According to World Anti-Doping Code, in its 1st article, doping is defined as “one or more anti-doping rule violations”.
Article 2 of the Code specifies what circumstances and what conduct constitute anti-doping rule violations:
I - Presence of a prohibited substance, its metabolites or its markers in a sample provided by an athlete
II - Use or attempted use by an athlete of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method.
III - Avoid taking a sample, refuse to take a sample or not submit to taking a sample.
IV - Breaches of localization obligations
V - Tampering or attempted tampering with any element of doping control
VI - Possession of a prohibited substance or method
VII - Trafficking or attempted trafficking of a prohibited substance or method
VIII - Administration or attempted administration, to an athlete, of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method
IX - Complicity in the violation of one or more anti-doping rules
X - Association prohibited with a person whose involvement in doping acts has been recognized
This purely regulatory definition has the merit of being clear within the limits it establishes. However, one cannot help but think that it is incomplete and that doping is a problem which readily goes beyond the "rules of the game".
The ethical dimension, even moral, associated with the theme of “doping behaviors” imposes a deep reflection on the excesses of a society which places the production of “performance” as the master standard of success. Defining doping is also, consequently, defining the sociological soil on which it germinates. The task therefore turns out to be of considerable magnitude and cannot be reduced to a few lines. However, in order to effectively combat this scourge, it is necessary to understand and know the mechanisms involved in its genesis.
Thus, players in the sporting world must get down, day after day, to questioning their own representations about doping and, thereby, renewing their motivations and their commitment to the fight against it.