Other Issues

ADAMS

The PASO MC used ADAMS to manage all anti-doping operations at these Games. Pre-

Games online training was provided by WADA to the PASO MC staff in charge of ADAMS.

While the use of ADAMS was a very positive step for PASO, some challenges were

observed regarding the respect of WADA’s requested deadlines to provide the list of

6,000 athletes that needed to be entered into ADAMS prior to the Games. The Pan

American Games Rules allow delegations to register their athletes up to 2 days prior to

the beginning of the Games while a minimum of a full week of work is necessary to enter

such a large number of athletes into ADAMS. Some efforts were done with temporary

lists but a lot of names and duplication errors were present and made it impossible to

start the OOCT Program before the beginning of the Games using the information in

ADAMS and created additional challenges during the first couple of days of competition.

This situation was at the same moment that ADAMS itself was facing problems that

required keeping the system offline for several days. To cope with this problem, the IO

Team recognized the efforts made by PASO MC in using an effective alternate method

for the randomized athlete selection in order to start the OOCT before the opening of the

Games, as mentioned before.

Throughout the Games, all DCFs and TUEs were entered daily into ADAMS by the PASO

MC or the TUEC. This allowed for an up-to-date record of all doping controls conducted

during the Games. The IO Team was able to monitor the doping control activities of the

Games and found this approach very helpful. While there were some errors with data

entry, the overall advantage of using ADAMS for record management during a Major

Games was clearly evident. Following the RIO 2007 recommendation to accelerate the

insertion of DCFs and TUEs into the system, positive changes and quicker turnarounds

were also observed.

Results Management

The PASO MC outlined in its Rules how the Results Management Process would be

conducted. In addition, the PASO MC invited Mr. Richard Young, a lawyer with several

years experience in anti-doping, to advice on all potential cases.

During the presence of the IO Team at the Games, no Results Management Hearings

were scheduled. In the last days of the mission the IO Team was informed about three

Adverse Analytical Findings (AAFs) for 16a-hydrodyprednisolone (metabolite of

budesonide). The PASO MC informed the IO Team that they would contact relevant

delegations to understand if the results could be related to the use of any medication

containing budesonide

. Additional AAFs have been reported by the laboratory and the IO

Team attempted to continue to monitor the process in place for these hearings without

success.

After leaving the Games, the IO Team continued to monitor the reporting of AAFs

through ADAMS and observed a lack of follow-up in the results management process.

For example, without knowing if athletes were appropriately notified or not, some AAFs

on the A sample were not followed-up by an immediate notification to the athlete or

request to open the B sample. At least two IFs contacted WADA with a request for

information about their athletes that had an AAF on A samples. For instance, the little

information on these cases was obtained by reading in the media where the IO Team

noticed that athletes had lost medals. After requests to the PASO MC Chair by email on

pending cases, the IO Team finally received partial information on 9 December 2011 on

how these cases have been solved and addressed its concerns on a few cases.

http://www.vogaz.com

Laboratory Sample Analysis

All analyses were performed at the Anti-Doping Laboratory of Mexico in Mexico City,

which served as a satellite laboratory of Barcelona’s WADA accredited laboratory during

the Games. Given that the Anti-Doping Laboratory of Mexico had not yet been accredited

by WADA, the only solution was to use the provision of the International Standard for

Laboratories to work under the supervision of the ISO certification and WADA

accreditation of the Accredited Anti-Doping Laboratory of Barcelona as a satellite

laboratory. The IO Team did not visit the Anti-Doping Laboratory of Mexico but taking

into consideration the information that was available, it seemed that the laboratory was

well equipped and had adequate facilities to analyze the large number of urine and blood

samples collected during the Games. Direction of the satellite laboratory was assumed

by Prof. Jordi Segura and the scientific, analytic and quality management was assumed

by two other members of the same laboratory, namely Dr. José António Pascual and Dr.

Rosa Ventura. Many experts from the Anti-Doping Laboratory of Barcelona were also

present to assist with the sample analysis.

All analytical reports were inputted and received through ADAMS, with the exception of

the reports issued at the beginning of the Games. This was a very efficient way to record

results and, although some minor problems were observed, the IO Team recognized the

benefit to the laboratories and the Major Games Organizers in using ADAMS.

The IO Team supported the decision of the PASO MC to request the analysis of the

sample related with a non-conformity reported by the Anti-Doping Laboratory of Mexico,

where a different “turbidity” between the A and B sample coming from the same athlete

was found.

http://www.vogaz.com

Therapeutic Use Exemptions

A Therapeutic Use Exemption Committee (TUEC) was established to review all TUE

applications received during the Pan American Games. This Committee was made up of

three medical doctors: Dr. Adrian Lorde, member of the PASO MC, a Brazilian doctor and

a Mexican Doctor, all having expertise in sports medicine.

Although the Anti-Doping Manual stated that all TUE applications were to be requested

through ADAMS, the IO Team was not aware of any TUEs submitted through ADAMS.

The IO Team believes that ADAMS could be a very useful tool for the Pan American

Games Organizing Committee in the management of TUEs. However, at the Pan

American Games there appeared to be a lack of a detailed plan to facilitate this, even

taking into consideration the initiatives taken by PASO MC in RIO 2007 to provide NOC

Team Physicians with ADAMS training prior to the Games. More incentive or education

may need to be given to the NOC Team Physicians to ensure they attend the training

sessions and agree to use the ADAMS system for TUE applications. The IO Team was

shocked with the number of requests that were rejected due to the fact that the

applications were not complete or were not needed because the substance was not

prohibited in the Prohibited List or the request was related to the use of

glucocorticosteroids by non systemic way of administration.

The IO Team was present at one formal meeting of the TUEC and concluded that all the

decisions made by the Committee were in compliance with the International Standard

for TUEs and the PASO Rules and the personnel involved showed great professionalism.

The IO Team would like to congratulate the TUEC for the response time for TUE

requests, which represents an improvement compared with Rio 2007.

The IO Team noticed that there was no TUE mailbox in the Policlinic for the reception of

TUE applications at the beginning of the Games. After two days a paper box was put in

place, which did not provide any security or protect the confidentiality of the

applications. After insistence of the IO Team and PASO MC a real mailbox that could be

locked was in place in order to preserve the confidentiality of the information related

with the TUE procedure.

http://www.vogaz.com

Transport and Receipt of Samples

The IO Team observed that although the Pan American Games Doping Control Services

provided security bags for the transportation of samples to the laboratory, on several

occasions the security seals provided with the bags were not used, which could have

threatened the security of the samples during transport. Although this is not a

requirement in the IST, such an approach could lead to better practice.

The IO Team observed the transfer of the samples from the DCO responsible for each

sample collection session at each venue to the DCO in charge of handling all samples

collected to the location where the samples were stored, while waiting the final

transportation by plane to the laboratory in Mexico City. No major concerns were

observed with the exception of the one mentioned above and related to the unsealed

transportation bags. The solution of using a DCO’s hotel room to store the samples was

not ideal but measures taken to guarantee security were satisfactory. To improve

security, the IO Team proposed that a lock should be added to the fridge and to always

have a DCO present in the room to assure the full security of the samples and to prevent

no one being available to receive samples being delivered to the room.

Some transport challenges had occurred in the beginning of the Games, namely security

guards requiring that the security bags were opened at the airport to check the contents

and the air transportation company preventing the transportation of blood samples,

which resulted in the PASO MC to suspend blood collections during two days. After some

initiatives taken by the Doping Control Services of Pan American Games the IO Team

was informed that the blood samples were transported to the laboratory and all

problems concerned with transportation were resolved.

The laboratory personnel confirmed that the samples were delivered and signed off on

receipt of the samples, closing the chain of custody.

http://www.vogaz.com

Security/Post-Test Administration

The IO Team did not have any major concerns with regards to this area, taking in

consideration that the samples were stored in a manner that protects their integrity,

identity and security prior to the transport, and the documentation for each sample was

completed and securely handled.

http://www.vogaz.com

Blood Sample Collection Procedure part 2

The DCOs carried out all procedures related to the doping control, with the exception of

the actual blood collection, which was performed by the BCOs. The DCOs were also

assisting during the blood collection ensuring that proper equipment was selected and

used. At the beginning of each blood sample collection the DCO explained the procedure

extensively to the athlete, outlining what was crucial, taking into consideration that in

the majority of the cases it was the athlete’s first experience with blood sampling.

Although some delegations complained about the delays or other requirements due to

such procedure, the IO Team was satisfied with what was put in place, not only in terms

of facilities and equipment but also in terms of personnel, and the professionalism of the

person responsible for the blood program.

The IO Team noticed the absence of data loggers, mandatory in the transportation of

blood samples, and agreed to the provisional suspension of the blood sample collection

at the beginning of the Games, as decided by PASO MC, until appropriate measures were

guaranteed (delays and, conditions of transportation). During one of the observations

the IO Team gave some instruction on how to optimize the transport of the samples to

the laboratory, in full compliance with 2ºC to12ºC requirements.

The IO Team would like to congratulate Dr. Orlando Reyes and his team for the work

done in such a short period of time in order to perform blood testing in full compliance

with the WADA Blood Sample Collection Guidelines.

http://www.vogaz.com

Blood Sample Collection Procedure

It was the first time that blood samples were collected in the history of the Pan American

Games, following the recommendation of the IO Team in Rio 2007.

Blood samples were collected mainly for hGH detection and for the Athlete Biological

Passport (ABP). The IO Team congratulates the PASO MC for the decision of having

contacted UCI and IAAF in order to get a list of priority athletes to be tested for the ABP,

using the experience of these IFs for their own anti-doping programs.

The PASO MC decided to centralize most of the blood sample collection in the Policlinic in

order to have the ideal facilities to perform the procedures. Given that it would have

been very difficult to have these conditions at the majority of the doping control

stations, this was a wise decision. In a few cases the blood collection procedures were

performed in other venues. The blood doping control station at the Policlinic was perfect.

Nevertheless in a few cases the blood collection procedures were also performed in other

venues, which created some particular challenges that were addressed appropriately.

Dr. Orlando Reyes, member of the PASO MC, was the person responsible for the

supervision of blood collection. At the beginning of the Games, a training session was

organized in order to train DCOs and blood collection officers (BCOs) on the blood doping

procedures and to familiarize them with the documentation and equipment. The BCOs

were local nurses or phlebotomists and the DCOs were a mix of international and

Mexican DCOs, which was a positive legacy of the Guadalajara Pan American Games.


http://www.vogaz.com

Urine Sample Collection Procedure

The number of ICTs collected was mostly in-line with the Testing Distribution Plan (TDP).

This said, in swimming eight EPO tests were planned but only two were performed, due

to a lack of coordination between the PASO MC representative and the lead DCO.

The IO Team is satisfied with what we have seen and the most of the international DCOs

were working in a very professional fashion, and the Mexican DCOs showed

improvement as the Games were progressing. The urine sample collection during the

Games was generally done in accordance with the PASO Rules and Doping Control

Manual as well as the International Standard for Testing. However, a few key issues that

were observed:



Two DCOs did not appear to be fully following the testing procedures. This was

raised with the PASO MC, resulting in one of the two DCOs being removed; The

IO Team observed a number of mistakes in the completion of the Doping Control

Forms by the DCOs, although most were minor. In few cases the mistakes could

have been relevant during the Results Management process should an Adverse

Analytical Finding (AAF) been reported; and



In some the box on the DCF indicating consent to have the sample used for

research was not filled. On most DCFs the box for “blood transfusions in the last

six months” was unnecessarily completed, given that it should only be filled in

case of blood collection.


http://www.vogaz.com

Notification

The chaperones were assigned from the corps of volunteers and/or medical staff shortly

prior to the start of competition. It was not verified whether the chaperones were related

to competitors or support personnel. The chaperones, with no previous experience or

knowledge of sport peculiarities were all assigned to carry out notification, chaperoning

and witnessing the passing of the urine sample. The chaperone training consisted of

less than 30 minutes of instructions relating to all of the above. During all the observed

doping controls the IO Team noted a very limited number of adequate notifications. In

order to ensure that the correct athlete was in fact made aware of the doping control, a

person from PASO or a DCO had to escort the chaperone to the athlete. Some

chaperones did not notify the athletes in accordance with the requirements – generally

only saying “doping control”. Some of them were not completing the Athlete Notification

Form before entering the doping control station. The IO Team never overheard the

athletes’ rights and responsibilities explained adequately to the athletes during

notification. It seemed that the chaperones were not aware of the athletes’ rights and

responsibilities and did not appear able to handle unexpected situations (such as if the

athlete wanting to take a shower).

Fortunately, the athletes and their support personnel were adequately familiar with the

doping control process and aware of the procedures, ensuring that both the athlete and

their support personnel would accompany the chaperones and arrive in due time to the

doping control station.

An athlete having to attend a press conference, a medal ceremony or receive medical

attention does not require them to report immediately to the doping control station,

however, the athlete still has to sign the Athlete Notification Form when notified. This

practice was not observed at all times. The athlete should immediately receive a copy of

the Athlete Notification Form. The IO Team noted that in some situations the Form was

only given at the very end of the doping control process.

Athletes Selection part 2

The day following this proposal, the representative of the IF and lead DCO, before the

beginning of the swimming events on that day, decided to test in each final Gold, Silver

and a randomly selected swimmer from the other finalists. After the intervention of the

Chair of the PASO MC, it was then decided not to test the Gold medalist in one event

because that athlete was apparently tested in different occasions. The IO Team reviewed

the DCFs and concluded that the athlete was previously tested only once during the

Games. The following day, the IO Team informed the PASO MC about the concern. The

IO Team also informed the PASO MC that during the first four days of swimming

competition eight athletes were tested more than once (one athlete four times, one

athlete three times and six athletes twice). The names of these athletes were sent to the

Chair of the PASO MC as requested.

The IO Team reviewed the DCFs from the beginning of the testing in Guadalajara 2011

Pan American until October 20 and noticed that a total of fourteen athletes provided two

dilute samples. Only five of those fourteen athletes provided an additional test the

following day, which was not in conformity with the provision described in the Anti-

Doping Manual. The IO Team recommended that an additional test be performed in all

these cases.

http://www.vogaz.com

Athletes Selection

The athlete selection for the in-competition testing (ICT) program generally followed the

International Federation (IF) guidelines or requests. It did concern the IO Team that in

some venues there was no coordination between the doping control personnel and IF

representatives which created problems (e.g. a swimmer was notified for doping control

after a first event because the chaperone was not aware that he/she would compete

later in another event and the chaperone could not prevent the athlete from urinating

between the two events). In order to avoid these situations, the IO Team recommended

a systematic coordination with the IF technical commissioner to plan the notification and

testing procedures. The IO Team observed that some doping control station managers

and/or lead DCOs and/or PASO MC representatives doing it but it was not done at all

venues.

Some IF delegates requested that the athletes who were tested on one day not be

selected for testing on the following day. This request was made, despite the fact that

the athletes were often competing in finals, resulting in a situation where even if an

athlete finished first in the event, they would not be selected for testing, which the IO

Team considered inappropriate and unacceptable. Nevertheless, systematically testing

gold/silver/bronze medal winners in a sport, for example like swimming, where events

took place on consecutive days and which were dominated by the same group of

nations, leads to several samples being collected from the same athletes and/or

countries. While the IO Team understood the need to test gold and/or silver medalists,

the third test could perhaps be distributed randomly in order to extend the pool of

countries and athletes that were selected for doping control. This could also serve as a

preventive factor for nations who think they can escape doping control at Pan American

Games because they do not take the podium but still perform well at a national or

regional level. The IO Team proposed that some athletes be randomly selected for

doping control between the finalists that did not go to the podium. The PASO MC

followed this recommendation, at least for swimming.


http://www.vogaz.com

Doping Control Documentation

The documentation used at the Pan American Games was prepared specifically for the

Games. Nevertheless the IO Team was concerned with the following aspects:



Doping Control Form (DCF) contained all of the necessary information, but only

had space for one blood sample code, which required the DCOs to complete two

DCFs when 2 codes were needed (for example one code for hGH and another

code for the Athlete Biological Passport). This was time consuming and prolonged

a procedure that, even in normal situations, was already very long;



Supplementary Report Forms had three sheets with one wrongly dedicated to the

IPC and did not include sequence number.



Supplementary Report forms were also used for medication declarations, with a

copy only needed for the laboratory, however all copies had the name of the

athlete and his/her signature, which created problems with the confidentiality of

the samples. The IO Team intervened during the first DCO training session to

point out this problem. The PASO MC instructed all DCOs to cut off the lower part

of the form, which contained the athlete’s name and/or signature, of copy sent to

the laboratory and to put the urine sample code on the form in order to match

the Supplementary Report Form with the DCF;



The Athlete Notification Form still included a box for “Report no later than”, which

should not have been included since the 60 minute rule to report to the doping

control station has not applied since 2009. The IO Team observed some

confusion on the part of the athletes related to this and recommended that the

box on all DCFs be crossed out prior to the notification. This recommendation was

put into place at all venues; and



The lack of a standardized DCO reporting for each session was a concern to the

IO Team. The DCOs were instructed to write a report when something

extraordinary occurred. During the Games, the IO Team witnessed a few issues

that the Team felt warranted a DCO report, however, the Team is not aware of

any DCO Report Forms being completed throughout the Games.


http://www.vogaz.com

Preparation for Sample Collection Process part 2

Ad-hoc solutions that to a large extent solved some of the main issues were initiated,

such as:

1. The toilet at the back of the technical delegate/organizers bus was used for doping

control purposes;

2. Two tables were hung from the roof dividing two processing tables;

3. A portable office from the technical delegate/organizers at site was voluntarily

lent to the DCO/PASO MC personnel for blood sample processing room.

Doping Control Equipment

Certified and adequate kits were used as doping control equipment for both blood and

urine sample collection.

In one case the number on the stickers containing a sample code did not match with the

number on the bottles only by a little difference in the last number of the code. The

PASO MC decided to request that the LOC find the other kit containing the same code as

the sticker and to send a letter to the company that created the kits to inform them

about this serious non-conformity.

The LOC preferred to use digital refractometers to measure the specific gravity (SG) of

urine samples. The IO Team noticed some problems with the measurement of SG related

to refractometers lacking power, which resulted in DCO accepting samples with SG out

of range.


http://www.vogaz.com

Preparation for Sample Collection Process

At these events it is essential to have one experienced DCO carrying out all planning and

preparation, including planning for the most suitable time of notification, assisting during

notification, setting up the doping control station, maintaining contact with the technical

delegate on site and other ongoing issues. Such person was not assigned, leaving all

these tasks to the DCO, who also had to deal with inexperienced chaperones and partly

experienced or inexperienced Mexican DCOs.

Doping Control Stations

Each venue was equipped with an identified doping control station during competition. At

larger venues, such as swimming or athletics, these were permanent doping control

stations, with a waiting area, processing room and adjacent toilet facilities for each

procedure room.

The doping control stations at several venues were temporary facilities. A more

professional layout for this size of competition was expected. Several of these doping

control stations lacked facilities that would fully secure the athlete’s privacy, such as:

1. Lack of closed waiting area;

2. No guard at the door restricting entrance;

3. No record of people entering and/or leaving the station;

4. Lack of toilet facilities at one site;

5. Lack of privacy at the processing table;

6. An office at one site was used as both a waiting area and processing room.


http://www.vogaz.com

Out-of-Competition Testing part 4



The LOC didn’ provide accurate information about the date of arrival and

departure for specific athletes. Sometimes they provide the date of arrival and

departure for the delegation, but we did not know if a given athlete would arrive

with the first group of members of that delegation or at a later stage. The same

applies with the date of departure;



The LOC provided, when available, the building where the delegations were

staying but without the room assignments. On several occasions the DCO arrived

at the building and members of the delegation refused to give the room list

without the DCO giving the name of the athlete or athletes to be tested, which

interfered with the no advanced notice requirement;



The athlete is member of a delegation that is staying in the Village but competing

in a sport that is far away from the Village and decided to stay in an hotel nearby

the competition venue; and



The athlete is staying in the Village but leaves very early to train at the venue

where the event is to take place or outside the Village and are not in the building

when the DCO tries to notify him/her.

The IO Team noticed that these issues occurred during the Pan American Games in Rio

2007 and recurs at most Major International Events (e.g. Olympic and Paralympics

Games, Commonwealth Games, Mediterranean Games, etc.) and for this reason thinks

that a solution should be found in order to solve this problem, so that other

organizations of Major International Events can be encouraged to follow the same

strategy. For example, ADAMS has been introduced at the Pan American Games and

should have been used by the participants as per the International Standard for Testing

(IST).

http://www.vogaz.com

Out-of-Competition Testing part 3

The IO Team noticed some occurrences during the OOCT performed in the Village in the

first days that affected the quality of the OOCT Program:



Strategy of using only one DCO with all chaperones notifying athletes one by one,

instead of splitting the DCOs available in the Village and pairing them with

chaperones in order to reach a larger number of athletes in a shorter period of

time;



The attempt to notify the athletes began late (10am-11am) decreasing the

chances of actually locating the athletes in their rooms;



When walking around the Village, the DCOs and Chaperones were wearing the

red doping control vest and accreditations providing an opportunity for athletes

and/or delegations to leave their building and escape from a possible test,

instead of only wear it at the moment of notification to avoid being identified as

doping control personnel;



There was confusion related to the amount of information the DCOs were able to

provide to the delegation and/or Chef de Mission, namely whether or not to

reveal the name of the sport of the selected athlete.

Appropriate measures were taken by PASO MC to correct these issues after being

informed by the IO Team.

Apart from the problems related to the notification of the athlete, the collection of urine

and/or blood observed by the IO Team in the doping control station at the Policlinic in

the Village were performed in a highly professional way.

While in theory it seems easier to perform OOCT on athletes that are staying at a Village

of a Major International Event than those that are living and training at their usual home

address or training venues, DCOs trying to notify athletes in a Games Village face a lot

of difficulties. These include:

Out-of-Competition Testing part 2

The IO Team noted that in the first two days of OOCT a total of 8 doping controls were

conducted cyclists (road race) - 4 requiring EPO analysis and 4 not requiring EPO. The

IO Team requested to know what selection criteria was used for such a decision, but

never received an explanation from the PASO MC.

The ability to ensure that unannounced, no advance notice testing occurred at the

Village was at times difficult, as was the case in the previous edition of the Games. The

doping control personnel were not always permitted to enter the athlete residence and

knock on the specific athlete’s door. Therefore, they had to talk to the National Olympic

Committee (NOC) staff to determine which athletes were present. In these cases, the

athletes were often not present and therefore the tests may have turned into an

advance notice test.

One particular incident happened with the Brazilian Chef de Mission when the DCO

requested the list with the room assignments in order to test a Brazilian athlete. The

Chef de Mission denied the request due to privacy protection issues. This was

unacceptable given that he was challenging the authority to formalize such a request

and the right of anti-doping authorities to request such information. The IO Team

Member present at the notification intervened to protect the integrity of the DCO and

reinsured the Chef de Mission that the DCO was following the instructions received from

the PASO MC. A tense verbal altercation occurred between people present and the IO

Team requested that the PASO MC Chair intervene to resolve the issue. A meeting with

all parties was planned to sort out this situation but never occurred. After this incident at

least two others occurred with the same delegation, always refusing to provide the list

with the room assignments and therefore not receiving the room number to find a

particular athlete for testing.

Out-of-Competition Testing

In addition to the in-competition testing program, the PASO MC also conducted out-ofcompetition

testing (OOCT) throughout the Games. Athletes were randomly selected and

the testing took place at the Pan American Village (Village). In general, the OOCT

program went well. The key observations were:



The PASO MC tried to use the Anti-Doping Administration and Management

System (ADAMS) to conduct athlete selection for the OOCT Program. While this

was an effective way of conducting the selection, it was dependent on the Team

Lists being entered into ADAMS which was impossible to fulfill do due to the lack

of accuracy of the information provided to the Local Organizing Committee (LOC)

and problems related to the availability of ADAMS in the beginning of the Games.

The PASO MC decided to establish a back-up plan with the creation of an Excel

spreadsheet where all the athletes were included in order to perform a random

selection for OOCT.



The IO Team was pleased with the randomized process that was used for the

selection of athletes for OOCT two days before the beginning of the Games. The

approach of selecting one athlete per country for smaller delegations and 5% for

delegations with more than 50 athletes was appropriate. The Team Lists delay

resulted in difficulties in the normal start of the OOCT Program and also in the

lack of fulfillment of the total of OOCT that were planned by PASO MC for the

Games. Nevertheless the IO Team would like to congratulate the PASO MC for

taking into consideration similar problems faced in Rio 2007, making

improvements in Guadalajara 2011.



The total number of OOCTs was lower than initially planned - not only urine

sample collection but also blood and urine for EPO detection. This situation was

related mainly with difficulties in getting the list of participants and their location

from the LOC, but also with the lack of cooperation of some delegations and

difficulties in the coordination of the doping control personnel during the first

days of OOCT at the Village. No OOCT was performed on athletes that didn’t stay

in the Village during the Games.

http://www.vogaz.com

Doping Control Manual part 2

The blood sample collection procedures were not described and considering that

these Games represented the first in the history of the Pan American Games

where blood samples were collected and that the majority of the athletes were

not familiar with the procedures, it would have been most useful to have a

detailed section dedicated to blood sample collection procedures in the Manual

and a leaflet to inform the athletes about the procedures;



The preventive measures put in place to prevent the use of proteases to

manipulate urine samples collected for EPO detection were not described, namely

the need for athletes to wash their hands before the collection of the urine

sample;



The responsibility of the athlete to provide information about any

prescription/non-prescription medications or supplements that he or she has

taken recently and the right to note comments and concerns regarding the

conduct of the doping control session on the Doping Control Form were not

described;



The manual does not include any information regarding conformity with the

Article 5.4.1 g) of the International Standard for Testing (IST) – “

That should the

Athlete choose to consume food or fluids prior to providing a Sample, he/she

does so at his/her own risk, and should in any event avoid excessive rehydration,

having in mind the requirement to produce a Sample with a Suitable Specific

Gravity for Analysis

.”



The Article 12.3 of the Doping Control Manual described the procedure to use

when urine samples did not meet the requirement for suitable specific gravity for

analysis, in compliance with the IST, that the DCO should continue to collect

additional

Samples until the requirement for suitable specific gravity for analysis

is met (1.005 or higher), or until the DCO determines that there are exceptional

circumstances which mean that for logistical reasons it is impossible to continue

with the

Sample Collection Session. Such exceptional circumstances shall be

documented accordingly by the DCO. Meanwhile, the Article 12.6 of the same

Doping Control Manual defined that only one more sample must be collected if

the first one did not met the requirement and if the laboratory inform that none

of the two samples eventually met the requirement and that fact is not due to

natural causes the athlete must be submitted to another doping control as soon

as possible. There is a clear contradiction between Articles 12.3 and 12.6.

With reference to this last discrepancy, the PASO MC said that they informed the DCOs

that only one more sample must be collected, to avoid long delays in the doping control

procedures, and the MC must be informed of such situations in order to plan the

collection of another sample from the athlete as soon as possible. The PASO MC cannot

create a rule to replace a requirement of IST that where only exceptional circumstances

are acceptable for not following the requirement. This means that for logistical reasons it

is impossible to continue with the

Sample Collection Session, decided case by case by

the DCO. The IO Team saw an unusual number of very dilute samples (1.000 or 1.001)

collected during in competition tests where a second doping control was not intended in

the next day.

http://www.vogaz.com

Doping Control Manual

The Doping Control Manual is always an important document to guide doping control

personnel, athletes and athlete support personnel through the doping control procedures

and to inform all concerned about their rights and responsibilities related to doping

control.

http://www.vogaz.com

The Doping Control Manual for the XVI Pan American Games was a well organized

document based on similar documents used in previous editions of the Games. This said,

it seemed that the doping control personnel were not well informed about the contents,

relying on their own experience as well as that of others instead of consulting the

Manual. The IO Team was concerned with some gaps and discrepancies in the Doping

Control Manual, which could lead to misunderstandings:

Training and Education of Doping Control Personnel

The first session was performed two days before the opening ceremonies. As some DCOs

and Mexican DCOs hadn’t attended the first session, a second session was organized one

day after the opening ceremonies. The first session was mainly theoretical, with no

practical training or demonstration of equipment. Forms to be used during the sample

collection session were explained during this education session.

A larger number of DCOs attended the second session (10 international and 15

Mexican). The training was also delivered in a professional manner. Having DCOs

perform some of the tasks, using the sample collection equipment used during the

Games, under the supervision of two members of the PASO MC, increased the

effectiveness of the training. This training session was a good opportunity to share

information between the more and less experienced DCOs and to clarify all the

remaining doubts about the doping control procedures during the Games. The IO Team

used the opportunity to give a brief presentation about the manipulation of urine

samples with proteases to defeat the EPO detection method and the preventive actions

that must be implemented during the doping control procedures in order to prevent that

manipulation.

Chaperones did not receive any training prior to the beginning of the Games, only

receiving a briefing at the venues just before the beginning of the start of the doping

control session. In addition, at some venues the volunteers recruited as chaperones

changed from one day to the next, what did not contribute to capitalize on their

experience from one day to the other.


http://www.vogaz.com

Doping Control

Several Mexican DCOs were assigned to assist the international DCOs. These DCOs did

not receive any pre-Games supervision or evaluation. At the beginning of the Games a

large portion of the doping controls were performed by the international DCOs with the

Mexican DCOs observing. Then, the MCDOs started conducting sample collection under

the supervision of the international DCOs. The IO Team feels that this was a good

strategy in order to increase their experience and to leave a legacy in Mexico in terms of

trained and experienced doping control personnel. Half way into the Games, most of the

less suitable Mexican DCOs were left to carry out other tasks and leaving the more

capable MCDOs to continue to perform sample collection with full autonomy.

The IO Team was present for the two training sessions that were organized by the PASO

MC to retrain all DCOs to ensure that they were familiar with the procedures described in

the Doping Control Manual, doping control equipment and documentation for the Games.

It was very positive to have PASO MC Members present at these sessions to share their

experience with the DCOs.

http://www.vogaz.com

Observations

Doping Control

Training and Education of Doping Control Personnel

Doping Control Officers (DCO) from different South American countries were recruited

for the purpose of ensuring that doping control was carried out as per the International

Standard for Testing. The competence and experience of the DCOs varied, with the

majority showing excellent performance and good planning skills prior to and during the

doping control procedures. Some DCOs had less experience, which was evident from

their performance. The international DCO pool was composed of DCOs from Brazil (10-

12), Colombia (1), Uruguay (1) and Venezuela (1). Having excluded native English

speakers in the recruitment of DCOs was problematic given the large delegation of

athletes using English as their mother tongue – especially those taking medals at the

Games. Even if the majority of DCOs was speaking English as a second language, a

widespread continental selection could have been more beneficial. The IO Team is aware

that there are experienced English speaking DCOs, not only from Canada and the US,

but also from the Caribbean RADO, that could have been considered for the international

pool of DCOs, which would have given a better linguistic balance and a good opportunity

to use the very experienced DCOs from CCES or USADA, both relating to carrying out

the doping control but also for educating the Mexican DCOs.

http://www.vogaz.com

Methodology

The terms of the Agreement between WADA and PASO established the base guidelines

for the role of the IO Team at the XVI Pan American Games. The PASO MC provided for

complete access to the IO Team throughout the Games, thus ensuring a collaborative

approach to guarantee the most effective doping control program.

The IO Team attempted to observe all aspects of the doping control program at the

Games, including:



In- and out-of-competition testing;



Athlete selection process;



Athlete notification and chaperoning;

 Urine and blood sample collection procedures;



Chain of custody procedures;



Delivery of samples to the laboratory;



Laboratory activities;



All doping control documentation;



Therapeutic Use Exemption Committee meetings;



Use of ADAMS during the Games;



Results management process; and



Possible hearings conducted during the period of the mission.

The IO Team attended all PASO MC meetings. At these meetings the IO Chair was able

to listen to MC Members discuss what they observed in the field and any other antidoping

issues that arose. In addition, the IO Chair presented a verbal report on the key

issues that the IO Team observed the previous day. Daily written reports were provided

to the Chair of the PASO MC. These reports included the information that the IO Chair

verbally reported to the MC, in addition to other issues that the IO Team felt was

important to report.

It is worth mentioning that in one of their very first meetings, the PASO MC analyzed the

recommendations from the Rio 2007 Pan American Games IO Report in order to focus on

the issues that were pointed out to correct them. The IO Team believes that this

approach is very important and that other Major Games Organizers should consider

doing the same.

In most occasions the PASO MC agreed with the Team’ observations and corrected the

issues. However, the Team reported one recurring issue to the PASO MC several times

and no formal corrective action was reported or appeared to be taken. With no formal

corrective action taken during the Games, the Team can only include in the report what

was observed.

At the venues, the IO Team would only intervene or provide immediate feedback to the

doping control staff if, in the view of the IO Team Member, there was the potential to

affect the validity or integrity of the sample or otherwise negatively impact the antidoping

program. This occurred on a couple of occasions and was reported immediately

to the Chair of the PASO MC or to the PASO MC the following day.

http://www.vogaz.com