Context is everything: A realist response to the commentary on epistemic racism in anti-doping research by Ruwuya et al. 2024

This article responds to Ruwuya et al.'s (2024) critique of epistemic racism in anti-doping research, particularly their mischaracterization of our study (Veltmaat et al., 2023). We challenge their claims, emphasising the importance of shared responsibility within the research community to produce culturally relevant, contextually accurate findings, as well as data-close and nuanced interpretations. Contrary to accusations of perpetuating stereotypes about athletes from developing nations, our research in Veltmaat et al. (2023) explores the complex interplay of cultural, social, and economic factors influencing athletes' vulnerability to doping. We stress the need to consider well-documented cultural value differences, such as those between Western and African countries, in shaping anti-doping education and policy. Our findings in Veltmaat et al. (2023) demonstrate that athletes’ internalisation of societal values of sport varies, and influenced by a combination of individual and contextual factors. Vulnerability to doping is not confined to any specific race, gender, or location, but arises where values tied to safety, economic stability, or social mobility outweigh rule compliance or the ‘spirit of sport’. We advocate for a decolonised approach to anti-doping that embraces cultural diversity and integrates local values into global frameworks. Personal values, not solely the ‘spirit of sport,’ often serve as protective factors against doping. Our research highlights that values-based anti-doping education may falter when overly reliant on a colonialised narrative of values, particularly in contexts where athletes face diverse pressures. We caution against over-sensitising critiques of epistemic bias, because doing so can hinder constructive dialogue and stifle progress in anti-doping research.