The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance methylhexaneamine.
After the notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete stated he was provided with a supplement by his training partner that contained the prohibited substance unknown to all concerned and he had no intention to enhance his performance.
The Committee accepts the Athlete’s statement and finds that the evidence has established the criteria that will qualify for the elimination or reduction of the period of ineligibility for specified substance under specified circumstances.
Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 7 week period of ineligibility starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 15 December 2010 to 1 February 2011.

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substances clenbuterol and testosterone.
Therefore SAIDS recommends to the Disciplinary Committee to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the notification.

Related case:
SAIDS 2011_03 WADA vs Johnny Young & SAIDS - Appeal
April 19, 2012

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (metabolite of nandrolone).
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete’s medical doctor confirmed that nandrolone was prescribed to treat a medical condition and that he was unaware that his patient would take part in a sports event. The Athlete acknowledged that he did not apply for a TUE.

The SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 2 year period on the Athlete starting on 18 November 2010 until 18 November 2012. The Committee decides that a possible reduction in sanction of 6 months would be revisited should SAIDS receive documented evidence of educational programmes undertaken by the Athlete beforehand.

On 29 November 2011 SAIDS concludes that the Athlete has satisfied the requirements for the reduction of his period of ineligibility by 6 months. Therefore the Athlete’s period of ineligibility expire on 15 November 2011.

Hereafter WADA appealed this revision decision.

Related case:
SAIDS 2011_03 SAIDS vs Johnny Young
February 17, 2013

On 17 February 2011 SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decided to impose a 2 year period on the Athlete for committing an anti-doping rule violation after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance nandrolone.
On 29 November 2011 SAIDS granted the Athlete a reduction of his period of ineligibility by 6 months because of his assistance in educating triathlone athletes. WADA appealed against this SAIDS revision decision to reduce the Athlete’s period of ineligibility by 6 months.

The Anti-Doping Appeal Tribunal of South Africa decides to dismiss WADA’s appeal on the fact that the Athlete is neither an International-Level Athlete nor a National-Level Athlete. The Appeal Tribunal finds that WADA has not established a proper locus standi to bring the appeal against the revision decision made by SAIDS.

In October 2010 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the minor Athlete Simone Button after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substances hydrochlorothiazide and amiloride.
After notification the Athlete filed a statement in her defence and was heard for the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete stated she was menstruating at the time of the incident. She felt bloated, heavy and with a broken scale at home she panicked about her possible increase in weight. Unbeknown to her father she took one of his ‘water tablets’ to lose weight.

Considering the circumstances the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 9 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 16 October 2010.

Related case:
SAIDS 2011_08 SAIDS vs Andrew Pretorius
September 29, 2011

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substances hydrochlorothiazide and furosemide.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The minor Athlete and her father filed a statement in their defence and were heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete’s father admitted that he administered water tablets to his daughter to stabilize her weight. The tablets form part of his personal prescription. The father led his daughter to believe that he is providing her with supplements for training.

Considering the evidence and the circumstances the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. 18 November 2010 to 18 February 2011.
In addition the Committee recommends that the Athlete’s father Andrew Pretorius be charged for trafficking / attempting trafficking and administration / attempting administration in any prohibited substance or prohibited method to any athlete.

Hereafter the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 6 year period of ineligibility on Andrew Pretorius.

Related case:
SAIDS 2011_06 SAIDS vs Stephanie Pretorius
February 22, 2011

In February 2011 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport
(SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against Mr. Andrew Pretorius, father and personal trainer of the minor Athlete Stephanie Pretorius, for the administration of prohibited substances to his daughter after her sample tested positive for hydrochlorothiazide and furosemide. The minor Athlete and her father filed statements in their defence and were heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

Mr. Pretorius admitted that he administered water tablets to his daughter to stabilize her weight. The tablets form part of his personal prescription. The father led his daughter to believe that he is providing her with supplements for training.

Considering the evidence and the circumstances the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decided to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete Stephanie Pretorius starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. 18 November 2010 to 18 February 2011.

Due to aggravating circumstances in this case the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 6 year period of ineligibility on Mr Pretorius, starting on de date of the hearing, i.e. on 17 March 2011.
Also the possible violation by Mr. Pretorius of the Medicines and Related Substances Control Act 101 of 1965, by supplying his daughter with a schedule 4 substance, needs to be answered by the relevant authorities about further prosecution.

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance sibutramine. After notification the Athlete was heard for the Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete pleaded guilty to taking the substance but stated he had requested clearance from the medical team before taking it and this was given.
The Committee finds that the Athlete provided sufficient corroborating evidence to demonstrate the absence of an intent of enhance his performance or mask the use of a performance enhancing substance.
Considering the evidence the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to give the Athlete a reprimand.

In April 2011 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the minor Athlete Chad Eekhout after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance ephedrine. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete admitted the violation and stated that in the days before and during the competition he suffered from a cold and flu. Therefore he used 4-in-1 Flu Combination, purchased ‘off the shell’ by his mother in a pharmacy in Johannesburg and also mentioned this medication on de Doping Control Form.
The container of the medication was not labelled and the Athlete did not reseach the ingredients of the product before using. After the positive test, information from the pharmacy showed that the Sinucon tablet in the 4-in-1 Flu combination contained ephedrine.

Considering the circumstances the Committee concludes that the Athlete took the medication for his cold and flu and without intention to enhance his sport performance. Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the notification, i.e. on 5 April 2011.

In March 2011 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete James Best after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances methylhexaneamine, 19-norandrosterone and 19-norticholanolon, metabolites of nandrolone. After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete admitted the use of methylhexaneamine and the injecting of Deca 300 (Nandrolone), not to enhance his sports performance but to deal with his lack of energy and his persistent knee injury.
At the hearing the Athlete did not mention the name of the person who had illegally injectied him.

The Committee considered aggravating circumstances in this case due to his unsatisfactory and uncorroborated explanations and through the Athlete having two prohibited substances in his system.
Also the Athlete failed to provide SAIDS with substantial assistance towards discovering or establishing anti-doping rule violations in the sport of triathlon.
Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.