“I believe we have the technology to revolutionize PED testing.”
The Problem
I don’t often delve into the questions around the use of performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) in running, perhaps following the adage that if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all. However, a recent stream of positive tests and subsequent bans in very highly accomplished runners has made it difficult to ignore for anyone interested in the sharp end of the sport.
Much attention has been focused on the fact that many of the recently-banned runners have been from the country of Kenya, and indeed, the 2021 Boston Marathon women’s winner and several of the male pacers for the sub-2:00 marathon project, all hail from Kenya. However, as much as we’d like to believe this issue is isolated to Kenya (or Russia, or wherever else…), over the course of my involvement in the sport, I have seen many distance runners from the U.S. and other countries banned for doping as well. So this is obviously not a problem restricted to one bad actor or one negligent nation.
Seeing these positive tests is of course upsetting, and it does lead us to call into question what we are seeing when witnessing a great performance. However, it does not change my approach to coaching or what I think is important in the sport of distance running. Results and accolades cannot become so overwhelmingly important that we are willing to compromise our values and act in defiance of the rules of fair play. In fact, I am oddly encouraged by the announcement of positive tests and doping bans, as it means that people are being caught. Are they all getting caught? Of course not, but there’s hope that testing is having some effect, and with time and advances in technology, we can further reduce the incidence and severity of doping.
Solutions?
Much of the discussion around what to do to get PEDs out of the sport has focused on punitive measures: increase the length of bans, or make them lifetime bans; punish coaches/agents/teams associated with the athlete; increase financial consequences; increase criminalization of illegal drug use, etc.
While some of these ideas may have merit, I propose that much like crime, prevention strategies are in fact much more effective than increased punishment. This is obviously the goal anyway, as it is not good for anyone when we celebrate a champion one day and banish them as a cheater the next. It will take time, money, and creativity, but I believe that we have the technology to revolutionize PED testing and control.
There are those who say that the cheaters will always be ahead of anti-doping efforts, and that is unfortunately true unless more resources are dedicated to the task. I hope that the major sponsors, events, and others in the industry can come together to pledge financial support for development of 21st Century technology to address practices of the 21st Century.
What might that look like? Given the reported “micro-dosing” and other practices that skirt around detection, I believe that testing needs to be not only more frequent, but that it can, and actually should be continuous. Yes, like a continuous glucose monitor, but for PEDs.
The basic technology for continuous monitoring of drug levels within the human body exists, and applications for monitoring for performance enhancing drugs could likely be developed, with enough incentive and resources applied to the problem. For a deep dive on the some technologies that already exist, and potential future applications of continuous drug monitoring (unrelated to doping in sport), you can check out the article at this link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7428759/ .
The idea of an implanted or semi-permanently affixed device to monitor the blood of elite athletes may sound way out there to you, or as too much of an invasion of athlete’s privacy. I agree that this type of monitoring should be reserved for those at the very high end of the sport, where the financial stakes are very high. And for those athletes, they are already required to inform anti-doping authorities of their whereabouts at all times, and are subject to visual inspection of the collection of urine samples wherever and whenever authorities require. Much of this type of invasion of personal space could be reduced or eliminated altogether with a modernization of technology. It will take time for such technology to be developed and tailored to the anti-doping application. But I would challenge those with skin in the game to encourage and fund development of better, more effective methods of prevention.
Chris Lundstrom is the head coach of Minnesota Distance Elite – formerly Team USA Minnesota – which includes some of the top distance runners in the USA, including Annie Frisbie and Dakota Lindwurm.
