Attitudes towards use of performance-enhancing substances and body modification techniques. A comparison between elite athletes and the general population

Abstract

Medical and technological developments open up new possibilities for modifying the body and enhancing performance in various areas of life. This study compares attitudes among Norwegian elite athletes (n = 234) with attitudes in the general population (n = 428). Whereas vitamins, nutritional supplements and hypoxic rooms were accepted by more than 65% of both athletes and population the rejection of EPO, anabolic steroids and amphetamines were similarly clear in both groups. The athletes were in general more reluctant to use performance enhancement means and body modification techniques than the general population. A significantly higher percentage of the population than the athletes accepted a) means to avoid memory failure in old age (61.6 versus 43.2, sig. 0.000), b) means to avoid decrease in physical fitness among old people (48.6 versus 34.7, sig. 0.005), c) liposuction (30.1 versus 12.4, sig. 0.000), d) surgery for obesity (15.3 versus 9.4, sig. 0.035), e) silicon implants (9.9 versus 5.1, sig. 0.001). The athletes were significantly more satisfied with their bodies than the population (sig. 0.000). Males were more positive about the use of performance enhancement means, whereas females were more positive about body modification techniques. Males were significantly more positive about the use of a) means that increase strength and endurance (sig. 0.002, and b) means that increase sexual performance (sig 0.000). Females were significantly more positive than males about the use of liposuction (sig. 0.000), plastic surgery on the face (sig. 0.013), surgery to combat obesity (sig. 0.000) and silicon implants (sig. 0.000).

Notes

¹ Savulescu and Bostrom, Enhancement of Human Beings; Mehlman, Wondergenes.

² Hoberman, Mortal Engines.

³ WADA, WADA Code.

⁴ Black and Pape, ‘The Ban on Drugs in Sport’; Tamburrini, The Hand of God?

⁵ Houlihan, Dying to Win; Waddington, Sport, Health and Drugs; Lueschen, ‘Doping in Sport as Deviant Behaviour’.

⁶ Hoberman, Mortal Engines.

⁷ Houlihan, Dying to Win.

⁸ Houlihan, Dying to Win

⁹ Houlihan, Dying to Win Waddington, Sport, Health and Drugs.

¹⁰ Mottram, ‘Prevalence of Drug Use in Sport’.

¹¹ Waddington, Sport, Health and Drugs, 170–5.

¹² Heikkala, ‘Modernity, Morality and the Logic of Competing’; Bette and Schimank, Doping im Hochleistungssport.

¹³ Breivik, ‘The Doping Dilemma’.

¹⁴ Guttmann, From Ritual to Record; Hoberman, Mortal Engines; Heikkala, ‘Modernity, Morality and the Logic of Competing’; Møller, ‘The Anti-doping Campaign’.

¹⁵ Murphy and Waddington, ‘Drugs, Sport and Ideologies’.

¹⁶ de Wachter, ‘The Symbolism of the Healthy Body’.

¹⁷ Elliott, Better than Well.

¹⁸ Hoberman, Testosterone Dreams.

¹⁹ DrugScope, ‘New Drug Scope Survey’.

²⁰ Giddens, Modernity and Self-Identity; Sennett, The Corrosion of Character; Berman, All That is Solid; Hellevik, Nordmenn og det gode liv.

²¹ Taylor, The Ethics of Authenticity.

²² Sault, Many Mirrors; Turner, The Body and Society.

²³ Bordo, ‘Feminism, Postmodernism and Gender-Skepticism’.

²⁴ Duncan, ‘Sports Photographs and Sexual Differences’.

²⁵ Grupe, ‘The Sport Culture and Sportization of Culture’.

²⁶ Cohen et al. , ‘A League of their Own’.

²⁷ Bordo, ‘Feminism, Postmodernism and Gender-Skepticism’; Fallon, Katzman and Wooley, Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders.

²⁸ Loland, Body Image and Physical Activity.

²⁹ EPO is an acronym for erythropoietin, a hormone that increases red blood cell production. EPO is the most commonly used substance to increase endurance capacity. It is on the doping list of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

³⁰ Questback is an international company with headquarters in Norway. For more information about QuestBack, see www.questback.no.

³¹ SPSS 15.0.1.

³² Levine, ‘Should “Artificial” High Hypoxic Environments be Considered Doping?’; Loland and Murray, ‘The Ethics of the Use of Technologically Constructed High Hypoxic Environments’.

³³ Anti-Doping Norway receives about 19 million Norwegian kroner (2.3 million Euros) each year from the government.

³⁴ Statistical significance levels are : ^*p < 0.05, ^{* *}p < 0.01.

³⁵ Augestad and Bergsgard, Toppidrettens formel.

³⁶ Gilberg, Breivik and Loland, ‘Anti-doping in Sport’.

³⁷ Hanstad, ‘Hva er det med Norge og doping’?, 37.

³⁸ Hanstad and Loland, Meldeplikt for toppidrettsutøvere'.

³⁹ Anti-Doping Norway, Befolkningens holdning til bruk av doping.

⁴⁰ Anti-Doping Norway, Statistikk: Dopingkontroll.

⁴¹ Elliott, Better than Well.

⁴² Bordo, Feminism, Postmodernism and Gender-Skepticism'; Johansson, Den skulpterade kroppen.

⁴³ Grupe, ‘The Sport Culture and Sportization of Culture’.

⁴⁴ Gilberg and Breivik, Hvorfor ble de beste best?

⁴⁵ Turner, The Body and Society, 123.

⁴⁶ Elliott, Better than Well; Miah, Genetically Modified Athletes.

⁴⁷ Savulescu and Bostrom, Enhancement of Human Beings; Miah, Genetically Modified Athletes.

⁴⁸ Miah, Genetically Modified Athletes, 135.

⁴⁹ Murray, ‘Enhancement’.