Are you sure? An article that CFC2010 posted a while back suggested otherwise with a quote from an ASADA guy.No,.
Substances that are subject to a threshold limit are called Threshold Substances.
The list of Threshold Substances are
Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin (hCG)
Some of them are indeed stimulants from Schedule 6 but not all and the vast majority of stimulants are not Threshold Substances.
So with cocaine, detection of any amount (which in practice is of its metabolite ecgonine) within the detection limit of the lab of testing triggers an Adverse Analytical Finding, if the test was an "in-competition" test.
Cocaine is defined also as a "non-specified substance". This may sound the better option than "specified substance" but its actually worse. "specified substances" are ones that, although not having a threshold limit, are acknowledged as being possible to find their way into an athletes body in ways not associated with an intent to dope. As a result, minimum penalties are lower and panels have more leeway in adjusting penalties to account. Not so for cocaine. cf
"An ASADA spokesperson said cocaine, cannabis, methamphetamine and heroin were all substances that needed to reach certain thresholds for a positive test, known as an "adverse analytical finding''."
The Age ›
AFL players warned of long bans with enhanced ASADA detection
Jake Niall March 08, 2019
AFL players are being warned by clubs that they can test positive on match day as much as seven days after taking an illicit drug and potentially earning bans of up to four years under the tough WADA code.
Some club doctors and football department officials have passed on the message to players that the detection capability of the ASADA laboratory that tests the players has improved to the point that they can test positive to the use of drugs such as cocaine seven days after it has been taken.
In November, the AFL's chief medical officer Dr Peter Harcourt told club doctors that players could be detected for illicit drug use within seven days of use. This message, intended for the doctors to pass on to players, has been communicated at different stages over summer by various clubs.
Harcourt's warning followed the positive test to cocaine by Collingwood defender Sam Murray in August, in a case that is in the hands of ASADA. Murray, who is training with Wangaratta Rovers, remains under provisional suspension as his legal team continues discussions with ASADA.
Magpie Sam Murray's case is still in WADA's hands.Credit:Wayne Ludbey
In the past, the conventional wisdom has been that illicit drugs such as cocaine, ecstasy and methamphetamine remain detectable via a urine test for a maximum of a few days, perhaps 48 or 72 hours, though it depends on the amount taken, the individual's physiology and other factors.
Despite speculation that Murray ingested the drug some days before his positive test, this cannot be confirmed. This is a rare instance of a player testing positive to an illicit drug in a way that jeopardises his AFL career, because the test happened on match day.
A player who tests positive to certain illicit drugs on match day faces a lengthy ban, because those drugs are considered performance-enhancing if taken immediately before a game.
A player who records a positive test (not on game day) under the AFL's completely separate illicit drugs code will be referred for treatment and counselling until the second "strike'', when he receives a four-match ban.
While Harcourt's warning - which has filtered back to players at some clubs - was intended to deter players from using illicit drugs by explaining the increased dangers of match-day positive tests, ASADA suggested improvements in the laboratory's detection capability did not have an impact on the drugs body's reporting of positive tests.
An ASADA spokesperson said cocaine, cannabis, methamphetamine and heroin were all substances that needed to reach certain thresholds for a positive test, known as an "adverse analytical finding''.
The concentration levels for positive results (which bring suspensions) for those drugs had not changed since 2013.
"Due to the set concentrations for these substances, an improvement in laboratory detection capability does not have an impact on the reporting of these substances,'' ASADA said.
But the AFL view is that the improved technology over the years means the Sydney-based laboratory can detect those minimum levels more easily than previously - hence their warnings to players via club doctors.
For example, the threshold for a positive test - and suspension - for cocaine is 100 nanograms per millilitre.
This is a very low reading compared to the standard level of about 1000 nanograms per millilitre that a player would typically have in his urine if he tested positive the day after taking cocaine.
Former ASADA boss Richard Ings said players were "playing Russian roulette'' with their careers if they used illicit drugs such as cocaine during the week. He said improvements in technology allowed the laboratories to detect substances at lower concentrations.
Ings said players faced bans of two to four years for match-day positives.
The AFL has long been concerned about the risks of match-day positive tests. One of the reasons the league established their own contentious illicit drugs code and testing regime was to treat and thus prevent at-risk players from having match-day positives that would bring lengthy bans.