Strong stuff : the size and seriousness of the doping trade in the Netherlands / Ilse van Leiden, Marjan Olfers, Anton van Wijk, Rebecca Rijnink, Joey Wolsink, Juno van Esseveldt. - 2020

Sterk spul : aard, omvang en ernst van de dopinghandel in Nederland / Ilse van Leiden, Marjan Olfers, Anton van Wijk, Rebecca Rijnink, Joey Wolsink, Juno van Esseveldt. - Bureau Beke; Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam; i.o.v. Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport. - Arnhem : Bureau Beke, 2020. - (Beke reeks)

• ISBN 9789492255402
  
  

Abstract

The use of image and performance enhancing drugs (IPEDs) for cosmetic reasons and in amateur sport has become accepted, a 224 page Report examining the size and seriousness of the doping trade in The Netherlands has highlighted. The Report found that this is in contrast to elite sport, where use of doping substances remains taboo.

The Report concludes that around 2% of the Dutch population uses or has used doping substances, and is fastest increasing amongst noncompetitive athletes who use doping substances to enhance their appearance. In addition, it found that doping is becoming accepted in recreational sport.

The Report found that elite athletes generally come into contact with doping substances through their entourage, which means that they are likely to receive guidance on usage. In contrast, cosmetic and recreational sport users do not receive guidance and gather most of their information from the internet, which puts their health at greater risk.

In elite sport, the Report found that the most common doping agents are anabolic steroids, stimulants, and hormonal and metabolic modulators. It found that there has been a decrease in the number of athletes who are prescribed substances without medical need in an attempt to boost performance since 2015. Micro doping (i.e. using substances in small amounts to avoid detection) is on the increase, as well as utilisation of experimental food (such as ketones).

More shipments of doping substances from outside the EU are being intercepted. From 2016 to 2018, customs seizures tripled with officers intercepting over 8,000 shipments involving medication, including 1,000 that contained doping substances. The most common substances intercepted were stimulants, glucocorticoids, and anabolic agents. Seizures of diuretics, masking agents, beta blockers, and hormonal and metabolic modulators are also increasing.

The Report points out that pharmaceutical companies in Eastern Europe are well known supply chains for the Dutch market. Also, it is impossible to know what substances are being imported into the country from other European Union countries, due to free trade rules. However, it did find that due to stricter regulation on doping substances in recent years, there has been a boost in Underground Laboratories (UGLs) in The Netherlands.

As well as the usual worries about the quality of substances produced in such labs being dangerous to health, the Report found that the increase in UGLs that compete with each other has led to a ‘hardening’ of the market. ‘In the Netherlands, a violent incident is already known where those involved in an UGL were extorted by new players on the market’, it reads.

Doping is not as lucrative as drug trafficking, but the Report did find that criminals are increasingly becoming involved in the doping market. This is because due to the increase in UGLs, the supply of doping substances is no longer dependant on foreign pharmacies. Products can now be produced for export where they can be sold in person or via the internet or dark web.

Doping in sport is not a criminal offence in The Netherlands. However, the Report concludes that the increased intertwining of doping with drug trafficking and the doping trade due to UGLs enabling an international market fo doping products represents a ‘serious problem’.

Source: www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com

Samenvatting:

In de media duiken met enige regelmaat berichten op over het gebruik van doping in de sport. Niet alleen in de topsport, ook daarbuiten worden middelen gebruikt om de (sport)prestaties te vergroten. Maar wat gaat er achter het dopinggebruik en de -handel schuil?

In opdracht van het ministerie van VWS onderzochten wij samen met de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam de aard, omvang en ernst van dopinghandel in Nederland. In ‘Sterk spul’ komen profielen van gebruikers van dopingmiddelen aan bod en welke risico’s er met het gebruik gepaard gaan. Daarnaast wordt ingegaan op de vraag hoe de handel in dopingmiddelen in elkaar steekt, hoe grootschalig deze handel is en in hoeverre er in Nederland ook dopingmiddelen worden geproduceerd. Een relevante vraag hierbij is wie er bij het produceren, verstrekken en verhandelen van dopingmiddelen betrokken zijn.

Related case:

NADO Flanders 2018 Disciplinary Commission 20186668
June 25, 2019

On 25 June 2019 the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission decided to impose a fine and a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Bulgarian Athlete after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Dehydrochlormethyltestosterone and Meldonium.

In First Instance the Disciplinary Commission deemed that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional nor did she produce any evidence that showed that the supplement she had usued was contaminated.

Hereafter in July 2019 the Bulgarian Athlete appealed the Decision of 25 June 2019 with the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Council.

The Disciplinary Council considers the evidence in this case and finds that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation. Analysis of the supplement, the Athlete allegedly had used, in the Ghent Lab showed the presence of the prohibited substances.

However the Council holds that due to the Athlete's failure to mention this supplement on the Doping Control Form there is no evidence that she indeed had used this supplement prior to the sample collection. Neither is there evidence that prior she had purchased this supplement.

Research on the internet conducted by NADO Flanders revealed no information about the supplement and the lack of information on the label of this product prevented any attempt to check its ingredients for prohibited substances.

As a result the Council concludes that the Athlete only had produced unsubstantiated assertions and clearly had acted recklessly and with Significant Fault or Negligence regarding the use of her supplements.

Therefore the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Council decides on 13 september to dismiss the Athlete's appeal and to uphold the Decision of the Disciplinary Commission.

Fees and expenses for this Council shall be borne partially by the Athlete.

Prohibited List January 2021 : The World Anti-Doping Code International Standard / World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). - Montreal : WADA, 2020

The Prohibited List is a mandatory International Standard as part of the World Anti-Doping Program.
The List is updated annually following an extensive consultation process facilitated by WADA. The effective date of the List is 1 January 2021.

CAS 2019/A/6249 Roman Balandin v. Association Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA)

• Basketball
• Doping (meldonium)

Criteria for the determination of the intentionality of an ADRV
CAS panels have to conduct fact-based and case-specific analyses. In the case of a young professional player not contesting the anti-doping rule violation (ADRV), the following elements can be relied upon in order to determine intent: relative experience level (with the sport and the relevant anti-doping rules), general anti-doping education (or lack thereof), level of awareness of previous cases involving the same prohibited substance, motivation to consume the product containing the prohibited substance, circumstances surrounding the player’s visit to his team’s doctor and the accounts of the various participants and witnesses, consistency of the player’s explanations with the levels of prohibited substance found in his system.

On 28 June 2018 the RUSADA Disciplinary Anti-Doping Committee (DADC) decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Russian basketball player Roman Balandin after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Meldonium. 

Hereafter in April 2019 the Athlete appealed the DADC decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

The Athlete requested the Panel to set aside the DADC decision of 28 June 2018 and to impose a reduced sanction on the basis of No Significant Fault or Negligence. 

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance, argued that he is very young and lacked any formal anti-doping education. He acknowledged that his behavior was careless but not intentional nor significantly negligent.

He explained that he had used the Meldonium as an over-the-counter product. It was recommended by their team doctor and he further had confirmed that he could take this product. Only later the Athlete became aware that the product was prohibited in sports he stopped using it. The team doctor later admitted his fault in allowing the Athlete to use the meldonium which ultimately led to his dismissal from the basketball club. 

The Sole Arbitrator finds that the Athlete very narrowly, by a balance of probabilities, has met his burden of proving that his violation was not intentional. However the Sole Arbitrator deems that the Athlete’s level of fault is significant and considerable. Consequently that there are no grounds to further reduce the period of ineligibility. 

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 13 September 2019 that:

1.) The appeal filed by Roman Balandin on 16 April 2019 against the decision issued by the RUSADA Disciplinary Anti-Doping Committee on 28 June 2018 is partially upheld.

2.) The decision issued by the RUSADA Disciplinary Anti-Doping Committee on 28 June 2018 is set aside.

3.) Mr Roman Balandin is sanctioned with a two-year period of ineligibility commencing as from the date of his provisional suspension (i.e.19 May 2017).

4.) (…).

5.) (…).

6.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.

Related case:

NADO Flanders 2018 Disciplinary Council 20186668 - Appeal
September 9, 2019


In August 2018 NADO Flanders reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Bulgarian Athlete after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Dehydrochlormethyltestosterone and Meldonium.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission. Later she failed to attend the final hearing.

The Athlete accepted the test result and could not explain how the substances entered her system. She believed that one of the supplements she used was contaminated.

The Commission finds that the presence of the prohibited substances has been established in the Athlete’s sample and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Commission deems that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional nor did she produce any evidence that shows that the supplement was contaminated.

Therefore the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission decides on 25 June 2019 to impose a fine and a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 30 August 2018.

Fees and expenses for this Commission shall be borne partially by the Athlete.

In November 2016 the International Motorcycling Federation (FIM) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Russian rider Anastasiy Nifontova after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Meldonium. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered.

The Athlete demonstrated with medical evidence that the violation was not intentional because she underwent treatment for her health problems and had used prescribed medication which she mentioned on the Doping Control Form.

FIM accepts that the violation was not intentional due to the prescribed medication for a legitimate medical condition but deems that there are no grounds for No Significant Fault or Negligence.

The parties in this case reached a settlement agreement and accordingly on 13 March 2019 a 2 year period of ineligibility was imposed on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 14 November 2016.

Doping in tennis, where we are and where we should be going? / Thomas Zandonaia, Darias Holgado. - (Performance Enhancement & Health 7 (2020) 100157 (31 January); p. 1-2).

• DOI: 10.1016/j.peh.2020.100157

Highlights

- The lack of studies concerning doping in tennis is evident.
- Doping rumours give rise to easy simplistic speculation around tennis players.
- Projects to fight against doping in tennis are needed.

Fluorescence Chemosensing of Meldonium Using a Cross-Reactive Sensor Array / Ergin Yalcin, Cem Erkmen, Tugba Taskin-Tok, Mehmet Gokhan Caglayan. - (Analyst (2020) 30 March).

• PMID: 32226998.
• DOI: 10.1039/d0an00209g

Abstract

In this paper, we report a fluorescent sensor array approach for the urinary detection of a prohibited substance in sports, meldonium. Four chemosensors with ethidium bromide scaffolds were employed in this method. The interaction between meldonium and chemosensors was investigated by different techniques, such as ultraviolet-visible absorption and fluorescence spectroscopy, nuclear magnetic resonance, and mass spectrometry. Molecular dynamics simulation was also used to elucidate and support the interaction mechanisms between meldonium and the chemosensors. Differential responses obtained from the sensor array enabled the qualitative and quantitative analyses of meldonium with low error values. This method was able to detect and quantify meldonium at the nM level, fulfilling the requirements of minimum performance defined by the World Anti-Doping Agency.