Doping Dilemma: How WADA's Policies Are Failing Our Sport

I am alarmed by how the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is policing our sport. It's disheartening to see athletes win races only to be stripped of their titles months later due to delayed doping allegations. This approach undermines the integrity of athletics and, in the long run, does more harm than good.​

Having dedicated my life to running—I ran my first mile on February 16, 1962, and I discovered my passion for our sport after clocking a 2:08.5 in a 880-yard race JUne 1, 1963—I've witnessed the sport's evolution firsthand. As the founder and publisher of Runner’s World for 18 years and, since 2007, the editor and publisher of My Best Runs, I am concerned about the professional side of athletics.

The Flaws in WADA's Zero-Tolerance Policy

WADA's strict liability standard holds athletes accountable for any prohibited substance in their system, regardless of intent. This has led to controversial sanctions, such as the four-year ban of American runner Shelby Houlihan. She tested positive for the steroid nandrolone, which she attributed to consuming a pork burrito. Despite her defense, the ban was upheld, raising questions about the fairness of such rigid policies.​

Overhauling the Banned Substances List

The extensive list of prohibited substances maintained by WADA includes compounds with minimal or no performance-enhancing effects. By focusing on substances with proven performance benefits, we can prevent athletes from being unjustly penalized for trace amounts of inconsequential substances.​

The Problem with Retroactive Disqualifications

Delayed disqualifications due to retroactive positive tests cause significant disruptions. Athletes are stripped of titles months or even years after competitions, leading to uncertainty and diminished trust in the sport. Investing in faster, more sensitive testing methods is crucial to detect violations promptly, ensuring that competition results are reliable and fair.​

Rethinking the "Whereabouts" Requirement

WADA's "whereabouts" rule mandates that athletes provide their location for one hour each day to facilitate out-of-competition testing. This constant monitoring infringes on athletes' privacy rights and imposes an unreasonable burden. Reevaluating this policy could help balance effective anti-doping measures with respect for personal freedoms.​

Understanding Blood Doping and Its Implications

Blood doping, which involves increasing red blood cells to enhance performance, poses significant health risks, including blood clots, stroke, and heart attack. While it's linked to deaths in sports like cycling, there is no documented case of a runner dying directly from blood doping.

Interestingly, many doping violations involve substances like erythropoietin (EPO), which, despite health risks, haven't been directly linked to fatalities among runners. In contrast, alcohol—a legal substance—is responsible for approximately 3 million deaths worldwide annually. This disparity raises questions about the consistency of current substance regulations in sports.​

The Business of Anti-Doping

Established in 1999 with an initial operating income of USD 15.5 million, WADA's budget has grown significantly, reaching USD 46 million in 2022. This increase reflects the expanding scope of WADA's activities, including research, education, and compliance monitoring.

Funding is primarily sourced from public authorities and the sports movement, with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) being a major contributor. Notably, in 2024, the United States withheld over USD 3.6 million—about 6% of WADA's annual budget—due to disputes over the agency's handling of doping cases.​

EPO's Prevalence in Doping Cases

Erythropoietin (EPO) has a history of abuse in endurance sports due to its performance-enhancing capabilities. For example, Kenyan marathon runner Brimin Kipkorir was provisionally suspended in February 2025 after testing positive for EPO and Furosemide. This suspension adds to a series of high-profile doping cases affecting marathon running, especially among Kenyan athletes.​

Adapting Governance and Policies to Maintain Trust

High-profile doping scandals have exposed flaws in the governance of athletics. The case of coach Alberto Salazar illustrates the challenges in enforcing anti-doping regulations. Salazar, who led the Nike Oregon Project, was initially banned for four years in 2019 for multiple anti-doping rule violations, including trafficking testosterone and tampering with doping control processes.

In 2021, he received a lifetime ban for sexual and emotional misconduct. His athlete, Galen Rupp, never tested positive for banned substances, yet his reputation suffered due to his association with Salazar. This situation underscores the importance of independent and transparent governance in maintaining the sport's integrity.

The banned drug list

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) maintains a comprehensive list of substances and methods prohibited in sports to ensure fair competition and athlete health. This list is updated annually and includes categories such as:

·       Anabolic Agents: These substances, including anabolic-androgenic steroids, promote muscle growth and enhance performance.​

·       Peptide Hormones, Growth Factors, and Related Substances: Compounds like erythropoietin (EPO) and human growth hormone (hGH) that can increase red blood cell production or muscle mass.​

·       Beta-2 Agonists: Typically used for asthma, these can also have performance-enhancing effects when misused.​

·       Hormone and Metabolic Modulators: Substances that alter hormone functions, such as aromatase inhibitors and selective estrogen receptor modulators.​

·       Diuretics and Masking Agents: Used to conceal the presence of other prohibited substances or to rapidly lose weight.​

·       Stimulants: Compounds that increase alertness and reduce fatigue, including certain amphetamines.​

·       Narcotics: Pain-relieving substances that can impair performance and pose health risks.​

·       Cannabinoids: Including substances like tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which can affect coordination and concentration.​

·       Glucocorticoids: Anti-inflammatory agents that, when misused, can have significant side effects.​

Additionally, WADA prohibits certain methods, such as blood doping and gene doping, which can artificially enhance performance. It's important to note that while substances like alcohol are legal and widely consumed, they are not banned in most sports despite their potential health risks.

In contrast, substances like EPO, which have not been directly linked to fatalities among runners, are prohibited due to their performance-enhancing effects and potential health risks. This raises questions about the consistency and focus of current substance regulations in sports..

Regarding the percentage of doping violations involving EPO, specific statistics are not readily available. However, EPO has been a focal point in numerous high-profile doping cases, particularly in endurance sports. For detailed and up-to-date information, consulting WADA's official reports and statistics is recommended

 Blood Doping Across Sports

Blood doping is prohibited across various sports, particularly those requiring high endurance. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) banned blood doping in 1985, and since then, numerous sports organizations have implemented similar prohibitions. Cycling has been notably affected, with many major champions associated with or suspended for blood doping.​

In conclusion, while the fight against doping is essential to maintain fairness in athletics, the current methods employed by WADA may be causing more harm than good. It's imperative to develop more nuanced, fair, and effective anti-doping policies that protect both the integrity of the sport and the rights of its athletes.

posted Thursday February 27th
by Bob Anderson