WADA - Play True Magazine
2010, issue 2
Sending the Right Message - Working to Inspire a New Generation
of Athletes and Coaches to Play True
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content

Editorials
01 Editorial John Fahey
02 Editorial David Howman

Features
03 Challenging Young Athletes to Play True
05 Advancing Social Science Research
08 Play True Generation at the Youth Olympic Games
09 WADA's Say NO! to Doping Program
12 Overview: WADA's Resources for Young People

WADA Updates
14 New Director for WADA’s Latin America Regional Office
14 New Online Anti-Doping Learning Tool for Coaches
15 WADA Programs Slated for upcoming Commonwealth
and Asian Games
15 Joint Declaration with Pharmaceutical Federation
15 WADA on the Web

Stephany RW. Handb Exp Pharmacol. 2010;(195):355-67. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-79088-4_16.

In contrast to the use of hormonal doping agents in sports to enhance the performance of athletes, in the livestock industry hormonal growth promoters ("anabolics") are used to increase the production of muscle meat. This leads to international disputes about the safety of meat originating from animals treated with such anabolics.As a consequence of the total ban in the EU of all hormonal active growth promoters ("hormones") in livestock production, in contrast to their legal use [e.g. of five such hormones (17beta-estradiol, testosterone, progesterone, trenbolone and zeranol) as small solid ear implants and two hormones as feed additives for feedlot heifers (melengestrol acetate) and for swine (ractopamine) in the USA], the regulatory controls also differ sharply between the EU and the USA.In the EU the treatment of slaughter animals is the regulatory offence that has to be controlled in inspection programs. In the USA testing for compliance of a regulatory maximum residue level in the edible product (muscle, fat, liver or kidney) is the purpose of the inspection program (if any).The EU inspection programs focus on sample materials that are more suitable for testing for banned substances, especially if the animals are still on the farm, such as urine and feces or hair. In the case of slaughtered animals, the more favored sample materials are bile, blood, eyes and sometimes liver. Only in rare occasions is muscle meat sampled. This happens only in the case of import controls or in monitoring programs of meat sampled in butcher shops or supermarkets.As a result, data on hormone concentrations in muscle meat samples from the EU market are very rare and are obtained in most cases from small programs on an ad hoc basis. EU data for natural hormones in meat are even rarer because of the absence of "legal natural levels" for these hormones in compliance testing. With the exception of samples from the application sites - in the EU the site of injection of liquid hormone preparations or the site of application of "pour on" preparations - the hormone concentrations observed in meat samples of illegally treated animals are typically in the range of a few micrograms per kilogram (ppb) down to a few tenths of a microgram per kilogram. In the EU dozens of illegal hormones are used and the number of active compounds is still expanding. Besides estrogenic, androgenic and progestagenic compounds also thyreostatic, corticosteroidal and beta-adrenergic compounds are used alone or in "smart" combinations.An overview is given of the compounds identified on the EU black market. An estimate is also given of the probability of consumption in the EU of "highly" contaminated meat from the application sites in cattle. Finally some data are presented on the concentration of estradiol in bovine meat from animals treated and not treated with hormone implants. These data are compared with the recent findings for estradiol concentrations in hen's eggs. From this comparison, the preliminary conclusion is that hen's eggs are the major source of 17alpha- and 17beta-estradiol in the consumer's daily "normal" diet.

The phenomenon of prohibited substance use among athletes, intending to increase artificially their performance has its origins in the ancient times and it is now so present, as it is supported and fed by the professional sport, so much commercialized and mediated. In the current study, we take into account that according to the humanistic psychology, the individual is free to decide over his or her life, being capable to make decisions and to lead himself or herself. Although each individual is unique, he lives in a collectivity, which is on its turn unique. From the synthesis of the two systems results a specific behavior of the individual athlete, who lives the sport activities specific situations. The efforts of the militants for a clean sport which are now or efforts, must be based on a good knowledge of the personality traits of the athletes and the impact of the impact of the entourage over them. All educational activities aiming to reduce and finally eradicate doping in all sports should be developed on these bases.

The main conclusion of our research confirms in general the formulated hypothesis that the elements of the athletes’ personality structure and the social environment may represent risk factors for the doping behavior. The risk factors with important signification are the ones in the system of personality features, especially in the domain of attitudes, knowledge and moral beliefs, all of these related to the aspects specific to sport practice and entourage. The idea that the features of Type A of personality of Romanian athletes are part of the risk factors category is not confirmed well enough.

Análisis de conocimientos y percepciones sociales sobre doping y prevención, en deportistas de Córdoba (Argentina) y su abordaje preventivo (Spanish title)

Summary
Este trabajo de investigación en Ciencias Sociales tiene como respuesta a la convocatoria de la Agencia Mundial Antidopaje (WADA), Comisión de Educación, que tiene como finalidad el mejoramiento de los procesos de conocimiento de la realidad del dopaje en distintos lugares del mundo para enfocar la prevención del mismo.
El dopaje en el deporte es un fenómeno ampliamente difundido periódicamente por los medios de comunicación al público, lo cual pone en duda cualquier actuación atlética. El dopaje, sin embargo, tiene una historia muy antigua que va más allá de los deportes y se reconoce en la relación entre el cuerpo, las drogas y el rendimiento. Este estudio se interesó por los deportistas federados y no federados de la Provincia de Córdoba, Argentina y tiene como objetivo abordar sus pronunciamientos y sus representaciones sociales específicas de dopaje y su prevención. A través de encuestas semi-estructuradas sobre el tema del doping y prevención, han sido encuestaron 1548 atletas, hombres y mujeres de diferentes disciplinas deportivas individuales y colectivas, federados y amateurs. También se entrevistaron 145 personas relacionadas directamente con los deportistas, entre los cuales se incluyen entrenadores, médicos deportólogos, dirigentes, periodistas deportivos, etc., a los cuales se le aplicaron entrevistas semi-estructuradas sobre el tema del dopaje y su prevención.

Las Representaciones Sociales (Moscovici, 1984; Jodelet, 1989; Doise, 1992) inspiraron el marco teórico y metodológico de este estudio, permitiendo un análisis descriptivo de ambas posiciones y estructurales de la toma de posición de los sujetos. El análisis descriptivo rescata cinco categorías de discurso. Las definiciones del dopaje en la mayoría se basan en conceptos equivocados, ya que lo representan como antidoping, otros sobre las nociones de peligro, de los efectos naturales y artificiales, de la desposesión de sí mismo y del rendimiento, de los efectos en el cuerpo y de la transgresión a la ley. Las causas de dopaje aparecen en los planos individual y social. Las razones que se atribuyen a la negativa del dopaje son biológicas, morales, médicas y técnicas. Las consecuencias del dopaje son a la vez paradójicas y ambivalentes. Por último, emerge un conjunto de matices con respecto al nivel, a la naturaleza o la forma de dopaje que resulta ser relativamente complejo y diferenciado entre los deportistas y personas relacionadas con ellos. En el análisis estructural emergen dos niveles en las representaciones del dopaje en los deportivos: una oposición sujeto/ fuera del sujeto y una oposición ética tradicional / característica inherente a la moral del universo de deporte. Parecería que finalmente, a pesar de los problemas como el dopaje, los ideales en que descansa el deporte todavía tienen un lugar en el deporte de élite y amateur. Por ello, tienen construida la idea que a partir de la educación antidoping se logrará vivenciar “el juego limpio” en las prácticas deportivas.

Palabras clave: deporte sin dopaje, las representaciones sociales, la transgresión ética, cuerpo, lealtad, educación antidoping.

Brochure 'Rondom Begeleiding' (Dutch title).

The brochure 'Support for the Athlete Support Personnel' is produced by the Dopingautoriteit and is distributed to sports associations, and other organisations involved in national elite sports.

The brochure gives information on the most important items in the prevention of unintentional doping use, tailored to the different occupational groups supporting the athlete (parents, coaches, physicians, physiotherapists, dieticians, officers from national sport federations). The items are:
- the prohibited list
- the doping control procedure
- the use of medication
- the use of food supplements
- the use of drugs
- the 100% Dope Free campaign

Reichel C, Gmeiner G. Erythropoietin and analogs. Handb Exp Pharmacol. 2010;(195):251-94.

Injecting human growth hormone as a performance enhancing drug : perspectives from the United Kingdom / Michael Evans-Brown, Jim McVeigh. - (Journal of Substance Use 14 (2009) 5 (23 December); p. 267-288)

• DOI: 10.3109/14659890903224383

Abstract

Injectable human growth hormone has been used as a performance-enhancing drug in the United Kingdom since at least the mid-1980s. However, because of its prohibitive cost and limited supply it was initially restricted to a relatively small number of people. More recently data suggest that there has been a large increase in the use of the hormone within some sections of the general population. Here the hormone is usually taken as part of a high-dose polydrug regimen (which includes multiple types of anabolic steroids) predominately to enhance physique and/or bodily aesthetics. However, detailed systematic studies of the cultural diffusion of this drug (including the motivations for use, prevalence, patterns of use, and supply network) are lacking. Moreover, questions about growth hormone's efficacy, effectiveness, and safety (including risks from injecting and the use of adulterated products) when used as a performance-enhancing drug remain largely unanswered. This article reviews the data that are available on the self-directed use of growth hormone in the United Kingdom and the associated risks to individual and public health.

In October 2009 the Irish Sports Council has reported an Anti-Doping Rule Violation against the Athlete IS-1520 (the Athlete) after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis in a concentration above the WADA threshold.

The Athlete admitted the violation, filed a statement in his defence and attended the hearing.
On 23 December 2009 the Panel decides to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

Andreas Buttner and Detlef Thieme
D. Thieme and P. Hemmersbach (eds.), Doping in Sports,
Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology 195,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-540-79088-4_19, # Springer‐Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Abstract
Side effects of anabolic steroids with relevance in forensic medicine are mainly due to life-threatening health risks with potential fatal outcome and cases of uncertain limitations of criminal liability after steroid administration. Both problems are typically associated with long-term abuse and excessive overdose of anabolic steroids. Side effects may be due to direct genomic or nongenomic activities (myotrophic, hepatotoxic), can result from down-regulation of endogenous biosynthesis (antiandrogenic) or be indirect consequence of steroid biotransformation (estrogenic). Logically, there are no systematic clinical studies available and the number of causally determined fatalities is fairly limited. The following compilation reviews typical abundant observations in cases where nonnatural deaths (mostly liver failure and sudden cardiac death) were concurrent with steroid abuse. Moreover, frequent associations between structural characteristics and typical side effects are summarized.

CAS 2009/A/1545 Andrea Anderson, LaTasha Colander Clark, Jearl Miles-Clark, Torri Edwards, Chryste Gaines, Monique Hennagan, Passion Richardson v/ IOC - Partial Award

Ms Andrea Anderson, Ms LaTasha Colander Clark, Ms Jearl Miles-Clark, Ms Torri Edwards, Ms Chryste Gaines, Ms Monique Hennagan and Ms Passion Richardson are all track and field athletes from the United States of America. The Athletes participated in the Sydney Olympic Games in 2000 as members
of the U.S. Olympic team sent by the United States Olympic Committee (USOC).

Following investigations the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) reported in 2003 that the Bay Area Laboratory Cooperative (BALCO) was involved in a conspiracy for the purpose of the distribution and use of doping substances and techniques. These substances were either undetectable or difficult to detect in routine drug testing.

BALCO is alleged to have distributed several types of banned doping agents to professional athletes in track and field, baseball and football. Thereupon multiple athlete's were charged and convicted for the use of various performance-enhancing drugs.

Consequently on 10 April 2008 the International Olympic Committee (IOC) decided to disqualify the USOC women relay teams and their results obtained at the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games because of their use of prohibited substances provided by BALCO.

Hereafter in April 2008 the Athlete appealed the IOC decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

This partial award concerned solely the IOC 3-year rule challenged by the Athletes. The Athletes asserted that this 3-year rule provided for in Rule 25.2.2.4 of the 2000 Olympic Charter prohibited the IOC from challenging their results at the
Sydney Olympics after 1 October 2003. Therefore, the Athletes request that the Appealed Decision be annulled.

The Panel assessed and addressed the following issues:

• Which version of the Olympic Charter is applicable to the present case?
• Does the three-year rule impose a limitation only to challenges brought by third parties or also to the power of the IOC to change its own decisions?
• Does the three-year rule only apply to decisions taken by the IOC?
• Under the relevant rules, was a decision reached in the context of the 2000 Olympic Games with regard to the distribution of medals to the Athletes?

The Panel determines that it is undisputed that on 30 September 2000 the Athletes received their relay medals from the IOC on the basis of and in compliance with the ranking provided by the lAAF and published by the SOCOG.

The Panel concludes that the IOC took no decision in the sense of Rule 25.2.2.4 of the 2000 Olympic Charter and Rule 6.4 of the 2008 Olympic Charter. As a consequence, the three-year rule did not preclude the IOC from taking the decision to withdraw from the Athletes the medals awarded for the
4x100 and 4x400 relay races of the Sydney Olympic Games of 2000.

The Panel thus deems that, as the Athletes' preliminary objection based on three-year rule has failed, the present case must proceed on the merits.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 18 December 2009:

1.) Rule 25.2.2.4 of the Olympic Charter in effect in 2000 did not preclude the IOC from taking a decision concerning the medals awarded for the women's 4x100 and 4x400 athletics relay races of the Sydney Olympic Gatnes of 2000.

2.) The exception submitted by Ms Andrea Anderson, Ms LaTasha Colander Clark, Ms Jearl Miles-Clark, Ms Tori Edwards, Ms Chryste Gaines, Ms Monique Hennagan and
Ms Passion Richardson on the basis of Rule 25.2.2.4 of the Olympic Charter in effect in 2000 and of Rule 6.4 of the Olympic Charter in effect in 2008 is dismissed.

3.) The CAS retains jurisdiction to adjudicate on the merits the appeal submitted by Ms LaTasha Colander Clark, Ms Jearl Miles-Clark, Ms Torri Edwards, Ms Chryste Gaines, Ms Monique Hennagan and Ms Passion Richardson against the decision of
the IOC Executive Board of 10 April 2008.

4.) All further decisions are reserved for the subsequent stages of the present appeal arbitration proceedings.

5.) The costs connected with the present partial award shall be determined in the final award.