i'm a fan of USADA and travis tygart. but i'm also a critic by nature and necessity because of what it is we do here. i interviewed tygart in 2011 on age group drug testing and it's clear that he didn't want to answer the questions beyond, "we got this".

i asked him then, and pressed him, on whether the agency was ready for AG drug testing, whether it had thought it through. he turns out to have been wrong on the points i raised.

a year later they came out with retroactive TUEs for 4 classes of drugs but testosterone was not among them. now that has been changed. and why? among other things. because of another giant miscalculation on tygart's part: what the threat of litigation means in an AG doping case.

imagine the staunchest anti-doping folks you can think of. the real crusaders. some of these people cower and buckle when they get pushback from someone who returns an A sample. i know because of firsthand stories.

when you begin as a hardass in public you may well end up a pussy in private. that has been a lot of the history of the last several years in anti-doping. better to think it all through and come up with a rational process in advance.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I don't get the impression that they are just granting TUEs left and right to anyone with a prescription. This article tells the story of the first cyclists to be granted a Recreational Competitor TUE for testosterone. It took them years to get the USADA to let them compete.

It seems like the application process is pretty robust. The RCTUEs are only granted if the athlete has a medical reason for having low testosterone. For example, one of the athletes had Parkinson's disease which can cause pituitary issues, and he did not have the energy to get out of bed without his testosterone treatment. RCTUEs aren't being granted to any person who walks into a sketchy aging clinic and says "I have a low sex drive, wink, wink."

This excerpt from the above article sums up Jeff Hammond's situation pretty well:
"Like Teeple, Hammond had to go off of his testosterone for several months and then submit blood work before USADA agreed to grant him a TUE. USADA’s rules require Hammond to submit his testosterone levels every three months and a doctor’s report every six months. He is forbidden from competing in the U.S. masters national championship race; only regional races are open to him. USADA also monitors Hammond’s results within Colorado’s masters races. If Hammond starts winning races, he could lose his TUE."

I don't know the answer to your question about Ironman racing, but I wouldn't be too concerned about it. The system is put in place to help MOP-type athletes who just want to go out and race with their friends. It seems like it would be difficult for someone to abuse an RCTUE so far as to get a Kona slot.

Edit to add: Obviously the article I linked was written specifically to tell one side of the story (these poor guys just want to ride bikes and the man his keeping them down!). I just thought it was an interesting perspective.

Sounds like the Ostarine contamination may not be unintended to me.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

yeah, what they listed there is pretty heavy stuff. Cannot believe what I was reading.

Thanks Dan!

So based on that, considering the current USADA system someone can go to Kona or take podiums spots in ironman races taking heavy stuff like testosterone (or others) if they have a TUE?

As is made clear in the recreational tue regulations,http://lmgtfy.com/...ional+competitor+tue, the answer to both of your questions is "no".

Thanks, glad about that.

My understanding based on your comment is that an amateur athlete that makes ironman AG podium or qualifies for Kona cannot use any type of PED even if they have a TUE. Because USADA only approves TUE for athletes that qualify as recreational, is that correct?

That was my understanding, but that article mentioned in some of the sentences "amateur" athletes instead of "recreational", so it really made me wonder.

If you back way up, support for this is philosophically consistent with support for Caster Semenya. When you cut through all of the noise, support for Semenya essentially distills down to something like "we need flexibility in our sports to allow for people who may not confirm to majority-defined norms.". And, the opposition essentially distills down to "we only want 'normal,' healthy competitors in sport who match norms defined by the majority of the population."

Some people have legitimate testosterone deficiency. Those people need medical treatment. Why should they be excluded from competition? The USADA position is to allow people with medical treatment needs to continue to compete in sports. I do not see how we do not logically move further and allow everyone, not just AG, to compete when they have a medical need and treatment. Anything less would be illogical and absurd.

The real solution is to do away with TUE's and have a zero tolerance policy for any drug/medication.
This will be bad for the few that have actual medical conditions, but it is the most fair policy for the largest amount of people.

This topic is not limited just Travis and USADA. This is Travis executing top-down reforms implemented by WADA. WADA addressed these very issues with the major revisions to The WADA Code in 2015, the first big overhaul since 2009.

Here's the complete statement on the changes: https://www.wada-ama.org/...anges-to-2009-en.pdf

I have highlighted some below for those who don't want to read the whole document (though it's relatively short).

The VERY first thing they address: "1. Theme One: The 2015 Code amendments provide for longer periods of Ineligibility for real cheats, and more flexibility in sanctioning in other specific circumstances"

They also speak exactly to the topic of what we call "age-group" athletes, but do so more broadly: "Lower-Level Athletes: Athlete Definition: Some countries choose to test lower-level Athletes and even fitness club participants. The definition of Athlete has been clarified to provide that where a National Anti-Doping Organization elects to test individuals who are neither national- nor international-level Athletes, not all of the Code requirements are applicable."

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

If someone is using testosterone (even because of deficiency), they are having and unfair advantage to other competitors and shouldn't be allowed to race competitively in amateur races.

Also opening the door for TUEs in amateurs can definitely lead to abuse. That's considering it's currently not allowed if applying for podium or Kona (which I hope for).

It's insulting to call me a weekend warrior.

To be competitive at a local and regional level at nearly 50 years old, I train at least twice almost every day. I'm never going to win any prize money, never going to win a national championships and I have to compete against someone that is artificially improving themselves?

I have slightly higher level of testosterone than someone my age but then my legs are 6 inches shorter than most peoples'. I have to play the cards dealt to me without any artificial improvements.

Sorry...turning ranting off

This is the crux of it. Either sport takes a black/white view of medical differences, or it allows for individual flexibility. Either way, someone gets burned. If you go black/white, then people with testosterone levels out of bounds (in the context of this thread) are harmed. If you allow individual flexibility, then people in the normal ranges are harmed. Currently, it looks like we are heading down a path of individual exception.

definitely agree with your point

There are possibly amateurs, who are not recreational athletes, who have TUEs for testosterone deficiency.

The methods to get one are lengthy and detailed here. http://www.usada.org/...ism-testosterone.pdf

You basically need to show that your glands don't work. either you don't have testicles or for some reason there is something definitely wrong with your endocrine. Simply having low testosterone isn't an adequate reason. Also, there are no TUEs for testosterone for women, period.

So, saying you have low T due to age, possible overtraining, opioid therapy, is not adequate reason.

well, maybe. the USADA mantra is, "every case is individual." what we don't know is all the private deals that get struck, such as, you can race locally but not in a world championship. very hard to say because the terms of some of these cases are very closely held. if the case doesn't go all the way to a hearing, with a public decision, i don't know the range of options available to an athlete.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman