Stephen Dank. Picture: ABC Source: The Daily Telegraph
THE director of Australia's peak body for sports scientists, David Bishop, has called into question the qualifications of the man at the centre of the Essendon drugs scandal.
Bishop said Stephen Dank "would not even be eligible for accreditation'' with Exercise & Sports Science Australia, the regulatory body that represents 3500 members, and suggested it was "beyond highly unusual'' for a person in Dank's role to oversee a program of supplement injections.
"From what I can tell he's got a physiology or pharmacology degree,'' Bishop, a research leader at Victoria University, said.
In February Dank told an interview with the ABC's 7.30 that he had a degree in biochemistry from the Queensland University of Technology, and was a PhD candidate (suspended last year) at the University of Sydney for a thesis on antioxidants.
It is believed Dank undertook a Masters degree in sports science at the University of NSW in the mid 1990s, but it is unclear whether he graduated.
"We have searched our system and have not been able to find a record of a Stephen Dank graduating from UNSW,'' a university spokeswoman said yesterday.
One of Dank's lecturers at the University of NSW, Kevin Norton, described him as a likable and intelligent student, but added "I can't say for sure that he qualified for his Masters."
"I'm not sure whether he graduated or not,'' Norton said.
"I know that he passed my courses (advanced exercise physiology), he was a very good student.''
Norton and Dank even published a paper together on anthropometry (body size and shape).
"As a student he was very bright and a likable lad to be around. He told good stories. I actually liked his intellect, he was a pretty smart guy. I didn't suspect any bad element,'' Norton said.
But Norton said there were worrying signs about the career path his student followed in the decade after they parted ways at university.
Norton, now a Professor of Exercise Science at UniSA, has worked extensively as a consultant with the Adelaide Crows and had a game-day role at the club when his good friend Neil Craig was the coach.
It was in that capacity that Norton caught up in 2006 with Dank, who was by then heading up a Sydney-based syndicate offering the Crows genetic testing technology and gimmicky products.
Dank had been conducting $750 DNA tests with rugby league club Manly, searching for particular genetic traits: the "power gene'' and the ``endurance gene''.
"The fact that he got involved in gene technology suggests that he had a salesman edge to him,'' Norton said.
"At that stage it was not very sophisticated ... it obviously didn't progress very far and he got involved in other areas.''
Norton said he recommended that the Crows steered clear of the testing, which involved swabbing a cotton bud on the inside of a footballer's cheek.
"The idea was to use it for talent identification, future selection policy. Ethically that was something I was uncomfortable with and opposed to,'' Norton said.
Norton said he was shocked by a general lack of ``checks and balances'' at AFL clubs.
Bishop agreed, saying a systematic series of injection should have rung alarm bells, regardless of what was injected into the players.
"It's beyond highly unusual, it's extraordinary. It's something that sports scientists at other clubs wouldn't do,'' he said.
"Injecting substances of any type is not a skill that comes with being a sports scientist. To be honest with you, I think the athletes, the coaches, everyone involved in this, the alarm bells really should have been going off once there were injections happening.''
