Welcome

Welcome to Doping.nl, the Anti-Doping Knowledge Center.
This site has been established to host information about doping in the broadest sense of the word, and about doping prevention.

Initiator
The Anti-Doping Authority Netherlands (the Dutch Doping Authority for short) established this site and maintains it. The Doping Authority was founded in 1989 and it is one of the oldest NADOs in the world. Doping.nl was developed with financial support from the Dutch Ministry for Health, Welfare and Sport.

Goals
This website  was established because of the importance that the Doping Authority and the Ministry attach to the dissemination of information relevant to doping prevention. Disclosing and supplying relevant information is one of the cornerstones in the fight against doping in sport. However, in practice, a significant amount of information is still not available, or only available to a limited group of users. We therefore decided to bring together all the relevant information in a single site: Doping.nl.

Activities
The Doping Authority aims to supply as much information through this website as possible on an ongoing basis. The information will be varied but will focus primarily on: WADA documents like the World Anti-Doping Code, the International Standards like the Prohibited List, Doping Regulations, scientific articles and abstracts, decisions by disciplinary bodies (mainly CAS decisions).As well as making documents available, the Doping Authority aims to supply searchable documents when possible, and to add relevant keywords to ensure easy access.
In the future, Doping.nl will also become a digital archive containing older information that is no longer available elsewhere.

Target readers
This site has been designed for use by anti-doping professionals such as National Anti-Doping Organisations and International Federations but also for students, journalists and other people interested in the subject.

Register
To use the lightbox option, you need to register.

More information explaining how to use this website can be found under "help".

Recently added documents More »

IOC 2016 IOC vs Antonina Krivoshapka

Ms Antonina Krivoshapka is a Russian Athlete competing in the Women’s 400m athletics event at the 2012 London Olympic Games. In 2016, the IOC decided to perform further analyses on certain samples collected during the 2012 Olympic Games. These additional analyses were performed with analytical methods which were not available in 2012. In July 2016 the International Olympic Committee reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after her 2012 A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance dehydrochlormethyltestosterone (turinabol). After notification the Athlete submitted that she did not accept the test results, she filed a statement in her defence and was heard for the IOC Disciplinary Commission. The Athlete disputed the filing of the McLaren Report, Part 2; she challenged the validity of the testing method; she contended that the presence of a Prohibited Substance in her bodily sample may be a result of a contaminated product unintentionally ingested; and she requested the appointment of independent expert. The Disciplinary Commission finds that the content of the McLaren Report has been publicly issued and is available to anybody. It is therefore part of common knowledge and its acceptance or exclusion from the file could not change that. The report was indeed not related to the Athlete and, as such, could not permit to draw a conclusion in her respect. Regarding the validity of the testing method the Disciplinary Commission observes that the Athlete filed the opinion of an expert witness Dr Kopylov which was also filed and heard in 3 other cases. The Commission notes that according to the McLaren Report, Part 2, turinabol appears to have been widely used in Russia in this period can only bring additional comfort in holding that the analysis through the challenged method did effectively properly identified this substance. The Commission concludes that the arguments put forward by Dr Kopylov are meritless. The scientific validity of the analytical method used by the Laboratory is beyond question and the application to appoint an independent expert is rejected. The Disciplinary Commission notes that athletes have long been warned against the use of supplements. As such, the fact that turinabol may have been ingested as part of a supplement is not likely to constitute an element exonerating the Athlete from having been at fault for using a Prohibited Substance. In this respect, the Disciplinary Commission observes that supplements do not, as a rule, contain turinabol and that accidental contamination of a legitimate supplement by this substance appears to be very unlikely. With the positive test results the Commission concludes that the Athlete has committed an anti-doping rule violation consistent with intentional use of prohibited substances specifically ingested to deliberately improve performance. The fact that the metabolites of a doping substance, which is a traditional doping substance, was found, supports this consideration. The Disciplinary Commission, which has now handled multiple cases arising out of the reanalysis of samples from the 2008 and 2012 Olympic Games, observes that the presence of metabolites of this particular substance has been established in a remarkably high number of cases, which resulted from the re-analysis of the samples collected in Beijing 2008 and London 2012. This constitutes an indication that said substance has been in widespread use by athletes, who were doping at that time. Therfore the IOC Disciplinary Commission decides on 27 January 2017 that the Athlete, Antonina Krivoshapka: 1.) is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to the IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXX Olympiad in London in 2012 (presence and/or use, of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an athlete’s bodily specimen), 2.) is disqualified from the events in which she participated upon the occasion of the Olympic Games London 2012, namely, the Women’s 400m event and the Women’s 4x400m relay event, and 3.) has the silver medal, the medallist pin and the diplomas obtained in the Women’s 400m event and in the Women’s 4x400m relay event withdrawn and is ordered to return same. 4.) The Russian Federation Team is disqualified from the Women’s 4x400m relay event. The corresponding medals, medallist pins and diplomas are withdrawn and shall be returned. 5.) The IAAF is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned events accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence. 6.) The Russian Olympic Committee shall ensure full implementation of this decision. 7.) The Russian Olympic Committee shall notably secure the return to the IOC, as soon as possible, of the diploma awarded to the Athlete in connection with the Women’s 400m event and the silver medals, medallist pins and diplomas awarded to the members of the Russian Federation Team who participated in the Women’s 4x400m relay event. 8.) This decision enters into force immediately.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

IOC 2016 IOC vs Adem Kılıçcı

Mr Adem Kılıçcı is a Turkish Athlete competing in the Men’s 69-75 kg boxing event at the 2012 London Olympic Games. In 2016, the IOC decided to perform further analyses on certain samples collected during the 2012 Olympic Games. These additional analyses were performed with analytical methods which were not available in 2012. In May 2016 the International Olympic Committee reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his 2012 A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance dehydrochlormethyltestosterone (turinabol). After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the IOC Disciplinary Commission. The Athlete denied the use of prohibited substances, he never tested positive in his career and contended that the presence of a Prohibited Substance in his bodily sample may be a result of a contaminated product unintentionally ingested. The Disciplinary Commission notes that athletes have long been warned against the use of supplements. As such, the fact that turinabol may have been ingested as part of a supplement is not likely to constitute an element exonerating the Athlete from having been at fault for using a Prohibited Substance. In this respect, the Disciplinary Commission observes that supplements do not, as a rule, contain turinabol and that accidental contamination of a legitimate supplement by this substance appears to be very unlikely. With the positive test results the Commission concludes that the Athlete has committed an anti-doping rule violation consistent with intentional use of prohibited substances specifically ingested to deliberately improve performance. The fact that the metabolites of a doping substance, which is a “classical” doping substance, was found, supports this consideration. The Disciplinary Commission, which has now handled multiple cases arising out of the reanalysis of samples from the 2008 and 2012 Olympic Games, observes that the presence of metabolites of this particular substance has been established in a remarkably high number of cases, which resulted from the re-analysis of the samples collected in Beijing 2008 and London 2012. This constitutes an indication that said substance has been in widespread use by athletes, who were doping at that time. Therfore the IOC Disciplinary Commission decides on 27 January 2017 that the Athlete, Adem Kılıçcı: 1.) is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to the IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXX Olympiad in London in 2012 (presence, and/or use, of Prohibited Substances or its Metabolites or Markers in an athlete’s bodily specimen), 2.) is disqualified from the event in which he participated upon the occasion of the Olympic Games London 2012, namely the Men’s 69-75 kg boxing event, in which he ranked 5th and for which he was awarded a diploma. 3.) has the diploma obtained in the Men’s 69-75 kg boxing event withdrawn and is ordered to return the same. 4.) The AIBA is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned event accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence. 5.) The Turkish Olympic Committee shall ensure full implementation of this decision. 6.) The Turkish Olympic Committee shall notably secure the return to the IOC, as soon as possible, of the diploma awarded in connection with the Men’s 69-75 kg boxing event to the Athlete. 7.) This decision enters into force immediately.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

IOC 2016 IOC vs Vera Ganeeva

Ms Vera Ganeeva is a Russian Athlete competing in the Women’s discus throw athletics event at the 2012 London Olympic Games. In 2016, the IOC decided to perform further analyses on certain samples collected during the 2012 Olympic Games. These additional analyses were performed with analytical methods which were not available in 2012. In May 2016 the International Olympic Committee reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after her 2012 sample tested positive for the prohibited substance dehydrochlormethyltestosterone (turinabol). After notification the Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard for the IOC Disciplinary Commission. The Athlete denied having used performance enhancing substances. As an explanation for the presence of the Prohibited Substance, she raises the hypothesis that the substances may have been contained in medication or food supplements bought in Ukraine by her coach/husband at that time. She also suspects that somebody would have contaminated her food during her preparation for the 2012 Olympic Games. The Disciplinary Commission notes that the Athlete does not bring forth any concrete evidence to support her submissions. Furthermore, the fact that the substance in question may have been contained in food supplements would not exonerate the Athlete from having used it. With the positive test results the Commission concludes that the Athlete has committed an anti-doping rule violation consistent with intentional use of prohibited substances specifically ingested to deliberately improve performance. The fact that the metabolites of a doping substance, which is a “classical” doping substance, was found, supports this consideration. The Disciplinary Commission further observes that the substance found in the Athlete’s sample is the same as the one detected in the overwhelming majority of cases of anti-doping violations, which were established in the course of the re-analysis process. The fact that turinabol has been effectively and widely used as a doping substance, notably in Russia, is further corroborated by the McLaren Report, Part 2, which expressly mentions turinabol as the doping substance of choice in the period up to the 2012 Olympic Games. Therfore the IOC Disciplinary Commission decides on 27 January 2017 that the Athlete, Vera Ganeeva: 1.) is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to the IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXX Olympiad in London in 2012 (presence, and/or use, of Prohibited Substances or its Metabolites or Markers in an athlete’s bodily specimen), 2.) is disqualified from the event in which she participated upon the occasion of the Olympic Games London 2012, namely the Women’s discus throw event. 3.) The IAAF is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned event accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence. 4.) The Russian Olympic Committee shall ensure full implementation of this decision. 5.) This decision enters into force immediately.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

iNADO Quarterly Report 4_2016

iNADO Quarterly Report 4/2016 / Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO). - Bonn : iNADO, 2017 (See attached pdf-file for more information) This communication goes to iNADO’s 62 Members. iNADO is happy to answer any questions on your Institute’s activities. Please send your questions to info@inado.org _________________________________________________ Contents: - New members - New iNADO Partnerships - iNADO Attendance at Anti-Doping Conferences/Meetings - NADOs visited - iNADO Webinars - iNADO Board Meetings - iNADO Public Statements - iNADO Finances - iNADO Updates - iNADO Member Communications - Added Documents on iNADO Website - Other iNADO Projects and Activities

show » details »
Type:
pdf
Category
  • (Medical) Science
  • Doping classes
  • Education
  • History
  • Laboratories
  • Legal
  • Statistics
Publication period
Origin
Country & language
  • Country
  • Language
Other filters
  • ADRV
  • Document category
  • Document type
  • Health/Medical
  • IF'S
  • Laboratories/Analysis
  • Legal Terms
  • Organisations
  • Substances
  • Various
  • Version