Download Nihill, G. Gene testing - Clearinghouse for Sport

SPORTS COACH
An online magazine for coaches
ISSN 1836-604X
VOLUME 28 NUMBER 3 2005
Gene testing: a valuble proposition
Author: Grant Nihill
Issue: Volume 28 Number 3
Gene testing to identify potentially successful athletes, or to produce ‘designer’ athletes has been an area of much
interest in the sports world — and beyond — for some time now.
The so-called ‘sprint gene’ has been identified, with involvement from the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS). The
‘boxing gene’ is touted as being able to pinpoint susceptibility to brain damage from impact sports. But where is all
this going? Is gene testing the new frontier in sports performance? Or is it uncharted territory that we should not
even be exploring — a maze of potential legal, moral and ethical issues?
According to Professor Peter Fricker, sports physician and AIS Director, the short answer to the latter two
questions is ‘yes’. But, Professor Fricker says, both questions miss the immediate point, at least for now. The real
question we need to be addressing is just how much of a difference a person’s genes really makes to their athletic
performance. How close to the mark is the often-used assessment that someone is a ‘born athlete’? Only when we
can validate the worth of the actual genetic information, can we validate the worth of gene testing — and that could
take years.
‘The challenge is that, having entered uncharted waters in relation to genetics in sport, people are now midstream
and trying to second-guess what is on the other side,’ Professor Fricker says.
‘It’s a journey of discovery — but what the AIS is saying is that you really need to get your charts and maps sorted
out first before you determine your destination. We haven’t even started the analysis of just how worthwhile gene
testing could be. Before anyone even thinks about applying genetic information, we need to establish the value of
that information.
‘We need to conduct longitudinal studies over years, tracking athletes’ performance and plotting them against their
genetic profile to see whether there ultimately is a useful reflection of their genetic profile, or whether there is any
association at all. We would look at athletes who have a certain genetic profile and then target their performance
over several years. You could then look back at an athlete who had, say, the sprint gene at 15 years of age, and
see where they ended up at age 25 or 30. Despite the fact that they showed early promise on the basis of their
genetic profile, their performance may never have been that great — or they may have ended up winning gold
medals at the Olympic Games.’
Professor Fricker likens the current debate on gene testing to the issue of a few years ago on carb loading in
relation to athlete nutrition. Everyone eats food — so the question the sports scientists asked back then was
whether there could be something in nutrition that might help athletic performance. ‘Carb loading for endurance
athletes is now taken for granted but someone had to prove it before it was applied,’ Professor Fricker says.
© Australian Sports Commission
Page 1 of 3
‘Everyone is now jumping on the application of genetics in sport — but we are saying you need more research to
establish the value of it. There is no point in using genetic information if it has not been proven to be useful.’
Whatever the result of further research, no one is saying that a single gene, or even combination of genes, will
ensure a gold medal or the development of an elite athlete. Gene testing might help in tailoring training programs
for individual athletes, or be a factor in selection, or help to identify athletes who are prone to particular sportrelated injuries. But there are no short cuts to elite sports performance.
The consensus is that gene testing could be a guide to sports performance — but not the single determinant of it.
So many other factors — access to opportunities, response to training, good coaching, equipment and nutrition
and, not least, the will to win — all play their part.
‘Our challenge is that if genetics, or genomics, are worth anything at all, it really is going to be only maybe 1 or 2
per cent of the total mix of the formula for success,’ Professor Fricker says. Equally, it follows that genetic
information on its own will not be able to be used to discriminate against people participating in sport, particularly
elite sport — a case of, if you have the gene, you’re in the squad, and if you don’t have it, you’re not in the squad. ‘I
don’t see genetic information as a stand alone discriminator,’ Professor Fricker says.
Discrimination, though, is but one issue in the gene testing debate. There are numerous ethical, privacy and riskmanagement issues. If promising athletes do not have the required gene, should they be denied scholarships and
specialised training? If a person is identified at a young age as a potential athlete in a particular sport, does that not
limit life choices? And on the other hand, if a person wants to be a champion but is identified as having no genespecific athletic potential, is that the end of it? Does that person just stop trying — give up on their dream? Is it
appropriate to test children at a certain age to see if their potential can be predicted on the finding of a particular
gene or combination of genes?
Research has identified the gene that can apparently predict whether an athlete involved in impact sports such as
boxing is at unusual risk of brain damage. Should a boxer be prevented from training if gene testing finds they have
this particular gene? Is that not discrimination? Or, if the test is not done and the boxer later suffers brain damage,
could they not sue the sports authority for denying them the knowledge of the risk in the first place? Should there
be mass screenings of all athletes for such susceptibility to injury?
And there is the privacy issue — once we start delving into people’s genetic makeup, we can discover all sorts of
information that people may not want to know about themselves, parents and other family members.
These are all fundamentally important issues but, as Professor Fricker advises, let’s not get too far ahead of
ourselves. ‘The discussion about these issues is so far ahead of where we are at the moment in terms of validating
genetic information, let alone applying it,’ he says.
That said, the Australian Sports Commission (ASC) intends to stay at the forefront of the ongoing debate on gene
testing. Following a landmark Australian Law Reform Commission report that raised concerns regarding the use of
genetic information in talent identification programs, the ASC developed a code of conduct on genetic research and
the use of genetic information in sport. This code, prepared by Professor Fricker, sets down the principles and
guidelines for ASC involvement in genetics research. Pivotally, it expressly rules out any work on gene technology
or manipulation to enhance sports performance through methods akin to doping. Here, the issue is not the genetic
information or the gene testing itself. It is how the information is used. And the ASC view is unequivocal — it is
cheating.
So, where to from here? ‘The AIS needs to work with other researchers around the country as to how we can stay
connected with the scientific community in genomics, so we can keep involved in the discovery of information in
this area and look at the implications for sport within those boundaries of what is legal, moral and ethical,’
Professor Fricker says. ‘The AIS has made it quite clear that we will not recommend genetic testing for anyone.
There is a huge need for validating genetic information before it can be applied and that is where we need good
research in partnering with hospitals, universities and other research institutions.’
And the message for coaches? ‘Genetics, or genomics, may or may not meet coaches’ expectations,’ Professor
Fricker says. ‘Be patient.’
Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3