|  | Emerging Scholars | No.56 May 2009 |
|  |  | print / save view |

Knowledge and Awareness towards Doping in Sports: A Survey Study Sameer E. Bhagirathi |
Abstract The purpose of the study was to assess the knowledge and awareness of doping and drugs abuse in sports from Coaches, Physical Education Teachers, Sports Physiotherapists and Medical Doctors in Central India, who interact with sports people and assist them in their daily practices. The researcher made a questionnaire; the questions addressed various aspects of doping regarding WADA, lists of banned substances, methods and knowledge of the TUE form. The questionnaire was completed by Coaches, Physical Education Teachers, Sports Physiotherapists and Medical Doctors in Central India. For the evaluation of questionnaire Qui-square tests and T-statistics were employed and the findings revealed a significant variation between groups of participants. Apart from this the overall knowledge regarding banned substances among all categories (Coaches, Physical Education Teachers and Medical practitioners) found that 54% were aware of the WADA banned substance list, as apposed to 46% of participants who were unaware. Knowledge of TUE among all participants was found to be 53% were aware and 47% unaware. Knowledge related to the testing methods of doping among all categories found 41% positive and 59% were unaware of methods used by WADA, this suggests knowledge in all three categories. This survey has given an insight into the overall knowledge and awareness of doping in sports amongst Coaches, Physical Education Teachers, Sports Physiotherapists and Medical Doctors. Introduction In the early 1900s, the most popular doping agent was a cocktail of alcohol and strychnine. The use of strychnine was superceded by amphetamine, following its development in the 1930s. In 1960, the Danish cyclist, Kurt Jensen, died after overdosing on amphetamine in an attempt to seek a competitive advantage and the search for control measures began. Methods of anti-doping control were first pioneered in the 1960s, by Arnold Beckett, an academic pharmacist with a specialist interest in sports pharmacy, based at Kings College London (formerly Chelsea College). It was however the televised death of the British cyclist Tommy Simpson, while under the influence of amphetamine during the 1967 Tour de France, that proved the catalyst for implementation of official anti-doping control systems and the banning of amphetamine in international sport. Cycling has long since been a harbinger for systematic doping and as one top cyclist claimed "it is impossible to finish in the top five of a Tour de France without doping". In 1968, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) published the first banned list of drugs and implemented its first formal drug-testing program at the Montreal Olympics. In the past three decades a number of names have joined the cheats' hall of fame including Ben Johnson (stanozolol), Dan Mitchell (testosterone), Linford Christie (nandralone), Olga Yegorova (erythropoetin) and Andrea Raducan (pseudoephedrine), to name but a few. Johnson was abusing stanazolol and other agents for years with the help of fringe practitioners, before testing positive at the Seoul Olympics in 1988. In the UK, many were shocked by the Linford Christie saga, however he first tested positive in 1988, at the start of his career, for the banned stimulant pseudoephedrine. It was the Irish swimmer Michelle Smith de Bruin who brought the reality of doping home to our own doorstep; while the country was divided in 1998 as to whether she was a sporting Jenny or a bold deceiver, the IOC confirmed that there was "Whiskey in the Jar" and the amount therein defied all possible human consumption. The doping scourge has continued into the new millennium. Alain Baxter came from 63rd in the world to attain a bronze medal in the 2002 Winter Olympics at Salt Lake City, only to be stripped of his medal after a positive test. Only recently, another scandal hit the headlines adding to the disrepute of cycling when Stefano Garzelli tested positive for probenecid; five of his team were arrested, indicted or "disappeared" during police investigations. Doping is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport. The World Anti-Doping code states, “Anti-Doping programs seek to preserve what is intrinsically valuable about sports. These intrinsic values, often referred to as ‘the spirit of sport’; are the essence of Olympism; it is how we play true.” Doping is defined as the deliberate or inadvertent use by an athlete of a substance or method banned by the IOC. Doping is also prohibited by International and National sports Governing Bodies. Encouraging or assisting athletes to use such substances or methods is unethical and considered a doping related offence. Doping is prohibited because it gives athletes an unfair advantage, which destroys the joy of fair competition and because many forms of doping put the athlete’s health at risk. The personal and financial rewards of modern sport can create unhealthy desires to win at all costs. To gain a competitive advantage, some athletes may use ergogenic aids, which enhance sporting performance beyond that attainable through genetic ability and training. Methodology The purpose of the study was to identify the knowledge and awareness of doping and drugs abuse in sports from Coaches, Physical Education Teachers, Sports Physiotherapists and Medical Doctors in Central India, who interact with sportspersons and assist them in their daily practices. The questions addressed various aspects of doping regarding WADA, list of banned substances, methods and knowledge of the TUE form. The questionnaire has filled by randomly selected Coaches, Physical Education Teachers, Sports Physiotherapists and Medical Doctors in Central India. Findings For the evaluation of questionnaire Qui-square test was employed and the findings reveled after using the T-statistics that there was a significant difference found among them i.e. for Coaches- 79.065, Physical Education Teachers - 63.380, Sports Physiotherapists and Medical Doctors- 69.657 and for all categories- 120.164. Results and discussion The questions addressed various aspects of WADA guidelines on doping, namely, lists of banned substances, knowledge of the TUE form and testing methods and procedures. Table I shows the percentage of positive and negative responses from all three categories: Table-I The percentage of YES and NO responses from all three categories
Categories | Coaches |  | #### Physical Education Teachers |  | Medical Practitioners |
Various aspects | Yes% | No% | Yes% | No% | Yes% | No%
Banned Substances | 56 | 44 | 55 | 45 | 51 | 49
TUE | 57 | 43 | 52 | 48 | 53 | 47
Testing Methods | 40 | 60 | 41 | 59 | 43 | 57
Table-II Over all percentage of YES and NO responses
Various Aspects | Yes% | No%
Banned substances | 54 | 46
TUE | 53 | 47
Testing methods | 42 | 58
Table-III Mean difference, Variance and T-statistics among the Coaches, Physical Education Teachers and Medical practitioners in their responses
Total | Sum | Mean | Variance | St. dev. | St. error | T-statistics
140 (Coaches) | 1625 | 11.607 | 3.017 | 1.737 | 0.147 | 79.065
135 (Physical Education Teachers) | 1560 | 11.556 | 4.488 | 2.118 | 0.182 | 63.380
137(Medical Practitioners) | 1619 | 11.818 | 4.180 | 2.044 | 0.175 | 69.657
412 (all) | 4804 | 11.660 | 3.879 | 1.970 | 0.097 | 120.164
The study found the knowledge of the coaches on banned substances to be 56% positive and 44% negative. In the same way the knowledge of the coaches related to TUE was found 57% positive and 43% negative. Regarding testing methods only 40% coaches has given a positive response and majority 60% were unaware of WADA testing methods for doping. (Series 1 shows % of Positive responses and Series 2 shows % of Negative responses) The study of the Physical Education Teachers knowledge of banned substances showed 55% gave positive responses and 45% negative responses. In the same way the knowledge of the Physical Education Teachers related to the TUE was found 52% gave positive responses and 48% negative, so just a 4% difference. Regarding testing methods, only 41% Physical Education Teachers gave positive responses, leaving 59% unaware of WADA testing methods for doping. (Series 1 shows % of Positive responses and Series 2 shows % of Negative responses) The banned substance knowledge of Medical practitioners involved in sport, found 51% gave positive responses and 49% gave negative responses. On the other hand, the knowledge of the Medical practitioners related to the TUE found 53% gave positive responses and 47% gave negative responses. Regarding WADA testing methods, only 43% medical practitioners gave positive responses as apposed to the 57% who gave negative responses. (Series 1 shows % of Positive responses and Series 2 shows % of Negative responses) The overall knowledge regarding banned substances among all categories (coaches, Physical Education Teachers and Medical practitioners) found 54% gave positive responses, which was slightly better than 46% giving negative responses on the WADA banned substance list. In the same way, the knowledge of TUE among all categories found 53% gave positive responses and 47% negative. Knowledge relating to WADA testing methods of doping, among all categories, found 41% positive and 59% gave negative responses, this implies poor knowledge among all three categories in this testing procedures. (Series 1 shows % of Positive responses and Series 2 shows % of Negative responses) Conclusion This study has to extend beyond the state, nation and sport experts. The subject of banned drugs in sports, their health hazards and implications are to be introduced into the medical school itself, as a part of their curriculum and as a part of continued Sport education. This study has given an insight into the overall lack of knowledge and awareness of doping in sport among Coaches, Physical Education Teachers, Sports Physiotherapists and Medical Doctors. The findings reveled that there was a significant difference found among them when statistical tests were applied. Apart from this, the overall knowledge regarding banned substances among all categories (Coaches, Physical Education Teachers and Medical practitioners) found 54% gave positive responses, which was marginally better then the 46% who were unaware of the WADA banned substance list. The knowledge of TUE among all categories found 53% of respondents gave positive and 47% negative. Knowledge relating to WADA testing methods of doping, among all categories, found 41% positive and 59% gave negative responses, this implies poor knowledge among all three categories in this testing procedures. References Bhagirathi S.E., “Doping and Sports” (2007) Book Published by Veena Publication, Bhopal, India. P.1-2 Kulkarni K., Nadgir A., Ahuja A., (2006) “Medical Doctors and Doping in Sports – Awareness, knowledge and Attitudes”. Abstract published in the abstract book of 29th FIMS World Congress of Sports Medicine, June-14-16, 2006, Beijing, China. P.135 Ichiro Kono, “Anti-Doping Movement” (2007) Abstract Published in the abstract book of 4th WFATT World congress, January 13-14,2007, Tokyo, Japan. P.17 Virupaksha N.D. Hallad H.B., “Drugs in Sports”, (2006) Abstract published in the proceeding of International Conference on Physical Education and Sports Sciences, 28th –30th April 2006. p.273 FIMS Advance Team Physician Manual,(2006) IInd edition, Published by International Federation of Sports Medicine supporting press Hong-Kong, 2006.p.80 Contact Sameer Elwin Bhagirathi Indira Priyadershini College of Physical Education Bhopal, India Email: sameer_elwin2007@yahoo.co.in icsspe.org/index.php?m=15 Knowledge and Awareness towards Doping in Sports: A Survey Study Sameer E. Bhagirathi