On 22 November 2007 the Ufficio di Procura Antidoping del CONI (UPA), the Italian Anti-Doping Prosecutor's Office, has reported several anti-doping rule violations against the physician Dr. Carlo Santuccione, due to the results of the “Oil for Drugs” investigations made by the Italian Carabinieri.

Santuccione had been involved in the purchase, trafficking, marketing, administration, use by himself or by other people doping substances, drugs and/or substances altering the psychophysical state of the body, in order to enhance the sports performance of the following licensed and non-licensed athletes:

• Maurizio Camerini,
• Renzo Asci,
• Luciano Numera,
• Cesare Coconi,
• Riccardo Barotti,
• Maurizio Balestri,
• Alessandro Barotti,
• Mauro Balestri,
• Zoltan Bebto,
• Viscardo Freudiani,
• Danilo Di Luca,
• Giuseppe Gibilisco,
• Alessandro Spezialetti,
• Ruggero Marzioli,
• Domenico Quagliarello,
• Maurizio Di Antonio,
• Vincenzo Cacalano,
• Francesco Marinucci,
• Sergio Urbani,
• Giulio Salvatori,
• Marco Cedroni,
• Mauro De Carolis,
• Alessandro D’Olimpio,
• Eddi Mazzoleni,
• Giuseppe Muraglia,
• Simone and Andrea Masciarelli,
• Daniele Marziani,
• Francesco Di Paolo,
• Ivan Stevic
• and many more unidentified amateur athletes.

Dr Santuccione was charged with unlawful association with another physician, Dr Simone Giustarini, to prescribe doping therapies specifying the suppliers of the drugs and products, as well as the relevant ways to find these products.

The Carabinieri also charged Dr Santuccione with the unlawful marketing, acquisition and administration of many doping substances, including:

• Andriol,
• Decadurabulin,
• Dhea,
• Proviron,
• Testoviron Depot,
• Testovis,
• Winstrol (all anabolic steroids),
• Efedrina,
• Eprex,
• Globuren,
• Profasi HP,
• Rubifen,
• Saizen,
• Synachten (growth hormone).

These substances and drugs had been acquired and transferred to different third parties in Roma, Fiano Romano, Rieti, Vetralla, Pisa, San Giuliano Terme, Marina di Pietrasanta, Pescara, Trieste and in other places until May 2004.

Evidence of the Carabinieri showed communications between the athletes and the doctor about providing instructions, advice, dosage plans, methods, supply and administration of the most varied doping substances. In particular, some athletes told and confessed that they had taken doping substances following the clear advice of Dr Santuccione, who had provided them with dosage plans, training methods, news about the doping drugs, which the doctor considered to have a preparatory function with a view to the enhancement of the sports performance of the athletes who had contacted him.

Considering the evidence the Court concludes that the striking sequence of violations committed by Dr. Santuccione is unprecedented. Therefore the CONI Anti-Doping Supreme Court decides to impose a lifetime ban on Carlo Santuccione. This sanction prohibits him from holding future positions or from carrying out future tasks within CONI, National Sports Federations or Associated Sports Disciplines, or from attending sports facilities, areas for athletes and insiders in Italy, or from taking part in sports events held on the national territory or organized by these sports bodies.

The Royal Netherlands Power Sport and Fitness Federation
(Koninklijke Nederlandse Krachtsport en Fitnessfederatie, KNKF)
reports defendant for not attending an out of competition doping test. The defendant filed a written defence on November 17, 2007. The defendant didn't attend the oral hearing on December 17, 2007.
In writing the defendant claims he is not a member anymore of the KNKF. The Committee agrees because he ended his membership in time.
The defendant is free of charge, all the expenses are for the KNKF.

The Dutch Royal Strength Sport Fitness Federation (KNKF) has reported against this person for a failure to comply by refusing to cooperate in an out of competition doping control. Person has filed a defence and the case is treated orally.

Person concerned, stated in his defence that he was no longer a member at the time of the doping test and assuming that he therefore was entitled to refuse the doping control test. At the hearing he stated that he stopped practicing his sport within the context of the KNKF in the spring of that year. The doping control test was in the autumn of that same year. The KNKF has been invited by the Disciplinary Committee to provide information regarding the system of membership records. The KNKF did not respond to this invitation.

On the basis of the documents attached by the KNKF at entry, a print-out of its register of members and the written defence based documents of the person concerned the Disciplinary Committee considered sufficiently proven that person in question terminated his membership well before the date of the doping control test and had stopped his sport activities within the context of the KNKF.

In the opinion of the Disciplinary Committee it is under these circumstances unreasonably onerous to consider the obligations of the Doping Regulations regarding out of competition doping controls. The person concerned therefore should not have been selected for a doping control test. Failure to comply therefore does not foul on the Anti Doping Regulations. Person was acquitted.

The Dutch Royal Strength Sport Fitness Federation (KNKF) has reported an anti doping rule violation against the Person after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone), Stanozolol and Testosterone. After notification the Person filed a statement in his defence.

Person submitted in his defence that he retired from sport some time before the Doping Control. Evidence of the KNKF showed that the person was not longer a member on January 2007 while the doping control test took place in October 2007.

In view of the evidence provided by the KNKF the Disciplinary Committee finds it sufficiently proven that person retired from sport and his membership was terminated well before the date of the actual doping control. The Disciplinary Committee rules that the Person should not have been selected. The positive result following the doping control is not an anti-doping rule violation and the Person is therefore acquitted.

Report to the commissioner of baseball of an independent investigation into the illegal use of steroids and other performance enhancing substances by players in major league baseball / George J. Mitchell. - Office of the Commissioner of Baseball, 2007

The Report, informally known as the "Mitchell Report," is the result of former Democratic United States Senator from Maine George J. Mitchell's 21-month investigation into the use of anabolic steroids and human growth hormone (HGH) in Major League Baseball (MLB). The 409-page report, released on December 13, 2007, covers the history of the use of illegal performance-enhancing substances by players and the effectiveness of the MLB Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. The report also advances certain recommendations regarding the handling of past illegal drug use and future prevention practices. In addition, the report names 89 MLB players who are alleged to have used steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs.

The report describes motivations for its preparation, including health effects of steroids, legal issues, fair play, and reports that baseball players acted as role models for child athletes. For example, after news coverage in August 1998 that Mark McGwire had used the then-legal androstenedione, a steroid precursor, sales of the supplement increased over 1000%, and the National Institute on Drug Abuse reported that 8% of male high school senior athletes had used androstenedione in 2001.

Mitchell reported that during the random testing in 2003, 5 to 7 percent of players tested positive for steroid use. Players on the forty-man roster of major league teams were exempt from testing until 2004. One player is quoted: "Forty-man [roster] guys already have all of the [major league] club advantages, and then they could use steroids . . . it was not a level playing field."

According to the report, after mandatory random testing began in 2004, HGH became the substance of choice among players, as it was not then detectable in tests. Also, it was noted that at least one player from each of the thirty Major League Baseball teams was involved in the alleged violations

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M61 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on February 25, 2007, respondent provided a sample for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of betamethasone which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had used a pharmaceutical product containing betamethasone. He had use the remnants of a product he had used years ago but was unable to contact the health specialist who had described it. The reason why he had used it was because of toothache. He has statements of his general practitioner and two statements by a dental surgeon.
The panel regards this as a case of self medication.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFC.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the sanction from the disciplinary committee of the FFC, dated July 27, 2007, and the time served in voluntary suspension.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Triathlon Federation (Fédération Française de Triathlon, FFTri) charges respondent M59 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an athletics event on May 19, 2007, a sample was taken for doping test purposes.

History
The respondent had mentioned the use of a pharmaceutical product on the doping control form, she was using it for a therapeutic reason. There was no intention to enhance sport performance. A Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) was delivered by the AFLD on July 4, 2007, to use the product for therapeutic purposes. It mentioned the method of administration and the inhalation dosage: two puffs before exercise or when needed, which seems consistent, given the statements of the respondent and the salbutamol concentration detected in the urine.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted.
2. The decision (warning) of the disciplinary committee dated September 4, 2007, is cancelled.
2. The present decision will start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation for Judo, Jujitsu, Kendo and Associated Disciplines (Fédération Française de Judo, Jujitsu, Kendo et Disciplines Associées FFJDA) charges respondent M58 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a judo tournament on June 3, 2007, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of furosemide which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had used a pharmaceutical product containing furosemide to treat a swollen ankle. He didn't mention the use of this product on the doping control form, although he as a prescription from a general practitioner. However the medical prescription (used for arterial hypertension and renal cedemes of cardiac or liver) doesn't match the treatment for a swollen ankle.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFJDA.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
2. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Pétanque Federation (Fédération Française de pétanque et jeu provençal, FFPJP)) charges respondent M57 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on May 6, 2007, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent uses cannabis occasionally, he had used it in the weekend before the match in a social setting. There was no intention to enhance sport performance.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFPJP.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the sanction of the decision dated September 28, 2007,
3. The decision will start on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Athletics Federation (Fédération française d'athlétisme, FFA) charges respondent M56 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an athletic event on May 17, 2009, respondent didn't attend the doping control after the match.

History
The respondent was taking flight at the sight of the sampler doctor after the finish who tried to perform the doping control. He claims to be running for recovery together with a friend, but his friend testified he was not running with him but going to change his outfit in his car, which means a contradiction.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three years in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by French sport federations.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.