The Economist explains

Why the Olympics still has a doping problem

Cheating with drugs has again become an organised affair

Photograph: Doug Mills/New York Times/Redux/Eyevine

NOT SO LONG ago it seemed that the Olympics was winning its battle with drug cheats. Retests of samples from competitors at the Beijing and London games led to more than 100 medalists being disqualified for doping. This tally highlighted the prevalence of drugtaking in Olympic sports, but also the success of anti-doping authorities. The creation of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in 1999 had shown that the sports world was serious about ending cheating. High-profile dopers, such as Marion Jones, an American athlete, were punished retroactively. Meanwhile a new generation of athletes like Usain Bolt and Michael Phelps broke records without the help of banned substances.

Discover more

Close-up of chrysotile asbestos fibers on a gloved hand.

Is RFK junior right to say America allows more toxins than the EU?

He is, but things are slowly beginning to change

A photo illustration showing a pile of coal gradually disappearing.

What would it cost to kill coal?

The price of shutting down coal power, and what would be gained


A bumper sticker on an SUV reads 'FLUORIDE - THERE IS POISON IN THE TAP WATER' in Blackhawk, Colorado, USA.

Should America ban fluoride in its drinking water?

The idea by Robert F. Kennedy junior—nominated by Donald Trump as health secretary—may have teeth


Why is Donald Trump keen to use “recess appointments”?

The president-elect is testing the loyalty of the Senate’s next majority leader

Will Donald Trump’s power be unchecked if Republicans win the House?

A “trifecta” of presidency, Senate and House of Representatives would provide a huge opportunity

Why The Economist endorses political candidates

Our independence is protected by our principles and structure