Glocal Fitness Doping

  • Jesper AndreassonEmail author
  • Thomas Johansson


Situated within a framework of a globalized gym and fitness culture, this chapter aims to investigate and compare how fitness doping can be understood in relation to, and how it is affected by, different national and local contexts. Representing different forms of welfare state regimes, the comparative analysis focuses on policy, practice, and prevention in the United States and Sweden. The findings indicate, among other things, how national level policy and implementation reflect local priorities, understandings, and values. Sweden’s choices form a pattern that reflects the priority of protecting the common good over individual pursuits. Conversely, the US does not do any policing outside formally governed competitions in sports or in criminal contexts. Further, US bodybuilders do not feel targeted for their appearance in the same ways, illustrating the priority of individual choice. The chapter also discusses how each country implements anti-doping in ways consistent with global policies, but is also informed by various local understandings and values. This interplay between supranational structures and locally diverse implementation is not only complex, but can seem contradictory, as each locality remains partly within a global system of anti-doping in sport, and operates partly outside this context.


  1. Andreasson, J. (2015). Reconceptualising the gender of fitness doping. Performing and negotiating masculinity through drug-use practices. Social Sciences, 4, 546–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreasson, J., & Johansson, T. (2014). The global gym: Gender, health and pedagogies. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andreasson, J., & Johansson, T. (2016). Online doping. The new self-help culture of ethnopharmacology. Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics, 19(7), 957–972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ASCA. (1990). Public Law 101–647.Google Scholar
  5. ASCA. (2004, March). Amendment to the Controlled Substances Act. 108th Congress; 2d Session; S. 2195.Google Scholar
  6. Bambra, C. (2004). The worlds of welfare: Illusory and gender blind? Social Policy and Society, 3(3), 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bambra, C. (2007). Going beyond the three worlds of welfare capitalism: Regime theory and public health research. Journal of Epidemiological Community Health, 61(12), 1098–1102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernstein, J. (2018, January 3). Working out with Charles Glass, a trainer to the stars. New York Times. Retrieved from
  9. Branch, J. (2016, October 28). No one is looking at this headline. The New York Times. Retrieved from
  10. Charlebois, D. (2017). Taking steroids: What could it hurt? Retrieved 10 October 2018 from
  11. Christiansen, A. V. (2009). Doping in fitness and strength training environments. Politics, motives and masculinity. In V. Møller, M. McNamme, & P. Dimeo (Eds.), Elite sport, doping and public health. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark.Google Scholar
  12. Christiansen, A. V. (2018). Motionsdoping. Styrketræning, identitet og kultur [Recreational doping. Strength training, identity and culture]. Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.Google Scholar
  13. Christiansen, A. V., & Bojsen-Møller, J. (2012). Will steroids kill me if I use them once? A qualitative analysis of inquiries submitted to the Danish anti-doping authorities. Performance Enhancement & Health, 1, 39–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DASCA. (2014). Public Law 113–260.Google Scholar
  15. DEA. (2018). Drug scheduling. Retrieved from
  16. Denham, B. E. (1997). Sports illustrated, the “war on drugs”, and the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 1990: A study in agenda building and political timing. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 21(3), 260–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Denham, B. E. (2006). The Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004: A study in the political economy of drug policy. Journal of Health & Social Policy, 22(2), 51–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dworkin, S. L., & Wachs, F. L. (2009). Body panic: Gender, health, and the selling of fitness. New York and London: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Elias, J., & Beasley, C. (2009). Hegemonic masculinity and globalization: ‘Transnational business masculinities’ and beyond. Globalizations, 6(2), 281–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elliot, D. L., Moe, E. L., Goldberg, L., DeFrancesco, C. A., Durham, M. B., & Hix-Small, H. (2006). Definition and outcome of a curriculum to prevent disordered eating and body-shaping drug use. Journal of School Health, 76(2), 67–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  22. Esping-Andersen, G. (2009). The incomplete revolution. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  23. Esposito, L., & Perez, F. M. (2014). Neoliberalism and the commodification of mental health. Humanity & Society, 38(4), 414–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. European Commission. (2014). Study on doping prevention: A map of legal, regulatory and prevention practice provisions in EU 28. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  25. Flashback. (n.d.). Flashback forum [website]. Retrieved 9 October 2018 from
  26. Goldberg, L., Clarke, G. N., Green, C., Wolf, S. L., & Lapin, A. (1996). Effects of multidimensional anabolic steroid prevention intervention. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 276, 1555–1562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hall, S., & Jefferson, T. (Eds.). (1976). Resistance through rituals. London, UK: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  28. Hanstad, D. V., & Houlihan, B. (2015). Strengthening global anti-doping policy through bilateral collaboration: The example of Norway and China. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 7(4), 587–604. Scholar
  29. Hearn, J., & Pringle, K. (2009). European perspectives on men and masculinities: National and transnational approaches. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Henning, A. D., & Dimeo, P. (2017). The new front in the war on doping: Amateur athletes. International Journal of Drug Policy, 51, 128–136. Scholar
  31. Hoff, D. (2013). Dopning utanför idrotten – individualisering och muskulösa skönhetsideal. En studie av dopning i grundskola, gymnasium och på gym i Kalmar kommun. Scandinavian Sport Studies Forum, 4, 1–24.Google Scholar
  32. Johnston, L. D., Miech, R. A., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., Schulenberg, J. E., & Patrick, M. E. (2018). Monitoring the future national survey results on drug use: 1975–2017: Overview, key findings on adolescent drug use. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liokaftos, D. (2012). From ‘classical’ to ‘freaky’: An exploration of the development of dominant, organised male bodybuilding culture. London: Goldsmith’s College, PhD.Google Scholar
  34. Maycock, B., & Howat, P. (2007). Social capital: Implications from an investigation of illegal anabolic steroid networks. Health Education Research, 22, 854–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McGrath, S., & Chananie-Hill, R. (2009). “Big Freaky-Looking Women”: Normalizing gender transgression through bodybuilding. Sociology of Sport Journal, 26, 235–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Moberg, T., & Hermansson, G. (2006) Mandom, mod och morske män. Anabola androgena steroider - medicinskt, rättsligt och socialt. Göteborg: Mediahuset i Göteborg AB.Google Scholar
  37. Monaghan, L. F. (2001). Bodybuilding, drugs and risk: Health, risk and society. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Monaghan, L. F. (2012). Accounting for illicit steroid use. Bodybuilders’ justifications. In A. Locks & N. Richardson (Eds.), Critical readings in bodybuilding (pp. 73–90). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Nathan, J. (2014, August 20). Shots or gel for TRT? Thank you [Msg 6]. Retrieved 10 October 2018 from
  40. Nathan, J. (n.d.). About me. Retrieved 10 October 2018 from
  41. Ntoumanis, N., Ng, J. Y., Barkoukis, V., & Backhouse, S. (2014). Personal and psychosocial predictors of doping use in physical activity settings: A meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 44(11), 1603–1624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pedersen, I. K. (2010). Doping and the perfect body expert: Social and cultural indicators of performance-enhancing drug use in Danish gyms. Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics., 13(3), 503–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pierson, C. (1998). Beyond the welfare state. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  44. Pope, H. G., Kanayama, G., Athey, A., Ryan, E., Hudson, J. I., & Baggish, A. (2014). The lifetime prevalence of anabolic-androgenic steroid use and dependence in Americans: Current best estimates. The American journal on Addictions, 23(4), 371–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. PRODIS. (2018). 100% ren hårdträning [100% pure hard training]. Retrieved 10 October 2018 from:
  46. Ram, U. (2004). Glocommodification: How the global consumes the local McDonald’s in Israel. Current Sociology, 52(1), 11–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rush, M. (2015). Between two worlds of father politics: USA or Sweden? Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Sassatelli, R. (2010). Fitness culture: Gyms and the commercialisation of discipline and fun. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shadow Pro. (2015). Steroids: What pro bodybuilders are really using. Retrieved 16 June 2018 from
  50. Skolverket. (2011). Läroplan, examensmål och gymnasiegemensamma ämnen för gymnasieskola. Retrieved 27 August 2018 from:
  51. Smith, A. C. T., & Stewart, B. (2012). Body perceptions and health behaviors in an online bodybuilding community. Qualitative Health Research, 22(7), 971–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Statens Folkhälsoinstitut. (2011). Dopning i Samhället [Doping in society]. Östersund, Sweden: Statens Folkhälsoinstitut.Google Scholar
  53. Stewart, B., & Smith, A. C. (2008). Drug use in sport: Implications for public policy. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 32(3), 278–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. The Swedish Doping Act. (1991:1969). Dopningslagen. Stockholm, Sweden: Svensk författningssamling SFS.Google Scholar
  55. Urry, J. (2003). Global complexity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sport ScienceLinnaeus UniversityKalmarSweden
  2. 2.Department of Education, Communication and LearningUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations