Here's where we are at with all this stuff. It has been a discussion that Dan and I have been having with Paula NF, who dedicates a great deal of her time at WTC to the IM Anti-Doping Program, Kate Mittelstadt, who runs the program for WTC, and Andrew Messick, who is of course CEO of WTC. Travis Tygart and some other folks at USADA have also been involved in separate discussions. Dan and/or I have asked very direct, very pointed questions. We have deliberately tried to pose questions where there is no way that you someone could say, "well, TECHNICALLY, I wasn't lying." These are not statements where "the least untrue answer" could be given with any sort of conscience.
EVERYONE has answered - unequivocally - "NO. Not in any way, shape, or form." to any questions about cover-ups, conspiracies, unannounced positives, etc, etc, etc.
There have been no legalese-laced answers. No "no comments." Nothing but, "no, that did not happen."
I think it's pretty clear that people will do their best to protect vested interests and cover their own asses. But there are too many people with too much at stake and too much integrity to be caught in a lie. Conspiracies are REALLY hard to keep quiet. The truth always outs. Look at this stuff with the NSA. You really think someone doesn't care enough about triathlon to out the truth - if it's something other than the public story - when they clearly will not have to flee to Russia as a result and may even be party to a whistleblower lawsuit and the funds that could come from that?
Now, the program isn't perfect. I think, as Dan does, that it's a conflict of interest for WTC to do it's own results management. This actually comes mostly - in our opinion - from the potential legal costs associated with AG testing, since many AG athletes have significant legal resources. Fighting pros, I'm less worried about. Pros are not rich, and the public has had it with "believe tyler" type campaigns. But many AG athletes have the means to fight a long legal battle. So that's a potential problem in my eyes. Plus, as we saw with the UCI, being responsible for your own results management presents a real potential area for abuse. So I just don't see the good that comes of it. That said, the people in charge of the program are people whose integrity and honesty I believe in. So while the appearance of a conflict of interest is there - and I'd like to see that gone, right now it only is an appearance thing.
I have a very strong vested interest in the credibility of the program. I have put my name and reputation behind the integrity of it. So I've asked these questions with Dan, because I want to do what I can to make sure the program has been "stress-tested." Especially since myself and my peers contribute to the funding of the program, I think it's even more important that the program be robust.
I think folks need to remember that, for better and for worse, it's REALLY hard to catch dopers. The system is heavily weighted to protect against false positives. There is only, roughly, a 1-in-33 chance (3%) that a test will catch someone who is actively cheating. This was from a discussion on Science of Sport. So maybe there's an A-sample that's a bit "off." In that case, another tech runs the test again. This time it shows up clean. Or the A-sample is suspicious and the B-sample is then clean. None of those things represent an AAF. Should they be made public? No, because they are not positive tests. A "suspicious" result is not a positive - an erratic A-sample that doesn't then show up in the B. That is NOT a positive. It just isn't. But maybe someone talks. But maybe someone heard something and started a rumor. People are involved and people are fallible.
There are DEFINITELY ways that the IM Anti-Doping program could be made better. Some outside oversight. More transparency on the financial contribution from the pros. These are all things that I'd like to see. But the program is still a huge step forward towards clean sport. A lot of people who I trust put a huge amount of themselves into this. And I think it is a program that is worth our support. People are asking the questions. And the answers that are coming back are loud and clear - "there has never been any sort of cover-up, conspiracy, or other non-standard response to any sort of AAF by WTC."
So, hopefully that adds some clarity and insight.
We all want to make this program better. Unfortunately, rumors like this inevitably happen. We do our best to track them down and address them. For everyone's sake.
"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp