Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport annual report 2005-2006 / Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport
CONTENTS
The New Zealand Power Lifting Federation (NZPF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Ephedrine. After notification by NZPF the Respondent filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Tribunal.
Respondent stated he suffers from asthma and to treat this he takes a range of prescribed medications. These medications include asthma inhaler for which he had been granted a therapeutic use exemption (TUE). Recently his doctor prescribed him Ephedrine tablets to help him breathing and help him complete cardio sessions. He took the tablets on the day of the competition.
The Tribunal concludes that Respondent had committed an anti-doping rule violation in accordance under the Rules of the International Power Lifting Federation Code. Therefore the Sports Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on Respondent starting from 22 May 2006. He is disqualified from the events he competed in during the championship.
Rapportage 12 Audit Commissie Doping : periode september t/m december 2005 / M.I. van Dijk, S.J.U. Veen-van der Wielen, C. van Bentum. - Arnhem : Audit Commissie Doping, 2006.
- Rapportage t.b.v. de Algemene vergadering NOC*NSF 23 mei 2006.
- Halfjaarlijkse rapportage aan de Algemene Vergadering van NOC*NSF, de staatssecretaris van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport en het bestuur van de Dopingautoriteit.
Inhoud:
- Hoofdstuk 1 Inleiding
- Hoofdstuk 2 Gegevens verzameling
- Hoofdstuk 3 Toelichting overzichten
- Hoofdstuk 4 Bevindingen
- Hoofdstuk 5 Conclusies en aanbevelingen
- Bijlage Rapportage Audit Commissie Doping 23 mei 2006
On May 22, 2005 provided Mr. Harris an urine sample at the Adidas Track Classics in Carson, California. July 6, 2005, USADA notified Mr. Harris of positive A and B sample from the May 22, 2005 Adidas Track Classic.
August 29, 2005, Mr. Harris requested arbitration under USADA-protocol for Olympic Movement Testing. August 31, 2005, Mr. Harris submitted Standard Application Form for Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) to IAAF for the use of Dexedrine (Amphetamine) to treat Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD).
Mr. Harris was first diagnosed with ADD in about 1992. He was initially treated for his ADD with Ritalin, and was later switched to Dexedrine. That in addition to ADD, he has been diagnosed with various learning disabilities.
On the first day at the University of Florida in the fall of 2000, where he was an member of the university track team, he was provided by the university’s athletic department with a number of forms to fill out so that he could continue to use Dexedrine before and during track competitions.
He believed, albeit mistakenly, that he had, in the fall of 2000, submitted all necessary paperwork to USADA and others to use Dexedrine (Amphetamine) before and during any track competitions, domestically or internationally. This fact was corroborated by the medical notes maintained and made available to the Panel by the University of Florida. One such note stated that “he does have proper authorizations for the track organizations for use of this medication based on his diagnosis. He declared the use op Dexedrine on his Doping Control Form on May 22, 2005, at the Adidas Track Classic. Even after testing positive for Amphetamine from his urine sample provided on May 22, 2005, he believed, albeit mistakenly, that he had the necessary paperwork on file with USADA for the use of Dexedrine in competition.
As a result of the provisional suspension that Mr. Harris accepted on August 30, 2005, he missed a number of track meets during the 2005 outdoor season, missed the entire 2006 indoor track season, and has already missed a number of track meets during the 2006 outdoor.
The North American Court of Arbitrage for Sports Panel finds that the written stipulations, documents and the testimony of Mr. Harris do support a finding of no significant fault of negligence. It appears that Mr. Harris does suffer from ADD. Mr. Harris was at all relevant times under the mistaken belief that he had submitted all necessary paperwork to use Dexedrine before and during any track competition, domestic and international. This mistaken belief was formed based on representations from the University of Florida.
Mr. Harris’ mistaken belief in this regard is supported by the fact that he openly declared the use of Dexedrine on his May 22, 2005 Doping Control Form.
The Panel agrees that given the unique circumstances presented in this case, and the evidence, Mr. Harris has satisfied that he bears No Significant Fault or Negligence, and, therefore, reduces the period of ineligibility from two years to one year.
The Panel further finds that the period of ineligibility should start on May 22, 2005, the date of the test. Respondent Mr. Harris did not abuse his defence rights or otherwise intentionally delay the proceeding in order to gain any competitive advantage, nor did he use Dexedrine with the intent of enhancing his performance. The Panel believes that for reasons of fairness, the period of ineligibility should commence on May 22, 2005, the date of the sample collection.
The parties propose that all competitive results achieved by Mr. Harris between May 22, 2005 and August 31, 2005 be disqualified. The Panel agrees with this proposal.
The North American Court of Arbitration for Sports Panel renders the following decision:
- Mr. Harris’ period of ineligibility is for one year commencing on May 22, 2005, and concluding on May 21, 2006.
- All competitive results achieved by Mr. Harris between May 22, 2005, and August 31, 2005, shall be disqualified.
2005 Adverse Analytical Findings Reported by Accredited Laboratories / WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency). - Montreal : WADA, 2006
Rabdomyolyse bij een bodybuilder na gebruik van diverse dopingmiddelen / J.M.A. Daniels, D.J. van Westerloo, O.M. de Hon, P.H.J. Frissen. - (Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 150 (2006) 19 (13 mei) p. 1077-1080)
Rhabdomyolysis in a bodybuilder using steroids / J.M.A. Daniels, D.J. van Westerloo, O.M. de Hon, P.H.J. Frissen. - (Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 150 (2006) 19 (13 mei) p. 1077-1080)
Een 34-jarige man presenteerde zich op de Spoedeisende Hulp met koorts, braken en spierkrampen, ontstaan tijdens krachttraining. Enkele dagen voor de patiënt begon met trainen nam hij tabletten en intramusculaire injecties met anabole steroïden: dehydrochloormethyltestosteron, boldenon en trenbolon. Daarnaast nam hij clenbuteroltabletten, fosfatidylcholine subcutaan en liothyroninetabletten. Bij aanvullend onderzoek had hij een ernstige rabdomyolyse. Hiervoor werd hij behandeld met intraveneuze vochttoediening en door alkaliniseren van de urine met natriumbicarbonaat. De klachten verdwenen snel en de nierfunctie bleef onaangetast. Gebruik van doping onder amateursporters komt in Nederland frequent voor en kan naast chronische gezondheidsproblemen ook acute schade veroorzaken. Derhalve dient men bij amateursporters tijdens de anamnese aandacht te besteden aan gebruik van dopingmiddelen.
Rhabdomyolysis in a bodybuilder using steroids.
- A 34-year-old bodybuilder presented at the emergency room with fever, vomiting and muscle cramps that had started during a bodybuilding session. Several days before he started training he had used tablets and intramuscular injections containing the anabolic steroids: dehydro-chloro-methyltestosterone, boldenone and trenbolone. In addition, he had taken clenbuterol tablets, liothyronine tablets and subcutaneous injections of phosphatidylcholine. Laboratory investigations revealed massive rhabdomyolysis. The patient was treated with intravenous fluid replacement and sodium bicarbonate to alkalinize the urine. He recovered quickly and his renal function remained unaffected. ‘Doping’ among amateur athletes in the Netherlands occurs frequently. Apart from long term side-effects, doping can also cause acute health problems. Therefore it is important to ask about doping use during history taking in amateur athletes.
Facts
The French Federation of Volley-ball (Fédération Française de Volley-ball, FFVB) charges respondent M35 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Volleyball match on October 16, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. 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 admitted at the panel the use of cannabis.
Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months, from which two conditionally, in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFVB.
2. The decision starts on the date of the notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.
Facts
The French Federation of Volley-ball (French Volleyball Federation, FFVB) charges respondent M34 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Volleyball match on October 23, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample showed the presence of salbutamol which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.
History
The respondent had mentioned the use of medication against asthma. He has a medical prescription and a medical report towards his bronchi which proof his medical state.
Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted.
2. The decision will not be published.
3. The decision will sent to the parties involved.
Facts
The French Federation of Volley-ball (French Volleyball Federation, FFVB) charges respondent M33 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Volleyball match on October 23, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample showed the presence of terbutaline which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.
History
The respondent had mentioned the use of medication against exercise induced asthma. He has a medical prescription and a medical report towards his bronchi which proof his medical state.
Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted.
2. The decision will not be published.
3. The decision will be sent to the parties involved.
Softball New Zealand (SNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Respondent after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis.
After notification by SNZ the Respondent filed a statement in his defence and was not available to be heard for the Tribunal.
The Respondent admitted he had smoked Cannabis and provided an explanation to the Tribunal.
The Tribunal concludes that the Cannabis use was unrelated to the sport and the Respondent did not smoke cannabis for performance-enhancing purposes. Therefore the Sports Disputes Tribunal of New Zealand decides to impose a reprimand and a warning on the Respondent.
The Tribunal directs Softball New Zealand to send a copy of this decision to the appropriate softball authorities in Canada, to ensure they are aware of it and can take such steps to notify the Respondent of it as may be appropriate.
