Non-Intentional Doping in Sports
Doping代写 The World Anti-Doping Code has imposed changes in the regulation of the ineligibility period imposed on athletes charged with doping.
The World Anti-Doping Code has imposed changes in the regulation of the ineligibility period imposed on athletes charged with doping. Guilty athletes can get either 4 or 2 years ban depending on whether it is first time offender or second. The athlete is subjected to sanctions unless established that the violation unintentional. However, there are discrepancies on how to determine and prove whether the violation was not intentional. Doping代写**范文
On one side is the arguments and decision show the athletes must prove how non-specific substances entered the body to prove lack of intention while on the other end the decisions show not vital to prove it. In this regard, there is athlete who tests positive for unintentional doping.
The article by Yonamine, Garcia, and de Moraes Moreau (2004) explores various empirical studies on doping to establish how unintentional doping happens. The authors began by reviewing the passive inhalation of drugs smoke. One of the most prevalent drugs was marijuana. The many studies reviewed indicated that individuals could produce detectable levels of cannabinoid in urine only after under extreme exposure to marijuana smoke. However, research shows that it is not possible to conclude the condition of passive exposure. The article also analyzed studies on passive exposure to cocaine smoke. Doping代写**范文
The various research under controlled conditions showed presence of benzoylecgonine in urine samples. The researchers concluded that it only under extreme exposure to cocaine smoke that individuals have traces of benzoylecgonine in urine. Besides cocaine and marijuana, there is methamphetamine. The authors found no research to evaluate the condition of methamphetamine smoke exposure. Overall, it is only under extreme conditions that an individual tests positive for doping.
The article also explores the ingestion of foods containing prohibited substances. Doping代写
They identified various studies on foods and drinks, including caffeine-containing food, hemp-containing food, poppy seed-containing food, herbal cocoa tea and anabolic agent residues in meat. Most concluded that ingestion of enough concentration would take drinking 500 mg of caffeine, which is more than 5 cups of coffee, 6 cups of tea, or 2 bars of chocolate bars. Therefore, it is improbable that one can take such amount before blood tests are carried. The consumption of hemp containing products proved that it is challenging to attain 15 g/L level even by avid hemp consumers. Doping代写**范文
On the hand, the defense for consuming poppy seed-containing food was difficult to determine unless careful examinations are done. Similarly, the consumption of cocoa tea 24 hours before blood tests increases the chances of testing positive of cocaine in urine. The same case was for the athlete who ingested meats from animals treated with anabolic agents. Thus, thorough analysis and evaluation of the matter are required to establish the source of intoxication.
The article analyzed studies on products sold as nutritional supplements that contain prohibited substances as well as the ingestion of biotransformation products of permitted substances. Testing positive of these substances above required levels needs proves by the athlete the absence of doping. Therefore, the athlete needs to be very careful in the consumption of permitted products, which might be contaminated with prohibited substances. Also, the permitted substances should be consumed at allowed level beyond which it will be considered as doping.
Eye Opener Doping代写
The article evaluates a less addressed field of unintentional doping. It is obvious that if inadvertent doping is always the defense, even athletes who have doped can use it as a defense. Thus, it should be construed that any athlete who tests positive should be taken as intentional doping until one proves otherwise. Other considerations should be taken to account when determining the decision about doping. Doping代写**范文
The type of substance in the urine can tell if it was intentional or not. For instance, research has established that only under extreme conditions can one test positive of smoking marijuana and cocaine. Thus, testing positive and the level of concentration can be used as proof of intentional doping.
Moreover, as one reads through the article, legal questions arise in cases where an athlete is irregularly dismissed and banned. Doping代写
A real case scenario two-years ban of tennis star Maria Sharapova by the International Tennis Federation (ITF) (Collins, 2017). Sharapova failed blood test and tested positive of banned meldonium. The athlete has been taking the substance since 2006 for heart issues, magnesium deficiency and family history of diabetes. The drug was added to list of banned substances at the beginning of 2006, but Sharapova and her manager failed to get the information. Doping代写**范文
She was given 2-year ban after realization that she did not intend to violate the prohibition. Sharapova lost her sponsorships and other business relationships. As a result, she claimed compensation for the lost income and time but lost the case because ignorant is not a defense. The ruling also introduced strict liability to athletes that mean fault is irrelevant to guilt.
Give Me More Doping代写
The article triggers the need to know why these substances are illegal in sports. That is, what are the effects on the body of the athlete and how they impact performance. So far, the authors have exhaustively explained how unintentional doping can occur. A curious reader, however, would like to know why these substances are prohibited. This is not provided in the article.
The article brings out the fact that not all athletes sanctioned for doping intended to cheat. But the various ruling and the difficulty in establishing whether doping was intentional or not show that athlete fault is not a defense, and the law should apply equally to avoid bias. Anyone found positive of doping should face disciplinary because it the role of the athlete to maintain the standards in sports.
Collins, R. (2017). Unintentional Doping: Legal Lessons from Maria Sharapova’s Court. HuffPost. Retrieved from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/unintentional-doping-lega_b_10461050
Yonamine, M., Garcia, P. R., & de Moraes Moreau, R. L. (2004). Non-intentional doping in sports. Sports medicine, 34(11), 697-704.