Demetriou has doubts over drug Jon Pierik
The Age
July 13, 2013 Andrew Demetriou has reopened the debate over the legality of the anti-obesity drug AOD-9604, claiming there is a ''classification issue'' about the supplement believed to have been administered to Essendon's players last year.
In its February report, the Australian Crime Commission says of the AOD-9604 peptide: ''During phase two clinical trials it was also found to have an anabolic effect to cartilage tissue and may promote cartilage creation and repair and have a capacity to enhance muscle formation.'' But it then adds: ''AOD-9604 is not currently a WADA prohibited substance.''
However, later in the report, it says, ''AOD-9604 is not currently prohibited under category S2 of the WADA prohibited list. AOD-9604 is not approved for human use.''
The drug is not banned under section S.2 because its performance-enhancing benefits are in question.
The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority, though, maintains the drug was banned under the ''catch-all'' section S.0 since 2011, although it had to clarify this in April.
It's this grey area that Essendon hopes it can use to prove it was misled by ASADA, although an alleged letter given to former sports scientist Stephen Dank confirming the drug was not banned has yet to be publicly seen. Dank has refused to help authorities.
Having returned from a mid-season break, Demetriou, the AFL chief executive, said on Friday there were still issues about AOD-9604.
''There is a view from WADA that they have deemed AOD-9604 to be banned. The AFL received the ACC report where it was determined in that report that it wasn't banned,'' he said. ''There is an issue around whether it is banned or not banned. There is a classification issue around that, but again I am not going to speculate
other than to say this investigation is coming to an end.''
The classification of AOD-9604 is a key part of Essendon's defence, reinforced in a message to Essendon members from club chairman David Evans last week when he said experts had declared the drug was not performance enhancing. He also did not concede players had been administered the drug in 2012.
ASADA maintains AOD-9604 is banned under S.0, and is classified as: ''Any pharmacological substance which is not addressed by any of the subsequent sections of the list and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use (e.g drugs under pre-clinical or clinical development or discontinued, designer drugs, substances approved only for veterinary use) is prohibited at all times."
Essendon captain Jobe Watson, who said he believed he had been administered the drug, said on Friday he was looking forward to the investigation ending.
While there has been a focus on the anti-obesity drug, players may have also taken Melantonan II, anti-ageing drug TA65, Interleukin 6 and Cerebrolysin.
Speaking on 3AW, Demetriou said: ''We do believe we might have an outcome before the end of August. That's what we are working towards.
''We are not trying to expedite the process. Everyone has been interviewed, it's been an extensive investigation, 130 interviews, but hopefully that's the timeline we work towards.''
Demetriou said if a player was charged, he would appear before an AFL tribunal.
AFL Players Association chief executive Matt Finnis maintains players are not to blame, despite signing consent forms.
Players could face bans of up to two years, but these could be extinguished under a ''no-fault'' clause.
Read more:
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demetriou-has-doubts-over-drug-20130712-2pv5z.html#ixzz2YqTUWCvF
