Cited by 0Doping in SportsForensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisPharmacological Effects and Assays

30th Cologne workshop on dope analysis (Manfred Donike workshop)

Open access
Schänzer, Wilhelm·2012·Drug Testing and Analysis

Abstract

The origin of the Cologne Workshop on Dope Analysis goes back to Manfred Donike (1938-1995), a well-known cyclist in Germany specialized in sprinting as well as track events (referred to as the Six-Day Races). Manfred Donike studied chemistry at the University of Cologne and finished his doctoral thesis in 1965. Already by 1966 he had published the first article regarding dope analysis focusing on gas chromatographic separation techniques.1, 2 In 1972 he was responsible for sports drug tests at the Olympic Games in Munich, applying for the first time, a gas chromatographic and mass spectrometric approach at an Olympic event. In 1977 he was appointed Professor for Biochemistry at the German Sport University Cologne. Following the installation of a laboratory with modern analytical equipment, a small symposium was held in 1981 and participated by delegates of the IOC (International Olympic Committee) Medical Commission and the Medical Commission of the IAAF (International Amateur Athletic Federation) with the focus on dope control analysis. At the first symposium the idea was born to establish a periodic workshop for practising and developing doping control laboratories all over the world, to share the experiences of the Cologne laboratory in sample preparation, derivatization techniques and detection methods by GC/MS. In 1983 the first workshop was organised in Cologne and about twenty anti-doping scientists from different countries participated. During the first years of the workshop, practical work in the laboratory was interspersed with scientific discussions. Over the years the workshop agenda was subject to numerous changes, the practical work in the lab was considerably reduced with the scientific presentations by participants becoming the most important part of the meeting. In the first decade of the annual workshops, most contributions were dealing with analytical methods of gas chromatography in combination with mass spectrometry. The main challenge was to achieve, for highly polar compounds, stable derivatives with improved gas chromatographic properties. The metabolism of doping substances played an important role and anti-doping scientists presented research data of an unambiguous identification of a banned substance by an exclusive detection of its main or a long-term excreted metabolite. With the introduction of sensitive and robust analytical instruments combining liquid chromatography (LC) and mass spectrometry (MS) the analytical facilities were improved and anti-doping researchers used LC-MS and LC-MS-MS to detect banned substances to a much greater extent. In the last ten years anti-doping scientists have been confronted by the challenge of peptide hormones, modern detection methods for growth hormone, erythropoietin, and other banned peptide hormones, all of which have been presented and discussed at these symposia. Over the years, the Cologne Workshop has offered anti-doping scientists all over the world the platform to exchange their scientific experience and expertise. The lectures and posters of new developments and analytical improvements are a highly valued addition to the latest research knowledge. This has and will lead to the implementation of new techniques and new methods in routine doping control without delay - A clear sign to strengthen the fight against doping. Selected articles from the 30th Cologne Workshop on Dope Analysis (Manfred Donike Workshop) are compiled in the following 2 issues of Drug Testing and Analysis. Thanks to all participants for their excellent work and presentations. Cologne, 8th August 2012

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/dta.1422

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 1

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. M. Donike. Der Dopingnachweis mit Hilfe chromatographischer Methoden. Sportarzt Sportmed. 1966, 17, 81.
  2. M. Donike. The detection of doping by means of chromatographic methods. 1966. Drug Test. Anal. 2011, 3, 15.

Authors
Schänzer, W.
Affiliations
German Sport University Cologne (DE)
Corresponding author
Schänzer, Wilhelm
Venue
Drug Testing and Analysis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-09
Volume
4
Issue
9
Pages
681-681
ISSN
  • 1942-7603 (ISSN-L)
  • 1942-7611
OpenAlex
W2132843472
Cited by
0
References
1
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Drug Testing and Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Doping in Sports
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Pharmacological Effects and Assays
Keywords
doping control, banned substances, growth hormone, erythropoietin, peptide hormones, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, LC-MS/MS, derivatization, sample preparation, metabolite identification
MeSH terms
Chromatography, Liquid, Doping in Sports, Education, Humans, Mass Spectrometry, Substance Abuse Detection, History, 20th Century, History, 21st Century, Performance-Enhancing Substances

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review