And they are always innovating because the idea behind what they want to do
is to circumvent the rules, and that makes thing quite complex even though the fight
against doping is making great strides because it can target things better.
It is developing intelligence techniques just like forensic sciences and so on.
So there is progress, but we do have problems of reliability in some cases, but
things are moving very fast on that front.
>> Now, from the educational, prevention side, it's true and
you said so that very often there are people who are cheaters.
These are moral failings.
Is it enough to present this to mame this a moral failing.
>> And call it that.
Well, when we're dealing with people who are violating rules in the area
of doping because they are ignorant about certain things, or real cheaters.
To describe this as an individual moral failing find, that's okay, no problem.
But when you're dealing with people who take substances
because they think that the only response to their system of constraints and
restrictions in terms of their work and what they do is to take substances
because they're de motivated, they're tired, they're abandoned.
By their teams, they're almost in a corner.
To deal with anti doping in this way doesn't work.
Doesn't work because we have to, I think depart, move away from that vision,
that approach.
So a new explanation means it's on an individual moral failing.
But it's more of question of one individual in one organization.
So, you should look at the fault in that interaction, yes in deed.
By contrast if you come out of, if you go out the world of sport and
you look at studies that look at the use of substances in various areas,
construction, agriculture and so on.
You will see that there are some the latest study in France.
There were 20,000 people who were questions,
survey find that 19% of people are using substances in their professional
environment or because or their jobs, because of their work.
You know the areas such as Laurie our truck driver's 5% test positive for
alcohol, 4% for opium, 8 1/2% for Cannabis, and so on and so forth.
So, there are studies from Scandinavia, from Canada, from France, many countries.
These studies all seem to be pointing to the fact that
workers outside the world of sports use substances in a very significant way.
And by contrast, we can see that we have very wide media coverage.
But we're not looking at ordinary workers outside the world of sports.
And by contrast, to say that it prevents us from thinking of things in
a correct and appropriate way when we look at sports, which means that your
change of approach Is to look at the athletes as workers.
What are you going to observe if you look at them as people
who are just doing a job?
Our approach, is an athlete as a worker, two obstacles.
The significance that we attach to sport.
Sport is.
Not work, so if it's considered to be not working then it's there for leisure time.
The second obstacle is that we're talking about a meritocratic show what
sociologists said sometime back that it was the harmonious marriage between
competition and justice.
And the one who works the most is the one who's successful.
So long as we stay in that area, we will not understand this.
But if we go beyond it, which is what we wanted to do as sociologists,
what are we going to look at?
Well, we're going to look at how the risk of doping can
increase as a function of the workload, conditions of working.
We're talking about performance.
The work is the contractual relationship with your employer.
We're looking, and going to look at, the length of contracts,
the amount involved in the contracts, and so on and so forth.
And we're going to, what are we going to do?
As sociologists, if we need, we're going to be dealing with conditions of work.
The conditions of employment.
>> But is that what prevention is targeting?
Those two areas?
More specifically, you have experience in following teams closely,
working conditions, conditions of employment, what are the proposals?
How do you proceed?
>> Well, how do we proceed?
Let me explain.
First of all, we are looking very closely
at the setting up of a follow up system for the riders.
The riders can spend between 40 and up to 80% of their
time not in contact with their employers.
So they're remote workers in a sense.
I think that.
A trainer has to say well, these people are training.
Are they really training?
What are they doing?
Are they taking substances?
Are they training properly?
Are they following the plans for training?
We have to set up a whole system to follow them with doctors, trainers.
Not to monitor them, but to assist them at those times when they feel vulnerable and
to help them to progress without using substances.
The second thing is we have to see to it that the preparation is rationalized.
They have to be planned, training plans.
It might seem bizarre, but two, three years ago,
many riders didn't have formal training plans.
They were training on their own.
[FOREIGN] And
it would never occur for a football club, for example, not to have a trainer.
Not to have a training plan, and so and so forth.
So putting this in place is very important.
It is so important that the young riders,
the new generation who have a different past because.
They had more massive access to education than the others.
Requiring that they're be trainers.
They're asking for trainers.
So you have to staff the support, the team.
So to prevent means to strengthen and
change the culture of these teams of this sports organization.
So, currently are we seen changes,
are they different cultures, i think it's become more uniform.
But i think the word culture is very important.
We do see that there are some teens.