AFLD 2009 FFHMFAC vs Respondent M54

17 Dec 2009

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M54 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a contest on March 21, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample showed the presence of metabolites of metandienone, a metabolite of nandrolone, 17α-methyl-5β-androstane-3α,17β-diol and 17β-methyl-5β-androst-1-ene-3α,17α-diol. These substances are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent admits the use steroids.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of six years in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by French sport organizations.
2. All the results obtained at the event on March 21, 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 Medals, points and prizes are withdrawn.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 2009 FFHMFAC vs Respondent M53

17 Dec 2009

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M53 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a contest on April 4, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample showed the presence of furosemide, a metabolite of stanozol and a metabolite of drostanolone. Furosemide, stanozolol and drostanolol are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

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

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of six years in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by French sport organizations.
2. All the results obtained at the event on July 4, 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 Medals, points and prizes are withdrawn.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 2009 FFTri vs Respondent M52

10 Dec 2009

Facts
The French Triathlon Federation (Fédération Française de Triathlon, FFTri) charges respondent M52 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an athletics event on June 14, 2009, a sample was collected for doping control purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a prednisone and prednisolone. These substances are prohibited according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and are regarded as specified substances.

History
The respondent didn't provide any information about how the prohibited substance had entered her body.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFTri, as pronounced by the decision dated September 23, 2009, by the disciplinary committee of the FFTri but extended to all relevant French sport federations.
2. The present decision will start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2009 FFG vs Respondent 51

10 Dec 2009

Facts
The French Gymnastics Federation (Fédération Française de Gymnastique, FFG) charges respondent 51 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on May 31, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of prednisone and prednisolone. These substances are prohibited according to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and they are regarded as specified substances.

History
Respondent had at least three nasal sprays daily between 25 and 31 May 2009, using a pharmaceutical containing prednisone and
prednisolone to treat, in his own words, an allergic acute sinusitis in the aftermath of conjunctivitis rhinitis. He also mentions such
administration on the doping control form.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one month in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFG.
2. The decision (no disciplinary sanctions) dated August 7, 2009, by the disciplinary committee of the FFG should be modified.
3. The decision start on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be publisched and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2009 FFTri vs Respondent M50

10 Dec 2009

Facts
The French Triathlon Federation (Fédération Française de Triathlon, FFTri) charges respondent M50 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an athletics event on may 24, 2009, a sample was collected for doping control purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a nikethamide and it's metabolite. Nikethamide is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent uses a pharmaceutical product against cramping or a state of hypoglycemia. She wasn't warned by her pharmacist about the prohibited substance. However she didn't mention her profession to the pharmacist, and she isn't an inexperiened athlete also she didn't mentioned the use of the product on the doping control form.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 2 months
2. The decision (six months period of ineligibility) of January 13, 2009, by the disciplinary committee of the FFTri should be modified.
3. The present decision will start on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2009 FFSquash vs Respondent M49

12 Oct 2009

Facts
The French Squash Federation (Fédération Française de Squash, FFSquash) charges respondent M49 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a squash event on June 6, 2009, respondent didn't attend the doping control.

History
The respondent had used cannabis ten days before the doping control. He feared the consequences for that reason he didn't attend the doping control.

Decision
1 The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestation organized by FFSquash.
2. The decision (period of ineligibility on three years) dated August 12, 2009, by the disciplinary committee of the FFSquash 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 2009 UFOLEP vs Respondent M48

10 Dec 2009

Facts
The French Federation for Public Physical Education (Union Française des Oeuvres Laïques d'Éducation Physique, UFOLEP) charges respondent M48 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on March 29, 2009, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of methylphenidate. Methylphenidate is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and regarded as a specified substance.

History
Respondent was unable to explain how the prohibited substance had entered his body. He thinks it's a malice act of an competitor or spectator handing over a bottle with the prohibited substance.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestation organized or authorized by French sport federations.
2. The decision start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2009 UFOLEP vs Respondent M47

10 Dec 2009

Facts
The French Federation for Public Physical Education (Union Française des Oeuvres Laïques d'Éducation Physique, UFOLEP) charges respondent M47 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on June 6, 2010, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of betamethasone. This substance is prohibited according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and regarded as a specified substance.

History
Respondent had used medication containing the substance detected in the urine; he claimed to have acted for therapeutic purposes, to treat chronic allergy of rhinitis, a treatment was prescribed several months ago; he produced in support of his statements, two certificates from his physician, and the results of an allergy test. However the amount measured is inconsistent with the use for medical reasons.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestation organized or authorized by the UFOLEP.
2. The decision (six months period of ineligibility) dated July 4, 2009, by the disciplinary committee of the UFOLEP will be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the time already served in voluntary suspension and by the decision of July 4, 2009.
4. The decision start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2009 FFHG vs Respondent M46

10 Dec 2009

Facts
The French Ice Hockey Federation (Fédération Française de Hockey sur Glace, FFHG) charges respondent M46 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on December 30, 2008 a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of prednisone and prednisolone. These are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and regarded as specified substances.

History
The respondent had used medication containing prednisolone and being metabolized into prednisone. He claims therapeutic reasons for the use of it to treat rhinitis and acute sinusitis. The disciplinary committee of the FFHG at first made the decision on March 18, 2009, for a period of ineligibility of one year. But later the appeal committee of the FFHG changed the decision on June 5, 2009, into a warning.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one month in which the respondent can't take place in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFHG.
2. The decision (a warning) dated March 18, 2009, from the appeal committee of the FFHG should be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served in voluntary suspension and the decision of March 18, 2009.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2011 FFL vs Respondent M45

10 Dec 2009

Facts
The French Wrestling Federation (Fédération Française de Lutte, FFL) charges respondent M45 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. The respondent didn't provide his whereabouts data as part of the registered testing pool.

History
The respondent explains he didn't respond because of his language problems, he is Russian from origin.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestation organized by the FFL.
2. The decision (period of ineligibility of four months as well as not taking part in training leading), dated August 1, 2009, from the disciplinary committee of the FFL should be modified.
3. The decision starts on the date of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

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