Mario Vuskovic Case: Extension and New Dispute at DFB Sports Court Hearing

The court around the chairman Stephan Behold decided to involve an independent professional in order to confirm or question the positive examination of Djokovic's urine sample. Against the selection of the appraiser there are prompt objections from Vuskovics protectors. The trial will continue on March 10th. Four professional reports had the defense of Mario Djokovic on Thursday to show: the urine sample that the HSV defense gamer had actually given on September 16 during a routine doping control on the domestic training ground was incorrectly classified as favorable at Dresden. In addition to John Nissen-Meyer (Oslo), David Chen (Vancouver) and Marcus Scholz (Leipzig), the Dresden Lorenz Bauer, who was turned on in the Settlement Hall of the DFB school in Frankfurt by video, likewise consisted of a video. His conclusion in the name of the four-person committee, which was specifically followed separately of one another: There is no positive EPO findings in A-and B sample. Instead, the responsible institute for doping analysis in Reach tends to work in such a method that one has the impression that the wedding rehearsal is positive. But we are handling a false-positive test here.

• disturbance of the cooling chain as a less definitive reason
• Djokovic's urine sample contained a high percentage of the body's own EPO
• appraiser NAD is expected to re-analyze frozen urine
• Defense reserves a request for predisposition

disturbance of the cooling chain as a less definitive reason

Some reasons made proved to be very convincing reasonably rapidly. For instance, the apparently statistically recorded quota of 43 false-positive outcomes per 1000 tests on EPO. The yearly report of the national anti-doping agency (NASA) suggested 4355 tests for EPO for 2021 without a single positive outcome, i.e. even without wrong-positive. A disturbance of the cold chain during Djokovic's urine sample was also cited as a possible source of error. Sven Loss, head of the institute in Reach, was definitive: A damage to proteins due to heating or temperature level variations can not lead to a false-positive outcome, but at many to a false-negative.

Djokovic's urine sample contained a high percentage of the body's own EPO

The expert viewpoint of the Canadian Chen likewise presumed an incorrect requirement. Appropriately, the apparently utilized urine quantity of 20 ml instead of the recommended 15 ml might have resulted in an overload of the sample. Loss was able to show that only 10 ml urine was utilized for A-and B sample, and this amount was even tiled. However, as a method to the defense stays: Djokovic's urine sample undoubtedly included a fairly high percentage of the body's own EPO, which could likewise have been strengthened by painkillers (ibuprofen 600 and pantoprazole 40) quickly in the past. And: The differentiation between the body's own and from the outside is eventually by means of an imaging procedure in which experts come to a judgment. There are generally no objective limitation values.

appraiser NAD is expected to re-analyze frozen urine

This is where Prof. Dr. Dr. Pericles Simon as a defense expert consultant: In the present pictures for the evaluation of Djokovic's urine sample, a difference in between the body's own and provided EPO is not possible with no doubt, according to the prominent sports researcher, from 2009 to 2013 even a member of the Gene Doping Panel of the World-Anti - Doping company (WADA). Loss takes out empirical experience, relative pictures specified by the WADA and an evaluation according to the six-eye principle. Under these situations, the attraction was an independent expert for the DFB jury around the sports court chairman Stephan Behold virtually without option. The choice fell on Teacher Jean-Francois NAD from Quebec (Canada). In turn, NAD must now produce a professional opinion on all questionable questions-and ideally a more analysis of the urine sample sent by Djokovic on September 16.

Defense reserves a request for predisposition

A residual amount of about 25 ml urine from the initial A rehearsal is still frozen at the institute in Reach, the NASA has already provided the approval for a brand-new examination. The selection of the judicial appraiser at Djokovic's defenders and HSV board member Jonas Bold supplied prompt outrage. Background: NAD, like Loss, comes from the eight-member EPO Working Group of the WADA. Djokovic lawyer Dr. Joachim Rain: He can not be unbiased with this network. We would think about a specialist from outside the WADA cosmos to be preferable. The DFB meal remained with NAD's order. Meanwhile, the Djokovic party expressly reserved the departure from the DFB building to have a main application for bias.