Report of the Independent Observers XVIII Asian Games Jakarta Palembang 2018 / Independent Observer Team. - Montreal : World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), 2019

ADAS Annual Report 2018 / Anti-Doping Agency of Serbia (ADAS). - Belgrade : Antidoping Agencija Republike Srbije, 2019

Anti-Doping Statistics of Turkisch Anti-Doping Commission for 2017 / Turkish Anti-Doping Commission (TADC). - Ankara : Türkiye Dopingle Mücadele Komisyonu (TDMK), 2018

CAS 2018/A/5681 Nationale Anti-Doping Agentur Deutschland v. Vincent A.

In June 2017 the National Anti Doping Agency Germany (NADA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the baseballplayer Vincent A after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Amfetamine.

In first instance the Athlete demonstrated with evidence that he was the victim of sabotage through contamination of his supplement. The German Institution of Arbitration (DIS) accepted the Athlete’s assertion an decided on 19 March 2018 not to impose a sanction on the Athlete.

Hereafter in April 2018 NADA appealed the DIS decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). NADA requested the Panel to set aside the DIS decision and to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

NADA accepted that the violation was not intentional but is doubtful that the Athlete acted without Fault and didn’t demonstrate how the substance entered his system. It contended that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the alleged contamination of his supplement in question was the result of sabotage by an ex-girlfriend. Also NADA pointed to a number of inconsistenties in the Athlete's statements made during the proceedings and during the police investigations into the doping violation.

The Athlete requested the Panel to uphold the DIS decision of 19 March 2018, he accepted the test results and he denied that he had committed the violation knowingly and intentionally. He asserted that the sample collection was initiated after NADA had received anonymous reports and he undertook enormous efforts in order to find an explanation for the positive test. Further the Cologne Lab had confirmed that the prohibited substance was found in his supplement in question while the Athlete’s hair analysis showed the presence of low concentrations of Amfetamine consistent with low ingestion.

Considering the evidence, the opinion of expert witnesses and the Athlete’s assertions the Panel is unconvinced that on a balance of probability the Athlete’s ex-girlfriend had sabotaged his supplement by mixing a crumbled amfetamine tablet into this supplement during her alleged visit to his apartment in March 2017. The Panel holds that the probability of sabotage is significant less than 50% and accordingly the Panel rejects the Athlete’s assertion.

The Panel accepts that the violation was not intentional and that the source of the positive test remained unknown. Also the Panel finds that the Athlete acted negligently regarding the storage and use of his supplements as this represents a conceivable risk in case of sabotage by friend or foe.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) decides on 27 December 2018:

1.) The Decision of the German Institution of Arbitration (DIS) of 19 March 2018 is set aside.
2.) The Athlete has committed an anti-doping rule violation and a 2 year period of ineligibility shall be imposed.
3.) The provisional period of suspension served by the Athlete shall be credited.
[…]

Annual report 2017-2018 / Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES). - Ottawa : CCES, 2018

Contents:

• Our Message to You
• Governance and Leadership
• Activate
• Advocate
• Protect
• Doping Control Statistics
• Financial Report

Impact of anti-doping education and doping control experience on anti-doping knowledge in Japanese university athletes: a cross-sectional study / Yuka Murofushi, Yujiro Kawata, Akari Kamimura, Masataka Hirosawa, Nobuto Shibata. - (Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy 13 (2018) 44 (5 Dec); p. 1-15).
- PMID: 30518383.
- PMCID: PMC6280366.
- DOI: 10.1186/s13011-018-0178-x

Abstract:

BACKGROUND:
This study was conducted to elucidate the anti-doping (AD) education, doping control experience, and AD knowledge according to the World Anti-doping Code (Code) of Japanese university athletes.

METHODS:
We collected data from 514 male athletes (Mage = 19.53 years, SD = 1.13) and 629 female athletes (Mage = 20.99 years, SD = 1.07). We asked them about their experience undergoing doping control and the AD education they had received. Then, we assessed their AD knowledge using the World Anti-Doping Agency's Athlete Learning Program about Health and AD (ALPHA) test.

RESULTS:
The results showed that 2.54% of the participants had undergone doping control. Further, 30.10% received AD education at least once, and 20.82% received AD education more than once. When comparing the ALPHA scores of athletes with/without doping test experience, we observed no significant difference. However, the ALPHA scores of athletes with/without AD education were significantly different; specifically, athletes who received AD education more than once had significantly higher ALPHA scores than non-educated athletes.

CONCLUSION:
These results revealed that doping control experience was not related to AD knowledge and that AD education was associated with AD knowledge, suggesting that athletes who receive AD education more than once have more accurate AD knowledge than less educated athletes on this topic. The importance of AD education in promoting understanding of AD according to the Code in sports is highlighted in this study.

iNADO Update (2018) 9 (23 November)
Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO)

Contents:

- 2019 iNADO Workshop (March 12, Lausanne)
- Report on the WADA Foundation Board and associated meetings, Baku, November 13-15 2018. CEO
Graeme Steel
- The Role of NADOs – Comment from the CEO
- NADOs give Feedback to the 2nd Draft of the Int. Standard for Education (ISE)
- Ideas how to implement the ISE using a Guidelines Document
- Spanish Anti-Doping Agency launches Education Module in Latin America
- Annual Larry D. Bowers Award for Excellence in Anti-Doping Science
- New NSF Certified for Sport® Certification Mark
- Leeds Beckett University: the Global Landscape of Whistleblowing Platforms
- Improved Search Function at the Anti-Doping Knowledge Center
- Vacancies at WADA
- New at the Anti-Doping Knowledge Centre

Annual banned-substance review: Analytical approaches in human sports drug testing / Mario Thevis, Tiia Kuuranne, Hans Geyer. - (Drug Testing and Analysis 11 (2019) 1 (January; p. 8-26)

• PMID: 30488582
• DOI: 10.1002/dta.2549

Contents:

• Introduction
• Non-Approved Substances
• Anabolic Agents
  • Anabolic-androgenic steroids
  • Initial testing procedures: Comprehensive screening, metabolism studies, and new target analytes
  • Steroid profiling
  • Confirmatory testing procedures – IRMS
  • Other anabolic agents
• Peptide Hormones, Growth Factors, Related Substances, and Mimetics
  • Erythropoietin-receptor agonists
  • Hypoxia-inducible factor stabilizers and activators
  • Transforming growth factor-beta (TGR- β) inhibitors
  • Growth hormone, its fragments and releasing factors, and chorionic gonadotrophin
•  β2‐Agonists
• Hormone and Metabolic Modulators
• Diuretics and other Masking Agents, Stimulants, Narcotics, and Glucocorticoids
• Chemical and Physical Manipulation / Gene Doping
• Monitoring Program
• Conclusion
  
  

Abstract

A number of high profile revelations concerning anti‐doping rule violations over the past 12 months have outlined the importance of tackling prevailing challenges and reducing the limitations of the current anti‐doping system. At this time, the necessity to enhance, expand, and improve analytical test methods in response to the substances outlined in the World Anti‐Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List represents an increasingly crucial task for modern sports drug testing programs. The ability to improve analytical testing methods often relies on the expedient application of novel information regarding superior target analytes for sports drug testing assays, drug elimination profiles, and alternative sample matrices, together with recent advances in instrumental developments. This annual banned‐substance review evaluates literature published between October 2017 and September 2018 offering an in‐depth evaluation of developments in these arenas and their potential application to substances reported in WADA's 2018 Prohibited List.