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.

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.

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.

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.

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 »

AAA No. 01 16 0000 8552 USADA vs Charis Chan

In December 2015 the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Charis Chan after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance trenbolone. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and waived her right to be heard for the American Arbitration Association (AAA) Commercial Arbitration Tribunal. The Athlete denied the intentional use of the prohibited substance and asserted that the positive test was the result of eating meat she did not know and had no reason to know was contaminated with trenbolone. The Sole Arbitrator holds that the Athlete’s assertions regarding meat contamination as the source of the positive sample are factually and scientifically implausible and for several reasons dismissed. Therefore the AAA Tribunal Panel decides on 6 January 2017 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 29 December 2015.

show » details »

IOC 2016 IOC vs Viktoriya Tereshchuk

Ms Victoriya Tereshchuk is an Ukrainian Athlete competing in the Women’s individual modern pentathlon event at the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. In 2016, the IOC decided to perform further analyses on certain samples collected during the 2008 Olympic Games. These additional analyses were performed with analytical methods which were not available in 2008. In July 2016 the International Olympic Committee reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after her 2008 sample 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 with evidence in her defence and was heard for the IOC Disciplinary Commission. The Athlete challenged the validity of the analytical results; 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 dna analyses of her samples conducted in an independent laboratory. The Disciplinary Commission holds that DNA analysis is not part of the regular process and at no time and place were the samples stored or handled in any context in which a manipulation of the kind, which occurred in Sochi, would be, even remotely, plausible. The Commission finds that none of the Athlete’s arguments is putting in question the validity of the analysis results of the Athlete’s sample and of the corresponding finding consisting in the establishment of an anti-doping rule violation. 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 February 2017 that the Athlete, Victoriya Tereshchuk: 1.) is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to the IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXIX Olympiad in Beijing in 2008 (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 Beijing 2008, namely, the Women’s individual modern pentathlon event in which she ranked 3rd and for which she was awarded a bronze medal, and 3.) has the bronze medal, the diploma and the medallist pin obtained in the Women’s individual modern pentathlon event withdrawn and is ordered to return same. 4.) The UIPM is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned event accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence. 5.) The National Olympic Committee of Ukraine shall ensure full implementation of this decision. 6.) The National Olympic Committee of Ukraine shall notably secure the return to the IOC, as soon as possible, of the bronze medal, the diploma and the medallist pin awarded in connection with the Women’s individual modern pentathlon even to the Athlete. 7.) This decision enters into force immediately.

show » details »

IOC Letter on the current situation of Anti-Doping System Reforms

IOC Letter on the current situation of Anti-Doping System Reforms / Christophe De Kepper. - IOC Office of the Director General. - Lausanne : International Olympic Committee (IOC), 2017 __________________________________________________ In a letter sent to Olympic Movement stakeholders today, the IOC gave an update of the current situation regarding the reforms of the anti-doping system. The letter outlines the specific actions being taken by the IOC with regard to the findings of the McLaren Report on doping and manipulation in Russia, explaining in detail the roles and responsibilities of the two Commissions established by the IOC to address the matter. It also highlights other steps taken in pursuing the reform of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) system.

show » details »

iNADO Update #79

iNADO Update (2017) 79 (24 February) Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO) _________________________________________________ Contents: - New Member - iNADO Workshop 2017 - WADA´s Research Package for Anti-Doping Organisations - Soon WADA´s Code Compliance User Guide also in Arabic, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish - Andreas Krieger Story: Website and Video available in 11 Languages - iNADO Testing Expert Group in Basecamp - Doping and Public Health Conference in Oslo (June 7-9): Last Days of Early Bird Registration - Funding available for Anti-Doping Research - PCC (2017) - Definition of Clean Sport to measure Anti-Doping - New at the Anti-Doping Knowledge Centre

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