Hansen 1
Madison Hansen
Professor Kelso
Core 412
3 November 2013
Blood Doping in Sports
Blood Doping is an illegal way to increase a person’s red blood cell mass, which
allows the body to send more oxygen to muscles and therefore increase stamina and
performance during practice or competition. Athletes all around the world participating in
sport are doing whatever it takes to be the best even if it’s by an illegal way. Cyclist
Alberto Contador was the 2010 Tour de France Champion. Contador was given a doping
test and failed due to traces of the banned substance clenbuterol during the Tour de
France. Currently, Contador still has the title but is suspended from racing(Averill, 2011).
The ethical question that arrives from this case study refers to ethical issues that relates to
athletes doping in sport. This ethical issue has caused great dilemma over whether or not
an athlete can use doping substances that improves ability, strength, or recovery in sport.
This question provides choices between what is right and what is wrong.
Ethical Situation
There are many types of blood doping that athletes are partaking in. However, the
most known substances or methods used for blood doping are erythropoietin (EPO),
synthetic oxygen carriers and blood transfusions. The World Anti- Doping Agency
(WADA) has banned each of these for athlete use. EPO is a chemical form of blood
doping, which allows aerobic potential to be increased by increasing the blood’s oxygen
transfer capacity. This is done by injecting EPO, a hormone produced by the kidneys that
Hansen 1
stimulates production of red blood cells, giving an athlete great advantages in
performance. It enables the doper to train harder and longer than he would be able to
naturally. (Friesen, 2012) The danger with EPO is that the body’s capacity to produce red
blood cells genetically is compromised; therefore the athlete has to rely on the injections
of the hormone the rest of their life. Also, EPO thickens blood leading to an increased
risk in heart disease, stroke, and cerebral or pulmonary embolism. Synthetic Oxygen
Carriers, such as hemoglobin based or perflurocarbons are purified proteins or chemicals
that have the ability to carry oxygen. Their abuse for doping purposes can cause
cardiovascular disease in addition to serious side effects such as stroke. Blood
transfusions for doping are classified by two forms. The first type is Autologous, which is
the transfusion of one’s own blood that has been stored until needed. The second type is
Homologous, which is the transfusion of blood that has been taken from someone else
with the same blood type. Homologous blood transfusion can be detected through a test.
However, Autologous blood doping can’t be detected but WADA is funding research
projects aimed to develop a test. Side effect with homologous blood transfusions is that a
person’s blood may contain a virus, which is passed during the transfusion. An athlete
using his or her own blood risks if the procedure is done properly or if the blood has been
handled properly. (Why is Doping Banned?).
The World Anti-Doping Agency, United States Anti-Doping Agency, and other
independent doping agencies are trying to find ways to stop athletes from doping in
sports. The agencies have discovered tests to detect certain blood doping. However,
athletes are out smarting these agencies by finding ways to manipulate the tests so they
don’t test positive. The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency currently tests for signs of doping
Hansen 1
through transfusion by examining proteins in blood. The increase in blood transfusion
and injections of athletes in sports has led WADA to funding research aimed to
improving detection tests. There are a few tests currently in practice however there
remains a lot of work to do in order to produce tests that are more reliable. One current
test aims to detect transfusions of any sort- homologous or autologous. Research finds
that athletes undergoing transfusions are exposed to a specific type of plasticizer (DEHP)
found in IV bags. The presence of DEHP in urine samples indicates practice of illegal
blood doping. Unfortunately, this detection method isn’t enough to charge an athlete with
illegal doping. Athletes are able to manipulate this test by duplicating their urine samples
according to the WADA. Another test that indicates illegal transfusions is by blood
analysis comparison of the concentration of mature and immature red blood cells in an
athlete’s bloodstream. A person should fall in a specific percentage of developed and
undeveloped red blood cells. A measure called “off-score” was developed through a
series of equations involving mature and immature concentrations in the body. This
measure allows researchers to determine if an athlete is considered typical by ranging
between 85 and 95. Any score that isn’t typical excludes the athlete from participating in
competitive events. (Friesen, 2012)
Alternatives
Given the ethical circumstances with athletes doping in sports, there are some
alternatives that are acknowledged. The first alternative is the idea of rules about
regulations when it is okay for an athlete to dope. Regulations include certain weeks
during “in-season” training when an athlete can use a form of blood doping. Also, a
regulation on the amount of substance they are putting into their bodies. The amount
Hansen 1
would be universal for all athletes even with different body weights, gender, or sport. The
second alternative is if an athlete has a disadvantage (physical condition) should they be
allowed to dope in reason to be equal to their competitors. The third alternative is if an
athlete is caught doping they are just suspended from the sport but not stripped of titles
they have won.
Ethical arguments against doping
People have determined arguments that are for and against the ban of blood
doping in sports. It is not ethical to use substances or any type of form of blood doping
when an athlete is participating in sport, whether that is in practice or competition.
Athletes should not be allowed to have unfair advantages against their competition and
expect to not have any consequences for their illegal actions. Arguments that are raised
by people against doping are the health issues, integrity of sport, and the fact that it is
cheating.
The first argument against doping is the concern of the health for athletes, who
may be doping, or using substances that enable performance enhancement during training
and competition. The use of medications or methods by athletes without actual medical
conditions can lead to damages of the body. At the 1904 Olympic games, Ancient Greeks
drank special drinks and potions to give them an edge over their competition. The potent
drinks were mixtures of cocaine, heroine, and strychnine. For most of Olympic history,
using drugs wasn’t considered cheating. The Anti-doping rules were established in 1960
because of a tragic incident by Olympic cyclist, Knut Jensen, who passed out during his
race, cracked his skull and died. The cause of death was by the illegal use of
Hansen 1
amphetamines. In 1968, drug testing began to protect athlete health (Aschwanden &
Christie, The Science of Doping).
The ethical theory of Utilitarianism would support the facts that doping can cause
serious health issues among athletes. Utilitarianists are mainly concerned with the
consequences resulting from actions. Therefore, athletes who are using doping substances
are causing themselves more harm than good. “There have been many cases of athletes
dying from the long- term consequences of prohibited substances and methods. In young
athletes the consequences of doping can be devastating, since their bodies are still
developing (Why is Doping Banned?). Utilitarianism weighs if the ends justify the
means. In cases of athletes using doping substances the results don’t prove to provide the
most good. Consequences are normally seen when an athlete uses doping substances to
improve their ability to perform at a higher level.
The next argument against doping is the integrity of sport is being lost because
athletes who win fairly are being questioned and tested to be sure that they didn’t use any
illegal substances to achieve victory. “The original intent of anti-doping rules was to
prevent athletes from dropping dead of overdoses, but over the years the rules have come
to focus just as intently on protecting the integrity of the Games”(Aschwanded, Christie,
The Science of Doping). World Anti-Doping Agency and U.S. Anti-Doping Agency are
doing their best to keep athletes clean of substance abuse. Also, some sports were
perceived to have a bad reputation, due to the amount of athletes using doping
substances.
Hansen 1
The ethical theory that would support the idea that the overall purpose of a sport
is becoming lost is Kant. Kant’s argument would be if you really want to do the right
thing, begin with your intention. The intentions of the athletes doping don’t serve as a
good purpose for themselves or their community whom they are representing. The
intention to use banned substances just to make their chances of winning greater is
wrong. Athletes need to work harder and longer at practices so they can see the same
results, as they would while doping. Kant would argue that athletes using banned
substances are not acting ethical because that requires a “Good Will” with the intention of
living up to principles, which ultimately means that someone who is being ethical is a
duty. Athletes have the duty to compete fairly all the time and to not find ways to gain an
upper hand against their competitors. Athletes who aren’t following their duties are
representing their sport negatively and giving that sport a negative connotation by the
public eye. Kant’s two categorical imperatives also support the argument against blood
doping. The first categorical imperative is Universalize your maxim, which is defined as
“Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law” (Sandel, Michael, Justice). Every athlete should be following the rules
that have been place against blood doping in practice and competition. Therefore they are
considered universal laws according to the first categorical imperative. It is an ethical
principle to abide by the rules of blood doping. The second categorical imperative is
Treat persons as ends, which is defined as “We can’t base the moral law on any particular
interests, purposes, or ends, because then it would be only relative to the person whose
ends they were” (Sandel, Michael, Justice). It is unethical to treat persons as things.
Ration beings have humanity therefore we should act in a way to treat humanity as a
Hansen 1
means and an end. This argues that humans should be treated with reason and each one of
us has dignity. These athletes should have the dignity and mindset to know that doping
isn’t ethical. Athletes who dope need to understand that what they are doing is wrong
since they are “thinking-beings,” who should know right from wrong.
The final argument is the fact that blood doping is cheating, giving athletes unfair
advantages when competing. Unlike a simple break of rules, which can be penalized
within the sport itself, doping has wider consequences. Doping in some countries is seen
as fraud and therefore dealt as a criminal offense (Why is Doping Banned?). Anti-doping
federations are going to do whatever it takes to stop athletes from blood doping and using
substances illegally to enhance their abilities to perform better than their competitors
unfairly. It has been a struggle for Anti-doping agencies to find effective drug tests that
can be used to detect those athletes using illegal substances.
Libertarianism focuses on the idea that we “own” ourselves and no one has the
right to question what an individual chooses to do with his or her life choices.
Liberationists wouldn’t be against athletes doping since they have the right to do
whatever they want to their bodies. Using any type of method for blood doping is only
causing harm to the athlete participating in the action. Blood doping is not directly
hurting the competition, which would be another argument from a libertarianism
standpoint. The idea of “the greatest good for me” is also an argument for libertarianism.
The athlete using the illegal substances is gaining the most by beating their competition
even if it is the morally wrong thing to do.
Ethical arguments for doping
Hansen 1
There are multiple arguments that oppose my view of this ethical dilemma and
support the idea that blood doping should be legalized so that athletes may use them in
practice and competition. These arguments are that the banning of substances has caused
athletes to become unmotivated and discouraged to reach the highest levels of success,
legalize and regulate substances to the benefit of sports and sports fans, legalizing
substances is a service for athletes to perform at their best.
Athletes who are competing at the highest level are under a ton of pressure to
perform well. Not everyone objects to athletes doping because of the pressure to win and
the rewards that come with winning are so tempting that an athlete will do what ever it
takes to be the best. Athletes have been known to be on special diets, scientifically
designed training, and elite equipment so then what is the harm with bags of whole blood
especially blood that is the athletes own. All of these are examples of how technology has
allowed outstanding achievements.
Blood doping should remain illegal for all athletes no matter what time of the
season. Using these illegal substances is ethically wrong because it can harm the athlete,
the integrity of the sport will subside, and it is flat out cheating. All athletes need to be
held accountable for their illegal actions when caught and there should be no excuses that
allow them to get away with their wrong actions. If all athletes start to follow all the rules
and guidelines then competition will be completely fair across the board. Athletes who
blood dope know that they have advantages that are unfair against the rest of their
competition therefore acting unmorally. An athlete is a figure who people look up to and
strive to be like since sports are such a prominent thing in our society. Athletes need to
recognize this and act responsibility to be role models in society.
Hansen 1
References
Aschwanden, Christie. “The Science of Doping.” Jul/Aug 2012,Vol. 43 Issue 4, p56-60.
Averill, Graham. “Contador’s Doping, PETA Thrilled” Blue Ridge Outdoors Magazine.
(2011): 1 Nov. 2013
Boyle, Devan. “Debate: Should Performance- Enhancing Drugs Be Legalized?” Blue
Ridge Outdoors Magazine. (2013): 1 Nov. 2013.
Friesen, Hannah. “Stemming the Flow of Blood Doping” (2012): 1 Nov 2013
Sandel, Michael. Justice, What’s The Right Thing To Do? (2010): 1 Nov 2013
“Why is Doping Banned?” Nationale Anti- Doping Agentur Austria.
http://www.nada.at/en/menu_2/prevention/why-is-doping-banned. 1 Nov. 2013
Hansen 1
Reflection
Overall, I enjoyed writing this paper on blood doping since I am an athlete. When
I first starting writing my paper I found some trouble with narrowing down ideas that I
wanted to focus most on. By the end of my paper I knew exactly what points I wanted to
state and what ethical theories would help back up my arguments. I am completely
against athletes who blood dope and think all substances and methods related to blood
doping should remain illegal no matter what part of the season the athletes are in. My
opinion on keeping blood doping illegal never changed even as I researched arguments
that were for the legalization of blood doping. Their arguments were valid and raised
good points but I still feel that athletes should stay away from these substances. There has
been a great number of athletes who have won huge titles in their sport without using
substances that will enhance their performance. Athletes who put in hard work day after
day will see results that they deserve.
I would’ve liked to research more articles that dealt with case studies of specific
athletes who have been either caught or figured out ways to pass drug tests. I was able to
research a few but there is always room for some more. I didn’t find it very hard to find
academic sources for my ethical question; there were a wide variety of sources to choose
from. I’m glad I chose this topic to research because it puts things in perspective as a
athlete. I know when its time for me to compete I hope that all my competitors are not
cheating and using substances that are going to help them race better.