After Valieva: 5 questions for a doping expert about fixing a messy system

The women's individual figure skating final took place in Beijing on Thursday.

Catherine Ivill/Getty Images

At the Beijing Olympics, young athletes tried to summon the performance of their lives without knowing all their rivals were clean, as the machinery of international sport generated an extraordinary and painful spectacle. They knew that the medal ceremony wouldn't be held if Valieva reached the podium.

The Russian teenager collapsed into tears at the rink she used to dominate.

That was an incredibly troubling outcome and a child should not have been on the ice. At some point, athlete well-being must be the main concern, especially when the athlete is a minor.

Valieva had become the first woman to land a quad jump in an Olympic competition 10 days before. She had tested positive for trimetazidine, a drug banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency. The sample dated from December should have prevented Valieva from going to the Olympics. The case was complicated by her status as a minor.

Valieva was allowed to participate in the competition pending the results of the investigation.

Valieva was failed at all levels in terms of duty of care regardless of the outcome of the anti-doping investigation or the CAS decision that she could compete.

Valieva's case has caused many questions about her coaches and other adults around her. The legitimacy of the Olympics and the effectiveness of drug policies that aim to prevent cheating are at risk.

The director of the International Network of Doping Researchers said that anti-doping is a mess. She co-authored a book called Doping: A Sporting History. We asked how anti-doping efforts could be improved.

The interview has been edited.

Is there a greater risk for young athletes like Kamila Valieva?

Yes. Valieva is considered a protected person under the World Anti-Doping Code. Young athletes are vulnerable to abuse of various kinds due to the power imbalance between a young athlete and coaches, managers, federations, even parents.

We understand that children may not be able to make decisions in the same way as adults.

The WADA Code is based on strict liability and it is thought to prevent athletes from inventing justifications for how a substance ended up in their sample. It is difficult as a minor, in the worst case, they may be forced or coerced into using something they don't want to use.

Even if they are willing participants in using a banned substance, we must question if a 15-year-old child is able to consent in a high-pressured environment.

Is the anti-doping system broken for the Olympics?

The current system is flawed. The absence of athletes voices in the rule-making process is one of the most glaring flaws. When WADA opens up for public comment, anyone can give input, but the power lies with a few executives.

Athletes need a voice and governance reform is needed, but it has been slow and small-scale.

There are other models for making anti-doping policies. These are sometimes viewed as being watered down, but they have athlete buy-in.

There are many suggestions for reform, from calls for criminalization of the drug, to the few who want no anti-doping efforts at all.

Is better testing an answer to the problem?

If samples are collected, analysis can be done. It doesn't matter how sensitive the tests are if the collection is ineffective or not.

Practical matters like cost and logistics need to be balanced against athlete rights. There are no easy answers, but without willingness to understand why the current system is getting it so wrong, it seems unlikely that more of the same is going to improve the situation.

Russia makes the most headlines, but how widespread is it?

Depending on the sport and method used for the estimate, it could be anywhere from 3% to 40% of athletes. We don't know for sure.

If we learned anything from Russia, it is that large-scale systematic drug use is possible. The one we don't know about is the best systematic program.

Many of us had never heard of trimetazidine. Do you see the shift away from steroids?

It's possible, though it's likely sport-specific. Steroids and other steroids are used in sports where power and strength are beneficial.

We don't know what substances come and go in popularity, but we do know that the evidence comes from reported anti-doping rule violations, which most researchers agree are a gross underestimation of prohibited substance use across sport.

It is difficult to study the prevalence of substance use, as the stigma of admitting use is so great that there is no incentive for athletes to reveal their use.