In March 2017 World Rugby has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the rugby player Adrian Gabriel Chiper after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone). After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the World Rugby Judicial Committee.

The Athlete admitted the violation, denied the intentional use and was unaware that there was anti-doping information on the internet neither that steroids were prohibited. He stated that he had purchased the substance as medication on the internet as treatment for his knee injury. He acknowledged that he didn’t report his injury to the team officials and failed to mention his medication on the Doping Control Form. He only discussed his medication with his team doctor after de sample collection.

World Rugby contended that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional nor how the substance entered his system. It requested the Committee for the imposition of a 4 year period of ineligibility.

On the balance of probabilities, the Judicial Committee is skeptical about the Athlete’s statement. The Committee holds that to self-diagnose and to self-treat a knee injury in the sport of rugby, based on advice from Google, is difficult to understand. The Committee finds it difficult to accept the Athlete’s version how the prohibited substance entered his system. While not absolutely essential to proving that the violation was unintentional, any question about the source of the prohibited substance severely undercuts the Athlete’s case on this point.

Therefore the World Rugby Judicial Committee decides on 20 August 2018 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 10 November 2017.

What do the humanities (really) know about doping? Questions, answers and cross-disciplinary strategies / Ask Vest Christiansen, John Gleaves. - (Performance Enhancement & Health 2 (2013) 4 (December); p. 2016-225)

• DOI: 10.1016/j.peh.2014.06.002

Abstract

Recent years have brought debates about the future role of humanities research in light of sciences’ progress. In doping research, tacit biases in favour of science risk ignoring the humanities in their efforts to understand and address the doping phenomenon. This article is a continuation of the discussion on the role of the humanities and social sciences in research on drug use in sport. The article asserts that until those who wish to address the doping issues in sport begin engaging humanities and social science research alongside the natural sciences, the results from scientific experiments will remain detached from the lived experiences of the athletes, and the anti-doping campaign risks losing its legitimacy. Conversely, we will also argue against two types of drawbacks for humanistic research; one is the dismissal of the pursuit of truth in exchange of epistemological relativism. The other is the tendency to turn inward and become reluctant to use empirical tools that provide purchase on the doping issue. The article will conclude by sketching a positive account of the two fields collaborating with more porous borders but one that asks neither side to compromise its professional standards or modes of inquiry. This new account asserts that future doping research requires cross-disciplinary and collaborative research rooted in strong methodologies but conversant in both languages.

The World Confederation of Billiard Sports (WCBS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against Respondent after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Acebutolol.
Respondent had no Therapeutic Use Exemption. He was notified of the doping violation, accepted a provisional suspension and did not request analysis of the B sample.
Respondent stated he used the substance as medicine prescribed by his personal physician for the purpose of medical treatment, and without the intention to enhance sport performances.

The WCBS Doping Hearing Panel decides a four month period of ineligibility, beginning May 13, 2010. Additional the Panel decides the automatic disqualification of all competitive results obtained from March 27 to May 13, 2010, including forfeiture of medals, points and prizes.

Results of the WADA monitoring program regarding substances which are not on the 2018 Prohibited List, but which WADA wishes to monitor in order to detect patterns of misuse in sport.

These substances are:

In Competition Monitoring:
- Tramadol
- Codeine
- Hydrocodone

In and Out of Competition Monitoring:
- Beta-2 Agonists
- Bemitil
- Glucocorticoids

Results of the WADA monitoring program regarding substances which are not on the 2017 Prohibited List, but which WADA wishes to monitor in order to detect patterns of misuse in sport.

These substances are:

In Competition Monitoring:
- Mitragynine
- Tramadol
- Codeine

In and Out of Competition Monitoring:
- Telmisartan
- Glucocorticoids
- Beta-2 Agonists

Results of the WADA monitoring program regarding substances which are not on the 2016 Prohibited List, but which WADA wishes to monitor in order to detect patterns of misuse in sport.

These substances are:

In Competition Monitoring:
- Mitragynine
- Tramadol,

In and Out of Competition Monitoring:
- Telmisartan
- Glucocorticoids

Results of the WADA monitoring program regarding substances which are not on the 2014 Prohibited List, but which WADA wishes to monitor in order to detect patterns of misuse in sport. These substances are:

In Competition Monitoring:
- Tapentadol,
- Mitragynine
- Tramadol,
- Hydrocodone
- Caffeine

In and Out of Competition Monitoring:
- Meldonium
- Telmisartan

Results of the WADA monitoring program regarding substances which are not on the 2014 Prohibited List, but which WADA wishes to monitor in order to detect patterns of misuse in sport. These substances are:
In-Competiion monitoring:
- Pseudoephedrine
- Bupropion
- Caffeine
- Tramadol
- Hydrocodone
- Nicotine

Out-of-Competition monitoring:
- Glucocorticosteroids