The purpose of the conference “Anti-Doping: Rational Policy or Moral Panic” is to discuss the rationale behind and consequences of the current effort to oppose the use of doping in sport. It is generally accepted that the core concepts anti-doping policy is based on ­ fair play and health ­ are values worth fighting for. Since the World Anti Doping Agency was founded in 1999 the fight against doping has intensified. A number of high profile athletes have been caught and sanctioned for doping offences. In that respect anti-doping has been a success. But the testing system is not perfect. So there is reason to believe that there are still elite level athletes who are doping and earning big money without being caught. Hence anti-doping authorities are constantly seeking new ways to improve their work. The introduction of out-of-competition testing, the whereabouts requirements, and the biological passport are all controversial measures which definitely makes life harder for the cheating athletes but at the same time restrict the freedom of law-abiding athletes. Initiatives which if proposed in any other area of society presumably would have resulted in strong opposition. In light of this the INHDR finds it timely to initiate a debate about whether the current anti-doping strategy is sustainable. Is the effort proportionate with the problem, or did the doping scandal at the Tour de France 1998 cause a moral panic which has blown the problem out of proportion with serious side-effects and counter-productive outcomes as the result?