We agree that a mechanism to ban new substances should be set up.

It takes a relatively modest amount of scientific evidence to have a substance banned.

It leads us to ban active substances which do not pose any problem at all in practice.

The system currently in force only bans dangerous substances and preparations, which is clearly inadequate.

One of our starting points was that it takes too long today to ban new substances that keep appearing.

This can then mean banning substances and phasing them out or permitting their continued use, subject to certain conditions.

IGF-1 is currently a substance banned by various sporting bodies.

Asbestos (population 5,000) is the spiritual home of a substance banned across most of the western world.

It could not be immediately determined which athletes were accused of taking which banned substances.

Consequently, I totally agree with additional measures being taken to limit or even ban ozone-depleting substances.