Blood Doping in Professional Athletics
Blood doping creates unneeded risk and endangers an athlete’s life for a slightly
increased chance of winning a competition. This practice should remain banned and athletes
should seek alternative practices that do not come with unusual added health risks. Though there
are logical arguments for each side, there is more evidence to support the argument that blood
doping should not be legal in athletic competitions. There is too much risk involved for the
reward to be so miniscule.
Blood transfusions became popular between the 1970s and 1980s with a diverse
population of professional athletes. EPOs (a natural hormone made by the kidney’s) followed
blood transfusions and gained their popularity in the late 1980s (Eichner). The effects of EPOs
were seen through the many health risks that the athletes encountered including the death of 20
European cyclists over a period of 4 years (Eichner). The 1998 Tour de France also saw its fair
share of EPO use among athletes with one team being disqualified and 6 more teams dropping
out (Eichner). Later came the use of synthetic or artificial blood. In recent years athletes have
been accused of, and caught, using all of these methods to increase their endurance and
performance. Tests are improving to be able to detect when an athlete has used one of these
methods.
Blood doping is a very controversial issue among the athletic community and continues
to grow. The reasons why the use of blood doping has become so much more common include
athletes’ increased ability to obtain the EPO injections or transfusions, the ability of doping to
increase an athlete’s performance, and the difficulty in detecting the use of any of the methods of
blood doping (de Oliveira, de Bairros & Yonamine). This method of performance enhancement
is unlike others because it uses processes and hormones that the body already makes. Blood
doping is used to increase the carrying ability of hemoglobin in the blood, which can mean great
possibilities for the human body, but could also cause many complications. With more oxygen in
the blood, the muscles will be better supplied and they can work both harder and longer.
However, the health risks are plentiful. There are many forms of blood doping including blood
transfusions, injections of erythropoietin (EPO), and injections of synthetic oxygen carriers
(Eichner).
Blood transfusions come in two types: autologous transfusions and homologous
transfusions. Autologous transfusions require the athlete to store some of their own blood prior
to their competition and have it put back into them before the competition. Homologous
transfusions differ in that the athlete has another individual's blood with the same blood type put
into them. Injections of erythropoietin (EPO) involve injecting the athlete with EPO (a natural
hormone made by the kidney’s) to stimulate red blood cell production (WebMD). More red
blood cells translates into more hemoglobin, and in turn more oxygen. The last method of doping
is through the use of synthetic oxygen carriers. These are chemicals that do the same job as
normal cells that carry oxygen. This allows the body to supply more oxygen to the muscles and
tissues.
This all sounds well and good when thinking about the potential for increasing an
individual's physical abilities but there are also some risks that come with the advantages. Any
form of blood doping that increases the number of red blood cells is going to thicken the blood.
Thicker blood can put an individual at risk for heart attack, stroke, or blood clots (WebMD).
With blood transfusions, there is also a risk of contracting HIV, Hepatitis B, and Hepatitis C
from contaminated blood (WebMD). Repeated use of doping through blood transfusions can
cause a buildup of iron (WebMD). It can also lead to damage of the lungs, and possibly
infection, if the blood was not stored in the correct manner. EPO’s can cause hyperkalemia (high
potassium in the blood that can affect heart rhythm), high blood pressure, and mild flu-like
symptoms (WebMD).
Though doping is an ethical issue in the sphere of sports, it has been a life saver in the
medical world. Blood transfusions are used to replace what a patient has lost due to an injury or
while in surgery. It can also be helpful in treating those suffering from anemia, kidney failure, or
other conditions. Synthetic oxygen carriers are extremely necessary in situations when: blood is
not available, there is a high risk for the patient to get an infection, or there is not time to type
and match the blood. The risks associated with blood doping are not worth it in the context of
sports because the athlete has so much to lose, but it can be a very viable option when a patient is
in need of lifesaving care.
Because this practice can be so harmful to an athlete’s body and is seen as an unfair
advantage, professional sports organizations are trying to find new ways to detect the use of all
of the methods of blood doping. There is no way to test directly for the use of autologous
transfusions and can only be tested indirectly through comparison of the athlete’s blood before
and after. Homologous transfusions can be tested directly and is a test used previously by the
Olympics (WebMD). EPO injections can be detected by urine and blood tests but have to be
tested within a short time of being injected (WebMD). There is also a method for direct testing
for synthetic oxygen carriers.
Currently, blood doping is banned by the International Olympic Committee and other
organizations involved with sports. It creates an unfair advantage for some and puts them ahead
of others who work hard to improve their own abilities. They test for the use of doping and
disqualify or punish those who have been found guilty. If organizations were to allow for this
practice to be acceptable, the playing field may then be equal; however, there would be those
who continue to push the boundaries to gain the upper hand.
Some argue that because detecting the use of blood doping is difficult and that the tests
that do exist are intrusive that the practice should just be legal. This is not a logical argument.
Just as science developed to allow doping to be possible, so will the methods to detect it. Also,
requiring athletes to comply with drug tests and tests for doping with samples of urine and blood
is not outrageous. For those that are doping, it should not bother them to give a little blood for
testing when they would be giving around two pints of it for the doping process. They just want
an excuse to keep their practices undiscovered. For those that are not doping and are putting in
actual work to attain their goals, complying with these tests keeps the playing field more even so
that their hard work will not go to waste.
There are many examples of blood doping scandals but one of the most well-known is
that of Lance Armstrong. In an interview with Oprah Winfrey on January 14, 2013, he admitted
to having used performance enhancing drugs (Rose and Fisher). The specific drugs that he
admitted to using were EPO, testosterone, cortisone, human growth hormone, and illegal blood
transfusions (Wilson). There was an investigation of Armstrong and his teammates by the U.S.
Anti-Doping Agency. The investigation resulted in over 1,000 pages of evidence to support the
doping allegations against the cyclists (Wilson). In turn, Lance Armstrong was stripped of his
seven Tour de France titles and was made to give back his bronze medal won in the 2000
Olympics by the International Olympic Committee (Wilson). The severity in which Armstrong
was punished for his acts shows just how damaging doping can be to one’s career and that it is a
big deal in professional athletics which is not taken lightly. These actions can also have a
detrimental effect on the teammates of those athletes and others associated with them. The other
riders in Armstrong’s team were also found out and punished for their use of performance
enhancing drugs and EPO (Rose & Fisher).
Though blood doping is not really safe or legal, there is a good alternative that allows
athlete’s to increase their abilities. Altitude training is a safe alternative to blood doping that
gives an athlete the same results without using any kind of drug. In altitude training, the athlete
trains in a location based on where they live and where they will compete. There are two
methods to altitude training which are “live high, train high” or “live high, train low” (The Daily
PT RSS). It is a method that is already working for so many athletes and can even be done in a
simulated environment. If it is not realistic for an athlete to travel to a location of a higher
altitude, there are oxygen tents and other devices that allow for an athlete to live or train in an
environment with reduced amounts of oxygen.
Training and living in a high altitude means that the body is going to have to produce
more oxygen carrying red blood cells because the air is thinner. This is done by triggering a
hormone naturally produced by the body called erythropoietin (EPO), which will prompt the
production of additional red blood cells. These extra red blood cells will be able to carry more
oxygen to the body’s muscles and tissues and increase the athlete’s performance and endurance.
During training season, runners from all parts of the world come to Kenya’s Great Rift Valley to
train in the very high elevation (The Daily PT RSS). The only downside is that the training will
be less rigorous and of less quality than what they could do at sea level.
Training in a low altitude when living or competing in a high altitude is also a great
method. The athlete is going to be able to train harder because their body is not trying to create
extra red blood cells to compensate for the thin air. The training that they do at the lower
elevation will be of better quality and when they return to the higher elevation, they will have the
rigorous training to accompany the extra red blood cells that their body will begin to produce
again. The 2002 US Olympic Speed Skating team actually used this “live high and train low”
method (The Daily PT RSS).
Blood doping is a great advancement in science and medicine. It has allowed science to
expand the body’s abilities to new horizons and preserve the lives of many. Medicine can and
has found better use of the process. Medical professionals continue to save lives while assuming
risks that cannot compare to what could happen if they did not. When it comes to sports, blood
doping is not a good idea. There will always be someone looking to get ahead so allowing for
this to be legal will not even the playing field. Winning a competition is not worth the risk of
losing or crippling a human life.
Works Cited
"Altitude Training: Your Blood Doping Alternative?" The Daily PT RSS. United States Army
National Guard, 21 July 2013. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.
Angelo Corlett, J., Vincent Brown, and Kiersten Kirkland. "Coping With Doping." Journal Of
The Philosophy Of Sport 40.1 (2013): 41-64. Academic Search Complete. Web. 24 Oct.
2014.
"Blood Doping: Types, Risks, and Tests." WebMD. WebMD, n.d. Web. 21 Oct. 2014.
de Oliveira, Carolina Dizioli Rodrigues, André Valle de Bairros, and Mauricio Yonamine.
"Blood Doping: Risks To Athletes' Health And Strategies For Detection." Substance Use
& Misuse 49.9 (2014): 1168-1181. Academic Search Complete. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.
Eichner, E. Randy. "Blood Doping." Sports Medicine 37.4-5 (2007): 389-91. Springer Link.
Springer International Publishing, 29 Nov. 2012. Web. 4 Nov. 2014.
Rose, Clayton, and Noah Fisher. "Following Lance Armstrong: Excellence Corrupted." Harvard
Business School Case 314-015, July 2013. (Revised October 2014.)
Wilson, Jacque. "Lance Armstrong's Doping Drugs." CNN. Cable News Network, 18 Jan. 2013.
Web. 29 Oct. 2014.