Methylhexaneamine spells big trouble for unwary athletes

It is not yet known which "specified substance" was present in the pills, reportedly slimming tablets, that Kolo Touré ingested. But his is just the latest in a string of cases in which athletes have unwittingly taken banned substances that are present in high-street nutritional supplements or slimming pills. Many recent cases of athletes who have been banned after taking supplements have centred on methylhexaneamine, a mild stimulant. It was added to the World Anti-Doping Agency's banned list in 2010. The British shot putter Rachel Wallander presented the first domestic case last year and was given a four-month ban. Another possibility is that the tablets contained diuretics, which are banned because they can be used to mask the presence of performance-enhancing drugs. Diuretics are present in weight-loss aids including "water tablets" and slimming tea. The cricketer Shane Warne tested positive for the diuretics hydrochlorothiazide and amiloride before the 2003 World Cup. He said he had no idea the substances were present in slimming pills that were given to him by his mother that were designed to reduce fluid retention but he still received a one-year ban. In October, UK Anti-Doping launched a drive to warn athletes of the dangers of taking supplements. The presence of contaminated substances or misleading packaging would be no defence, it said. The Hamilton Academical footballer Simon Mensing recently served a month's ban after testing positive for methylhexaneamine. Mensing, who was taking supplements to lose weight, had checked with two retailers and his club's fitness coach that the wording on the front of the packaging – "no banned substances" – was correct. In its judgment, UK Anti-Doping gave credit both for the fact that Mensing had sought advice and that he had no intention of seeking to enhance his performance. If Touré is not considered to have taken reasonable steps, he could face a far longer suspension. If the tablets contained diuretics, ignorance would be no defence. Dietary supplements can contain banned substances as active ingredients, in which case they will usually (but not always) be listed on the label. But supplements can contain ingredients listed by a different name from that on the Wada list, and batches can be contaminated. While the Football Association, which will handle Touré's case according to Ukad guidelines, will want to progress quickly, experience suggests any hearing may not take place for months. Touré will be offered the chance to have a B sample tested. This will have been collected at the same time as the original. If the B sample confirms the result he will be asked to explain himself in writing and before a full hearing in front of a panel. The panel will then deliberate and hand down a punishment. Any punishment can be appealed, all the way to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne. While the panel would take into account the "degree of fault", the onus would be on Touré to prove that he had not been seeking to gain an advantage. If he could not do that, a lengthy ban would be inevitable. If he could, a ban measured in months would be more likely than one measured in years. Either way, the Wada principle of "strict liability" that makes athletes ultimately responsible for anything that shows up in their bodies will apply.