Nt and are not natural.” Even as a marathon runner who has won or placed in several races though was never given an anti-doping test, Carlo was not much clearer on the regulations: I think it’s more injecting yourself with ?or I’m not sure say injecting but taking some sort of foreign substance or taking you know like blood doping, adding something; another more blood to your system to increase your ability to ?like exchange oxygen or even like when running you know, the recovery. So you know, HGH ?and I don’t know if runners really take HGH or marathoners but I’m sure like blood doping and EPO to increase your blood volume and things like that, yeah. The interviewees’ views of doping focused on substances used to increase power or strength (e.g. anabolic steroids), are injected into the body in some way or are used to manipulate one’s blood for increasing endurance. Externally applied substances or enhancements were considered differently, usually as an aid to improved performance that did not equate withNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptSurveill Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 November 04.HenningPagedoping. Even if they had never seen the list of banned substances, most fell back on the rules as their reasoning for what was good/healthy or bad/unhealthy. As such, any substance not identified banned was considered fair for athletes to use at their discretion, as were any substances for which an athlete had received a therapeutic use exemption for the treatment of an illness or injury. Some interviewees, such as Sam, were forthcoming about their ignorance of the rules as they relate to their own training: On our level, the competitive athlete level, I’m not that cognizant of all the rules and drugs. I take caffeine, alcohol, and Advil. I’m pretty sure I’m not in violation, but I don’t know. If a doctor prescribed eye drops and that’s a steroid am I in violation? I don’t know. Sam also noted that he worried about the negative health impacts of some of his habits and did his best to avoid anything he thought presented a risk to his health, including monitoring his intake of the “vices” he described. By making sure he only used legally available products, Sam felt he was likely to be in compliance with the rules. Sam’s question about the acceptability of products such as steroidal eye medications was tempered by having a doctor’s prescription. In his view, this type of therapeutic use exempted him from being labeled a doper–his goal was not to run better by using a prescribed 1-Deoxynojirimycin manufacturer medication, but to heal an illness. Coupled with the divided judgments of elite and non-elite runners using PEDs, these views of doping demonstrate the ways non-elite runners maintain a coherent self-narrative of healthy and moral citizenship. Non-elite runners monitor themselves to ensure they do not dope by avoiding injected drugs or blood manipulation. Any injected or otherwise questionable substance would only be Leupeptin (hemisulfate) side effects sourced from a doctor or used only in extreme cases that could be justified as therapeutic. While elite athletes may seek prizes and victories in immoral or unethical ways, non-elite runners and those they associate with are not seeking such outcomes. As a result, health, as opposed to ethics or morality, is the main concern. As long as non-elite runners remain vigilant about not transgressing the clearest boundaries between doping and therapy, they may remain good and healthy citizens. All of the int.Nt and are not natural.” Even as a marathon runner who has won or placed in several races though was never given an anti-doping test, Carlo was not much clearer on the regulations: I think it’s more injecting yourself with ?or I’m not sure say injecting but taking some sort of foreign substance or taking you know like blood doping, adding something; another more blood to your system to increase your ability to ?like exchange oxygen or even like when running you know, the recovery. So you know, HGH ?and I don’t know if runners really take HGH or marathoners but I’m sure like blood doping and EPO to increase your blood volume and things like that, yeah. The interviewees’ views of doping focused on substances used to increase power or strength (e.g. anabolic steroids), are injected into the body in some way or are used to manipulate one’s blood for increasing endurance. Externally applied substances or enhancements were considered differently, usually as an aid to improved performance that did not equate withNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptSurveill Soc. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 November 04.HenningPagedoping. Even if they had never seen the list of banned substances, most fell back on the rules as their reasoning for what was good/healthy or bad/unhealthy. As such, any substance not identified banned was considered fair for athletes to use at their discretion, as were any substances for which an athlete had received a therapeutic use exemption for the treatment of an illness or injury. Some interviewees, such as Sam, were forthcoming about their ignorance of the rules as they relate to their own training: On our level, the competitive athlete level, I’m not that cognizant of all the rules and drugs. I take caffeine, alcohol, and Advil. I’m pretty sure I’m not in violation, but I don’t know. If a doctor prescribed eye drops and that’s a steroid am I in violation? I don’t know. Sam also noted that he worried about the negative health impacts of some of his habits and did his best to avoid anything he thought presented a risk to his health, including monitoring his intake of the “vices” he described. By making sure he only used legally available products, Sam felt he was likely to be in compliance with the rules. Sam’s question about the acceptability of products such as steroidal eye medications was tempered by having a doctor’s prescription. In his view, this type of therapeutic use exempted him from being labeled a doper–his goal was not to run better by using a prescribed medication, but to heal an illness. Coupled with the divided judgments of elite and non-elite runners using PEDs, these views of doping demonstrate the ways non-elite runners maintain a coherent self-narrative of healthy and moral citizenship. Non-elite runners monitor themselves to ensure they do not dope by avoiding injected drugs or blood manipulation. Any injected or otherwise questionable substance would only be sourced from a doctor or used only in extreme cases that could be justified as therapeutic. While elite athletes may seek prizes and victories in immoral or unethical ways, non-elite runners and those they associate with are not seeking such outcomes. As a result, health, as opposed to ethics or morality, is the main concern. As long as non-elite runners remain vigilant about not transgressing the clearest boundaries between doping and therapy, they may remain good and healthy citizens. All of the int.
