Reflections on method, racism, and context and anti-doping research: A commentary response

This commentary responds to critiques of our earlier work on raising awareness of epistemic racism in anti-doping research. We address our critics through three reflective sections on method, racism, and context. In the first section, we address critiques of our method, by outlining the deliberative process behind our commentary and provide details of our lived experiences. In the second section, we reflect on racism. Far from being a novel concept, epistemic racism has been acknowledged across disciplines, making it relevant for anti-doping scholarship. Moreover, we challenge its dismissal as irrelevant and note that systemic racial biases in knowledge production have long shaped science and policy. Hence, our recommendation for scholars to be racially aware seems pertinent given the academia's ongoing failure to eradicate racial biases. This is further supported by the observation that the recommendation for editorial board representation was assumed tokenism. The third section focuses on context – a term heavily leaned upon but inconsistently and questionably used. We note how the original framing of athletes from developing countries lacking choice, values, and morality was obscured in favor of a new framing that paints the original work as a positive connotation of these athletes. We critique the concept of self-selection bias as a form of blame-shifting that ignores the historical context and consequences of colonialism. By structuring our reflections in this manner, we aim to not only respond to our critics but also to encourage a more inclusive and equitable approach to anti-doping research.