The China Anti-Doping Agency issued a statement on August 6 regarding the steroid positive case of the U.S. Olympian Erriyon Knighton.
China Anti-Doping Agency (CHINADA) noted that the Global Times published a report on the suspected doping case involving the U.S. Olympic track and field star Erriyon Knighton. Knighton, a member of the U.S. Olympic track and field team, tested positive for the steroid Trenbolone in an out-of-competition doping test on March 26 of this year.
However, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) decided, just before the start of the domestic qualifying rounds for the Paris Olympics, that Knighton’s positive result was due to the consumption of contaminated meat. Consequently, they did not impose a ban, allowing him to represent the U.S. at the Paris Olympics.
USADA’s handling of Knighton’s case starkly contrasts with its approach to doping cases involving Chinese swimmers. While USADA worked to exonerate its own athletes, it ignored repeated explanations from WADA and the Swiss independent prosecutor, accusing CADC and WADA of a “cover-up” and calling for sanctions against Chinese athletes.
Media reports indicate there are still many unanswered questions about Knighton’s positive doping case. Relevant studies show that Trenbolone, an anabolic agent with a strong effect on strength and explosiveness, is not a common contaminant. In recent years, hundreds of Trenbolone positives have occurred worldwide, with the vast majority resulting in four-year bans. Only three U.S. athletes have escaped punishment by claiming food contamination.
In Knighton’s case, the independent arbitrator ruled that the contaminated meat came from a restaurant in Florida. However, the coincidence that USADA conducted an investigation two months later and detected Trenbolone in a different batch of beef from the same restaurant raises questions. If Trenbolone contamination in U.S. beef is a genuine issue, did USADA conduct extensive market research, compile statistics, alert U.S. athletes, study how much contaminated meat would lead to a positive test, or make a public statement about these findings?
Furthermore, USADA declared “justice has been served” before WADA had reviewed the case file or the appeal deadline had expired. Suspiciously, this statement, along with other related reports, has since been removed from USADA’s website. What might they be concealing behind such actions?
The Knighton case highlights a significant discrepancy between USADA’s advocacy for fairness and purity and its actual actions. This contradiction is further evidenced by the fact that U.S. professional sports leagues and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) set their own anti-doping standards, which are in clear conflict with the WADA Code. USADA does not test these leagues, creating a substantial loophole in the anti-doping system.
Despite being a signatory to the WADA Code, USADA does not enforce these standards on major U.S. professional sports leagues—such as Major League Baseball (MLB), the National Basketball Association (NBA), the National Football League (NFL), and the National Hockey League (NHL)—nor on the NCAA, which produces the majority of the country’s top athletes. The 2006 Mitchell Report revealed that over eighty-five current and retired baseball players had used performance-enhancing drugs, with some players estimating that as many as forty to eighty percent were using steroids.
WADA’s current president, Witold Bańka, stated in a recent meeting that up to 90 percent of U.S. athletes, including those in professional and collegiate sports, are not in compliance with relevant WADA regulations. Additionally, the Rodchenkov Anti-Doping Act of 2019, which took effect in 2020, allows the U.S. to exercise extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction over doping incidents at international sporting events. While the Act’s purported purpose is to combat doping, its exclusion of domestic professional and collegiate leagues suggests a double standard in the U.S. government’s approach to anti-doping efforts both domestically and internationally.
USADA has turned a blind eye to its own long-standing anti-doping “bad habits” while becoming obsessed with “transborder jurisdiction,” demanding sanctions on other countries to divert attention from the serious deficiencies in its domestic anti-doping efforts. This is a blatant example of political maneuvering and hypocritical double standards. Since April this year, the U.S. Congress, anti-doping agencies, and the media have selectively ignored cases of food contamination involving Chinese swimmers, fabricating and framing narratives to confuse and mislead the international community and the public. This politicization of the anti-doping issue encourages the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI to exercise “long-arm jurisdiction” over the incident.
Such actions represent a clear double standard and a blatant violation of the principles of fairness and impartiality. USADA should cease creating false narratives and engaging in politicized cognitive manipulation. USADA should stop disrupting the functioning and governance of the global anti-doping order and refrain from using so-called “legal means” to exert undue pressure through “long-arm jurisdiction.”
USADA must re-examine its position and approach to dealing with doping cases to ensure that its actions align with the aims of the global anti-doping system. It is imperative for USADA to demonstrate integrity and consistency in its anti-doping efforts to regain the trust of the international community.
Source: athleticsweekly, getty, CHINADA
