In September 2022 World Rugby reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Chilean rugby player Jaime Paredes after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Oxandrolone.

Following notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by World Rugby. The Athlete denied the intentional use and assumed that the supplement he had used was the source of the prohibited substance.

Because the Athlete gave a prompt admission and signed the acceptance of sanction within the set deadline he received a 1 year reduction from World Rugby.

Therefore World Rugby decides on 9 February 2023 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 15 September 2022.

In September 2022 World Rugby reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Zimbabwean rugby player Tavonga Ablant after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).

Following notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by World Rugby.

The Athlete admitted the intentional use of the substance. Because the Athlete gave a prompt admission and signed the acceptance of sanction within the set deadline he received a 1 year reduction from World Rugby.

Therefore World Rugby decides on 9 February 2023 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 27 September 2022.

In August 2022 World Rugby reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Canadian rugby player Veronica Harrigan after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Canrenone (Spironolactone).

Following notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, accepted a provisional suspension and the proposed sanction by signing an Acceptance of Consequences Form.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance. She explained that medication was used prescribed by her family physician as treatment for her condition without a valid TUE.

World Rugby accepts that the violation was not intentional and that she acted with a degree of fault. It deem that there are no grounds to grant a retroactive TUE.

Therefore World Rugby decides on 12 November 2022 to impose a 2 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 5 August 2022.

In July 2022 World Rugby reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Chilean rugby player Vincente Tredinick after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Clomifene.

Following notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by World Rugby.

The Athlete admitted the intentional use of the substance. Because he gave a prompt admission and acceptance of sanction within the set deadline he received a 1 year reduction from World Rugby.

Therefore World Rugby decides on 9 February 2023 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 27 September 2022.

In May 2023 World Rugby reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Paraguayan ruby player Estefano Aranda Caceres after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis.

Following notification the Athlete admitted the violation, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by World Rugby. The Athlete acknowledged the unintentional use of the substance whereas Word Rugby deemed that the violation was due to a Substance of Abuse.

Therefore World Rugby decides on 20 September 2023 to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 8 May 2023.

In January 2023 World Rugby reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Chilean rugby player Joaquin Huici Espinosa after his sample - provided in South Africa in Septermber 2022 - tested positive for the prohibited substances 19-norandrosterone and 19-noretiocholanolone (Nandrolone).

Prior in October 2022 the South American Sports Organization (ODESUR) had also had reported that the Athlete's sample - provided in Paraguay in October 2022 - tested positive for Nandrolone.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered by ODESUR. Thereupon in February 2023 the Athlete admitted to ODESUR the intentional use of the substance to aid recovery from a shoulder injury.

Hereafter in June 2023 Word Rugby commenced separate proceedings against the Athlete for the presence and use of Nandrolone. In July 2023 the Athlete timely admitted the violation, waived his right for a hearing and accepted the sanction proposed by World Rugby.

World Rugby deems that the Athlete's violation was intentional and determines that he shall receive a 1 year reduction for his timely admission of the anti-doping rule violation.

Therefore World Rugby decides on 14 July 2023 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibililty on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension imposed by ODESUR, i.e. on 25 October 2023.

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

Comment on:
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.

Would Relaxation of the Anti-doping Rule Lead to Red Queen Effects? / Bengt Kayser, Adreas De Block. - (Sport, Ethics and Philosophy (2020) 7 June); p. 1-15)

• DOI: 10.1080/17511321.2020.1770846

ABSTRACT

One of the claims sometimes advanced in favour of anti-doping is that allowing doping would lead to a uniform increase in performance in comparison to no doping. The idea is that if all athletes would use doping, this would just shift the playing field to a higher level without a change in ranking, but at a higher health cost. In this paper, we critique this contention. We first develop our theoretical framework, with reference to the so-called Red Queen effect. We then argue that, if doping were allowed, Red Queen effects would not be the rule. We also show that to some extent Red Queen effects would occur, but these would not necessarily be morally problematic. We end by developing an argument in favour of a more liberal approach of doping, since such would allow escaping from today’s runaway effects of anti-doping efforts.

Would they dope? Revisiting the Goldman dilemma / James Connor, Jules Woolf, Jason Mazanov. - (British Journal of Sports Medicine 47 (2013) 11 (July); p. 697-700)

• DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091826

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIM:
Discussions of doping often report Goldman's sensational results that half of the elite athletes asked would take a drug that guaranteed sporting success which would also result in their death in 5 years' time. There has never been any effort to assess the properties of the 'Goldman dilemma' or replicate the results in the post World Anti-Doping Agency context. This research evaluated the dilemma with contemporary elite athletes.

METHODS:
Participants at an elite-level track and field meet in North America were segregated into an interview or online response. After basic demographics, participants were presented with three variant 'Goldman' dilemmas counter-balanced for presentation order.

RESULTS:
Only 2 out of 212 samples (119 men, 93 women, mean age 20.89) reported that they would take the Faustian bargain offered by the original Goldman dilemma. However, if there were no consequences to the (illegal) drug use, then 25/212 indicated that they would take the substance (no death condition). Legality also changes the acceptance rate to 13/212 even with death as a consequence. Regression modelling showed that no other variable was significant (gender, competitive level, type of sport) and there was no statistical difference between the interview and online collection method.

CONCLUSIONS:
Goldman's results do not match our sample. A subset of athletes is willing to dope and another subset is willing to sacrifice their life to achieve success, although to a much lesser degree than that observed by Goldman. A larger scale online survey is now viable to answer important questions such as variation across sports.

Would you dope? A general population test of the Goldman dilemma / James Connor and Jason Mazanov. - (British Journal of Sports Medicine 11 (2009) 43 (October), p. 871-872)

• Doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2009.057596

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:
To test Goldman's dilemma on a general population sample by asking whether they would take the Faustian bargain of a drug that guaranteed sporting success but would result in their death in 5 years' time. Between 1982 and 1995 a bi-annual survey using this dilemma suggested half of all elite athletes would take the drug.

DESIGN:
A random telephone survey of 250 members of the Australian general public, with counterbalanced presentation of success and death.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Respondents gave age, gender, sports engagement and response to the dilemma (yes/no).

RESULTS:
Only two of a sample of 250 reported they would take the bargain offered by the dilemma.

CONCLUSIONS:
Athletes differ markedly from the general population in response to the dilemma. This raises significant practical and ethical dilemmas for athlete support personnel. The psychometry of the dilemma needs to be established more comprehensively for general and athlete populations.