Criticisms of the ethical justification of antidoping legislation are not uncommon in the literatures of medical ethics, sports ethics and sports medicine. Critics of antidoping point to inconsistencies of principle in the application of legislation and the unjustifiability of ethical postures enshrined in the World Anti-Doping Code, a new version of which came into effect in January 2009. This article explores the arguments concerning the apparent legal peculiarities of antidoping legislation and their ethically salient features in terms of: notions of culpability, liability and guilt; aspects of potential duplication of punishments and the limitations of athlete privacy in antidoping practice and policy. It is noted that tensions still exist between legal and ethical principles and norms that require further critical attention.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2009.030023 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Prevalence of therapeutic use exemptions at the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games: an analysis of data from 2016 to 2022.
Br J Sports Med
September 2024
School of Life Sciences, Pharmacy and Chemistery, Kingston University, Kingston, UK.
Objectives: The objectives of this study are to describe the prevalence of therapeutic use exemptions (TUEs) among athletes competing in four Olympic and four Paralympic games. The secondary objective was to present the prohibited substance and methods classes associated with TUEs.
Methods: Data from the Anti-Doping Administration and Management System were extracted for this cross-sectional observation study.
Detecting novel psychoactive substances around the world.
Curr Opin Psychiatry
July 2024
Department of Chemistry, University of Turin.
Purpose Of Review: The worldwide spread of novel psychoactive substances (NPS) in the illicit drug market and their continuous increase in number and type, for the purpose of bypassing controlled substance legislation, represents a continuing challenge for forensic scientists, clinicians and enforcement authorities. We aim to provide information regarding the most urgent harms related to NPS consumption in different world regions and the current state of the art for NPS analysis.
Recent Findings: Unfortunately, the identification of NPS in biological samples is controversial, especially when samples are limited, or the drug is promptly and extensively metabolized.
Doping yesterday, today, tomorrow: A challenge for the clinical laboratory.
Malays J Pathol
April 2024
Sapienza University of Roma, Department of Experimental Medicine, Italy.
This work highlights the role of the clinical laboratory, in the early detection of the use of substances prohibited for doping. This is because most people who practice sports today are non-professional athletes and amateurs, in particular young kids. These persons are not subjected to anti-doping controls but are at risk for their health.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe evolution of European legislation on doping: new challenges in the age of NPS.
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci
September 2022
School of Law, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.
The fight against doping in sport, formally started in 1960 with the constitution of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and culminated in 1999 with the birth of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), commissioned to chair various activities, including the publication of the annual list of prohibited substances and methods for doping. In Europe, as early as 1967, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted a resolution to stigmatise the intake of substances foreign to the body for the sole purpose of artificially and unfairly influencing sports performance. In 2002, the Council of Europe adopted an Additional Protocol to the 1989 Strasbourg Convention against Doping to ensure mutual recognition of doping controls and to strengthen the enforcement of the Convention.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFStaying on the Right Side of the Regulatory Authorities.
Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract
April 2021
Regulatory Discretion, Inc, 16256 Ravenglen Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, USA.
This article provides reviews of the following: principal regulatory frameworks governing the supply of feed products for horses, focusing on the United States and Europe with guidance on compliance; key federal, state, or country requirements to ensure safe and accurately labeled products; rules concerning antidoping with a review of naturally occurring prohibited substances commonly found in feedstuffs; essential information for brand holders of equine nutrition products, practicing veterinarians, independent nutritionists, research scientists, competition riders and racehorse trainers, and those responsible for the direct feeding of horses.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!