Drug-testing coming to regional meets, masters record-setters
Masters will see more of these, even after meets.
Responding to my questions, Stephen says funding for this program comes out of the national MT&F Committee budget, and ādrug-testing will be performed at as many meets as possible.ā
He also says: āIf a person sets a national or world record as a sanctioned meet, the Masters [T&F] Committee may request that person be tested after the competition.ā
Given the hundreds of records set annually, this entails picking-and-choosing. Who decides?
Stephen says his Midwest Regional indoor meet did drug-testing two years ago. The first tested meet of 2016 may be the Mid-America indoor regionals Feb. 7 at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.
Another source tells me: āThere is a possibility of a $5 surcharge at regionals.ā
The number of tests done by USADA āwill have to be within the financing capacity of MTF. It could begin this year with education widespread about it and a meet to launch it. We will not announce at least right now indoor/outdoor or what meet yet, but the key is all masters and open athletes are subject to testing.ā
One masters officer answered my questions thusly:
How many tests will be done?
āThis is something only 2 people at USATF, and an unknown number of people at USADA, know and they arenāt telling.ā
Who decides on who gets tested?
āUSADA.ā
Bottom line: Look for drug positives galore. Our sport is going over the edge.
62 Responses
I disagree with your bottom line “Bottom line: Look for drug positives galore. Our sport is going over the edge”. If anything I think there will be fewer positives as athletes will start taking this more seriously and people who insist on PEDs will hopefully not show up for these competitions.
I believe the edge is up, not down. Hopefully a true level playing field for all.
If an athlete has an astonishing improvement in their performance at a major competition…..they should be tested…Not only to catch cheaters, but stop allegations of cheating if they are clean. We need to keep folks honest, and if testing is the answer, so be it.
If the punishment was more than just a suspension, that also included the erasing of any Records or Marks set by that individual,at any time they competed as a Masters competitor, I believe there would be fewer violations.
Just a thought…Is it that difficult to be honest as Athletes?
The sky will not be falling anytime soon. Good riddance to the National meet testing loophole.
I look forward to running and jumping in 2016 and beyond.
I think what Ken means by “look for drug positives galore” is that there are frequent incidences in which people have failed to get a TUE for a physician-prescribed medication and didn’t know the drug was on the banned list. Not everyone who tests positive is dishonest; some people make mistakes by not doing their homework and getting TUEs.
As people become educated about the list of banned substances, there will necessarily be an increased number of TUE requests for physician-prescribed drugs. Older people take a lot of physician-prescribed drugs. Just a fact. More drugs = more TUEs
Hopefully, the organization is prepared to process in a timely fashion the increased number of TUEs that regional testing will cause.
Many regional competitors don’t know what a TUE is. The level of awareness is far lower in regionals than Nationals. This regional testing is a red herring….the sport has more serious problems than this.
Rob, those people don’t really need to worry. If they could have gotten a TUE but didn’t, if they test positive and prove it with medical records they get only a private warning and they get a TUE. Then if they don’t renew the TUE when it expires two or three years later and they test positive again then they get a public warning.
Bottom line, people who qualify for a TUE don’t need to worry unless they are lazy or don’t bother to renew it after getting caught once. And the rest of us won’t even know it if they are caught without at TUE the first time.
I’ve explained this in far greater detail in my column in the December/January issue of National Masters News.
Bottom line this is a good thing for our sport, not the catastrophe some (like Ken above) are predicting.
Just for my education and maybe others. Where does a person get or send the information for TUEs. I recently have been diagnosed with diabetes, high blood pressure, cholesterol issues etc…. and now on medication. I probably won’t begin competing until summer due to achilles surgery but would like to get the ball rolling. (in case I break some kind of record or something.) (tongue in cheek) š
The best place to start is the USADA website (usada.org). On the site is a link to another site (http://www.globaldro.org/Home) where you can learn if your meds are currently on a banned list. The USADA site also had detailed information on how to apply for a TUE.
Speaking of Regional meets, where are they ? Can’t find any on USATF website, especially the East.
@7. Thank you Jerry
Would someone who is knowledgeable on this topic please clarify somethings for me. By definition, a TUE is granted when an athlete is using a medication that is on the “prohibited” list. And I strongly believe no one who needs such a medication should be denied it. However, this medication supposedly gives the athlete a performance advantage; hence it being prohibited. If this is correct, (1) should records set by individuals with TUEs be allowed and (2) shouldn’t openness and fairness dictate that competitors be aware that they are competing against someone who has a TUE? I understand the concern about privacy but no master’s athlete HAS to compete. I think that if someone has a TUE, he or she should accept that this information will be made public. As it is now, I don’t believe there is any public source where we can find out who has an active TUE. Personally, I would like to know if I am competing against someone who has a TUE. I would also like to know if any current records were set by individuals who had an active TUE. If we don’t allow sprint records that are wind-aided, why would we allow records set by individuals who have a performance advantage?
Not all medicines lead to a TUE. I think that if a medicine not only makes the athlete healthier but also leads to improvements above his or her normal level, than a TUE is not given. Think of steroids. Diuretics is a very different story and will lead to a TUE.
Can anyone tell me how I can pay to be tested? I take off the shelf sports supplements like N.O. Explode before I work out, and everyone says there is nothing in it that is illegal – my doctor, the company that makes it, etc. etc. But I want to pay to be tested just to make sure. I am putting in a hell of a lot of work to improve next season, and I want to know for sure that what I am taking is clean. How can I get that done?
The 2016 SE Indoor Region will be Feb. 21 at the JDL Fast Track in Winston-Salem, NC. Currently we have $1,200 in prize money to the top age graded performance in various events. As of now, there will be 12 individuals who will receive $100.00. Ya’ll come on down.
Weia–I understand that all medicines don’t lead to a TUE. But are you saying that if a TUE would improve performance, then it won’t be approved? How would the committee that oversees TUEs know if a specific medicine might improve a specific athlete’s performance “above a normal level”? If, for example, I’m taking an asthma drug that is prohibited and I’m issued a TUE, how would the committee know if the drug was or wasn’t influencing my athletic performance? If I run faster in 2015 than I did in 2014, after being issued a TUE, would my TUE be rescinded?
The 2016 East Region & New England Indoor Championships are Sunday Jan. 31 in Providence, RI. $600 in prize money available. Age graded winners male & female will win $250 each.
https://www.usatf.org/Products—Services/Event-Registration-Form.aspx?e=107128
Mike Travers
The TUE application form is a bit daunting:
http://www.usada.org/wp-content/uploads/tue-form-trackfield.pdf
Pag. 4 of 6
Notes: Note 1
Diagnosis Evidence confirming the diagnosis must
be attached and forwarded with this application.
The medical evidence should include a comprehensive
medical history, and the results of all relevant
clinical examinations, investigations, specialist medical reports and imaging studies.
Copies of original reports or letters should be
included when possible.
Evidence should be as objective as possible
in the clinical circumstances and, in the case
of nonādemonstrable conditions, independent supporting medical opinion will assist this application.
==
In addition, the steps to fill out a TUE application state:
http://www.usada.org/substances/tue/apply/
“All TUE applications must contain sufficient medical information, including clinic and laboratory testing notes to allow the USADA TUE Committee make the same diagnosis and arrive at the same treatment plan as your physician without ever seeing the patient.”
Hi Stephen and others. I’m no expert but have some experience with this. It is my understanding that to get a TUE for a drug it may have some ingredients that by themselves might be performance enhancing. The test is it (in many cases such as blood pressure diuretics compounded with other drugs) must be proven by your medical records as a drug that has been found to be the drug (maybe the only drug) that can treat your condition and isn’t really performance enhancing I hope.
I believe that there might be a committee or a single doctor at USADA who determines if you qualify for a TUE. You and your doctor need to be checking (http://www.globaldro.org/Home) to know if your drugs are a performance enhancing drug. Thee telephone contact is very responsive and helpful with any questions. Call when there is any doubt.
Supplements are a real problem. There is no list that I am aware of that lists prohibited supplements. The biggest caveat seems to be knowing what is in anything that you take in your body. Reading labels helps but in many cases supplements have proprietary formulations which don’t tell you what is in them. Also, quality control is a big issue with supplements. There are many instances of adulteration of supplements with peds that can get you busted. Then its still your problem. The only thing that may help if you want to take supplements may be informed-choice.org testing of supplements. Manufactures pay this independent testing company to continually test batches of specific products. The products they test and batch reports are on informed-choice.org website. I don’t think that there is any guarantee with this but it is a good start if you must.
George
Stephen, if you run faster taking a drug for which you received a TUE the TUE would not be rescinded unless the drug in question is put on the banned list. Performance is not assessed, only whether or not you have a substance in your body that has been determined to be performance enhancing.
Jerry–Excuse my stupidity here. I assume you can’t get a TUE for a drug that is on the banned list. Right? But by definition, all prohibited drugs are prohibited precisely because they are performance enhancing. So I’m back to asking: If TUEs are issued for performance-enhancing drugs and if these drugs truly enhance performance, shouldn’t we know who has TUEs and shouldn’t their performances be ineligible for records? Non-TUE athletes shouldn’t have to chase records that may have been set by individuals who had a performance-enhancement advantage. Remember, we’re competing in a sport where records are set by hundredths of a second and centimeters.
Medicines can be on the list because they are used by young athletes to mask real PED’s. Like diuretics. But diuretics as a medicine isn’t enhancing your prestations. Same with athma medicines, a healthy person cannot gain anything, only asthmatic persons gain – up to a ‘normal level’.
Bring on the testing!!!! I am an honest and fair athlete. The idea of an increase in testing does not concern me personally because I know I am clean. I do, unfortunately, feel we need to increase testing to send the message our sport needs…regardless of age. It is too bad people feel cheating is necessary and it leaves us no choice but to test to make sure the cheaters are caught.
Further to # 13 above …
Does USATF Masters have an anti doping committee?
Whom do Regional and Association meet directors contact with anti doping questions?
Do the tests increase the meet cost?
Weia is correct. I had to obtain a TUE for my blood pressure diuretics. When I asked why this medication was on the banned list, the reason given was that its used to mask over PEDs. And judging by my performance over the past decade, its pretty darn safe to say that there ain’t no enhancers included. Not even a micro-bit. But, what a shame that money and resources have to be channeled to prevent cheating on the masters level. smh. That money could be spend on subsidizing travel expenses or uniforms or red wine. Just saying. š
Yes on the Masters anti committee. Steve Cohen is the chair; Stephen Cohen . Also, USADA.org. Yes increase cost maybe? Tests are expensive.
Further to #20 above. If medication is not on the prohibited list there will never be a requirement for a TUE. My medication is to keep levels within the ‘normal’ range. Levels are monitored via blood tests and dosage would be either increased or decreased as necessary to keep within the ‘normal’ range, although no change has been necessary for more than 15 years. It is also interesting to note that whilst I had a TUE, when I went to renew it at expiry I was advised that this was not necessary as the medication was no longer on the prohibited list. I would therefore think it prudent for every athlete to take responsibility to regularly check whether the status of any medication (whether currently prohibited or not) has changed.
Yes. any doubt check by phone. Example Losartan isn’t banned. You look up Losartan HCTZ no results. In fact HCTZ part is a diuretic and should have been on the list needing a TUE. I called about from my Doctor’s office when they were thinking of changing meds and sure of enough they said it should have been on the online search list. Hopefully added by now. Liability is still on the athlete although this category of drugs would probably qualify for pre and post competition testing tue.
I have had a TUE for an asthma medication for many years – particularly for international competition as that is where the drug testing was until recently. The medication allows me to compete. Without it I wheeze, cough, on occasion my lips turn blue and I have to stop running. With the use of the inhaler I can run and breath -so I suppose one could say it “enhanced my performance”-certainly over how I performed without the inhaler. I have exercise induced asthma -it has gotten worse over the years, can be really bad during allergy season, and when it is very damp. Frankly without the inhaler probably I would have stopped competing – in fact when I first developed exercise induced asthma I did not compete for several years until I saw an asthma specialist and was prescribed an inhaler to help open my bronchial passages.
So -yes my TUE drug enhances my performance – so to speak -and the irony of all this is that for the past few years I have not needed a TUE and the rules were changed to allow the use of this medication without a TUE up to a certain level in the body. The two puffs from the inhaler do not come near to that level. I think I would probably pass out or have a heart attack if I took enough to reach the banned level.
I think too much is made of the need for a TUE for some medications – ie – sometimes the drug for which a TUE is needed is used to mask performance enhancing drugs – thus the ban and requirement for a TUE – being concerned about enhanced performance by someone using these drugs is silly -as the drugs are prescribed for genuine medical needs -and the amount does not rise to the level of “enhancing performance” It is pretty darn hard to get a TUE for true performance enhancing drugs. The medical need must be certified – and having danced this dance for years – having to fax to WMA my medical history – repeatedly -having to see my asthma specialist yearly and take a breathing test and submit the results -this is pretty hard to fake, require access to specialists and good health insurance. Those trying to use performance enhancing drugs are not usually seeking medical assistance for medical purposes.
Masters getting “caught” seem to be folks who are taking prescribed medications for health reasons and unaware of the need to get a TUE – over the counter supplements that are contaminated with who knows what- or a cold medication that the person was not aware was on the banned list. And of course the occasional cheater trying to pump up results. I have no sympathy for the last group – and hope all of them are caught.
All of us who take any prescribed medication need to check the websites USADA and the one for international drug testing several times a year as things change all the time. Those taking OTC supplements to try to boost their performance need to stop doing that and eat real food and not fill their bodies with unknown chemicals in hopes of finding “an edge”. Real food tastes better –
“Test’um….I say”
Clean is clean and cheaters for the most part don’t show at big meets anyway…………..and we all know who they are anyway. Funny how they disappear from site or say they are waiting for the next age group.
I do think that the weight events need to be watched and any records broken should be followed by testing. Just my two cents.
Perhaps weāll see a decline in mastersā athletic performance, as time formerly spent training will now be devoted to researching generic and proprietary names of various medications, poring over lists of ingredients, searching online banned-drug lists, making phone calls to verify the accuracy of the online listings, writing letters to confirm that the information obtained over the phone is accurate, checking back every week or so in case something has been added to the banned lists, compiling ācomprehensiveā medical histories (including diagnosis evidence, copies of clinic and laboratory reports, and specialist medical reports), coaxing doctors to write independent supporting medical opinions, and making sure that the TUE committee can āmake the same diagnosis and arrive at the same treatment plan as your physician without ever seeing the patient.ā
usada.org has just about everything you need to know about banned substances and tues. If competing internationally need to check wada.org. They could have some differences in banned substances and definitely a different tue process. Need to plan way ahead on getting a wada tue. Usada tue doesn’t cover international competition.
We all need to be very involved in our medical treatment anyhow.
Linda Carty wins this round!!! Yay!!!!
More testing is a good idea in my opinion just as long as they do it without putting athletes in uncomfortable situations. The focus should be on the top performers but not just winners. Allowing athletes to compete and win with permission to use banned substances will always propose a serious problem.
I believe that most individuals using PED’s with permits are not abusing their TUE to use that substance during competitions; however, there has to be some abusers out there. One abuser is too many. Especially when it comes to steroids like Testosterone. My T levels might be lower than normal. I don’t know, but I refuse to take any banned substance that can give me an advantage over my competition. In brief; a TUE can be viewed as a permit to enable one to compete, or a permit to enable one to cheat “If one so desires”.
After reading how difficult getting information was, I got online to check my medications and fortunately, none appear to be prohibited. I don’t take supplements so my search only took a few minutes. To me, it does look like the process for getting a TUE is really designed for elite athletes and seems overly complicated for masters. Do we need to test or should we just accept that there will be a percentage that will use PED’s?
# 23 above Jeff – The delegates voted to start testing in 2016 at the Regional & Association Championship level. There will be a $5.00 surcharge imposed on those meets to cover the expense.
Clean athletes workout way too hard to accept that some a will cheat. Why should we accept this if we can catch the cheaters and deter potiental cheaters by testing.
Plus, the TUE process is available and if you need help with the process just reach out to USADA. In any case, the fact is that testing is here and going to be more extensive in the future.
With costs of meet venues and officials on the rise, we meet directors are faced with raising entry fees to make up the difference. Now the Masters Committee wants to another fee to be foisted on the athlete? Once again, the rank & file are required to finance this quixotic chase of the “dirty” athlete.
URGENT- Volunteers needed for elite Pee Patrol. Help stop cheating in it’s tracks. Be a part of something special and serve your Master’s track and field.
Unless they ban Oreos and Peanut M&Ms I’m all set.
Educate yourself at USATF’s antidoping page: http://www.usatf.org/About/Anti-Doping.aspx
I think we should test more! Thats what our sport is now. It really sucks that we can’t enjoy our sport becasue awesome performances usually proceed speculation. Some one said we should test significant improvements, I agree, I hope I get a test for that reson next year š Also if you have Low T and get testostorone Treatment Are you allowed to use that under the TUE bylaws?
Nobody has adequately responded to Stephen Robbins (#11):
‘ (1) should records set by individuals with TUEs be allowed and (2) shouldnāt openness and fairness dictate that competitors be aware that they are competing against someone who has a TUE? ‘
I say “Yes” to both.
K. Chambers – As I understand it, no amount of testosterone supplementation is allowed under USADA testing, No TUE’s permitted.
43. Records are allowed with tues. A persons medical needs should not be exposed. Tues do not give a competitive advantage.
44. synthetic testosterone could give a competitive advantage. It also defeats the normal aging process and can create an artificial advantage in a competitive environment as it has been explained to me.
Not sure I agree with it but that’s the way it is at this time. Also, control of artificial T is a concern. Normal is different for different people. Would have to have baseline for each individual and keep checking against that. Hard to stop pushing # is a concern. I believe the evidence of any artificial T is a positive.
George–Yes, I understand that records are allowed with TUES. But could you share the evidence that supports the claim that “TUES do not give a competitive advantage.” It certainly seems possible that the request for, and issuance of, TUES could be abused. And maybe some drugs DO give a performance advantage. As long as everything is secret, we don’t know. I would also take issue with the statement that “a person’s medical needs should not be exposed.” George, participation in masters’ athletics is voluntary. While this argument certainly makes sense for employment situations, it doesn’t necessarily apply to our sport. If someone is sensitive about others knowing their medical issues, then don’t apply for a TUES and don’t compete. As long as we don’t know the number of people with TUES and who they are, we just have to take the word of those in authority that everything is on the up-and-up. Is it asking too much for athletes to accept public awareness of their TUES as the price to compete?
Let me add: At the very least, the USADA could report the NUMBER of TUEs that are currently outstanding among masters’ competitors. Are we talking about a dozen or hundreds? To quote the USADA website on TUES, the process should protect “the rights of clean athletes to complete [sic] on a level playing field.”
Stephen, getting a TUE isn’t easy. There are a substantial amount of supporting documentation required from your doctor that almost everything else has been tried. Then a board of USADA doctors evaluate the submission to see that the banned drug is the only way to go for the athlete before a TUE is issued. I believe that if the banned drug is truly performance enhancing that it will not be given.
I believe USADA’s statement. Maybe Steven Cohen can get you the # of TUES outstanding. I doubt it though.
George–I will ask Stephen if he will provide the number. But in response to your #48, may I provide 3 examples? Justin Gatlin’s first positive drug test was executed under a TUE. Oregon’s Salazar has been accused by several of his former athletes of encouraging them to request TUEs in order to enhance their performance. And soon after Major League Baseball banned amphetamines, the number of exemptions for ADHD nearly quadrupled, resulting in nearly 8% of all players being “diagnosed” with ADHD. Ritalin, a medication for ADHD, contains performance-enhancing stimulants. My point is that abuses can occur. That’s why we at least should know the number of outstanding TUEs.
Stephen, sounds reasonable to me. I think Masters athletes are a different breed of cat. Those you mentioned I believe are making desperate business decisions. That’s how they make their living. Hopefully we do what we do for the fun of it among other good reasons.
I find the comments and interest in the subject matter healthy. Awareness is a common thread that connects most of the statements. As the Masters Anti-doping and Substance Abuse Committee Chair, I feel it would be improper for me to engage in this discussion. However, as an attorney, I suggest that all individuals have a legal protection that prohibits, without the individual’s consent, the release of the individual’s medical records. Except under special circumstances, an HIPPO release is required before medical records will be produced otherwise they remain confidential. One fact, however, may be stated without hesitation: the Masters Committee has no information concerning the number of TUEs that have been issued or are currently in existence with reference to Masters Track and Field athletes.
Stephen–(1) Is there any individual or committee that monitors US athletes with TUEs and would be able to address the number of TUEs outstanding? (2) Wouldn’t it be possible for US masters’ athletes applying for a TUE to agree (as part of the process) that they would allow the release of this information? Could this be done for US athletes without international approval? As part of efforts to make this process more open,it is not unreasonable for athletes applying for TUEs to accept that approval comes with some trade-offs–one being public release of this information.
Hypothetically I would have no problem being identified as having a TUE (for the record, I don’t, at least at the present) but I would not want the details of that TUE and its medical diagnosis to be shared as public information. Perhaps I am thinking way too far ahead, but public notice could cause the potential abuse of such confidential information if it’s accessible.
TUE use. For fairness to everyone, an athlete/record on a TUE could be identified with an asterisk (*) or the like. No additional health detail. I would agree to that for me personally. Far from being negative for the athlete, it also signifies that the athlete is competing despite some sort of disability and is worth our extra respect.
Drug testing. Are masters athletes actually tested? It would be reassuring to know how many athletes are tested, at least at international championships. WMA, EMA etc., should release those figures.
Where are the first 50 comments?
In my country, Netherlands, there could be testing at nationals (or maybe even at any meet), but I know of only very few. And indeed someone who had medicines but not been aware of the TUE possibility.
If the TUE is for high blood pressure, depression, cancer treatment, or due to real health issues … it makes sense to keep the “why” of the TUE confidential.
Reference to Comment 56 (or 6) by Jeff. Not only why, but the fact that there is a TUE at all needs to be confidential.
(1) If you really think that a TUE for a hormone would be issued, just go ahead and read the criteria on the USADA website for a TUE for testosterone and after you take all that in, tell me that anyone is getting a TUE for something that will enhance performance. If you want a TUE for testosterone, go ahead and donate two chestnuts and then give it a whirl.
(2) Given that no TUE that would be granted would be for a treatment that is performance enhancing, why this paranoia. Some of you should apply to be guests on the Jerry Springer Show (if it still exists) This desire to know who might have a TUE is middle school voyeuristic and is an invasion of privacy.
(3) Now if WMA pulled their collective heads out of their collective hind ends and worked with WADA on a realistic prohibited drug list and realistic TUE procedures that take into account the changes in the body as we age, and very importantly acknowledge that there is no $$$ to be made in masters competition, then just maybe there might be a reason to release information. But since this will happen sometime around when the US national debt is completely paid down, none of us should be waiting for this.
Hi, all
Sorry for the glitch that, for a time, failed to display the first 50 comments on this post. I unchecked a box in my WordPress settings and now all comments are shown. Keep up the lively chatter!
Thanks for the Info, now that I know people are not allowed to take testorone, GH, or simulants like Adderall, then I have no problems with the system. It would be a little disheartening to know or even suspect that a TUE allows that. Also a very good conversation I think there is a lot of differnt perspectives on the topic due to the Difference in Ages and how the body changes over time. But I will say for those who say we do it for fun and no money that is not the case when you compete internationally. Other countries pay money for medals and that forces some athletes to do whatever it takes. Integrity takes a backseat to the all mighty dollar or Euro. š
Oy! Back to the TUE issue and diuretics — similar to Linda Carty (#24) – I have to use these (and it is the ONLY meds taken) for BP. When I investigated the TUE issue, I encountered what #17 David Ortman detailed: a daunting TUE for the doc to complete. Copies of clinical notes? Give me (the doc) a break! For BP, most of the required info is either irrelevant or non-existent. I did call the USADA number last Spring and I was told I did not need to submit a TUE – I documented it on the form I had but unfortunately only there and it appears I recently recycled the form! So, based upon all the conversation here, I will have to call again or go through the hassle of having my doctor look at that form and barf! Or, just risk the consequences of not taking the diuretics.
One annoyed ancient!
Am I correct in thinking that USATF Masters Indoor or Outdoor National Championships do NOT fall under the TUE definition of “any open-elite or professional level National Championship” ? I am assuming “Open” is for the under 30 year olds?
wow — as someone earlier said — the time spent researching this issue could be better spent training. After another bunch of wasted hours (including downloading TUE etc), I went back to the USADA source regarding diuretics. The verbiage has changed from 2013. I do NOT compete internationally (that WOULD be a joke!) so according to this (copied Jan 2, 2016), I do not need to do a TUE for diuretic. (You other folks are probably international competitors). (I chose non-national level based on their definition as competing in age group competitions.) copied from USADA:
Select Competition Level & Follow Directions For Corresponding Substance
International / National Level
Non-National
1) If the substance is prohibited only during competition, and not out-of-competition as well, then a TUEĀ is not needed priorĀ to competition.
2) If the substance is prohibited both in-competition and out-of-competition, then a TUEĀ is needed prior to competition,except for the following substances.
ā¢ Diuretics and masking agents
ā¢ Beta-2 agonists
ā¢ Insulin (If diagnosed with insulin-dependent diabetes.)
Pasted from
sorry for all the muddling around by me of this issue, but perhaps other elderly folks were also uncertain.
Leave a Reply