Do you have any idea why Bridge would ban, what they admit is a non performance enhancing drug then?

Is it because of the IOC links?

Good question. I believe that whilst there are a few drugs that have different rules for different sports, in general it is easier to just have the same rules for all sports. It's possibly this doesn't make sense with regard to "mind-sports" like Bridge; there's probably some politics involved.

Back in 2004, I remember drugs were broken down into categories and almost all categories were either blanket banned, allowed out of competition but not in competition, or allowed. Very few categories (possibly only beta-blockers?) had a more complex classification. While that was 15 years ago, I think the system is still similar.

Do you have any special insights into the process?

Naively, I would hope that the Bridge governing body would get the stakeholders together with medical experts to come together to decide on a sensible list. That doesn't seem to be the case, I'm guessing it's (lack of) money?