“One of the Most Elaborate Doping Ploys in Sports History”: The Impact of the 2016 Russian Doping Scandal on Anti-Doping, WADA and Athletes’ Rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation analyzes the impacts of the 2016 Russian doping scandal from a philosophical and historical perspective. This dissertation’s second chapter, the article entitled (1) “The Brave New World of Athletes’ Rights: A Canadian Perspective on Significant Shifts for the World Anti- Doping Agency” in time for the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) 20 th anniversary, puts into words the new investigative reality of contemporary anti-doping. It explains a new attitude of anti-doping authorities in response to the ‘game-changing’ Russian manipulation of samples, what has been described as “one of the most elaborate doping ploys in sports history” 1 (Icarus, 2016) The third chapter, the entitled (2) “Caring for Athletes in the 2016 Russian Doping Scandal” makes a novel philosophical distinction. Feminist theory, particularly the ethics of care, is used to distin- guish women and men leaders’ general reaction to the Russian scandal. The article nuances their proposed solution and finds that women leaders tended to suggest listening to athletes more than their counterparts. The fourth chapter, (3) “The Role and Relationship of Science and Ethics in the Evaluation of Fairness in Sport” is another feminist critique of ‘pure science’. It argues for the social problem-solving standpoint, in contrast to the impartial rational biotechnological scientific standpoint. Examples connecting the critiques to the Russian doping scandal are given in ‘How chapter 4 concretely relates to the Russian scandal’ (p. 95). The final chapter, the article (4) “A Narrative of a Canadian Self-Diagnosis on Anti-doping Contributions” establishes the historical context in which the scandal emerged through the lens of Canadian experts and their respective contribution in anti-doping. Even if the article was written in the context of the country’s 150 th anniversary, it explains experts’ scepticisms and concerns with current anti-doping. It finds that the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) governance is the source of many fears. The themes of contemporary anti-doping, state-sponsored doping, athletes’ vulnerability and sport corruption best summarized this dissertation. This exploratory doctoral study is one of the first, if not the first, in-depth analysis of the 2016 Russian doping scandal and it is argued that the controversy was as impactful to the world of sport as the 1970s East German state-sponsored doping system
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".