for its shortcomings through detailed analysis of its alleged logical and scientific merits. Specifically, we draw the attention of the anti-doping community – including researchers and practitioners – to the potential pitfalls of using assessment tools beyond the scope for which they have been validated, and implementing new approaches without validation. Further, we argue that whilst protecting clean sport is critically important to all stakeholders, protocols that put athletes in disadvantageous positions and/or pose risks to their professional and personal lives lack legitimacy. We criticise the use of anti-doping data and scientific research out of context, and highlight unintended harms that are likely to arise from the widespread implementation of such protocols in parallel with – or in place of – the existing global anti-doping framework.
published_date	2021-07-01T04:10:21Z
_version_	1763753718046523392
score	11.012678

‘Clean athlete status’ cannot be certified: Calling for caution, evidence and transparency in ‘alternative’ anti-doping systems

Similar Items