One official of the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (Adak), who has worked at the agency for five years, acknowledged that AK distances itself from sanctioned athletes and admitted the absence of psychological support.When
a Kenyan athlete receives the phone call confirming a positive drug test, it
cannot only shatter a career but also a life. For one athlete, that dreaded
phone call came early in the morning.
“I started shaking.
‘Like how?’ I was confused…The only thing I remember is going inside the house,
coming outside the house, and then my wife asked, ‘What’s wrong?’ I was
shaking. It [had] a huge impact,” he recalls.
Confusion and fear
followed: he did not know whom to trust or what to believe. In the lonely days
that followed, dark thoughts crept in, and late one night, he questioned why he
should go on.
Extensive interviews
with Kenyan track and field athletes who faced doping bans confirm that this
despair is common. Seven out of 10 athletes interviewed reported having
suicidal thoughts during their ban.
One said, “I remember
thinking, ‘Why don’t I just die?’ I even contemplated throwing myself from the
top of the building and letting everything come to an end”.
Another athlete
said bluntly, “In the third month, I felt like things were at a climax, so I
tried taking my own life.”
The interviews form
part of a new study by Kenyan researcher Dr Byron Juma and US-based Jules Woolf, published
last week in the Performance Enhancement & Health journal.
The study uncovers
what happens to Kenyan athletes after a doping ban. The authors write that
“many reported psychological struggles, including suicidal thoughts, with one
requiring psychological intervention after a suicide attempt.”
Most athletes described
persistent anxiety about their future and ability to support themselves
and their families.
The authors warn that
mental ill-health is worsened by abandonment by Athletics Kenya (AK), the
federation overseeing track and field events, which immediately cuts ties, citing a
policy of non-engagement with sanctioned athletes.
“When you are
sanctioned, you are alone. I don’t think AK will listen to you,” said one
athlete, who claimed AK stopped answering his calls.
Two others received no response when they sought help.
Anti-doping
officials echoed athletes’ concerns. One official of the Anti-Doping Agency of
Kenya (Adak), who has worked at the agency for five years, acknowledged that AK
distances itself from sanctioned athletes and admitted the absence of
psychological support.
ADAK is the national
agency responsible for catching and prosecuting individuals involved in doping in
Kenyan sports.
It collaborates with the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the
Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) to test athletes, investigate violations and
issue sanctions.
The official’s
observations reflected the anti-doping community’s awareness of the mental and
emotional strain sanctions cause, yet do little or nothing about it.
“AK’s limited
support may reflect Kenya’s deep talent pool, which stretches resources,
forcing AK to prioritise eligible competitors over sanctioned ones,” the authors said.
“Without
institutional support, sanctioned athletes faced not only emotional isolation
but also the abrupt collapse of their professional livelihoods.”
Dr Juma, the lead
author, is an assistant professor and programme coordinator in sport leadership
and recreation at the US’s Emporia State University.
Dr Woolf is a researcher on the management of drugs, sport and health at the
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
The athletes said that once the ban is announced, public vilification is relentless.
Some athletes were
mocked with nicknames tied to the substances in their cases.
“These nicknames,
often used by peers or community members, served as a constant reminder of
their violation. For instance, WanjalaM [name changed] was greeted by the name
of the supplement linked to his sanction, while MusyokaM [name changed] was
dubbed ‘Mr [substance]’ after testing positive for a Beta-2 Agonist,” the authors said.
“Over
time, such labels affected their identities, with MusyokaM noting how he was
repeatedly referred to as ‘the [type of] person who uses drugs’.”
The punishment spreads
far beyond the athlete. “When you sanction them, it is not only the athlete who
suffers, but also the immediate family, the extended family, and the
community,” an anti-doping official observed.
Athletes who once supported whole
households suddenly face shame and financial ruin. Children watch their parents
crumble.
“While no definitive
conclusions can be drawn, Kenyan athletes’ concerns for their children
underscore the urgent need to examine and mitigate any potential impacts of
sanctions on these ‘unseen victims’. This represents a novel direction for
future research, offering a family systems perspective on the consequences of
anti-doping enforcement,” Dr Juma and his colleague said.
Their paper is titled, ‘The hidden cost of doping sanctions: examining the experiences of Kenyan
athletes sanctioned for violating anti-doping rules’.
Many athletes said
they turned to alcohol. “MusyokaM (a former long-distance runner) shared that he
would hire a motorbike rider to deliver alcohol and drink with him, saying they
would ‘just laugh about nothing.’”
Under WADA’s strict
liability rule, athletes are responsible for any banned substance found in
their bodies, even without intent. The study notes that this principle “makes
successful appeals seem futile, leaving athletes feeling powerless.” The
result, researchers say, is deep hopelessness and mistrust.
The rule states that
“it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing use on the
athlete’s part be demonstrated to establish an anti-doping rule violation.”
Dr Damaris Ogama, a
Kenyan lawyer and researcher on doping interventions, said this rule potentially
leads to unjust punishments for innocent athletes who ingest prohibited
substances inadvertently.
“Contamination of
supplements is becoming an acute problem. Research has found that certain
vitamins and protein powders contain additives that are not declared because of
poor manufacturing standards. An athlete who consumes such a product in good
faith may end up testing positive and suffer career-threatening ramifications,”
she wrote recently.
About 257 Kenyan
athletes have been sanctioned for doping since 2017, according to the Athletics Integrity Unit, which
enforces rules in track and field games. Nineteen Kenyans have been banned in 2025
alone.
Despite the despair,
many Kenyan athletes have refused to give up the sport that defined them.
“Kenyan athletes expressed a strong desire to return to competitive sport, with
some successfully re-entering competition and others transitioning to ASP (Athlete
Support Personnel, such as coaching) roles, reflecting a continued sport
commitment.”
Some used the ban
period to pursue education or farming, others to coach younger runners. One
athlete said the experience had “opened your mind and made you think outside
the box.”
Dr Juma and Woolf
called for authorities to provide mental-health services and coping skills to
help athletes manage their post-sanction identity disruption and stigma and
potential return to sport.
They said the wider
consequences of sanctions on athletes’ families should prompt sports
organisations to also focus on the needs of athletes’ families and offer
targeted interventions to aid reintegration or separation from sport.
They argue that doping
bans should protect sport’s integrity without destroying human lives.