Psychosocial factors facilitating use of cognitive enhancing drugs in education: a qualitative investigation of moral disengagement and associated processes

2 Jul 2919

Psychosocial factors facilitating use of cognitive enhancing drugs in education : a qualitative investigation of moral disengagement and associated processes / Andrew Robert Heyes, Ian David Boardley

  • Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 26 (2019) 4, p. 329-338
  • DOI:10.1080/09687637.2019.1586831
  • Special Issue: Pharmaceutical Cognitive Enhancement


Abstract

Illicit use of prescription drugs (e.g. modafinil) to enhance academic performance – termed cognitive enhancement (CE) – is a legal, health, and ethical issue. Guided by Bandura’s social cognitive theory of moral thought and action, this study investigated whether student users of CE evidenced specific psychosocial mechanisms (i.e. mechanisms of moral disengagement) when explaining their reasons for CE. Following ethical approval from the lead author’s institution, in-depth-semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine students with experience of CE. Data were content analysed deductively, using definitions for the eight mechanisms of moral disengagement; six of the eight mechanisms were identified through data analysis: diffusion of responsibility (DR), advantageous comparison (AC), distortion of consequences (DCs), displacement of responsibility, moral justification, and euphemistic labelling. In addition, inductive data analysis identified three further themes; self-medication, family and friends, and institutional position. Overall, the study findings suggest students may morally disengage to justify and rationalise use of CE to minimise negative emotional responses (e.g. guilt) that may be expected to result given the potential legal-, health-, and ethics-based deterrents to CE.

Annual banned-substance review: analytical approaches in human sports drug testing - [2021-2022]

11 Nov 2022

Annual banned-substance review: analytical approaches in human sports drug testing / Mario Thevis, Tiia Kuuranne, Hans Geyer

  • Drug Testing and Analysis 14 (2022) 11 November
  • PMID: 36369629
  • DOI: 10.1002/dta.3408


Contents:

  • Introduction
  • Anabolic Agent
    • Anabolic-androgenic steroids (AASs)
    • Initial testing procedures (ITP): Comprehensive screening, metabolism studies
    • Other anabolic agents
    • Steroid profiling in urine and blood
    • Confirmatory testing procedures – IRMS
  • Peptide Hormones, Growth Factors, Related Substances, and Mimetics
    • Erythropoietin-receptor agonists
    • Growth hormone (GH), its fragments and releasing factors
  • β2‐Agonists, Hormone and Metablolic Modulators, and diuretics
  • Stimulants, Glucocorticoids, and Cannabinoids
  • Manipulation of blood and blood components
  • Chemical and Physical Manipulation and Gene Doping
  • Conclusion


Abstract

Also in 2021/2022, considerable efforts were invested into advancing human sports drug testing programs, recognizing and taking into account existing as well as emerging challenges in anti-doping, especially with regard to substances and methods of doping specified in the World Anti-Doping Agency's 2022 Prohibited List. In this edition of the annual banned-substance review, literature on recent developments published between October 2021 and September 2022 is summarized and discussed. Focus is put particularly on enhanced analytical approaches and complementary testing options in human doping controls, appreciating the exigence and mission in anti-doping and, equally, the contemporary “new normal” considering, for example, the athlete's exposome versus analytical sensitivity and applicable anti-doping regulations for result interpretation and management.

iNADO Update #2022-11

7 Nov 2022

iNADO Update (2022) 11 (7 November)
Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO)



Contents:

iNADO Community

  • iNADO Presentation Report - NADOs acting as Sport Integrity Agencies
  •  Insights Report: Practices around calling Athletes within the final five minutes of the testing time slot
  • Testing Process for Athletes with Disability

Bulletin Board

  • iNADO Stakeholder Survey designed by OAKS Consultancy
  • Working Together Towards Excellence: iNADO Board hosted Webinars to Present the 5-year Strategic Plan
  • iNADO Webinar: New Way of Working
  • iNADO Webinar Summary: WADA NADO EAG Elections Candidates Introductory Webinars

Practical Development in Anti-Doping

  • iNADO ADAMS Working Group
  • iNADO Members: Data Protection and Privacy Policy

Athlete's Voice

  • Léa Krüger - Advocating for Athletes and Clean Sport
  • Sharing Global Stories: Inclusion of Athletes' Voice in the Eduation Sessions of NADA Germany

People

  • Tony Josiah appointed as Director of Education, Insight and Global Engagement at UKAD
  • Kim Højgaard Ravn, new CEO of Anti-Doping Denmark

iNADO Partners & Sponsors

  • New at the Anti-Doping Knowledge Center

World Athletics 2022 WA vs Marius Kipserem

18 Oct 2022

In September 2022 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) on behalf of World Athletics has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenyan Athlete Marius Kipserem after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Erythropoietin (EPO).

After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the AIU.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of EPO, yet could not explain how the substance had entered his system.

Because the Athlete submitted and confirmed the Admission of Anti-Doping Rule Violations and Acceptance of Consequences Form he received a 1 year reduction from the AIU.

Therefore the AIU decides on 18 October 2022 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 22 September 2022.

World Athletics 2022 WA vs Mark Kangogo

12 Oct 2022

In September 2022 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) on behalf of World Athletics has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenyan Athlete Mark Kangogo after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone) and Triamcinolone acetonide.

After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the AIU.

The Athlete stated that he had used supplements and medication for the treatment of an ankle injury. Yet, none of them listed the prohibited substances in their ingredients.

Because the Athlete signed and submitted the Admission of Anti-Doping Rule Violations and Acceptance of Consequences Form he received a 1 year reduction from the AIU.

Therefore the AIU decides on 12 October 2022 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 9 September 2022.

World Athletics 2022 WA vs Kamalpreet Kaur

11 Oct 2022

In March 2022 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) on behalf of World Athletics has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Indian Athlete Kamalpreet Kaur after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Stanozolol.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete conducted an investigation into the source of the substance. Analysis of her supplements in a private laboratory in India and in the accredited New Delhi Lab revealed the presence of Stanozolol in a Protein Supplement.

Thereupon the AIU assessed the Athlete's statements regarding the Protein Supplement and finds that the concentration in her sample was not consistent with the use of this supplement as documented and explained by the Athlete. Consequently the AIU deems that the Athlete failed to establish that the violation was not intentional, nor how the substance had entered her system.

Hereafter the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived her right for a hearing and accepted the proposed sanction. Because she signed and submitted the Admission of Anti-Doping Rule Violations and Acceptance of Consequences Form she received a 1 year reduction from the AIU.

Therefore the AIU decides on 11 October 2022 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 29 March 2022.

iNADO Update #2022-10

4 Oct 2022

iNADO Update (2022) 10 (4 October)
Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO)



Contents:

iNADO Community

  • iNADO welcomes Regional Anti-Doping Organizations as Full Members

Bulletin Board

  • Transforming into a Sport Integrity Agency:
    the FINCIS Experience Webinar
  • iNADO Webinar: WADA NADO EAG Elections: Meet the Candidates
  • Discussion Summary: Education for Athletes Returning from a Sanction

Practical Development in Anti-Doping

  • FAQ: How do N/RADOs in average alloce their budget?
  • FAQ: How many iNADO Member Organizations are ISO 9001:2015 certified?

People

    • Sarah Shibutse - Appointed CEO of ADAK
    • Ritu Sain - CEO of National Anti-Doping Agency India

    Feature of the month

    • New Anti-Doping Videos on Youtube

    iNADO Partners & Sponsors

    • New at the Anti-Doping Knowledge Center

    World Athletics 2021 WA vs Chijindu Ujah

    29 Sep 2022

    Related case:

    CAS 2021_ADD_33 IOC vs Chijindu Ujah
    February 18, 2022

    In August 2022 during the Tokyo Olympic Games the International Testing Agency (ITA) on behalf of the IOC has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the British Athlete Chijindu Ujah after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Enobosarm (Ostarine). After notification both the ITA and the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) ordered a provisional suspension on the Athlete.

    Consequently on 18 February 2022 the Anti-Doping Division of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS-ADD) decided that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation. His results were disqualified including the results of the Great Britain Men's Team.

    Hereafter the case was referred to the AIU to determine sanctions based on the Athlete's anti-doping rule violation. Both Parties entered into a Case Resolution Agreement. The Athlete gave a prompt admission and established that the violation was the result of his ingestion of a contaminated supplement.

    Therefore the AIU decides on 29 September 2022 to impose a 22 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 6 August 2021.

    CAS 2022_A_8727 UKAD vs Wayne Boardman

    28 Sep 2022

    CAS 2022/A/8727 United Kingdom Anti-Doping Limited v. Wayne Boardman


    On 26 June 2021, UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) collected an In-Competition urine Sample from Mr Boardman following a Mid-Season International match between England and Wales Wheelchair Rugby League teams. Analysis of Boardman’s urine Sample returned an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) for metabolites of oxandrolone.

    Mr Boardman’s case was first heard by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP) and in a decision dated 23 February 2022, the NADP found ADRV charges proved, but ordered that Mr Boardman should not be subject to any period of Ineligibility on the basis he had been able to show he had acted with No Fault or Negligence. 

    UKAD sought to appeal the NADP’s decision to impose no period of Ineligibility on Mr Boardman. In light of Mr Boardman’s status as an International Level athlete, The appeal proceedings were heard before the CAS and an oral hearing took place before a Sole Arbitrator on 13 July 2022.



    The Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 28 September 2022 that:

    1.) The appeal filed on 15 March 2022 by United Kingdom Anti-Doping Limited against Wayne Boardman with respect to the decision taken by the National Anti-Doping Panel on 23 February 2022 is partially upheld.

    2.) The decision rendered by the National Anti-Doping Panel on 23 February 2022 is set aside.

    3.) Mr Wayne Boardman is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation under Articles 2.1 and/or 2.2 of the UK Anti-Doping Rules.

    4.) Mr Wayne Boardman is sanctioned with a 13-month period of ineligibility starting from 26 June 2021, with credit for any suspension already served by Mr Wayne Boardman.

    5.) All competitive results achieved by Mr Wayne Boardman from 26 June 2021 through to and including 28 September 2021 are disqualified with all of the resulting consequences, including the forfeiture of any titles, awards, medals, points and prize and appearance money.

    6.) The costs of the arbitration, to be determined and served to the Parties by the CAS Court Office in a separate letter, shall be borne equally by the Parties.

    7.) Each Party shall bear their own costs and expenses incurred in connection with the present proceedings.

    8.) All other or further prayers for relief are hereby dismissed.

    CCES 2022 CCES vs Audrey Sawers

    28 Sep 2022

    In May 2022 the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the field hockey player Audrey Sawers after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Canrenone.

    After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived her right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by CCES.

    The prohibited substance was consumed by the Athlete in a prescription medication for which a therapeutic use exemption (TUE) had not yet been granted by the CCES. The CCES has since granted the athlete a TUE for use of Canrenone.

    Therefore CCES decides on 28 September 2022 to impose a 1 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on 8 September 2022.

    Category
    • Legal Source
    • Education
    • Science
    • Statistics
    • History
    Country & language
    • Country
    • Language
    Other filters
    • ADRV
    • Legal Terms
    • Sport/IFs
    • Other organisations
    • Laboratories
    • Analytical aspects
    • Doping classes
    • Substances
    • Medical terms
    • Various
    • Version
    • Document category
    • Document type
    Publication period
    Origin