#hey friends adhd goes crazy. i found myself reading thru anti-doping regulations at like 1am and decided to be Productive about it

[bright-and-burning]

i was pretty sure in-competition vs out-of-competition drug testing had different rules from following track and field doping scandals. and i was right! and then i accidentally dug a little too deep into doping regulations so. here's some fun info on anti-doping & motorsports (& how allowed doing drugs is) below the cut (you could perhaps call this a ~primer~ if you wanted)

i'm going off of the FIA's anti-doping regulations (appendix a to the international sporting code, this is from 2017 but it gets the gist across (and doesn't require a download). i checked it against the 2021 version and nothing i referenced changed significantly; click on the "appendix a" link here to download the 2021 version) and the world anti-doping code international standard prohibited list (link is to the 2024 list but i don't think things have changed very much over the years).

the appendix was only added to the international sporting code in 2010, so i can't speak to anything before then.

the FIA link is 69 pages long and also not an easy read BUT from what i can tell their testing works the same as any other international sport's (so if you're looking for a simpler read on the general process than the FIA's code, check out this wiki page on biological passports and the world anti-doping agency (WADA)'s pretty simple anti-doping process page here).

substances

the important part (to me, at least) is article 4: prohibited list and international standards. this is the bit that says what drugs you can and can't do.

it essentially boils down to "the WADA list applies. and also a few other things."

the few others things here are specifically alcohol and beta-blockers. alcohol for drunk driving reasons, beta-blockers because they lower heart rates and reduce tremors (they're banned in many sports that require high accuracy, like motorsports but also archery and golf).

the WADA list is broken down into two main parts: substances & methods prohibited at all times, and substances & methods prohibited in-competition

substances prohibited at all times

these are things like anabolic agents, peptide hormones, growth factors, beta-2 agonists, hormone and metabolic modulators, and diuretics and masking agents (you can explore more in depth here if you're interested).

basically, what i typically think of when i think of doping. the stereotype of bodybuilders taking steroids, you know. not the fun stuff.

substances prohibited in-competition

these are probably what people are more interested in hearing about (especially fic writers). these are stimulants, narcotics, cannabinoids, and glucocorticoids. i will admit to never having heard of glucocorticoids by that name before this (they are steroids used to treat asthma, inflammation, allergies, etc).

these include things like cocaine, adderall and other stimulants commonly used to treat adhd, ecstasy, weed, heroin, oxycodone, and so on.

once again see here for more info; if you're looking for something specific, go to the index and use what page it points you to as a guide. ecstasy, for example, is not listed by name as ecstasy on page 14 (stimulants prohibited in-competition but not out of competition), but if you look in the index, the ecstasy listing points you towards page 14 (where it's referred to by its 'chemical' name), marking it as a stimulant only prohibited in-competition. you might have to google your drug of choice to find other names for it.

in-competition, by the way, is defined as "the period commencing just before midnight (at 11:59 p.m.) on the day before a competition in which the Athlete is scheduled to participate until the end of the competition and the sample collection process." ie 11:59pm the night before right up to after you pee in the cup. assuming competition includes free practice, this period would be wednesday at 11:59pm to sunday after the race.

obviously you can get a therapeutic use exemption, where your doctor says "yeah they need this banned substance for this reason." it's more complicated than that, and there's a lot of paperwork and different agencies' approval involved, but that's the gist of it. this is, for example, how simone biles is allowed to take adhd medication despite those being prohibited in-competition.

the testing method itself isn't explicitly identified in the 2021 code, but it mentions blood and urine testing as options in a footnote. the 2017 code treats urine testing as the automatic option (and lays out the specifics of how that should occur quite explicitly), and blood testing as an alternative or optional addition.

different drugs stay in your system for different lengths of time. cocaine can show up on saliva & blood tests for up to two days, and on urine tests for up to three. weed's urine testing window can be as long as 30 days (depending on frequency of use). and so on. so risk levels vary!

sanctions stuff

you can get hit with sanctions for tampering with tests, evading tests, etc, but i'm gonna talk about specifically sanctions for testing positive because i feel like that's more interesting and relevant than going into sanctions for missing tests three times in twelve months (but if you are interested, read through the FIA's code).

they make special note of what they call "specified substances." these are substances that are "more like to have been consumed or used by an athlete for a purpose other than the enhancement of sport performance" aka fun drugs as opposed to performance enhancers. pretty much all of the in-competition banned ones are specified substances. notable exception here is cocaine. cocaine (and some other stimulants) are not specified substances. you can see which specific substances are specified here.

the definition of "specified substances" above is pretty much just used for sanctions reasons. it kind of helps determine who the burden of proof falls on.

nitty gritty sanctions stuff

the rest of this post gets into the nitty gritty of sanctions (feel free to skip this bit). motorsports has so few violations at the top level (like, to the point where anti-doping lab people are quoted as being genuinely amazed by how clean everyone is) that this kind of thing hasn't really played out (or at least, not since the FIA started working with WADA. or as far as i know). this is different from just about every other sport i've Ever paid any kind of attention to.

this part would honestly make a really solid flowchart. it makes for a pretty rough primer. it is so confusing, but hopefully i make it even a tiny bit more clear than the FIA's code.

there's quite a few cases here, and they're all kind of complicated:

if the violation involved a specified substance, the FIA has to prove it was intentional use to hit the violator with a four year "period of ineligibility," which i will refer to as a ban throughout for ease.

if the violation does not involve a specified substance, the athlete has to prove it wasn't an intentional use to avoid a four year ban.

the two cases above are what i see as the general cases. if a violation doesn't fall under any of the below cases, then it falls back into those. they're the "if not anything else, then these."

a violation for a substance only prohibited in-competition can be ruled not intentional if it is a specified substance and the athlete can prove that it was used out-of-competition, or if it is not a specified substance and the athlete can prove it was used out-of-competition in a context unrelated to performance.

aka (this is an extremely handwavey and flippant example for demonstration purposes only) if they test positive for ecstasy (specified substance), but they can prove they used it at the club for a good time, then it's not intentional. if they test positive for cocaine (not a specified substance), but they can prove they used it at the club and specifically for fun not for performance, then it's not intentional.

if intent isn't there, and none of the other options i go into below apply, you get a two year ban (as far as i can figure it out).

intentional use is specifically "meant to identify those athletes who cheat," basically doing it knowing it was a rule violation/carried a risk of being a rule violation and disregarding the risk (paraphrased from the FIA).

if the violation involves a substance of abuse as specified by WADA here, and the driver can establish that the use occurred out-of-competition and wasn't related to performance, then they get a three month ban. furthermore, if the driver completes an FIA-approved substance of abuse treatment program, then that ban will be reduced to one month.

if the violation involves a substance of abuse and it occurred in-competition, but the driver can prove it wasn't related to performance, then the violation'll be considered not intentional, and is therefore (as far as i can tell) subject to a two year ban.

if the driver can prove they bear no fault or negligence (literally Zero), then whatever ban they would've gotten will go away. this is REALLY hard though; the document states that it "will only apply in exceptional circumstances, for example, where a Driver could prove that, despite all due care, he or she was sabotaged by a competitor."

Conversely, it says that this no fault case wouldn't apply if: a) they consumed a mislabeled/contaminated vitamin or supplement (drivers are responsible for what they ingest), b) their personal trainer/physician gave it to them without explaining what it was (drivers are responsible for their choice of medical personnel), c) sabotage of their food or drink "by a spouse, coach or other person within the driver’s circle of associates (drivers are responsible for what they ingest and for the conduct of those persons to whom they entrust access to their food and drink)." In these scenarios, however, they could potentially use the no significant fault or negligence cases outlined directly below.

if the violation involves a specified substance (but not a substance of abuse), and the driver can prove no significant fault or negligence, then the consequences will be somewhere between a reprimand and a two year ban depending on how at fault they are.

if they can prove both no significant fault/negligence AND that the detected substance came from a contaminated product, then the consequences will be between somewhere between a reprimand and a two year ban depending on how at fault they are. (as an aside, i'm pretty sure this is the out that shelby houlihan tried to use when she tested positive for an anabolic steroid and blamed it on a pork burrito from a food truck).

to be able to use this out, the driver has to prove separately that a) the substance came from the contaminated product and b) they aren't significantly at fault.

these are, as far as i can tell, all of the potential violation cases the FIA's code has articles for. they align with other sports' regulatory bodies' rules, in my (limited) experience.

i hope this was at least a little interesting and informative! (it certainly was for me). thanks for reading :)

several disclaimers here: i make NO promises abt this being perfectly accurate bc it IS me interpreting the FIA's code. and this is nowhere near my area of expertise (i am not a doctor or a lawyer or anything else relevant to this. i am just a nerd with adhd and a whole lot of time). but i did my best ! and i think it's a solid stone's throw at accurate.

and also to be clear if they do coke in fic on thursday night or whatever for the plot or the vibes im still here for it. this is not me requiring pitch-perfect accuracy on doping violations in fic (and all of this info will probably drain out of my brain by saturday); it's (hopefully) a resource!