Doping doesn't do much good

Following the examination of over 120 years of sporting records, University of Adelaide researchers have concluded that doping actually has very little effect on athletes’ results.

Writing in the Journal of Human Sport and Exercise, Aaron Hermann and Maciej Henneberg explained that they collected about 1560 records of male and female athletes, across 26 sports, between 1886 and 2012. Comparisons were made between pre- and post-1932 records - the year when steroids became available - as well as pre- and post-1967, when widespread use of doping was formally acknowledged.

“The average best life records for ‘doped’ top athletes did not differ significantly from those considered not to have doped,” said Hermann. “Even assuming that not all cases of doping were discovered, the practice did not alter sporting records as commonly believed.”

The study suggests that doping practices are, if anything, harming athletes’ results - “seemingly indicating that ‘natural’ human abilities would outperform the potentially doping ‘enhanced’ athletes”, according to Hermann. He explained, “Doping may produce a minor improvement in one aspect of performance, but in other areas it may have a detrimental effect, which outweighs the positive.”

Hermann said the study may also show that doping is more widespread than initially thought. He noted, “The 2000 Olympics gold medal result for the women’s 100 m sprint was even poorer than the gold medal obtained in the 1968 Olympics - the first year of doping testing in the Olympics.”

Hermann said he hopes the study will confront the perception that athletes need to dope in order to remain competitive. The practice may be damaging the image of sport, he said, without benefiting athletes’ results.

Source