In October 2009 NADO Flanders has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Clenbuterol.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete failed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission. 

The Athlete admitted the violation and assumed that the supplements he had purchased and used were the source of the positive test. 

The Disciplinary Commission finds that the presence of the prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete’s sample and accordingly that he committed the anti-doping rule violation. Further the Commission concludes that the Athlete acted with culpable fault. 

Therefore the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission decides on 8 December 2009 to impose a fine and a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 12 October 2009. 

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

In November 2009 NADO Flanders has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the cyclist for his refusal or failure to submit to sample collection. After notification the Athlete failed to attend the hearing of the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission. 

The Doping Control Officer (DCO) reported that the Athlete was duly notified about the Doping Control but unable to produce a sample under supervision of the DCO. The Athlete was requested to drink and come back later but in the evening the DCO established that the Athlete had failed to return for sample collection and had left the competition. 

The Disciplinary Commission concludes that the Athlete had refused to submit to sample collection and accordingly that he had committed an anti-doping rule violation. 

Therefore in absentia of the Athlete the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission decides on 8 December 2009 to impose a fine and a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the decision. 

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

Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and Respondent was heard for the Tribunal. Respondent admitted the violation and gave corroborated evidence that the cannabis was used at a party to celebrate his club team winning its competition.

The Tribunal considers that Respondent was aware that Cannabis was prohibited in sport. His statement that, at the time of his cannabis use, he did not think he would be chosen to represent his provincial team was no excuse.
The Tribunal considers that there were no mitigating circumstances.
Therefore the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a period of ineligibility on Respondent preventing him from participation in the rugby league and other sports up to and including 29 January 2010.

"We are not sportsmen, we are professionals" : professionalism, doping and deviance in elite sport / Ask Vest Christiansen

• International Journal of Sports Management and Marketing 7 (2010) 1-2 , p. 91-103
• DOI: 10.1504/IJSMM.2010.029714

Abstract

As a part of its legacy of being the first genuine modern sport, cycling has a proactive attitude to pharmacological developments. This attitude, however, is in conflict with the norms and values of both the wider society in general and the International Olympic Committee's (IOC) historical emphasis on the amateur ideal in particular. As such, riders who use banned substances are considered deviants or pariahs. Using Danish elite cycling as a case study, the paper will explore how these contradictory norms are reflected in today's professional and amateur riders' attitudes to doping. The paper concludes by illustrating how the entrepreneurial attitudes of the athletes have developed in different directions: While amateurs came to regard the professionals' attitude to sports as normative, the professionals had to submit to the norms of the amateurs in order to be allowed to compete in important competitions.

Keywordselite sport, cycling, doping, modernity, amateurism, professionalism, deviance, moral entrepreneurship, Olympics, banned substances, Denmark

Related cases:

- Dutch District Court 2009 Athlete 2009005 vs KNSB and Dopingautoriteit
June 9, 2009
- KNSB 2009 KNSB Preliminary Decision Disciplinary Committee 2009005 TU1
September 8, 2009
- Dutch District Court 2010 Athlete 2009005 vs KNSB
September 30, 2009
- KNSB 2009 KNSB Preliminary Decision Disciplinary Committee 2009005 TU2
October 15, 2009
- KNSB 2010 KNSB Decision Disciplinary Committee 2009005 T
March 12, 2010
- KNSB 2010 KNSB Preliminary Decision Appeal Committee 2009005 TU4
July 6, 2010
- KNSB 2010 KNSB Decision Appeal Committee 2009005 B
November 26, 2010
- CAS 2010/A/2311 Stichting Anti-Doping Autoriteit Nederland (NADO) & the Koninklijke Nederlandsche Schaatsenrijders Bond (KNSB) vs W.
August 22, 2011

In February 2009 the Royal Netherlands Skating Association (KNSB) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the minor Athlete after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance norandrosterone (Nandrolone). After notification a provisional suspension was ordered by the KNSB.

In this 3# preliminary case proceeding the Athlete argued that his provisional suspension dragged on endlessly due to the advancing proceedings against him.
Therefore on 2 December 2009 the KNSB Disciplinary Committee decides that the Athlete's provisional suspension will expire in February 2010 when the KNSB has not rendered a final decision against the Athlete.

Full Case History:

Between 2009 and 2011 a number of proceedings and appeals followed in the dispute between the Athlete, the KNSB and Dopingautoriteit about the anti-doping violation and the Athlete seeking annulment of the disciplinary proceedings and sanctions.

- On 9 June 2009 the Dutch District Court dismissed the Athlete’s objections about the validity of the sample collection and violation of his rights.
- On 8 September 2009 the KNSB ruled in the 1# Preliminary Decision about the validity of the sample collection and the validity of the test results for which a independent expert is appointed and the Dopingautoreit is ordered to provide additional information about the laboratory procedures and protocols.
- On 30 September 2009 the Dutch District Court dismissed the Athlete’s request to lift the provisional suspension.
- On 15 October 2010 the KNSB Disciplinary Committee ruled in the 2# Preliminary Decision about the possibility for lifting the provisional suspension for which a new hearing is ordered.
- On 2 December 2009 the KNSB Disciplinary Committee ruled in the 3# Preliminary Decision that the imposed provisional suspension will expire in February 2010 when the KNSB has not rendered a final decision against the Athlete.
- On 12 March 2010 the KNSB Disciplinary Committee dismissed the Athlete’s arguments about the validity of the test results and decided to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete and 1 year probationary period until November 2011.
- On 6 July 2010 the KNSB Appeal Committee ruled in the 4# Preliminary Decision that under the Rules the costs for an expert investigation shall be borne by the KNSB.
- On 26 November 2010 the KNSB Appeal Committee decides to annul the KNSB Disciplinary Committee decision of 12 March 2010 because of the KNSB’s refusal to provide additional documentation to verify the validity of the laboratory testing method as violation of the Athlete’s right of defence.

Hereafter the Dopingautoriteit and the KNSB appealed the decision the KNSB Appeal Committee of 26 November 2010 with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

The CAS Panel concludes that the Athlete’s samples tested positive for the prohibited substance norandrosterone (Nandrolone) and that no departure from the ISL occurred in this case. Therefore the CAS Panel upholds the decision of the 12 March 2010 of the KNSB Disciplinary Committee and decides to set aside the decision of the KNSB Appeal Committee of 26 November 2010.

Detection of Growth Hormone Doping by Gene Expression Profiling of Peripheral Blood / Christopher J. Mitchell, Anne E. Nelson, Mark J. Cowley, Warren Kaplan, Glenn Stone, Selina K. Sutton, Amie Lau, Carol M.Y. Lee, Ken K.Y. Ho. - (The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 94 (2009) 12 (1 December); p. 4703-4709)

• PMID: 19875482
• DOI: 10.1210/jc.2009-1038

Abstract

Context: GH abuse is a significant problem in many sports, and there is currently no robust test that allows detection of doping beyond a short window after administration.

Objective: Our objective was to evaluate gene expression profiling in peripheral blood leukocytes in-vivo as a test for GH doping in humans.

Design: Seven men and thirteen women were administered GH, 2 mg/d sc for 8 wk. Blood was collected at baseline and at 8 wk. RNA was extracted from the white cell fraction. Microarray analysis was undertaken using Agilent 44K G4112F arrays using a two-color design. Quantitative RT-PCR using TaqMan gene expression assays was performed for validation of selected differentially expressed genes.

Results: GH induced an approximately 2-fold increase in circulating IGF-I that was maintained throughout the 8 wk of the study. GH induced significant changes in gene expression with 353 in women and 41 in men detected with a false discovery rate of less than 5%. None of the differentially expressed genes were common between men and women. The maximal changes were a doubling for up-regulated or halving for down-regulated genes, similar in magnitude to the variation between individuals. Quantitative RT-PCR for seven target genes showed good concordance between microarray and quantitative PCR data in women but not in men.

Conclusion: Gene expression analysis of peripheral blood leukocytes is unlikely to be a viable approach for the detection of GH doping.

Doping im Behindertensport : Dopingkontrollaktivitäten bei den Paralympischen Spielen 1984–2008 und in Deutschland 1992–2008/ Mario Thevis, Peter Hemmersbach, Hans Geyer, Wilhelm Schänzer. – In: Medizinische Klinik, 12 (2009), vol. 104 (December), p. 918-924

Efforts in anti-doping fight regarding the Paralympic Games can be traced back to 1984, when the first doping controls were carried out, along with the founding of the International Paralympic Committee exactly 20 years (1989) ago which has strengthened the systematic and specific challenges and introduced adapted controls, particularly in the Paralympic Summer Games numerous findings of prohibited substances (essentially anabolic-androgenic steroids, diuretics, corticosteroids, and stimulants) were conducted. Germany systematically conducts doping tests since 1992 in the field of disabled sports, organized by the German Disabled Sports Association and the National Anti-Doping Agency. Here too numerous parallels regarding the doping offenses analysis results and for doping use convicted non-disabled athletes. This work shows the available numbers of inspections carried out at the Paralympic Summer and Winter Games and sports for the disabled in Germany with the specifics of doping controls, the sampling and the special doping measures against the so-called boostings are shown.

This research report focuses on the culture of young Belgian, French and Swiss road cyclists aged 18 to 23, on the way to becoming professionals or who are already professionals. The main goal is to understand and compare the effects of various forms of socialization of young cyclists on their attitude towards doping. This stage of the career has been largely neglected although it constitutes an essential phase in understanding the consumption of prohibited substances. Indeed, this young cyclist’s exposure to a new environment and a new professional approach is rather overwhelming, offering both a potential career and profits, and attendant risks. The goal of this research is to understand whether the relationship with pharmacology and doping evolves and if approaches to organization and support for the young athletes have an impact on their tendency to consume these substances. In particular, we hope to learn about the effects of interactions amongst cyclists and the various groups supporting them (peers, former cyclists, coaches, managers, and doctors) on their level of information, and their know‐how, as well as on the standards and
values adopted during this phase of professional socialization.

Conclusion
Actors in the cycling milieu describe very significant changes in discourse that seem to reflect an evolution in the way doping is perceived. The transformation of modes of support by teams deliberately invested in the battle against doping has clear consequences. In well supported teams, doping is no longer a collective practice, as it used to be. Therefore, the cyclist culture
has changed significantly but this does not mean that doping has been eradicated and that the temptation to consume these substances does not exist. Yet the practice of doping is certainly rare for “strongly supportive” teams and this can only be an individual practice in other teams. These transformations in the
cyclist culture do not at all indicate that other teams’ practices, especially in other countries, have evolved in the same way, nor that older cyclists in the most highly ranked professional teams have changed in a similar fashion.

Finally, nothing guarantees that a shift to a team with different attitudes towards doping will prevent cyclists from consuming illegal substances. The approaches to coaching, habits of consumption of legal substances, the perception of doping, and the insecurity
of the cyclist’s professional condition are factors that, in the least supportive teams, are likely to lead to a perception of doping according to a range of ambivalent standards.

Clean Olympians? Doping and anti-doping : The views of talented young British athletes / Andrew Bloodworth, Michael McNamee. - (International Journal of Drug Policy 21 (2010) 4 (July); p. 276-282)

• PMID: 20056401
• DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2009.11.009

Abstract

Background: Review articles suggest a small but significant proportion (between 3 and 12%) of male adolescents have used anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS) at some point (Yesalis and Bahrke, 2000; Calfee and Fadale, 2006). In sport, the use of prohibited substances or processes to enhance performance, collectively referred to as 'doping', is banned by both sports' National and International Governing Bodies, and by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) who run an extensive testing programme and educational initiatives designed to foster anti-doping attitudes.

Method: A total of 40 talented male and female athletes (mean average age 19.6 years) from 13 different sports attended 12 focus groups held over the UK intended to investigate athletes' attitudes toward doping. Focus group transcriptions were analysed and coded with the use of QSR NVivo 8.

Results: Athletes in general did not report a significant national doping problem in their sport, but exhibited sporting xenophobia with regard to both doping practices and the stringency of testing procedures outside of the UK. Athletes often viewed doping as 'unnatural' and considered the shame associated with doping to be a significant deterrent. Athletes perceived no external pressure to use performance enhancing drugs. In response to hypothetical questions, however, various factors were acknowledged as potential 'pressure' points: most notably injury recovery and the economic pressures of elite sport. Finally, a significant minority of athletes entertained the possibility of taking a banned hypothetical performance enhancing drug under conditions of guaranteed success and undetectability.

Conclusions: The athletes in this study generally embraced those values promoted in anti-doping educational programmes, although there were some notable exceptions. That the social emotion of shame was considered a significant deterrent suggests anti-doping efforts that cultivate a shared sense of responsibility to remain 'clean' and emphasise the social sanctions associated with being deemed a 'drugs cheat', resonate with this atypical social group.

In order to provide athletes with basic information about their rights and responsibilities in the doping control process, WADA, in partnership with the Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games (VANOC), has developed a doping control video.

This 5-minute video is intended to provide a general overview of the doping control process while raising awareness of the athlete’s rights and responsibilities. The video outlines each of the phases of the doping control process:

Athlete selection
Athlete notification
Sample collection
Laboratory analysis
Results management

The video, currently available in nine languages (Arabic, Croatian, English, French, German, Greek, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish), can be ordered by stakeholders at no cost for use as part of their information and education efforts. Those interested in producing a co-branded version of the video with their own logo or a version in their own language (voiceover or subtitles) can contact WADA at info@wada-ama.org.

The World Anti-Doping Agency's (WADA) mission is to lead a collaborative worldwide campaign for doping-free sport.

WADA was established in 1999 as an international independent agency composed and funded equally by the sport movement and governments of the world. Its key activities include scientific research, education, development of anti-doping capacities, and monitoring of the World Anti Doping Code (Code) – the document harmonizing anti-doping policies in all sports and all countries. WADA is a Swiss private law Foundation. Its seat is in Lausanne, Switzerland, and its headquarters are in Montreal, Canada.

WADA works towards a vision of a world where all athletes compete in a doping-free sporting environment.