Little soldiers in their cardboard cells

1 Mar 2014

Little soldiers in their cardboard cells / E. van Breda, J. Benders, H. Kuipers. - (British journal of clinical pharmacology (2014) 3 (March) : p. 580-581) doi: 10.1111/bcp.12187.

Comment on:
Erythropoietin doping in cycling: lack of evidence for efficacy and a negative risk-benefit / J.A. Heuberger, J.M. Cohen Tervaert, F.M. Schepers, A.D. Vliegenthart, J.I. Rotmans, J.M. Daniels, J. Burggraaf, A.F. Cohen. – (British journal of clinical pharmacology (2013) 6 (June) : p. 1406-1421) doi: 10.1111/bcp.12034.

Comment in:
World-class cyclists on erythropoietin / J.A. Heuberger, A.F. Cohen. - (British journal of clinical pharmacology (2014) 3 (March) : p. 582) doi: 10.1111/bcp.12186.

AFLD 2010 FFBB vs Respondent M28

6 May 2010

Facts
The French Basketball Federation (Fédération Française de Basket-Ball, FFBB) charges respondent M28 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on October 24, 2009, 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 and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent had used the prohibited substance the day before the doping test in a recreational setting during a birthday party. There was no intention to enhance sport performance.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of four months in which respondent can't take part in competitions or manifestations organized by the FFBB.
2. The decision (2 months period of ineligibility), dated January 27, 2010, by the disciplinary committee of the FFBB should be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility should be reduced by the period already served under the decision of January 27, 2010.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2010 FFR vs Respondent M27

22 Apr 2010

Facts
The French Rugby Federation (Fédération Française de Rugby, FFR) charges respondent M27 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a math on November 30, 2008, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of stanozolol. Stanozolol is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent denies the use of the prohibited substance.

Decision
1. The decision, dated April 1, 2009, by the appeal committee of the FFR should by cancelled.
2. The decision will start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2010 FFPJP vs Respondent M26

22 Apr 2010

Facts
The French Pétanque Federation (Fédération Française de pétanque et jeu provençal, FFPJP)) charges respondent M26 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on August 30, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence hydrochlorothiazide. Hydrochlorothiazide is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and it is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent used medication to treat high bloodpressure. She has a medical certificate for this condition.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted.
2. The decision (a warning) dated October 19, 2009, of the disciplinary committee of the FFPJP should be modified.
3. The decision will start on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2010 FFA vs Respondent M25

18 Mar 2010

Facts
The French Athletics Federation (Fédération Française d'Athlétisme, FFA) charges respondent M25 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an athletics event on September 20, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample tested positive on heptaminol which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. It is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent had used a pharmaceutical to cure the sensation of heavy legs. This pharmaceutical was the cause for the positive test.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 sport manifestations organized by the FFA.
2. The decision (1 month period of ineligibility) dated December 2, 2009, by the disciplinary committee of the FFA should be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the decision of December 2, 2009.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2010 FFA vs Respondent M24

18 Mar 2010

Facts
The French Athletics Federation (Fédération Française d'Athlétisme, FFA) charges respondent M24 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an athletics event on September 27, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample tested positive on prednisone and prednisolone which are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. They are regarded as specified substances.

History
The respondent had used a pharmaceutical product to heal an ear infection, this product was the cause of the positive test. However she failed to provided evidence of the justification for therapeutic purposes of the use of the medicine.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months in which respondent can't take part in competition or sport manifestations organized by the FFA.
2. The decision (a warning) dated December 2, 2009, by the disciplinary committee of the FFA should be modified.
3. The decision starts on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2010 FFA vs Respondent M23

18 Mar 2010

Facts
The French Athletics Federation (Fédération Française d'Athlétisme, FFA) charges respondent M23 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an athletics event on September 26, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample tested positive on a metabolite of budenoside which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. It is regarded as a specified substance.

History
Respondent used several pharmaceutical products to treat allergies, rhinitis and asthma. These product are the cause of the positive test. He has a certificate from his physician to state his condition.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of six months in which respondent can't take part in competition or sport manifestations organized by the FFA..
2. The decision (1 month period of ineligibility) dated December 2, 2009, by the disciplinary committee of the FFA should be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the decision of December 2, 2009.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2010 FFHMFAC vs Respondent M22

18 Mar 2010

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M22 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a mixed contest on June 20, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample showed the presence of the prohibited substances cannabis and  metandienone.

History
The respondent didn't provide any explanation about how the prohibited substances had entered his body.

Decision
1. The sanction is a four years period of ineligibility in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by French sport federations.
2. All the individual results obtained at the event on June 20, 2009, are cancelled. Medals, points and prizes are withdrawn.
3. The decision starts on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2010 FFV vs Respondent M21

11 Mar 2010

Facts
The French Sailing Federation (Fédération Française de Voile, FFV) charges respondent M21 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a sailing event on September 9, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping prohibited list, it is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent used the prohibited substance a week before the doping test in a recreational setting. There was no intention to enhance sport performance.

Decision
1. The decision (3 months period of ineligibility), dated December 1, 2009, of the disciplinary committee of the FFV should be modified.
2. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of six months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFV.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced with one month which is the period already served in by the decision, dated February 1, 2010, of the disciplinary committee of the FFV.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Affidavit Jean-Pierre Verdy [USADA vs Lance Armstrong October 10, 2012]

10 Sep 2010

Affidavit Jean-Pierre Verdy [USADA vs Lance Armstrong October 10, 2012] September 10, 2012

Mr. Jean-Pierre Verdy is Testing Director of the Agence française de lute contre le dopage (AFLD), the French Anti-Doping Agency.

Mr Verdy testified to USADA about a reported anti-doping rule violation committed by the cyclist Lance Armstrong on 17 March 2009 in Saint-Jean Cap Ferrat, France.

On that day a French doping control officer notified Mr. Armstrong to provide a out-of-competition sample. However after the notification Mr. Armstrong went inside his home and came out of the house twenty minutes, after repeated requests by telephone. Hereafter he provided a sample to the doping control officer.

In the AFLD report on the 2009 Tour de France, for which the French agency was given the mandate by the Union Cycliste Internationale to carry out doping control tests, the Astana team, of which Lance Armstrong was a member, benefited from privileged information or timing advantages during doping control tests.

Category
  • Legal Source
  • Education
  • Science
  • Statistics
  • History
Country & language
  • Country
  • Language
Other filters
  • ADRV
  • Legal Terms
  • Sport/IFs
  • Other organisations
  • Laboratories
  • Analytical aspects
  • Doping classes
  • Substances
  • Medical terms
  • Various
  • Version
  • Document category
  • Document type
Publication period
Origin