In October 2015 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the powerlifter Dylan Treges after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Clenbuterol and Turinabol (Dehydrochlormethyltestosterone). After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel.

The Athlete gave a prompt admission, accepted the test results and the sanction proposed by SAIDS. He stated that he had used tablets provided by a friend at the gym and he failed to mention the use of these tablets on the Doping Control Form nor did he consult his doctor.

Without grounds for a reduced sanction the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decides on 1 December 2015 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension i.e. on 15 October 2015.

In November 2015 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Mixed Martial Arts Athlete Gary Smit after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone), Drostanolone and Testosterone. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied that he used these substances for enhancing his sport performance. He explained that he underwent treatment for 2 years for a severe shoulder injury and had received prescribed medication and physiotherapy. Because his shoulder didn’t recover he had to consider an operation. He stated that he was desperate and following the recommendations of friends at a gym he purchased the substances and injected these into his shoulder for several weeks.

SAIDS did not accept the Athlete’s explanation and requested the Panel to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility. SAIDS argued that the substances he took did not heal the shoulder injury, there were contradictions in his evidence and his explanation was so improbable that it must be fabricated.

The Panel concludes that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional because he had admitted that he was aware at the time that the substances he used were illegal and prohibited in sport. Also the Panel finds that the Athlete’s testimony is unreliable and his evidence improbable and unreliable.

Therefore the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decides on 17 June 2016 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 17 November 2015.

In November 2015 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the ice hockey player George Lyon after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine). After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and waived his right to be heard for the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel.

The Athlete did not admit the anti-doping violation and he denied the intentional use of the prohibited substance. The Athlete asserted that he checked the products before he used them and argued that the supplements and fat burner he had used didn’t mention on the label they contained the prohibited substance.
SAIDS did not accept the Athlete’s statement and contended that the Athlete’s statement is not truthful throught the lack of evidence and witnesses.

The Panel finds that SAIDS tried to discredit the Athlete and failed to call witnesses or to provide any other evidence in support of such an approach. The Panel concludes that the Athlete’s testimony is reasonably probable and truthful, in order to reasonably assume on the balance of probability that the violation was not intentional and that the Athlete’s fat burner was the likely source of the positive test.

Considering the circumstance and the Athlete’s degree of fault in this case the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decides on 30 March 2016 to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 16 November 2015.

In December 2015 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the ice hockey player David Watson after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine). After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied that the violation was intentional. He assumed that the fat burner supplement he had used a few days before he was tested was the likely source of the prohibited substance. When he purchased this over counter supplement he was advised that this supplement was safe.

The Panel finds that the Athlete failed to establish how the prohibited substance entered his system and also that SAIDS failed to demonstrate that the Athlete used the substance to enhance his sport performance.
Therefore the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decides on 4 February 2016 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of hearing.

In November 2015 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Mixed Martial Arts Athlete Peter Nyide after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Hydrochlorothisazide. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered.

The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel.
The Athlete accepted the test results, denied the intentional use of the substance and claimed that a supplement he had used is the possible source of the positive test.

The Panel finds that the Athlete failed to establish how the prohibited substance entered his system and he was evasive in his explanation about his failure to mention his supplement on the Doping Control while he clearly knew a lot about prohibited substances. In the view of the Panel the Athlete used the substance to avoid a positive test result.

The SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decides on 1 March 2016 to impose a 4 year period of ineligiblilty on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 3 October 2015.

In November 2015 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the ice hockey player Deen Zain Magmoed after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis in a concentration above the WADA threshold. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered.

The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel.
The Athlete accepted the test result and admitted the use of the substance out of competition at a party. The Panel finds that the anti-doping violation has been established and that it was clearly unrelated to sport performance.

Therefore the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decides on 23 February 2016 to impose a 4 month period of ineligiblilty on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 16 November 2015.

In November 2015 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the equestrian Gail Foxcroft after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Phentermine. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard for the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel.

The Athlete admitted the violation and explained with medical information that she had used the prescribed product Duromine in order to deal with a weight problem she suffered all her life and not to enhance her performance. She always stopped using this product at least 9 days before a competion on advice of her doctor. The Athlete also used the medication Diotroxin for a hypo-thyroid disorder.

Medical examination of the Athlete during the proceedings revealed that the medication Diotroxin not only effected the Athlete’s thyroid. The medication also created a weight problem, a decreased rate of metabolism by the body and a drug interaction between the 2 medications the Athlete took. In this situation there was an increased rate of absorption and a reduced rate of excretion or metabolism of Phentermine. It would lead to an increased half-life and drug clearance time for Phentermine. As a result the Athlete’s hold on using Duromine (Phentermine) 9 days prior to competition was insufficient to excrete the substance out of her system leading to a positive test.

The Panel accepts the Athlete’s evidence and established that the violation was not intentional with grounds for No Significant Fault or Negligence for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decides on 13 July 2016 to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 26 November 2015.

In February 2016 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the powerlifter Craig Masson for his refusal to submit to sample collection. After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel.

SAIDS reported that in December 2015 on 3 occasions the Athlete was not present at his home. On the 4th occasion on 9 December 2015 at his home the Athlete refused to provide an urine and blood sample.

The Athlete pleaded not guilty on the ground that he had no intention to refuse and that he had a compelling justification not to be tested on 9 December 2015. The Athlete claimed that he was victimized in the sport. By hearsay he was informed that a person disliked him and had reported him in order to be tested by SAIDS.

The Athlete asserted that he sought clarity from the Doping Control Officers (DCO’s). He had prepared a letter in order to protect his family for harassment which had to be signed by the DCO’s. In this letter the Athlete demanded certain conditions for his co-operation. Without these conditions the Athlete refused to provide a sample.

The Panel did not accept the Athlete’s explanation and finds that he failed to produce any witness to confirm the hearsay and that the evidence about the alleged person is inadmissible and not to be considered in this case. Also the Athlete didn’t demonstrate that he was unaware of the risk to be sanctioned by SAIDS nor did he establish a compelling justification for his refusal to provide a sample.

The SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel concludes that the Athlete committed the anti-doping rule violation and decides on 16 March 2016 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

Related case:
SAIDS 2016_06 SAIDS vs Lauren Lincoln
April 12, 2016

On 12 April 2016 the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the duathlon Athlete Lauren for testing positive for the prohibited substance testosterone as a result of the medication she had used.

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the Hearing Panel decision with the Anti-Doping Appeal Tribunal of South Africa. The Athlete argued that she used the medication without intention to enhance her sport performance. She asserted that she is a recreational athlete, had not receive anti-doping education and she was not advised by her doctor that the medication she used contained the prohibited substance.

SAIDS accepted that the imposed sanction was incorrect and the Panel concludes that the Athlete was extremely ill and also is the Panel doubtful whether the Athlete could continue as an athlete while pumped full of pills and injections.

Without intention to cheat the Anti-Doping Appeal Tribunal of South Africa decides on 21 November 2017 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

Related case:
SAIDS 2016_06 Lauren Lincoln vs SAIDS - Appeal
November 21, 2017

In February 2016 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the duathlon Athlete Lauren Lincoln after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance testosterone. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel.

The Athlete admitted the anti-doping violation and explained that she had used medication and was unaware that it contained the prohibited substance. Previously the Athlete’s application for a TUE was rejected by SAIDS. She stated that she intentionally used the medication in order to compete and to finish the competition.

The SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decides on 12 April 2016 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the notification, i.e. on 24 February 2016.