Natural killer cell activity following six weeks of strength training in healthy young males with/without testosterone enanthate administration / Sonya M. Marshall-Gradisnik, Robert P. Weatherby, Glen Bede Deakin, Rosanne A. Coutts, Rudi A. Meir, Paul A. Connellan, Lesley M. Stevenson, Shane Rogerson, Shi Zhou. - (Journal of Exercise Science and Fitness 6 (2008) 2; p. 106-114)

Abstract

There is limited information on the acute immune response to resistance-training programs in combination with short-term administration of the anabolic androgenic steroid, testosterone enanthate (TE), in healthy young males. Eighteen healthy young men were match-paired and randomly assigned in a double-blind manner to either a TE or a placebo (PG) group. All subjects performed a structured resistance-training program while receiving injection of either TE at the dosage of 3.5 mg per kilogram body mass, or saline as placebo, once weekly for 6 weeks. A 10-second all-out cycle sprint test was conducted at the beginning (Week 0) and end (Week 6) of the treatment period. NK, B and T lymphocyte populations were counted and natural killer cytotoxic activity (NKCA) was measured prior to and 5 minutes post the cycle sprint at Weeks 0 and 6. The TE group significantly increased their total work in the 10-second cycle sprint test from Week 0 to Week 6 (p< 0.04), while there was no significant increase for total work in the PG group. There was a significant increase in NKCA from Week 0 to Week 6 (p < 0.05) in the PG group. A significantly higher NKCA in the PG group than in the TE group was found in the post exercise sample in Week 6 (p < 0.04). No significant differences were found between groups for the lymphocyte subsets. The 6-week strength training increased acute NKCA response to anaerobic type of exercise as shown in the PG group. Although dosing of TE enhanced anaerobic performance, the NKCA response in the TE group was lower than that in the PG group. The impact of this altered immune response on athletes’ health requires further investigation.

THE 2008 MONITORING PROGRAM*

The following substances are placed on the 2008 Monitoring Program:

1. Stimulants:

a) In-Competition Only: Bupropion, caffeine, phenylephrine, phenylpropanolamine, pipradrol, pseudoephedrine, synephrine.

b) Out-of competition: Adrafinil, adrenaline, amfepramone, amiphenazole, amphetamine, amphetaminil, benzphetamine, benzylpiperazine, bromantan, clobenzorex, cocaine, cyclazodone, dimethylamphetamine, etilamphetamine, etilefrine, fenbutrazate, fencamfamin, fencamine, fenetylline, fenfluramine, fenproporex, furfenorex, mefenorex, mephentermine, mesocarb, methamphetamine (D-), methylenedioxyamphetamine, methylenedioxymethamphetamine, methylphenidate, modafinil, norfenfluramine, parahydroxyamphetamine, pemoline, pentetrazol, phendimetrazine, phenmetrazine, phentermine, 4-phenylpiracetam (carphedon), prolintane, strychnine.

2. Narcotics:

In-Competition Only: Morphine/codeine ratio

* The WADA Code (4.5) states: “WADA, in consultation with other Signatories and governments, shall establish a monitoring program regarding substances which are not on the Prohibited List, but which WADA wishes to monitor in order to detect patterns of misuse in sport.”

WADA - Play True Magazine
2008, issue 1
A Greater Resolve, a Stronger Code - Actions taken at the Third World Conference on Doping in Sport strengthen the World Anti-Doping Code and reinforce the links uniting the global anti-doping movement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content

Editorials
01 John Fahey: Fresh Resolve
02 David Howman: Team Effort

Cover Story
03 A Stronger Fight Against Doping
05 IF Symposium
06 Q&A: Revised World Anti-Doping Code
09 Revision of International Standards
11 The Madrid Resolution

Features
13 Interview: John Fahey
15 Athlete’s Passport: Q&A
17 Code Compliance Update
18 WADA 2008 Committee Review
22 WADA Content Sharing Program
23 Athlete Profile: Sara Fischer
25 Partner Profile: OCA

WADA Updates & Calendar
27 Education Update
29 New RADOs Added
29 ADAMS Update
29 UNESCO Convention
30 Call for Research Proposals
30 New WADA Leadership
31 WADA Event Calendar

WADA - Play True Magazine
2008, issue 2
Beijing 2008 - The WADA Olympic and Paralympic Preview
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content

Editorials
01 John Fahey
02 Jacques Rogge

Cover Story
03 Beijing 2008
07 Lenovo Supports WADA Outreach
08 WADA’s Fifth Olympic Games
09 China’s Drive Against Doping
11 Olympic Teams
15 Paralympic Teams

Features
17 Interview: Sir Craig Reedie
19 Athlete Profile: Kalusha Bwalya
21 WADA Athlete Committee
23 Code Compliance
27 ADAMS on the Rise

WADA Updates & Calendar
25 RADO Developments
25 2009 Code Online
26 UNESCO Convention
26 Call for Research Proposals
26 Third Gene Doping Symposium
28 IF/NADO Anti-Doping Symposium
28 Coach’s Tool Kit Online
28 Third Investigations Symposium
29 WADA Event Calendar

WADA - Play True Magazine
2008, issue 3
Levelling the Playing Field - Newly-revised, a firmer and more practical World Anti-Doping Code promises to strengthen the fight against doping and bring all athletes one step closer to fairer competition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content

Editorials
01 John Fahey
02 David Howman

Cover Story
03 Levelling the Playing Field
05 Code Timeline
09 International Standards Update
14 Compliance Preview

Features
15 Beijing 2008
19 Gene Doping Symposium
23 Gene Doping: Expert Interviews - Dr. Thomas Murray
24 Gene Doping: Expert Interviews - Dr. Mark Frankel
25 Athlete Profile: Frank Fredericks
27 Partner Profile: Anti-Doping Agency of Malaysia
29 Play True Generation
31 UNESCO Convention

WADA Updates & Calendar
32 WADA President Meets with Top Officials
32 An Olympic Champion's Gift to WADA
32 RADO Developments
33 New WADA Corporate Video
33 ADAMS Update
33 WADA Event Calendar

WADA - Play True Magazine
2008, special issue
Defining the Play True Generation - WADA launches its Play True Generation Program at the 2008 Commonwealth Youth Games, engaging a new generation of athletes, coaches and support personnel who believe that clean sport is a fair and powerful tool for positive change and growth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As described in the initial funding application, I began data collection among under-23 (U23) collegiate cyclists in the Spring of 2008. Overall data collection proceeded much more slowly than initially anticipated. I also experienced resistance to filling out surveys from potential subjects once they heard that WADA had funded the study. Many of the U23 athletes had negative opinions and reactions to WADA. Anecdotally, they seemed to feel that WADA, as an organization, was working against their interests and as one survey participant said, “aren't they on a witch hunt?” I experienced very similar reactions when I surveyed and interviewed American U23 cyclists racing in Europe. Despite these negative reactions I was able to collect 170 valid surveys. I was also able to collect 10 one-hour interviews from U23 cyclists racing professionally as Espoirs.

The present study aimed to assess the status of anti-doping works among the Hong Kong NSOs. Apart from this, the organizations’ readiness to change and to initiate / strengthen the anti-doping works was also studied from the point of view of administrator, coach, and committee member. It would appear that a great majority of NSOs in Hong Kong were at the contemplation stage in implementing anti-doping functions and that their major constraints were the limited financial and manpower resources.

This study examined the attitude towards doping and behaviour regarding doping amongst Ukrainian students. The sample consists of both Sports students and Polytechnics students. The first part of the study includes material of self-reported data of mass survey amongst students. The second part deals with focus groups’ interview materials in order to deeper investigate driving forces of doping behaviour.

It has been established that the doping prevalence in Ukraine might affect nearly 10 % of university students. Prevalence of doping varies greatly with level of sports’ results, kind of sports activity, and the aims of engaging in sport. Representatives of strength and cyclical kinds of sports are at a higher risk of doping prevalence.

The opinion that using doping can lead to better sport results and development of muscles is widespread among Sports students, while Polytechnics students mostly consider that doping can improve appearance and increase muscles.

In spite of the widespread opinion of doping pernicious effect on health, the opinion of athletes has an essential distinction from common beliefs. Sports-oriented students consider that doping does not impact on health negatively if it is used in a reasonable way. Among athletes the opinion that doping in small doses and in reasonable proportions would be beneficial is widespread.

Our results suggest that doping use has a moral legitimacy among the majority of athletes, and this point determines doping use. The motive of “necessity” looks like a mature explanation – an ideological scheme. One of the main reasons of doping use that athletes indicated was the self-affirmation motive, reaching high sport results, material welfare.

A considerable proportion of students have lack of knowledge, in terms of side-effects, sources of information and testing procedure.

A vast proportion of high performance athletes have admitted positive attitude towards doping. One of the main reasons to take a risk of using doping is an opportunity to have a compensation (tangible, social, ideological) for harm to health.

This indicated that driving forces of doping behaviour among sports students are mainly described by the self-affirmation motive, which in turn resulted in pecuniary component.

The findings highlight a gap between policy and student behaviour regarding doping. The evidence from these results may provide arguments for governing bodies and serve as a platform in creating educational programs for main stakeholders.

Christopher L. Campbell, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I concur with the majority decision in finding that Mr. Gatlin should be sanctioned for his second violation. I dissent from the majority decision to increase Mr. Gatlin’s sanction on the basis of his first violation. The procedural and substantive status of the first violation makes it improper for the Panel to impose an increased sanction because there was no finding of fault by the arbitration panel or the IAAF Council. Moreover, given the facts, Mr. Gatlin was not at fault for his first violation.

The first violation was caused by the medication Mr. Gatlin was taking for his disability, Attention Deficit Disorder (“ADD”). Increasing Mr. Gatlin’s sanction for his first violation because of his disability is blatant discrimination in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
By imposing sanctions on athletes like Mr. Gatlin who take medication for their legitimate disability, the Anti-Doping Organizations are willfully violating the law behaving as if they are above the law. In these circumstances, they are nothing more than bullies preying on the vulnerable. The federal government should take a serious look at this practice.

It is deeply disturbing how the majority has played fast and loose with the facts and the law in justifying discriminating against Mr. Gatlin. To find fault and fail to provide a reasonable accommodation for the first violation of an athlete testing positive because of a legitimately disability is an affront to the federal law and human rights. Such discrimination is incompatible with the public policy of the United States and Switzerland.