Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

The science of doping

The processes used to charge athletes with cheating are often based on flawed statistics and flawed logic, says Donald A. Berry.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Metabolite data.


  1. Buchanan, M. The prosecutor's fallacy. The New York Times (16 May 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Berry, D. A. Stat. Sci. 6, 175–205 (1991).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. Berry, D. A. Statistics: A Bayesian Perspective (Duxbury Press, California, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Berry, D. A. & Chastain, L. A. Chance 17, 5–8 (2004).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 


Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Additional information

See Editorial, page 667 . Donald Berry testified for the defence team of 1996 Olympian Mary Decker Slaney before a doping hearing board in 1997. He was paid for his time.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Berry, D. The science of doping. Nature 454, 692–693 (2008).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing