Image: Wikimedia
Australian tennis player Max Purcell, a two-time Grand Slam men’s doubles champion, has been handed a draconian 18-month suspension for breaching little-known anti-doping regulations affecting intravenous (IV) vitamin infusions. The 27-year-old admitted to the infringement after unknowingly, within a 12-hour period, receiving infusions of vitamins from bags that exceeded a permitted fluid volume limit of 100 ml. Amid the inevitable flurry of legacy media reporting on this story, little attention has been paid to the fact that Purcell did not actually test positive for any banned substance.
The rule breach occurred in late 2023 after the tennis player fell ill while on holiday in Bali. Attending a local clinic, he informed it that he was a professional athlete and explained that any IV treatment he received had to stay under the 100 ml fluid threshold. According to the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA), the organization charged with safeguarding the integrity of professional tennis, Purcell was instead twice given more than 500 ml of IV fluids containing vitamins.
This treatment apparently breached Article 2.2 of the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme (TADP), which prohibits the use or attempted use by a player of a prohibited method of doping. Under the World Anti-Doping Code and TADP, the limit for IV infusions is 100 ml in a 12-hour period. In other words, while Purcell couldn’t be directly banned for being given IV vitamins, he was indirectly banned for the ‘crime’ of receiving them in more than 100 ml of fluid.
Reacting with incredulity to news of the ban, Australian former professional tennis player John Millman slammed the apparent “triple standards” in the sport and called for a “complete overhaul” of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) punishment system. Describing the suspension as “shocking” and “ridiculous,” Millman pointed out that the vitamins Purcell received in the infusions are all on WADA’s approved list.
Maverick Australian tennis player Nick Kyrgios also questioned the justification for the ban, calling it “absurd” and reposting a cynical comment on X (formerly Twitter) implying that, in the eyes of the authorities, taking steroids might now be more acceptable than vitamins. Purcell’s U.S. Open-winning doubles partner, Australia’s Jordan Thompson, was similarly critical, labeling the suspension a “stitch-up” and a “joke.”
The severity of Purcell’s punishment stands in sharp contrast to the recent treatment of other tennis players, many of whom have received significantly shorter bans despite testing positive for banned substances. Four-time French Open champion Iga Swiatek served a brief one-month suspension last year after a positive test for the banned substance trimetazidine, for example, a drug used to prevent angina attacks. This was eventually traced back to contamination in her sleep medication. Similarly, the current men’s singles world number one, Jannik Sinner, was cleared of wrongdoing last year after two failed tests for an anabolic agent, clostebol. He accepted a three-month ban earlier this year as part of an agreement with WADA.
Max Purcell’s suspension is a glaring example of how anti-doping regulations in sport have overreached beyond common sense. Punishing an athlete for receiving an infusion of vitamins – substances essential for human health – defies logic and undermines the credibility of the entire anti-doping system. Vitamins are not anabolic steroids or designer stimulants; they are nutrients found in food that millions of people worldwide take daily in supplementary form.
To treat an innocuous overage in IV fluid volume as deliberate cheating is an absurd interpretation of the anti-doping rules. Purcell did not fail a drug test, did not gain a competitive advantage, and even made clear to the clinic in Bali that he was an athlete subject to strict limits. Yet, he is being penalized as if he had tried to game the system. This isn’t just regulatory overkill – it amounts to a direct assault on the legitimate use of vitamins in sport, casting suspicion on basic wellness practices and turning nutritional support into a punishable offense.