KiopHuitre

@ppp9911: I agree, The fact that he still tested positive 14 days after finishing treatment is suspect. I wasn't aware of that when I wrote my initial reply. Maybe probenecid can be detected at near trace levels, but I don't have that information. It would seem we're missing some information and those details could be what changes this from innocent error to something more nefarious. The not being able to walk thing doesn't stand out as odd to me though. His inability to walk would have been due to the pain from inflammation at the wound site. That resolves quickly when the infection begins to clear. I think, regardless of what happened, Maes is in charge of adhering to the doping policy as it is written. He failed to do so.

I agree with your assessment of the situation, but you are ignoring a few things that support Maes and the prescribing doctor. This was not a text book case and there are viable reasons why text book approach wasn't taken. Firstly you aren't familiar with the local infection tendencies and that can have a huge impact on prescribing. This doctor probably didn't even consider MRSA and I wouldn't have either. There is no reason to suspect Maes came into contact with MRSA. Usually, these types of infections are very predictable in that they are almost always the same bacteria depending on where it happened. If I see a patient with a dog bite, I don't give broad spectrum antibiotics. I target the usual suspect. Prescribing pip-tazo and vancomycin in this situation would honestly be silly. Secondly, I believe the doctor said the infection was potentially life or limb threatening if left untreated. That would not warrant admission to a hospital. This is an infection that developed under the most ideal circumstances. A prophylactic course of antibiotics failing is not overly surprising considering the exposure the wound experienced. Also Maes is young, fit, and healthy. An obese diabetic with that wound might warrant admission, not a fit athlete in his prime who is also moving to the next event soon. I think this doctor made a very reasonable decision with the best interest of his patient (maes) in mind. His treatment resolved the infection, minimized disruption to his daily life (other than the eventual ban), and was fiscally responsible. The only flaw in the process was failing to confirm the banned status of probenecid. Any athlete who gets drug tested should be confirming every drug they take and I mean every drug. I'd have checked the antibiotic, the probenecid, and the ondansetron. For that reason, I think the 90 day ban is a reasonable punishment. I would have ruled differently, taking the situation into account if given the choice, but overall I feel the ruling us fair.