ABSTRACT
The relationship between drugs and sport has a long history in Britain, as in many other countries. For example, Dimeo (2007: 20-23) has noted that several British physicians were involved in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in research designed to investigate the effects of a variety of drugs, including coca leaves, strychnine and caffeine, on muscular strength and physical performance. More recently, one of the most high profile drugs-related deaths in sport was that of the English cyclist, Tommy Simpson, who collapsed during the 1967 Tour de France and died before reaching hospital. The central object of this chapter is to examine the recent history of drug use in British sport; more specifically, we set out to document the prevalence, and the changing patterns, of drug use in British sport, in particular since the 1960s. At the outset, we should make clear what we can hope to learn from
such a detailed case study. First, although there is a large and growing body of literature on the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sport, there have been few attempts to estimate systematically the level of drug use in sport, or to examine changes in the patterns of drug use over time. Perhaps this is not surprising for, as Mottram (2005: 357) has noted, ‘[m]eaningful data on the prevalence of use of performance-enhancing drugs in sport are difficult to obtain’. Indeed, it is paradoxical that, because of data which have become available since the collapse of the communist regime in East Germany, we now know much more about the prevalence and organization of drug use in that relatively closed society than we know about the recent history of drug use in Western liberal democracies. A systematic review of the evidence relating to the prevalence and the changing patterns of drug use in British sport since the 1960s will help to correct this imbalance. We do not, of course, claim that the changing pattern of drug use in
Britain over the last fifty years has been identical to that in other countries. In particular, it is clear that, as we hinted above, there are important differences between patterns of drug use in liberal democratic societies and in those countries in which there were state-sponsored doping systems, such as the former Soviet Union and, in particular, the former East Germany (Riordan, 1994; Spitzer, 2004; 2006a; 2006b). However, there are
broad similarities between the British case and the situation in many other ‘Western’ liberal democracies such as the United States, Canada and Australia, the data in relation to which are examined in Chapter 11. Third, detailed national case studies, like case studies of individual sports
such as cycling and soccer (see Chapters 8 and 9) are particularly useful ways of identifying and analyzing the figurations, or networks of relationships, in which drug-using athletes are involved. Fourth, there are, as noted above, numerous difficulties in gaining reliable
data on the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sport and the case study approach forces us to examine the various sources of data which are available, the problems which they present and how these problems may best be overcome. However, before we examine these issues, it is important to remind our-
selves of a point of fundamental importance: modern elite sport is a global phenomenon. Globalization takes many forms: international athletes today not only spend a great deal of time competing but also, increasingly, training outside of their home countries, while the international migration of elite sportspeople is also increasing (Bale and Maguire, 1994; Lanfranchi and Taylor, 2001); international media corporations provide instant television coverage of major sporting events such as the Olympic Games around the world; the huge growth in sports sponsorship in recent years and, directly or indirectly, the massive growth in incomes and prize money for successful athletes, have also increasingly been provided by multinational corporations (Armstrong, 1996; IOC, 2001); and governments, too, have not been slow to recognize that international sporting success brings economic, cultural, political and diplomatic benefits within the context of international relations. One consequence of the globalization of sport is that it is not possible adequately to understand any aspect of elite level sport, including the use of drugs in elite sport, within a single country simply by looking at processes which might be considered ‘internal’ to that country. A clear example is provided by the early development and use of anabolic
steroids in sport in the Soviet Union and the United States in the 1950s, a development which, as we saw in Chapters 4 and 6, can only be properly understood if we locate it within the context of the ColdWar rivalry between those countries at that time. In a similar way, one can only adequately understand the importance attached to sport (and, associated with this, the practice of ‘state sponsored’ doping of athletes) in the former East Germany in terms of the international political and diplomatic objectives of the East German government.We will return to the importance of the globalization of sport later in the context of our discussion about drug use in British sport.
There seems to be general agreement that the modern era of drug use in sport in Britain, as elsewhere, can be traced to the post-war period and,
more particularly, to the period from the 1960s. Houlihan, for example, has commented that the ‘first sign that the use of drugs to enhance sporting performance was systematic and regular rather than exceptional emerged in the 1960s’ (Houlihan, 1991: 201-2), while as we noted in Chapter 4, Michele Verroken, the former head of the Anti-Doping Directorate of UK Sport, has similarly suggested that the use of drugs in sport had become widespread by the 1960s. But is it possible, in relation to British sport, to describe more accurately what Donohoe and Johnson (1986: 2-4) have called this ‘massive acceleration in the incidence of doping in sport’ in recent times? As Yesalis et al. (2001) have pointed out, there are numerous difficulties
involved in trying to arrive at a precise estimate of the extent of drug use in sport. They note that there are four major sources of information about the prevalence of drug use among athletes: investigative journalism, including the writings and testimonials of athletes and others involved in sport; government investigations; results from drug testing; and surveys. However, all four sources suffer from significant methodological problems. Yesalis et al. (2001: 45) suggest, for example, that those who have used drugs and who serve as informants ‘may project their own behavior onto others in an attempt to rationalize their drug use – as they may say, “Everybody does it”’, and that, as a consequence, an overestimate of the level of drug use may result. However, they believe that most of the methodological difficulties are more likely to lead to an underestimate of the level of drug use. In particular, they argue that
