Doping and Physiological Research – Hostile Brothers or Unwanted Twins?

The authors of the Letter to the Editor published in this issue [2] communicate their suspicions that some coauthors of, and participants in, two studies on professional cyclists recently published in the IJSM [4], [5] had been involved in doping during the Tour de France 2007. These two manuscripts had been reviewed and accepted before any such suspicions were raised and, as such, the Editors were not aware of a potential bias of physiological data by unknown doping practices.

Studies involving athletes, who often have an extremely “high” physiological profile, may give valuable insight into the physiological limits of performance. However, researchers conducting and presenting such studies should do their utmost to know and, if so, must declare, whether any of the participant's data might have been influenced by doping interventions.

On the other hand, such a policy should not produce a blanket ban of manuscripts that deal with the effects and, especially, the side effects of the use of banned substances, e.g., [1], since this body of data would then remain in the “grey market” of knowledge. Of course, any such studies should have been presented to a local ethics committee for approval.

The issue raised in the Letter to the Editor sets up some fundamental ethical questions. Should papers be rejected by the IJSM on the basis that some of the authors have admitted to be involved in doping with athletes and these athletes might be study participants in the submitted paper? If so, should the IJSM reject, retrospectively, other papers if coauthors have been involved in any past unethical or immoral behaviour? It might not be appropriate to do so unless there is tangible evidence indicating that the authors have digressed ethically; such evidence, however, would be extremely difficult for any Editor to track.

In conclusion, it is our policy to advise any author to state clearly (if there might be the slightest suspicion) whether or not study subjects may have been doped and whether this could have biased the data. Reassuringly, such a statement has been made in a recent paper from the same research group [3]: “Prior to the race, blood was drawn and analysed using the algorithms for the indirect detection of EPO abuse … to avoid falsification of the data by doping abuse. None of the subjects showed abnormal results.” (p. 373).

In general, we as the Editors of IJSM strongly object to any scientist, who has been, or is, involved with illegal doping practices with athletes, to submit manuscripts to the IJSM. We also encourage all scientists to communicate to us a guilty outcome of any formal trial of a scientist who has doped athletes and has previously published in the IJSM.

References

• 1 Bonetti A, Tirelli F, Catapano A, Dazzi D, Dei Cas A, Solito F, Ceda G, Reverberi C, Monica C, Pipitone S, Elia G, Spattini M, Magnati G. Side effects of androgenic steroids abuse.  Int J Sports Med. 2008;  29 679-687
• 2 Böning D, Steinacker J M. Problems with doping in scientific articles?.  Int J Sports Med. 2008;  29 699
• 3 Schumacher Y O, Pottgiesser T, Ahlgrim C, Ruthardt S, Dickhuth H H, Roecker K. Haemoglobin mass in cyclists during stage racing.  Int J Sports Med. 2008;  29 372-378
• 4 Vogt S, Roecker K, Schumacher Y O, Pottgiesser T, Dickhuth H H, Schmid A, Heinrich L. Cadence-power-relationship during decisive mountain ascents at the Tour de France.  Int J Sports Med. 2008;  29 244-250
• 5 Vogt S, Schumacher Y O, Roecker K, Dickhuth H H, Schoberer U, Schmid A, Heinrich L. Power output during the Tour de France.  Int J Sports Med. 2007;  28 756-761