I finally have some time to blog after some happy times spent at the
Paralympics; the highlights of what I saw being Sarah Storey at the velodrome, Hannah Cockroft and Shelley Long in the Olympic
Stadium and, of course, Shiyun Pan the swimmer in possession of the
amazing one armed butterfly stroke which made me forget that it was a Brit he
was beating on the way to his world record.
So what are the similarities and differences in doping between
the Olympics and Paralympics? Much is the same. Power and strength are key
requirements for many Paralympians. So not surprising there were bans for users
of steroids and human growth hormone [1]. Just as in the Olympics there
were variations in the length of sentences. An athlete claiming that the green
tea he took contained an unlabeled banned diuretic received a nine-month ban
and missed the Games [2]. Yet someone who inadvertently took a banned substance
in a nasal decongestant had a more limited three month ban; this finished a few
days before the games [3] and she ended up winning a silver medal, coincidentally
creating one of the moments of the games as the two British athletes fighting
for the bronze medal in that event tried - and failed - to cross the line
together to share the remaining medal [4].
So much, so similar. However, the two unfounded
allegations of cheating that created media storms illustrated some of the
differences between the two Games. Whilst the voices raised against the
Olympic Chinese swimmer Ye Shiwen focussed on biochemical enhancements, those
against the Paralympic 200m runner Alan Oliveira related to his equipment. Allegations
of “technological doping” seem more prevalent in the Paralympics where
naturally equipment is a bigger issue for more athletes. The French though remained
equal opportunity accusers of the “unfair” advantages conferred on Team GB and
Paralympics GB by their bikes and wheelchairs of [5].
More seriously are concerns about classifications. In the
Olympics suh arguments are rare; after all the only classes are those based on
gender and weight. Weight is readily quantifiable and, fortunately, accusations
of males competing as females are rare. However, in the Paralympics allegations
of athletes trying to cheat the classifications are more widespread [6].
Concerns about the fact that other athletes have unfair advantages seem to have
triggered a more laissez faire attitude to cheating. Take the practice of
“boosting”. Some Paralympians with spinal injuries lack the ability to raise
their blood pressure when they start to exercise. This can limit performance. Therefore this pressure is “boosted” by extreme action;
for example breaking a toe or blocking a catheter [7]. Boosting is dangerous
and consequently banned. However, in an anonymous questionnaire study up to 17%
of disables male athletes admitted to trying this [8]. This value is much higher
than would ever be the case for an equivalent study on drug use. It seem likely
that disabled athletes, in part, feel that boosting is justified if they
perceive that others in their classification have a blood pressure response they
lack. Rather like Ben Johnson’s excuse that everyone was doping so it made no
difference if he did.
As many have
noted with regards to Pistorius’s outburst, this level of conflict can all seen
as a positive sign that the Paralympics have come of age as an elite sport. However,
there is still one area that I think progress needs to be made. As long as the
equipment needed to compete is expensive, many countries will be excluded from
competing meaningfully; this includes many of the 25,000 people per year who
become amputees as a result of land mines. Still perhaps it is a bit churlish
to ask the Paralympics to being about world peace and economic regeneration as
well as changing our attitudes to people with disabilities …..
