In January 2012 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Enzo Lezzi after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone, metabolite of nandrolone. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athelete filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee.

The 48 years old amateur cyclist admitted the violation and stated that he suffered from an injury relating to arthritis in the knees. Therefore the prescribed substance Deca Durabolin was administered out of season through double injections in both knee joint by his sister, an apaediatrician. The Athlete’s statement was sustained by his medical file presented to the Committee.

Considering the circumstances in this case the Committee finds that the Athlete bears no significant fault or negligence. Therefore the SAIDS Discliplinary Committee decideds to impose a 15 month period of inelgilibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the notification, i.e. on 21 November 2011.

Facts
The French Cycle Tourism Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclotourismo, FFCT) charges respondent M09 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During an event on September 23, 2007, respondent was asked to attend a doping test but he didn't go to the doping control.

History
The respondent was asked by announcement in French to attend the doping control, but he wasn't able to understand this because he speaks English. The panel agrees that in this case there is a problem with the announcement of the doping control.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

In August 2011 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Russell Lund after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substances hydrochlorothiazide, amiloride and furosemide. After notification the Athlete filed a statement in her defence and did not attend the hearing of the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete stated that the diuretics she used were medication prescribed by her gynaecologist and declared by the Athlete on the Doping Control Form. The Athlete’s application for a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) for diuretics and a progesterone in August 2001 was denied in September 2011.

The Committee considered that the Athlete mentioned her medication on the Doping Control Form, co-operated with the investigation and that she used prescribed prohibited substances for her medical condition.
Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 12 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the notification and the provisional suspension, i.e. on 5 August 2011.

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

The Athlete disputed the process relating to compliance with the International Standards for Testing (IST). The Athlete argued that the Doping Control Station; the collection of the sample; and the official responsible for the sample collection did not comply with these requirements.

Considering the evidence the Committee concludes that there was no departure of the IST which could reasonably have caused an adverse analytical finding.
Therefore the SAIDS Disciplianry Committee decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 5 April 2011.

In June 2011 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Unathi Nteta after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substances metandienone and methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine). After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete had no explanation for the positive test result and only used three supplements, recommended by the person in the shop where he purchased these products.
Laboratory analysis showed that the supplement Wired contained the prohibited substance methylhexaneamine and the label of this product warned in fine print that it contained banned substances.
The Panel noted that the Athlete, who spoke Xhosa, had obvious difficulty in reading what was written in English on the label of the product.
The Athlete suggested that the presence of metandienone could have come from vitamin B he took, or even the meat of one of the cows which had previously been injected, which had died and was eaten in December 2010.

The Committee considers exceptional circumstances in this case due to the Athlete’s disadvantaged position. Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decides to impose a 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the notification, i.e. on 21 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.

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.

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M08 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a contest on August 31, 2006, samples were taken for doping test purposes. The sample showed the presence of indapamide which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent takes a drug containing indapamide regularly due to a medical condition. He wants to prove this by showing the medical record of his father. He had no intention to enhance sport performance.

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 French sport federations.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served in voluntary suspension and by the decision dated May 19, 2007, by the disciplinary committee of the FFHMFAC.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

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.

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.