Earlier this year it was revealed that Brock Lesnar failed in and out of competition tests surrounding his bout with Mark Hunt at UFC 200 with “Clomiphene and hydroxyclomiphene” being detected.
Lesnar is undergoing results management with the United States Anti Doping Agency who oversee the UFC’s in house anti-doping program and further facing regulatory consequences with the Nevada State Athletic Commission.
There is speculation that Lesnar may try the ‘tainted supplement‘ defence blaming the positive results on products which failed to include them on their label. While this is not an outright defense it is a mitigating factor which canresult in drastically reduced punishments for athletes who successfully pull it off.
While USADA punishment is one thing, the NAC regulatory process creates its own challenges and Lesnar’s biggest barrier, even if he can prove a contaminated product, may be an alleged misrepresentation to the NAC.
I have obtained a copy of the State’s Complaint against Lesnar where not only doping allegations are made but also allegations of providing “false or misleading” information to the commission, a stand alone offence.
Lesnar’s pre-fight medical questionnaire indeed denies ingesting any “medication, drug, cream, inhalant, intravenous infusions, or injection, whether prescription or over the counter” in the month prior to UFC 200.
Lesnar does admit to ingesting multivitamins, creatine and protein powder but nothing else.
In short, if Lesnar’s legal team can indeed identify a product which resulted in his unwitting ingestion of Clomiphene he will need to link it to “multivitamins, creatine and protein powder” or a drug or other product ingested more than 30 days prior to UFC 200 which was capable of leaving detectable traces beyond 30 days. This is, to put it charitably, an uphill legal battle.
Originally published here - https://combatsportslaw.com/2016/10/13/brock-lesnars-uphill-anti-doping-battle-following-ufc-200/
