N,N‐dimethyl‐2‐phenylpropan‐1‐amine – new designer agent found in athlete urine and nutritional supplement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reports of new designer agents banned in sport being detected in supplements widely available for athletes are constantly emerging. The task of anti-doping laboratories is to control athletes for the presence of substances listed by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and those that are structurally/biologically similar to them. Recently, a new designer stimulant, N,N-dimethyl-2-phenylpropan-1-amine (NN-DMPPA), was detected by the WADA accredited anti-doping laboratory in Warsaw during routine anti-doping control. The urine samples from four athletes were analyzed in the screening method for stimulants and narcotics and the presence of NN-DMPPA was detected. The identity of NN-DMPPA was confirmed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry using a synthesized reference standard. The measured concentrations of NN-DMPPA were between 0.51 and 6.51 µg/mL. The presence of the NN-DMPPA compound has been detected in the 'nutritional supplement' NOXPUMP that had been purchased in a store in Poland. NN-DMPPA at 121.7 µg/g was indicated in the investigated supplement together with another banned stimulant β-methylphenethylamine. The presence of this new stimulant was not indicated on the labelling of the supplement, a situation which is not unusual within this market. Thus, it is important to make athletes aware of the risk related to the use of supplements. Moreover, specific legistation dealing with the commercialization of drugs banned for sport should be undertaken.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".