Okay, we're back to codeine. In a book, published by FITA and edited by two members of the FITA Medical Committee, and published in 2004, entitled
Sports Medicine and Science in Archery on page 132 the following appears.
"Morphine is a natural ingredient of opium. After processing, morphine can be converted to heroin, a highly addictive substance and a leading drug of abuse. Narcotics are widely used as analgesics (painkillers). All potent narcotics are prohibited (see FITA C. & R., book 1, appendix 5). Several we can narcotics are permitted including codeine, detropropoxaphene, pholcodine and tramadol. Those drugs are much less par for the morphine and rarely lead to addiction. The most serious side-effects of powerful narcotics are due to physical dependence and the development of withdrawal symptoms. Heroin is the most addictive and codeine the least harmful narcotic"
I think that this says most of what is needed to be said about codeine. It also mentions pholcodine, which is a cough suppressant.
With all this discussion of drugs in sport I think it is worthwhile going back to thinking about why drugs are banned in sport. It is principally to stop cheating. People who take drugs to gain an unfair advantage over their opponents need to be caught. As has been mentioned in this thread is very unlikely that anyone will get drug tested except at high-level tournaments, and even then probably only the top three.
If the medication is being taken for medical purposes, for example for asthma, then there is a good reason for the person to continue taking this medication for his/her own health. Given that this is so the justification for the presence of, for example, steroids present in urine is obvious.
Further on in the article by Emin Ergen and Karol Hibner, the latter of whom is the chairman of the FITA Medical Committee, the following occurs.
"THERAPEUTIC USE OF PROHIBITED SUBSTANCES.
In 1992 the IOC established criteria for an athlete to be granted permission to use a prohibited substance and compete.
The exemptions offer the following cases:
... the athlete would experience significant impairment of health if the prohibited medication was withheld.
... no enhancement of performance could result from the administration of prohibited substance as medically prescribed.
... the athlete would not be denied the prohibited substance if she or he was not a competing athlete.
... no available permitted and practical alternative medication can be submitted for the prohibited substance.
... Post competition (retrospective) permission will not be granted."
They go on to discuss the guidelines for the use of Therapeutic Use Exemption.
It occurs to me that the forthcoming European Masters Games in Malmö, Sweden, to which I shall be going will be riddled with drug use in all probability. In order to qualify for the games you have to be over the age of 40. There is a category above the age of 50 in which I shall be competing. Although in order to be competing the larger part of the competitors will be quite fit by comparison with many of their contemporaries, there will still be those with hypertension, cardiac problems, respiratory problems, arthritis, and so on. I have no idea whether there will be an intensive drug screening problem whilst I am there. If you read the above few paragraphs it should be clear that if you can justify the use of the medication prescribed to you by a medical practitioner, there should be no problem.
Should you really be that worried ASW1973 is quite correct, Sport UK has a list on its site but the link I gave earlier in this discussion to WADA has the definitive worldwide version.
Here it is
Again.
World Anti-Doping Agency
Murray, beta-blockers have the effect of preventing your heart rate rising as it would normally during exercise. They may not change your resting heart rate, and for an asthmatic to take beta-blockers could be risky, as they are known to precipitate, in some people (this is always important to note --
some people) they can precipitate an asthma attack. I should also point out that far too often COPD is incorrectly diagnosed as asthma, the latter having a large reversible component in terms of lung function. Inhalers are used in both conditions.
As Little Miss Purple has suggested, failing to take medication prescribed for long-term conditions can result in problems. It's probably only the stupid things like Xylometazoline in nasal sprays taken for colds that can get you into trouble with the drug testing authorities. I believe that last year a skier was tested and found to have something of this sort 'on board' and had not realised what was in the self-medication. What Fur Face has said is also correct. You are responsible for what you are taking.