are never enough of us in this fight for clean sport!
regard to FINA, we are not sparing our efforts to eradicate this cancer from
our sport once and for all.”
Larfaoui, FINA President
It is our pleasure to report
FINA’s Doping Control Programme (In & Out-of-Competition)
for January-September 2001, and to give a total summary of all
tests conducted during this period.
positive tests have been reported till the 30th of September
the three first quarters 2001, FINA has conducted 1124
tests, In and Unannounced
(GRE) appealed to the Greek Athletics Court.
Swimming Federation, following its Rules and Regulations as well as the FINA
Doping Rules, decided to impose... more »
DOPING PANEL DECISION
on CEZAR BADITA (ROM) DOPING CASE
FINA Doping Panel decided on 10 February 2001 the following conclusion
Cezar Badita Doping Case
A suspension of one
be imposed on Mr. Cezar Badita, the suspension to start with 10th
a retroactive sanction involving the
of all results achieved by the swimmer during
the period prior to the date the suspension takes effect
and extending back to six (6) months before 20 May 2000
Swimming Federation, following its Rules and Regulations as well as the FINA
Doping Rules, decided to impose:
lifetime expulsion to the swimmer Vasileios Demetis after he
was sanctioned for doping control second offence (FINA Rule DC 9.1.1. and
FINA Rule DC 9.1.5.). The athlete was tested positive for 19-Norandrosterone
(36,5n/ml), lidocaine and its metabolite in a doping control carried out on September
5, 2001 with the occasion of the Mediterranean Games in Tunis (TUN).
athlete had previously tested positive for caffeine in May 2001 and had been
four (4) years’ suspension to the swimmer Aikaterini Bliamou
after she was sanctioned for doping control first offence (FINA Rule DC
9.1.1.). The athlete was tested positive for 19-Norandrosterone (135,9n/ml)
in a doping control carried out on September 6, 2001 with the
occasion of the Mediterranean Games in Tunis (TUN).
NATIONAL FEDERATION DOPING CONTROL REPORT
part of the National Federation Doping Controls 2001 (First semester),
swimmers from a total of 9
countries have been tested. It includes a total of 623 tests (In
& Out-of-Competition). more
accordance with the FINA Rules DC 12.1, we are pleased to report all results of
National Domestic Doping Control programmes for 2000.
part of the National Federation Doping Controls 2000, swimmers from a total of 21
countries have been tested. It includes a total of 2003
use the following spreadsheet
(in PDF Format)
in order to improve the quality of the
Federation Doping Control Report.
FINA LIST OF PROHIBITED SUBSTANCES
list of FINA prohibited substances will take effect on September 1, 2001 and
will remain in effect until December 31, 2002.
wishes to clarify its position in relation to some press statements on
Erythropoietin (EPO) tests being conducted in connection with
the Goodwill Games in Brisbane (AUS)
DOPING CASE TRENT BRAY (NZL)
Appeal to the CAS on July 16, 2001.
FINA DOPING PANEL DECISION
on TRENT BRAY
(NZL) DOPING CASE
Doping Panel decided on June 14, 2001 the following conclusion on
Trent Bray Doping case:
A suspension of four (4) years,
Shall be imposed on Mr. Trent Bray, the suspension to start with
19th May 2000, the day when the provisional suspension, decided by the FINA
Executive was effective.
"Suspension" shall mean that the swimmer shall not
participate in any activities of FINA or any of its Member Federations, in any
discipline, including acting as competitor, delegate, coach, leader, physician
or other representative of FINA or a Member Federation (FINA Rule DC
9.11). Also according to FINA Rule DC
9.1.1 a retroactive sanction involving the
cancellation of all results achieved by the swimmer during
the period prior to the date the suspension
takes effect and
extending back to six (6) months before 22 November 1999
CASE TRENT BRAY (NZL)
FINA received on January 13, 2000 a report from Australian
Sport Drug Testing Laboratory (ASDTL) regarding a positive A-test for Nandrolone
on a swimmer from New Zealand. The certificate of the analysis of the sample was
issued on January 7, 2000. The Doping control had taken place unannounced out-of-competition
in New Zealand, on November 22, 1999.
After having requested information about this doping
infraction from Swimming New Zealand, FINA received a short history of the
matter dated April 4, 2000. Therein, it could be seen that Trent Bray, as is his
right under the New Zealand Drug Agency Act, had filed an appeal against the
finding by the New Zealand Sport Drug Agency (NZSDA) of a doping infraction. The
appeal was heard by a District Court Judge, who on two grounds out of twenty
quashed the NZSDA determination, which left nothing to hear for the Swimming New
Zealand Disciplinary Tribunal.
NZSDA has appealed this decision to the High Court of Appeal,
which has not yet heard the case.
The FINA DCRB has reviewed the decision by the Judge and
found that none of the two grounds on which the Judge quashed the determination
had any effect on the final result of the analysis of the sample from Trent
The Executive has in determining whether or not to
provisionally suspend Trent Bray considered the likelihood that he will be found
to have violated FINA Doping Control Rules and the unfairness of allowing him to
compete pending a final decision in the case.
Trent Bray shall, in
accordance with FINA Rule DC 9.6, be provisionally suspended without a hearing
from May 19, 2000, until a determination by a competent authority or the FINA
Doping Panel has been issued.
On June 14, 2001
the FINA Doping Panel took a decision with respect to Trent
Bray doping case. Click here
such FINA Doping Panel Decision.
GH 2000 PROJECT
WORLD SWIMMING CHAMPIONSHIPS IN HONG KONG - APRIL 1999
As part of their campaign against the use of performance enhancing
drugs in swimming FINA invited GH-2000 to send a team out to Hong Kong
to the World Short course Swimming Championships in April 1999. GH-2000
offered to provide confidential post-event blood testing to detect the
use of GH on swimmers on a voluntary basis. The information gathered was
not to be used as evidence of a doping offence but to be used by FINA to
see if there was any evidence to suggest that levels of markers of GH in
blood different in any way from those of other international athletes,
and in particular to assess whether there was any indication of doping
amongst any of the swimmers. Report
STATEMENTWITH REGARD TO DOPING CONTROL AT THE FINA SWIMMING
WORLD CUP COMPETITIONS IN BERLIN (GER) 5-6, FEBRUARY 2000.
Shortly after the end of the FINA Swimming World
Cup competition in Berlin (GER) 5-6 February 2000 FINA received information
about an incident in the doping control station at the swimming complex.
After having been approached by the Australian
Swimming Inc. and United States Swimming, the FINA Executive, on February
8th , decided to request written reports from those present in the doping
Written reports have been provided FINA by the
February 9th Dr. Eide Luebs, FINA Medical
February 16th Chief Thomas, TSC Member,
February 17th Ian Thorpe (AUS) swimmer
February 21st Lenny Krayzelburg (USA) swimmer,
John Skinner (USA) coach
February 23rd Don Talbot (AUS) coach
Faxletters in this matter have also been received
from Terry Gathercole, President, Australian Swimming, Inc, Vena Murray,
Executive Director, Australian Swimming Inc., and Chuck Wielgus, Executive
Director, United States Swimming, Inc.
The FINA Executive has considered the reports
from those persons directly involved in what happened in the doping control
station in Berlin. The following observations have been made.
1. No violation of the FINA Doping Control Rules
valid from 1 June 1999 has taken place at the doping control neither by
the FINA Medical Delegate nor by anybody else.
2. The following remarks made in the reports requested
a) Although FINA Rule DC 6.4.5 requests that “the
competitor must show identification at the doping control station” personal
recognition of the competitor by the staff should be acceptable.
b) The use of a German Swimming Federation Doping
Control form containing all necessary information does not invalidate the
c) There is no requirement in FINA Rule DC 8.1.6
that the competitors shall place the A- and B- containers in a transport
d) The FINA Rule DC 6.2 requests that “any swimmer
establishing or breaking a World Record shall submit to doping control
following the race”. It is thus the responsibility of the swimmer to do
e) The use of Versapak kits has been approved
3. The FINA Executive decided that no action needs
to be taken in the matter.
Without correct knowledge about the FINA DC Rules,
competitors and coaches should not interfere in the procedures at the doping
control station. Medical Delegates appointed by FINA are responsible for
the procedures and their decisions and actions must be respected in order
not to create any doubt regarding the correctness of doping control at
FINA Events. Remarks, if any, shall be directed to FINA without involvement
of any third person.
Lausanne, March 1, 2000
The IOC Medical Commission has distributed the following explanatory
note which modifies the reporting levels for Salbutamol and Ephedrines:
Salbutamol is classified as both a stimulant and an anabolic agent.
The intent of unannounced out-of-competition testing is to detect anabolic agents.
The revised rules on salbutamol consider it as anabolic agent when its
concentration is higher than 500 nanograms/millilitre and confirmed by
However, pending the acceptance of the enantiomeric analysis by a peer-reviewed
journal, only concentrations higher than 1000 nanograms/millilitre will
be considered a positive as an anabolic agent until further notice. Samples
that contain less than this amount are not to be reported to the authorities
for unannounced out-of-competition testing.
In-competition testing is designed to detect the use of salbutamol either
as an anabolic agent or as a stimulant. Whether or not the administration
of salbutamol is declared is an important issue for in-competition testing.
As always, it is the task of the authorities to interpret the laboratory
finding. In order not to overload authorities with the need to confirm
medical notifications of non-recent inhaled use, laboratories do not need
to report concentrations lower than 100 nanograms/millilitre.
All concentrations above correspond to free (non conjugated)
The pharmacology and urinary pharmacokinetics of the ephedrines were
reviewed. The consensus was that the revised cutt-offs would detect all
cases of doping where the ephedrines were ingested on the day of competition.
FINA DOPING CONTROL REVIEW BOARD MEETING
17 January 2000, Lausanne (SUI)
The FINA Doping Control Review Board had its 2nd
Meeting on January 17 in Lausanne (SUI), with Dr. Andrew Pipe chairing
the meeting. Attending the Meeting were: Mr. Gunnar Werner (FINA Honorary
Secretary), Mr. Cornel Marculescu (FINA Executive Director), Prof. J. Malcolm
Cameron (FINA Medical Committee Honorary Secretary), Dr. Brian Corrigan
(AUS), Prof. Winton Arthur Hawksworth (RSA), Willem L. Mosterd M.D., Ph.D.
(NED), Prof. Wu Moutian (CHN), Prof. Jordi Segura (ESP). Only Dr. Bowers
Some of the main issues discussed in the Meeting
were the Review of Application for Exemptions and Review and the protocol
for doping tests during Olympic Games and World Championships. The subject
of blood testing was also mentioned: Dr. Mosterd expressed an opinion that
blood collection is acceptable more in a moral way and it is faster, whilst
Dr. Segura said that he did not foresee blood testing replacing urine analysis
in the near future. Dr. Pipe stated that there are no reliable tests yet
developed and that for the moment this remains a political issue.
It was agreed that the next meeting of the DCRB
would be held on November 3, 2000, also in Lausanne (SUI).
VISIT TO CHINA
1-3 December 1999, Shanghai (CHN)
The FINA delegation was formed by:
Mr. Ross E. Wales, FINA Vice President, Head of Delegation
Mr. Roger Smith, FINA Vice President
Mr. Sam Ramsamy, FINA Bureau Member, FINA Spokesperson
Mr. Pipat Paniangvait, FINA Bureau Member
Mr. Cornel Marculescu, FINA Executive Director
The following is a summary of the FINA Delegation meetings with representatives
of the Chinese Swimming Association led by Vice President, Mr. Shi Tianshu.
The delegation also met with representatives of the Shanghai Swimming
Association, athletes and coaches and visited the various swimming centres
in the city of Shanghai.
Shanghai, China - 1-3 December 1999. FINA concluded their follow-up
visit to China today where they received reports on doping control instituted
by the Chinese Swimming Association. Previously, the FINA delegation visited
China in 1995 and then again in 1998.
The delegation was pleased to learn that most of the recommendations
that were jointly agreed upon at the February 1998 meeting had been implemented.
Also, the delegation was very satisfied to hear that the Chinese Swimming
Association, in conjunction with Chinese Olympic Committee, has instituted
blood sampling of swimmers as a pilot project.
Moreover, the FINA delegation learned of more positive actions taken
by the Chinese Swimming Association:
1. that the Chinese Swimming Association has strengthened its publicity
policy on anti-doping and has expanded its education programme.
2. that there has been a marked increase in the number of unannounced out-of-competition
tests. For 1999, 646 tests have already been conducted, 217 in-competition
and 429 unannounced out-of-competition. In 1998 4 tests were returned positive and
the appropriate sanctions were imposed on the guilty swimmers.
3. that the regulations pertaining to the allotment of cash awards were
revised so that only 20% of the money is paid to the swimmers and the coaches
and the remainder is only paid four years later, provided that the swimmer
does not return a positive drug test.
4. that the Chinese Swimming Association now engages in international
exchanges so that the previous suspicions and perceptions are corrected
However, there was concern that certain aspects of the initial agreement
had either not been fulfilled completely or that their implementation
had not been reported to FINA. The following was pointed out to the Chinese
1. The issue surrounding the Chinese Swimming Association's initial
proposal to impose more severe sanctions for doping offences than imposed
by FINA has been partially diluted. Because the FINA delegation understands
the legal and social debate arising out of such severe sanctions, such
an amendment should have been adopted in consultation with FINA.
2. There is a lack of fluidity in the communication process between
the Chinese Swimming Association and FINA. FINA need to be informed in
a timely manner about actions taken by the Chinese Swimming Association.
Poor communication has resulted in delays in locating swimmers to conduct
the unannounced out-of-competition doping tests.
The FINA delegation understands and accepts that doping in sport is
a worldwide problem and not only specific to China.
Therefore, FINA and the Chinese Swimming Association have agreed, as
part of the on-going campaign against doping in sport generally and doping
in swimming specifically that:
1. the Chinese Swimming Association improve their registration system
so that the national and provincial systems are integrated.
2. an official should be appointed solely to deal with doping matters;
to connect swimmers with anti-doping education resources and to disseminate
the appropriate publicity material to swimmers and coaches.
3. the anti-doping education programme will be extended to all swimmers
on the national and provincial levels.
4. The communication with FINA will be prompt to avoid delays in the
execution of decisions and in obtaining the relevant information to clarify
positions and perceptions.
5. All actions taken to intensify doping control and strengthen the
anti-doping education programmes must be communicated to FINA as soon as
possible. These must also be communicated to the media so that the previous
negative perceptions of Chinese Swimming Association can be corrected.
Since February 1998 there have been six positive results returned on
the Chinese swimmers. This indicates that the campaign against doping needs
to be strengthened. Both parties are committed to pursue anti-doping matters
until the issue is brought to a positive and favorable conclusion.