Every now and then I get an email from a reader asking whether all the anti-doping hand-wringing is necessary. Why go through so much trouble to hunt down picograms of banned molecules in the Contador “steak” case when the quantities involved don’t alter the racing? Some see a bigger picture where dopers are more than just a step ahead of the testers. Why not just let adults decide what to do?
It’s not just a question for curious newcomers. Julian Savulescu is a professor of ethics at the University of Oxford and he says prohibition is only helping organised crime and that doping should be allowed for the good of sport. This is an argument worth exploring. I think the basic premise is so wrong it needs shooting down with a hail of bullet points. Professor Savulescu’s thoughts are interesting and stimulate debate but away from theory, cycling’s own past suggests it can’t work.
