True.This matter is settled isn't it? Two facts are all that remain from this saga:
1) Sharap deserves to be punished cause she broke WADA's rules, which put the substance on the prohibited list. Rules are rules. Athletes don't have the right use substances that WADA bans even unfairly (without evidence).
Meldonium may not necessarily "enhance" performance in the sense of boosting service power or leg speed, but its effects are certainly questionable when related to performance of an individual who is not using it for treatment of an actual ailment.2) WADA jumped the gun. It hadn't then —and still has not now— got any evidence that Meldonium enhances performance.
Meldonium may be used to treat coronary artery disease. These heart problems may sometimes lead to ischemia, a condition where too little blood flows to the organs in the body, especially the heart. Because this drug is thought to expand the arteries, it helps to increase the blood flow as well as increase the flow of oxygen throughout the body. Meldonium has also been found to induce anticonvulsant and antihypnotic effects involving alpha 2-adrenergic receptors as well as nitric oxide-dependent mechanisms. This, in summary, shows that meldonium given in acute doses could be beneficial for the treatment of seizures and alcohol intoxication.
I'm not for one moment suggesting that Sharapova was an epileptic or alcoholic. From memory, she claimed that meldonium had initially been prescribed for her heart and possible familial links to diabetes. Whilst meldonium is used to treat coronary artery disease, I can't see how anyone with that illness could possibly play tennis at the level shown by Sharapova, no matter what treatment was employed. However, anyone without heart problems is certainly going to benefit markedly from an increase in blood and oxygen flow during competitive sport.
The following section on the physio-pharmacology of the drug is also very interesting, but it would send everyone to sleep if I included it here. Maybe @Tampering has some opinions to offer from a medical viewpoint.
Maybe. If so, it will have to come with a far stricter monitoring regime than it previously had....I suspect at some point in the future the drug will be allowed again.