CAS 2019/0/6156 International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) v. Russian Athletic Federation (RUSAF) & Aleksandr Shustov On 16 July 2016, Professor Richard McLaren (the Independent Person or the IP) issued a first report on the allegations of systemic doping in Russia. Some of the key findings of the First IP Report were that: 1.) the Moscow Laboratory operated, for the protection of doped Russian athletes, within a state-dictated failsafe system, described in the First IP Report as the disappearing positive methodology (DPM) and 2.) the Ministry of Sport of the Russian Federation directed, controlled, and oversaw the manipulation of athletes' analytical results or sample swapping, with the active participation and assistance of the Russian Federal Security Service, the Center of Sports Preparation of National Teams of Russia, and both Moscow and Sochi Laboratories. On 9 December 2016, the IP elaborated on the First IP Report and released a second report on the doping allegations in Russia, together with the First IP Report. The Second IP Report confirmed the key findings of the First IP Report and described in detail the DPM and the Washout Testing. Within the context of the Second IP Report, the IP identified a significant number of Russian athletes who were involved in, or benefitted from, the doping schemes and practices that he uncovered. The IP made publicly available on the IP Evidence Disclosure Package (EDP) website the evidence of the involvement of the Identified Athletes. According to the IP and the IAAF, the evidence on the EDP was retrieved from the hard-drive of Dr Rodchenkov and, after the metadata of all the documents was examined, the documents were determined to have been made contemporaneously to the events. _________________________________________________ Mr. Aleksandr Shustov is a Russian high jumper competing in the Moscow 2013 IAAF World Championships. In November 2017 the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Russian Athlete based on the findings of the First and Second IP Report and the disclosed evidence. After deliberations between the parties the case was referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in February 2019 for a Sole Arbitrator first instance hearing panel. The IAAF requested the Panel to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete due to aggravating circumstances and for the disqualification of the Athlete’s results from 8 July 2013 until the date of the decision in this case. The IAAF contended that the Athlete had used anabolic steroids in the lead-up to the Moscow 2013 IAAF World Championships based on the findings of the Second IP Report and the disclosed evidence (the Moscow Washout Schedules). Here 3 official samples, provided by the Athlete, were reported as negative in ADAMS in 2013 by the Moscow Laboratory while the evidence showed that these samples contained prohibited substances. In addition 2 unofficial samples were listed in the Moscow Washout Schedules in 2013 containing prohibited substances. Furthermore one of the Athlete’s B sample bottles had multiple T marks as evidence of tampering. The Athlete challenged the Sole Arbitrator, denied the use of prohibited substances and disputed the reliability of the filed evidence in this case provided by the IAAF, Professor McLaren and Dr Rodchenkov. Sustained by expert witnesses, he pointed to various inconsistencies in this evidence. The Sole Arbitrator concludes that the Athlete is present in the Moscow Washout Schedules in respect of the 5 samples listed as belonging to the Athlete. Here the Athlete’s presence in the Moscow Washout Schedules are strong indication that the Athlete used the prohibited substances Methandrostenolone (Methandienone) and Methasterone in 2013 as corroborated by the evidence. The Sole Arbitrator finds that the Athlete's repeated denials and challenges were exposed as empty and his attempts at alternative scientific explanations for the facts were comprehensively refuted. Accordingly the Sole Arbitrator finds that the IAAF has proven to his comfortable satisfaction that the Athlete violated the IAAF Rules through the use of multiple prohibited substances on multiple occasions. Considering the seriousness of the Athlete's violations and the fact that many aggravating factors are relevant in this case, the Sole Arbitrator finds that a 4 year period of ineligibility is appropriate. Finally the Sole Arbitrator deems it appropriate to disqualify the Athlete's results from 8 July 2013 until 7 July 2017. Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 5 June 2020 that: 1.) CAS has jurisdiction to decide on the subject matter of this dispute and the Request for Arbitration of the International Association of Athletics Federations is admissible and is upheld. 2.) Aleksandr Shustov is found guilty of anti-doping rule violations under Rule 32.2(b) of the IAAF Rules. 3.) A period of ineligibility of four ( 4) years is imposed upon Aleksandr Shustov, commencing on the date of this A ward. 4.) All competitive results obtained by Aleksandr Shustov from 8 July 2013 to 7 July 2017 are disqualified, with all resulting consequences (including forfeiture of any titles, awards, medals, profits, prizes and appearance money). 5.) The arbitration costs (to be determined and notified by the CAS Court Office) shall be paid by the Russian Athletic Federation. 6.) The Russian Athletic Federation shall contribute the sum of CHF 2,500 (two thousand five hundred Swiss Francs) to the International Association of Athletics Federations' fees and expenses. 7.) Aleksandr Shustov shall contribute the sum of CHF 2,500 (two thousand five hundred Swiss Francs) to the International Association of Athletics Federations' fees and expenses. 8.) All other and further prayers or requests for relief are dismissed.
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.
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.
More information explaining how to use this website can be found under "help".
Recently added documents More »
Athletes' Anti-Doping Rights Act / World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). - Montreal : WADA, 2020 ___________________________________________________ The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has published the final designed version of the Athletes’ Anti-Doping Rights Act (Act), which WADA’s Athlete Committee developed over two and half years in consultation with thousands of athletes and stakeholders worldwide. The purpose of the Act, which is based on the 2021 World Anti-Doping Code (Code) and its related International Standards that take effect on 1 January 2021, is to ensure that the rights of all athletes worldwide to participate in doping-free sport are clearly set out, accessible, and universally applicable. The document was approved by WADA’s Executive Committee on 7 November 2019 during the World Conference on Doping in Sport in Katowice, Poland. Developed by athletes, for athletes, the Act provides an outline of rights provided by the 2021 Code and International Standards in terms of equality of opportunity, fair testing programs, medical treatment, justice, accountability, education, data protection and more. It also makes recommendations around athletes’ rights to be part of a system that is free from corruption, that they are appropriately represented in terms of governance and decision-making, and that they have a right to legal aid. This Act is made up of two parts. Part one sets out rights that are found in the Code and International Standards. Part two sets out recommended athlete rights, which are not found in the Code or Standards but are rights that athletes recommend that anti-doping organizations adopt for best practice. Contents: Part One - Equality of opportunity - Equitable and fair testing programms - Medical treatment and protection of health rights - Right to justice - Right to accountability - Whistleblower rights - Right of education - Right to data protection - Right to compensation - Protected persons rights - Rights during a sample collection session - Right to B sample analysis - Other rights and freedoms - Application and standing Part Two - Right to an anti-doping system - Free from corruption - Right to participate in governance and decision-makeing - Right to legal support
iNADO Update (2020) 6 (19 June) Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO) ____________________________________________________ Contents: iNADO - We welcome 14 RADOs as new Members - Upcoming Webinar - How Athletes can change the Sport for Good - by Olympic Athlete Nikki Hamblin Testing - PWC - Useful Guidelines in place for DCOs during COVID-19 Research - Journalists reveal a massive Abuse of Pain-Killers in German Football - Richard Pound: "The Russian Doping Scandal: Some Reflections on Responsibility in Sport Governance" - Testimonials from Whistleblowers urge for better Practices Legal - The Impact of COVID-19 on Procedures in Sport Disputes Resolution WADA - Updates by WADA related to COVID-19 - Limited Supplementary Stakeholder Consultation Phase for the 2021 ISPPPI International Federations - FIA sets up Whistleblower Hotline New at the Anti-Doping Knowledge Center - Recent cases of meat contamination
1,5-Dimethylhexylamine (Octodrine) in Sports and Weight Loss Supplements: Natural Constituent or Synthetic Chemical?
1,5-Dimethylhexylamine (Octodrine) in Sports and Weight Loss Supplements : Natural Constituent or Synthetic Chemical? / Mei Wang, Saqlain Haider, Amar G. Chittiboyina, Jon F. Parcher, Ikhlas A. Khan. - (Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 152 (2018) 15 April; p. 298-305). - PMID: 29454882. - DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2018.02.008 _________________________________________________ Abstract In the past years, there has been a mounting trend toward the addition of sympathomimetic stimulants in sports and weight loss supplements sold in the US and claimed to be from natural constituents. The latest among those pharmaceutical stimulants is 1,5-dimethylhexylamine (1,5-DMHA or octodrine), an ingredient in newly introduced sports and weight loss supplements with its 'natural' origin being cited from Aconitum or Kigelia plants. In order to validate the natural existence of 1,5-DMHA, two GC/MS methods were developed. One method involved using thick film megabore capillary columns to analyze the underivatized 1,5-DMHA. The second method was to determine enantiomeric distribution of 1,5-DMHA. Fifteen Aconitum or Kigelia plant samples originating from various locations were analyzed, and none of them contained 1,5-DMHA within the limit of detection (25 ng/mL) of the method. In contrast, although 1,5-DMHA was listed on the labels or website for all the 13 dietary supplements, only four products were found to contain this compound, with the highest quantity being reported as 112 mg per serving size. This is equivalent to more than three times the highest pharmaceutical dose established in Europe. The enantiomeric ratios of 1,5-DMHA in these products were determined to be between 0.9-1.0 (expressed as peak area ratio of one enantiomer over another), suggesting racemic nature. Interestingly, two byproducts from 1,5-DMHA synthesis were identified in commercial supplements containing 1,5-DMHA, indicating that 1,5-DMHA indeed originated from a poor quality source. Overall, the significant amount of 1,5-DMHA observed in the supplements, the enantiomeric distribution and the presence of the synthetic byproducts all suggested the synthetic origin of 1,5-DMHA in the commercial products.
Thyroid Therapy or Dysfunction in Athletes : Is It Time to Revisit the Clinical Practice Guidelines? / Krista G. Austin, Steven Petak. - (Current Sports Medicine Reports 18 (2019) 12 (December); p. 474-476). - PMID: 31834179. - DOI: 10.1249/JSR.0000000000000663 ___________________________________________________ Abstract Recent media have highlighted the controversy surrounding treatment of elite athletes for hypothyroidism. The World Anti-Doping Agency denied a request by the United States Anti-Doping Agency to ban the use of thyroid medication. At present, there is no scientific evidence that thyroid medication has the potential to enhance performance. Clinical practice guidelines are not definitive in regard to what classifies a patient as having hypothyroidism. Thyroid-stimulating hormone and free T4 are recommended to screen for thyroid disease; however, the thyrotropin-releasing hormone stimulation test is still advocated by some for detecting the earliest stages of hypothyroidism. Hypothyroidism has been demonstrated to reduce cardiopulmonary function and result in musculoskeletal symptoms, such as fatigue and muscle stiffness. Symptoms of hypothyroidism, including depression, fatigue, and impaired sleep, are similar to those reported in overtraining. These patients may have hypothalamic-pituitary dysfunction that may complicate interpretation of basal thyroid-stimulating hormone and free T4. To date, no association has been identified between training state and hypothyroidism. Research to more clearly define hypothyroidism using provocative testing, evaluate the potential for thyroid medication to enhance performance, and examine whether training may induce hypothyroidism in athletes is desirable.
Comparison of the Effects of High Dose Testosterone and 19-nortestosterone to a Replacement Dose of Testosterone on Strength and Body Composition in Normal Men
Comparison of the Effects of High Dose Testosterone and 19-nortestosterone to a Replacement Dose of Testosterone on Strength and Body Composition in Normal Men / K.E. Friedl, J.R. Dettori, C.J. Hannan Jr, T.H. Patience, S.R. Plymate. - (The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 40 (1991) 4-6; 607-612). - PMID: 1958561. - DOI: 10.1016/0960-0760(91)90283-b ___________________________________________________ Abstract We examined the extent to which supraphysiological doses of androgen can modify body composition and strength in normally virilized men. In doubly blind tests, 30 healthy young men received testosterone enanthate (TE) or 19-nortestosterone decanoate (ND), at 100 mg/wk or 300 mg/wk for 6 weeks. The TE-100 mg/wk group served as replacement dose comparison, maintaining pretreatment serum testosterone levels, while keeping all subjects blinded to treatment, particularly through reduction in testicular volumes. Isokinetic strength measurements were made for the biceps brachii and quadriceps femoris muscle groups before treatment and 2-3 days after the 6th injection. Small improvements were noted in all groups but the changes were highly variable; a trend to greater and more consistent strength gain occurred in the TE-300 mg/wk group. There was no change in weight for TE-100 mg/wk but an average gain of 3 kg in each of the other groups. No changes in 4 skinfold thicknesses or in estimated percent body fat were observed. Of 15 circumferences, significant increases were observed only for men receiving TE-300 mg/wk (shoulders) and ND-300 mg/wk (shoulders and chest). The data suggest that high dose androgens increase body mass and may increase strength in normal men but, except for a consistent weight gain with greater than replacement doses, the detectable changes were highly variable and relatively small, especially in comparison to the significant alterations which were observed for other markers of androgen action.
Androgen regulation of satellite cell function / Yue Chen, Jeffrey D. Zajac, Helen E. MacLean. - (Journal of Endocrinology 186 (2005) 1 (July); p. 21–31). - PMID: 16002532. - DOI: 10.1677/joe.1.05976 ___________________________________________________ Abstract Androgen treatment can enhance the size and strength of muscle. However, the mechanisms of androgen action in skeletal muscle are poorly understood. This review discusses potential mechanisms by which androgens regulate satellite cell activation and function. Studies have demonstrated that androgen administration increases satellite cell numbers in animals and humans in a dose-dependent manner. Moreover, androgens increase androgen receptor levels in satellite cells. In vitro, the results are contradictory as to whether androgens regulate satellite cell proliferation or differentiation. IGF-I is one major target of androgen action in satellite cells. In addition, the possibility of non-genomic actions of androgens on satellite cells is discussed. In summary, this review focuses on exploring potential mechanisms through which androgens regulate satellite cells, by analyzing developments from research in this area.
Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMs) as Pharmacological Treatment for Muscle Wasting in Ongoing Clinical Trials
Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMs) as Pharmacological Treatment for Muscle Wasting in Ongoing Clinical Trials / Guilherme Wesley Peixoto Da Fonseca, Elke Dworatzek, Nicole Ebner, Stephan Von Haehling. - (Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs (2020) 18 June; p. 1-11). - PMID: 32476495. - DOI: 10.1080/13543784.2020.1777275 ___________________________________________________ Abstract Introduction: Skeletal muscle wasting is a frequent clinical problem encountered in patients with chronic diseases. Increased levels of inflammatory markers play a role in the imbalance between muscle protein synthesis and degradation. Although testosterone has long been proposed as a treatment for patients with muscle wasting, undesirable side effects have raised concerns about prostatic hypertrophy in men as well as virilization in women. Selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) have demonstrated similar results like testosterone at improving lean body mass (LBM) with less side effects on androgen-dependent tissue. Areas covered: This review outlines the ongoing clinical development in the field of SARMs and their effectiveness in improving body composition and physical function. The included articles were collected at pubmed.gov and analyzed integrally. Expert opinion: There is an unmet clinical need for safe and effective anabolic compounds such as SARMs. Despite the effect on LBM shown by SARMs in phase II clinical trials, results on improved physical function and muscle strength are still lacking and long-term outcomes have to be assessed in these patients. Moreover, there is a need to determine the effect of resistance exercise training and protein intake associated with SARMs in the treatment of patients with muscle wasting.
Acute Myocardial Infarction in Young Newbie Bodybuilder Using Multiple Steroid and Protein Supplements
Acute Myocardial Infarction in Young Newbie Bodybuilder Using Multiple Steroid and Protein Supplements / Vaibhav Jain, Gajinder Goel. - (Journal of Cardiology Cases 21 (2019) 4 (4 Dec); p. 134-136). - PMID: 32256860. - PMCID: PMC7125384. - DOI: 10.1016/j.jccase.2019.11.010 _________________________________________________ Abstract Coronary artery disease (CAD), the major reason of deaths worldwide is generally known as a disease of the elderly, however it is grasping the youth too. The most common etiology of young CAD is lifestyle changes, smoking, and development of other comorbid conditions such as diabetes and hypertension at an early age. There has been an upward trend in youngsters regarding consciousness about their body build and thus use of various protein supplements and anabolic steroids for faster results. The present case reports a young patient presenting with severe retrosternal left-sided chest pain for 15-20 min to the emergency department. His electrocardiogram was suggestive of acute anterolateral wall ST segment elevation myocardial infarction for which he underwent urgent coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. His personal history revealed a significant use of steroids, proteins, and other supplements in supraphysiological doses for instant body building efforts without any other significant past medical, surgical, or family history. He showed good recovery and was strongly recommended to stop steroids and protein supplements. In conclusion, supraphysiological doses of protein supplements, anabolic steroids, and other nutritional products bear a risk factor for CAD. Learning objective: This is evident from the case report that excessive supplements use by body builders for immediate mass gain and performance enhancement may lead to adverse cardiovascular complications. This is mostly prescribed by peer groups or untrained gym professionals without judging their adverse effects so we recommend a detailed history for steroid use and protein supplements in young patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction without other significant risk factors and need for counselling for use of such substances.
Oxandrolone Augmentation of Resistance Training in Older Women : A Randomized Trial / Yorgi Mavros, Evelyn O'Neill, Maureen Connerty, Jonathan F. Bean, Kerry Broe, Douglas P. Kiel, David Maclean, Ann Taylor, Roger A. Fielding, Maria A. Fiatarone Singh. - (Medicine & Science Sports & Exercise 47 (2015 11 (November); p. 2257-2267). - PMID: 25899102. - DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000690 ___________________________________________________ Abstract Introduction: Sarcopenia is disproportionately present in older women with disability, and optimum treatment is not clear. We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to determine whether oxandrolone administration in elderly women improves body composition or physical function beyond that which occurs in response to progressive resistance training (PRT). Methods: Twenty-nine sedentary women (age 74.9 ± 6.8 yr; 5.9 ± 2.8 medications per day) were randomized to receive high-intensity PRT (three times a week for 12 wk) combined with either oxandrolone (10 mg·d(-1)) or an identical placebo. Peak strength was assessed for leg press, chest press, triceps, knee extension, and knee flexion. Power was assessed for leg press and chest press. Physical function measures included static and dynamic balance, chair rise, stair climb, gait speed, and 6-min walk test. Body composition was assessed using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Results: Oxandrolone treatment augmented increases in lean tissue for the whole body (2.6 kg; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.0-4.2 kg; P = 0.003), arms (0.3 kg; 95% CI, 0.1-0.5 kg; P = 0.001), legs (0.8 kg; 95% CI, 0.1-1.4 kg; P = 0.018), and trunk (1.4 kg; 95% CI, 0.4-2.3 kg; P = 0.004). Oxandrolone also augmented loss of fat tissue of the whole body (-1 kg; 95% CI, -1.6 to -0.4; P = 0.002), arms (-0.2 kg; 95% CI, -0.5 to -0.02 kg; P = 0.032), legs (-0.4 kg; 95% CI, -0.6 to -0.1; P = 0.009), and tended to reduce trunk fat (-0.4 kg; 95% CI, -0.9 to 0.04; P = 0.07). Improvements in muscle strength and power, chair stand, and dynamic balance were all significant over time (P < 0.05) but not different between groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions: Oxandrolone improves body composition adaptations to PRT in older women over 12 wk without augmenting muscle function or functional performance beyond that of PRT alone.