Should a drug test be used to stop student ‘cheats’?
Taking performance enhancing drugs has long been illegal in sport, but what about in academia? Some students are arguing that action is needed to control the use of ‘smart drugs’ in the context of exams, as taking them could potentially provide an unfair advantage.
Several different substances fall into the category of smart drugs, including racetams, dopamine enhancers, stimulants, certain vitamin supplements and compounds designed to improve concentration and memory. These are mostly legal to use. Many, however, are available by prescription only and are exclusively prescribed in cases where they may counter an existing deficiency, such as improving memory in a patient with Alzheimer’s disease. If they are obtained without a prescription, the seller is breaking the law.
Current concern are focused on modafinil. This is a drug used to treat narcolepsy and improves alertness in the average person, though there is no direct scientific evidence that it improves exam scores. A clinical neuropsychology professor at the University of Cambridge, Barbara Sahakian, says that use of the drug by students has grown dramatically in recent years and many may feel that they have no choice but to take it if they are to compete. She has expressed her support for a drug test and her concern for the wellbeing of users, given that the long-term effects of taking the drug are unknown and young people may be particularly vulnerable to any adverse effects because their brains are still developing.
Part of what makes modafinil so appealing to some students is that it is very cheap to buy at around £2 a time. The root source seems to be internet pharmacies, which raises further concerns – those unscrupulous enough to sell the drug without a prescription cannot necessarily be relied upon to sell the real thing or to make sure it is of good quality. This could expose users to unpredictable health risks.
Whilst it may be possible to test for modafinil, problems arise because of the number of different smart drugs out there and the fact that new ones keep entering the market. Because of their therapeutic importance, it would be difficult to impose tighter controls. The situation is also complicated by the fact that unregulated substances such as caffeine and partially regulated ones such as nicotine can also have a brain-boosting effect. When it comes to vitamins it is impossible to tell the difference between somebody taking supplements with the express aim of improving exam scores and somebody who is simply promoting a healthy diet.
Where drug tests for smart drugs could come in useful is in helping to control the use of those with potentially risky side effects and those for which the side effects have not yet been properly established. This could reduce the pressure on students to take drugs that might do them harm. Overall, however, testing in academia is likely to run into the same problems that it has in sport. Individual problems can be resolved, but it will never be possible to level the playing field when the origins of natural advantages are still unknown.