評論
打印
Other estimates suggest even higher numbers. A paper published in 2011 examined the prevalence of "blood doping", a catch-all term for ways to increase the capacity of blood to ferry oxygen to muscles. The researchers analysed samples from more than 2,700 athletes and concluded that 14% were probably guilty (though the tests fell short of explicit proof). That average concealed wide variations. Some countries had prevalence rates as high as 48%, though the researchers diplomatically refused to name the alleged offenders.
其他估計數字甚至更高。2011年發表的一篇論文調查了“血液興奮劑”的流行情況?！把号d奮劑”是一個籠統的術語，指的是增加血液向肌肉輸送氧氣的能力。研究人員分析了2700多名運動員的樣本，得出的結論是14%的運動員可能有罪(盡管測試缺乏明確的證據)。這個平均值掩蓋了很大的差異。一些國家的流行率高達48%，盡管研究人員委婉地拒絕說出被指控的罪犯的名字。
Another study, published in 2018, simply asked more than 2,000 athletes whether they were doping. The data were collected in 2011 at two big competitions—the World Championships in Athletics and the Pan-Arab Games. To encourage honest responses, the researchers used what is called the randomised-response technique. This guarantees individual answers will remain anonymous and untraceable. They concluded that 43.6% of the athletes surveyed had doped in the past year. Translated to Tokyo, that would imply around 4,800 drug-boosted competitors—roughly in line with Mr Chalmers' fears.
2018年發表的另一項研究只簡單詢問了2000多名運動員是否服用了興奮劑。這些數據收集于2011年兩大賽事——世界田徑錦標賽和泛阿拉伯運動會。為了獲得真實的回答，研究人員使用了所謂的隨機反應技術，確保了個人的回答將保持匿名和不被追蹤。他們得出的結論是，有43.6%的受訪運動員在過去一年中服用過興奮劑。換作在東京奧運會的話，這意味著大約有4800名運動員服用了興奮劑，該結論與查爾默斯先生的擔憂大致相符。
But all these estimates are just that: estimates. "My gut feeling, from having worked with many Olympic-level athletes, is that the randomised-response numbers are too high," says Yorck Olaf Schumacher, who helped develop the Athlete Biological Passport (ABP), a widely used anti-doping test that tracks blood readings, looking for suspicious changes. Some athletes may not have understood the question properly, he says, or may have confused legitimate dietary supplements with doping.
但所有這些估計都只是估計?！拔液驮S多奧運會水平的運動員一起工作過，我的直覺是隨機反應的數字太高了，”幫助開發了運動員生物護照(ABP)的約克·奧拉夫·舒馬赫說。運動員生物護照是一種被廣泛使用的反興奮劑測試，可以跟蹤血液讀數，尋找可疑的變化。他說，一些運動員可能沒有正確理解這個問題，或者可能把合法的膳食補充劑和興奮劑混淆了。
Athletes dope because drugs offer big advantages—potentially so big that undoped rivals have no hope of matching them. WADA, the rules of which bind many sports, maintains a list of hundreds of banned substances. They range from obscure chemicals with names like IGF-1 LR3 and AOD-9604 to insulin (to boost muscle size), amphetamines (for their stimulating effects) and even diuretics (used to mask the presence of other drugs). The clandestine nature of doping means that, for most drugs, there is little hard evidence for their effect on performance. Athletes are forced to rely instead on locker-room rumours and "street knowledge", says Chris Cooper, a sports scientist at the University of Essex, much of which will probably be exaggerated. But for some of the best-known drugs, science—and history—can give a sense of the advantages on offer.
運動員服用興奮劑是因為藥物提供了巨大的優勢——潛在的優勢是如此之大，以至于未服用興奮劑的競爭對手無法匹敵。世界反興奮劑組織(WADA)制定了一份包含數百種違禁物質的清單，該清單約束了許多運動項目。它們種類繁多，從名稱模糊的化學物質，如IGF-1 LR3和AOD-9604，到胰島素(增加肌肉體積)，安非他命(具備刺激作用)，甚至利尿劑(用于掩蓋其他藥物的存在)。興奮劑的隱秘性質意味著，對于大多數藥物來說，幾乎沒有確鑿的證據能夠表明它們對成績有影響。埃塞克斯大學的體育科學家克里斯·庫珀表示，運動員們被迫依賴于更衣室謠言和“街頭知識”，其中很多可能會被夸大。但是對于一些最著名的藥物來說，科學和歷史可以讓我們知道它所提供的優勢。
譯文由可可原創，僅供學習交流使用，未經許可請勿轉載。
