Report

On Saturday, January 16, 1999, a task force composed of Olympic Gold Medalists Edwin Moses and Donna de Varona, leaders of American and Canadian sport organizations, physicians, scientists, educators, and lawyers meeting under the auspices of the Duke University Law School's Center for Sports Law and Policy concluded that there is an urgent need for true independence in sports drug testing programs. The task force also concluded that credible drug testing programs must reflect the prevailing ethic that using performance enhancing drugs is cheating, and that such programs must be transparent, based in peer-reviewed science and properly recognize the athlete's right to due process.

The group was motivated by a shared concern that the use of performance enhancing drugs and the failure -- despite many positive efforts -- of international and national governing bodies to develop and enforce a comprehensive anti-doping policy threatens the credibility and future of sport. The task force hopes that its conclusions will influence the development and implementation of new doping control policies both domestic and international. In particular, the group hopes that its conclusions will be considered by participants and observers of the Anti-Doping Summit that is to be convened by the International Olympic Committee in early February in Lausanne, Switzerland.

The task force reached consensus on a number of important issues.

The group concluded that doping is a significant problem that threatens to undermine the fundamental nature of sport and the ethical and physical well-being of children who may wish to participate in sport. In this latter regard, the group agreed that whether or not sport figures want to be role models, the publicity surrounding their behavior influences the choices and conduct of children; therefore, elite athletes have to be governed in fact, not just rhetorically, by the principles that underlie fair competition.
The group concluded that for any solution to be effective, and so that all relevant procedures are uniform and harmonized, the problem of doping has to be dealt with comprehensively, on the national level for purely domestic sports, and on the international level for sports conducted in that arena. With regard to Olympic sports, the task force concluded that in the absence of effective international leadership, credible initiatives at the national level are to be applauded.
The group concluded that doping must be defined to include substances and methods that permit an athlete to gain an unfair advantage in competition. A definition that is limited only to such substances and methods that are harmful to the health of the athlete would be contrary to the spirit of sport and fair play and would render moot any legitimate effort to control doping.
The group concluded that to be credible, an anti-doping program had to be truly independent of and external to the federations that govern international and national sports. In this respect, the group agreed that an independent and external anti-doping program would permit the sports governing organizations properly to return their energies and resources to the positive aspects of the development of their sports and athletes.
The group concluded that an effective anti-doping effort had to be both ethically and scientifically based. The group concluded that a scientific basis for doping control is essential and requires validation by peer reviewed research. The science of doping is a moving target and a successful program must contemplate its evolution with careful research. The group also concluded that, apart from the question of scientific research, an effective and intelligent program must also ensure that existing means of doping control that have been shown to be effective are properly implemented.
The group agreed that, in addition to an independent anti-doping effort, there also is substantial need for educational and other value-drive programs that emphasize the positive aspects of drug-free competition.

Much of the focus of the discussion this weekend concerned the overriding need for the creation of an anti-doping entity that is external to and independent of the authorities that govern sport. Many of these authorities have made substantial and good faith efforts to address the problem of doping, some of which have had relative success. However, the lack of adequate funding and inherent conflicts of interest that plague these authorities make it practically impossible for them to administer fair and effective drug control programs. It was emphasized that this externalization and independence must be real, not rhetorical. Indeed, the scope of the independence contemplated by the group was complete: The new entity should be charged with:

determining what constitutes doping;
overseeing and coordinating the objective and peer-reviewed scientific research necessary to establish and enforce anti-doping rules;
and establishing an adjudicatory system that protects the rights of athletes as well as the public's interest in fair competition.

The consensus of the task force was that the establishment of such an independent authority is crucial to the survival and credibility of an international sporting community that has failed adequately to come to terms with the doping problem. It was also the consensus of the task force that to succeed in the first instance, the new entity has to include among its founders representatives of the stakeholders in the enterprise, namely athletes, sponsors and constituent organizations that currently govern sport; however, the governance and decision-making authority of the entity must not be capable of being compromised in any respect by the participation of such representatives.

The participants also concluded that once this independent entity is established, it has to develop doping rules that are based on peer-reviewed science, rather than speculation and rumor, as well as uniform standards and procedures to protect athletes' rights and govern the adjudication of doping disputes.

With respect to the scientific issues implicated by doping, the task force discussed extensively the special problem of inappropriate use of normal bodily substances including rEPO and testosterone, and agreed on the need for peer-reviewed research that would identify those exogenous substances that should be considered doping, the circumstances in which those substances should be banned, and the relevant base lines for endogenous substances for male, female, older and adolescent athletes, where gender or age are scientifically relevant. The need to include scientific experts from a range of disciplines in the research effort, to make transparent the existing closed-society of doping experts, and to conduct research pertaining specifically to women and children was emphasized. There was consensus on the need for universally accepted, uniform standards for the appointment and review of independent laboratories used in the enforcement of anti-doping policies.

Finally, the task force concluded that governments and sponsors who financially support the anti-doping efforts of international and national sports need to ensure that their money is being used to fund such truly independent, credible, and publicly transparent programs. Likewise, the group agreed on the need for the pharmaceutical industry to assist in the international effort to prevent and detect the abuse of their products.

The task force will hold a two-day conference in May to discuss specific proposals for an independent anti-doping effort consistent with the consensus reached this weekend. The conference also will be sponsored by the Duke University Center for Sports Law and Policy.

Present at the task force meeting and subscribing to the consensus points set out in this release were two-time Olympic Gold Medalists Edwin Moses and Donna de Varona; Andrew Pipe, M.D., Director of the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport; Craig Masback, CEO of USA Track & Field; Philip Milburn, the COO of USA Cycling; Jill Pilgrim, Senior Counsel of USA Track & Field; Steve Roush from USA Swimming; Dr. Evie Dennis, former Superintendent of the Denver Public Schools and a Member of the USOC's Task Force on Doping; Jerry Diehl of the National Federation of High School Athletic Associations; Gary Wadler, M.D. of the Women's Sports Foundation and NYU School of Medicine; Richard Clark, M.D. of GlaxoWellcome and the Duke University Medical Center; Professor John Hoberman of the University of Texas; the freelance journalist Jim Ferstle; Professor Jim Coleman and Doriane Lambelet Coleman of the Duke University School of Law; Professor Paul Haagen, Co-Director of the Center for Sports Law and Policy at Duke; and Bernhard Welten, an LLM Candidate at the Duke Law School and a Swiss lawyer specializing in international and Olympic sports law. Gene Cherry from Reuters and the Raleigh News and Observer was also present.