Navigating the WADA prohibited list: catchalls and consistencies
How far should the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list “catchall” phrases reach in the context of the control of the use of supplements and culturally/ethnically relevant "complementary and alternative medicines" (CAM)? This article examines the potential inconsistency of the prohibited list, as a universally binding document, and the implications for athletes.
To continue reading or watching login or register here
Already a member? Sign in
Get access to all of the expert analysis and commentary at LawInSport including articles, webinars, conference videos and podcast transcripts. Find out more here.
- Tags: Anti-Doping | Australia | Australian Ant-Doping Agency (ASADA) | World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)
Related Articles
- The Athlete Biological Passport: a ‘magic bullet’ for EPO detection? Part 1 of 2
- The Athlete Biological Passport: a ‘magic bullet’ for EPO detection? Part 2 of 2
- WADA Article 10.4 "specified substances" - the end of the farce?
- Jamaican athlete Steve Mullings banned for life
- Operacion Puerto: bigger than Armstrong?
- Deer antlers provide unlikely challenge for the anti-doping movement
Written by
Dr Ben Koh
Dr Ben Koh is a medical doctor with a Masters in Sports Medicine and a Masters in Psychology and has clinical and educational training in surgery, sports medicine, emergency medicine and critical care.
Philip Gibbs
Philip is a barrister with over 20 years call specialising in Crime and Sports Law. Philip was recently co – counsel at the Court of Arbitration for Sport acting for Taekwondo Olympic gold medallist Mu Yen Chu and Chinese Taipei against the International Olympic Committee.
