Dr. Una May:

With regard to Senator Daly's queries on whether we are winning the battle, we recognise there will never be a day when anti-doping is not required because athletes will always find new ways in which to carry out doping, but we have progressed a lot. Intelligence and investigation measures have come into the world anti-doping code more recently, along with working very closely with partners. For example, WADA has partnered with the pharmaceutical industry so when new products are being researched and developed the pharmaceutical industry works with it to let it know if something could be abused. This is before it ever comes on the market. We have gone a long way towards people providing us with information. One of the biggest cases in the US, in which Marion Jones was implicated, resulted from an athlete or coach providing information to a laboratory. A syringe was found, which the laboratory analysed and it established the new substance. More recently, there has been a very strong element of information sharing and intelligence.

The Management of Intelligence and Drugs Action in Sports, MIDAS, group is world-class in regard to its level of information sharing and expertise. It has greater expertise than we do in terms of investigators. My colleagues are in Lyon, at present, at a meeting with Interpol on information sharing with authorities around the world. When new substances appear often they are found by customs, which might look for advice as to what it is. Particularly in countries where doping is a criminal offence, athletes' hotel rooms are searched, and it tends to be in the case of cycling, for example, that substances are found and the authorities realise it may be something new which we need to look at. It is through investigations, intelligence and information sharing that we get on top of many of the developments. A significant amount of funding is put into research for new detection methods, which also helps.

With regard to how we update the prohibited list there is an annual process. There is also the option to add something new by emergency, if it is very clear that it is a doping substance, clear that it is being heavily abused, and clear that it can be added immediately. On the whole, the process involves consultation with all the international stakeholders throughout the first six months of the year. In September, the new list is put before WADA's committees where it is signed off, and it then comes into force the following year. Each year the list is updated with the most recent versions of substances.

The other reason we manage to not have to change it more often than annually is the substances are generally described in scientific terms as a product or substance and related compounds.

It is a general scientific term which allows for things that are similar. If it is a tweak in a molecule or something, it will still fall under the definition of "prohibited substance".

In terms of the lines of communication within the sector, the Midas group is an example of world class best practice. Its presentation in London was very well received. I am not aware of any other country where there is that level of co-operation between the different sectors to ensure that the issue is dealt with appropriately. It may be about the communication of that kind of thing. Getting out there and presenting at a conference goes a long way towards communicating the strength of that relationship. I spoke today with my colleague in Germany where the human anti-doping agency is also responsible for testing in the Olympic equestrian sports. However, it only covers those equestrian sports which are in the Olympics and does not test in respect of horse racing, for example. I do not think they have a greyhound racing industry. Certainly, I am not familiar with it. It is those kinds of connections. They have found it to be quite strong and developed regulations. That goes a long way towards making it reputable when there is a connection with an existing authority with a reputation already. That is why connecting it to the world anti-doping code would help to strengthen it reputationally. It would prove that there was no question of trying to create new rules. It is recognising the principles of a well-established system that has been in place for a long time.

In relation to the imported feed, the best opportunity for athletes to protect themselves is to buy from those supplement providers who are willing to pay to protect their own product by having it batch tested. Therefore, athletes should only purchase the batch-tested version of the product. That is to protect the reputation of the company itself because it can be named and implicated where a case comes in. Its reputation would be tarnished if it was found to have contaminated supplements. That is the best way for athletes to deal with that. The difficulty from our point of view is that there are athletes who purchase things which are clearly not reputable. Even the way they are described is a bit of a giveaway. When something is described as being a "testo-boost", it is a hint as to its reputability. That is what we advise athletes and it is how the system protects them.