Dr. Una May:

On Deputy Cahill's question on contamination, it is an area with which we have a huge problem. We have an issue in relation to the use of supplement and it is a massive multi-million pound and euro industry. Athletes are all tempted to use supplements and we see it across the world. The International Olympic Committee has issued a statement in recent weeks about the extent of the problem. However, by having a strict liability, it means that the presence of a substance remains an offence and that an athlete is answerable to the allegation that there is a prohibited substance. He or she then has the opportunity to explain and justify how that substance got into his or her system, and that is where the issue around the contamination comes in. We have a whole section in the Irish anti-doping rules and also under the world anti-doping code around dealing with and managing situations around contaminated supplements. It would be a similar situation to where the substance is still present and it is up to the individual to explain how the substance got there. It means that, to avoid that first port of call where the person says it was not his or her fault, he or she did not do it or it was someone else, the person answerable in some shape or form. The opportunity is there to reduce the sanction if the person can justify it and there are reductions specifically relating to contaminated substances, but the person has to prove that he or she has taken appropriate actions to try to reduce the risks. He or she has to prove risk minimisation strategies, that he or she did not purchase a substance from an non-reputable source, and that the person did a reasonable Internet search to make sure the contents of the substance were checked out in advance. The person has certain criteria he or she has to meet to prove he or she took all appropriate actions to avoid the possibility of that sort of contamination. That is how we deal with it on the human side.