Welcome to Doping.nl, the Anti-Doping Knowledge Center.
This site has been established to host information about doping in the broadest sense of the word, and about doping prevention.

The Anti-Doping Authority Netherlands (the Dutch Doping Authority for short) established this site and maintains it. The Doping Authority was founded in 1989 and it is one of the oldest NADOs in the world. Doping.nl was developed with financial support from the Dutch Ministry for Health, Welfare and Sport.

This website  was established because of the importance that the Doping Authority and the Ministry attach to the dissemination of information relevant to doping prevention. Disclosing and supplying relevant information is one of the cornerstones in the fight against doping in sport. However, in practice, a significant amount of information is still not available, or only available to a limited group of users. We therefore decided to bring together all the relevant information in a single site: Doping.nl.

The Doping Authority aims to supply as much information through this website as possible on an ongoing basis. The information will be varied but will focus primarily on: WADA documents like the World Anti-Doping Code, the International Standards like the Prohibited List, Doping Regulations, scientific articles and abstracts, decisions by disciplinary bodies (mainly CAS decisions).As well as making documents available, the Doping Authority aims to supply searchable documents when possible, and to add relevant keywords to ensure easy access.
In the future, Doping.nl will also become a digital archive containing older information that is no longer available elsewhere.

Target readers
This site has been designed for use by anti-doping professionals such as National Anti-Doping Organisations and International Federations but also for students, journalists and other people interested in the subject.

To use the lightbox option, you need to register.

More information explaining how to use this website can be found under "help".

Recently added documents More »

IAAF 2017 IAAF vs Suleiman Kipses Simotwo

IAAF 2017 IAAF vs Suleiman Kipses Simotwo February 27, 2018 In July 2017 the IAAF Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenyan Athlete Suleiman Kipses Simotwo 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 was heard for the IAAF Disciplinary Tribunal Panel. The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and stated that he was tested before without issues. He suggested that something may have happened when he was in a district hospital in December 2016. He testified that he became unconscious and suffered an injury due to a fall in the bath. In the hospital he underwent treatment and left it with some medication. The AIU contended that the Athlete statement did not explain his positive test about 4 months later. The Panel finds that the Athlete failed to establish how the substance entered his system nor did he demonstrate with evidence that his hospital treatment in December 2016 caused the positive test result. The Panel concludes that het evidence establishes that the Athlete has committed the anti-doping rule violation without grounds for a reduced sanction. Therefore the IAAF Disciplinary Tribunal Panel decides on 27 February 2018 to impose a 4 year period on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 14 July 2017.

show » details »

ADAK 2017 ADAK vs John Anzarah Imbaiza

ADAK 2017 ADAK vs John Anzarah Imbaiza - Appeal No 3 of 2017. ADAK 2017 John Anzarah Imbaiza vs ADAK - Appeal No 6 of 2017. Mr John Anzarah Imbaiza (John Anzrah) is a Kenyan Sprint Coach (61) participating at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games. In August 2016 the Kenyan Athlete Ferguson Rotich was selected at random to be tested in the Olympic Village. Tracking the Athlete’s Accreditation Card the Doping Control Officers (DCOs) found the Kenyan Coach Anzrah in possession of the Athlete’s Accreditation Card and they chaperoned him to the Doping Control Center. There the Coach provided a sample and signed the documents. Meanwhile the Athlete Rotich was called and when he arrived unchaperoned at the Doping Control Center he provided a sample. As a result the Coach Anzrah was sent home and in August 2016 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported an anti-doping rule violation against him for tampering. ADAK charged the Coach for his intentional interference or attempted interference with the Doping Control and for providing fraudulent information. In April 2017 the Coach Anzrah filed an appeal with the Judiciary Office of the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal requesting to lift the imposed suspension. AKAK hereafter filed a counter appeal charging the Coach with the anti-doping rule violation. The Tribunal consolidated these appeals in one proceeding. The Coach Anzrah explained that during the Olympic Games in Rio he was forced to stay in a rented house with several other members of the Kenyan delegation under deplorable conditions as the Kenyan team had already exceeded their quota of accreditations for officials inside the Olympic Village. The Athlete Rotich gave his Accreditation Card to the Coach in order to have breakfast in the Olympic Village. The Coach contended that due to the language barrier he could not explain to the DCOs that he was not the selected Athlete Rotich. He denied the intentional interference with the Doping Control and he acknowledged that he represented himself as the Athlete in order to buy time to have the Athlete informed to report to the Doping Control Station. Regarding the Coach Anzrah’s suspension the Tribunal holds that time has lapsed and that the suspension already had been served. The served suspension will be taken into account when a sanction is imposed. The Tribunal concludes that there was a provision of fraudulent information at the Doping Control Station, however it finds this was without intention to interfere with the Doping Control Process. The Tribunal also considers that the Athlete Rotich was already called by the Coach Anzrah to go to the Doping Control Station and he arrived there 15 to 30 minutes after the Coach. The Athlete’s sample was tested and it revealed no prohibited substances. Therefore the Judiciary Office of the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal decides on 12 October 2017 to dismiss the appeal filed by the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya.

show » details »

iNADO Update #93

iNADO Update (2018) 93 (9 May) Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO) _________________________________________________ Contents: - May 24 - "An Effective Tool to Report Doping" by Peter Dagø (GotEthics). - Lessons for Anti-Doping from CAS Decisions - A. Legkov and A. Zubkov (vs. IOC) - Update Sample Collection Bottles - Update on ADAMS Next Gen - Play True Day - EU Commission publishes Whistleblowing Protection Regulation - WADA Calls for Social Science Research Proposals - European Athletics: Criteria to set New Records (and erase Old Ones) - Cases in the Anti-Doping Knowledge Centre

show » details »

WADA - Independent Observers Report Olympic Games 2018

Independent Observers Report of the XXIII Olympic Winter Games Pyeongchang 2018 / McDevitt, Ben. - Independent Observer Team. - Montreal : World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), 2018

show » details »
  • (Medical) Science
  • Doping classes
  • Education
  • History
  • Laboratories
  • Legal
  • Statistics
Publication period
Country & language
  • Country
  • Language
Other filters
  • ADRV
  • Document category
  • Document type
  • Health/Medical
  • IF'S
  • Laboratories/Analysis
  • Legal Terms
  • Organisations
  • Substances
  • Various
  • Version