By Tim Parsons-
Mo Farah is the latest British athlete to be scrutinised over his use of so-called therapeutic use exemptions (TUEs) after his confidential medical data was leaked online by Hacking group, Fancy Bear.
Farah, the exceptional double gold medallist at the 2016 Olympics, is one of eight more British athletes who competed in Rio Olympics in Brazil, whose records were released on Monday by the hacking group.
Others affected include Helen Glover, Justin Rose, and three victorious members of the Great Britain women’s hockey team. Among the 26 athletes affected, are Rafel Nadal- the Spanish 14-times grand slam tennis champion.
Farah has confirmed applications for two legitimate therapeutic use exemptions(TUEs), although he initially claimed to have had only one, raising questions as to what he was hiding by withholding partial information in relation to serious enquiries. His association with controversial coaches, Alberto Salazar and Jama Aden, has not done him many favours either, in terms of perception.
In Birmingham in 2015, Farah was clearly asked whether he had ever applied for an exemption. He replied: “I’ve had one TUE and that was in Park City, I collapsed on the floor, was taken in an ambulance and put on a drip. That was the only one.”
That was a reference to an incident when he collapsed after a training run at high altitude and had to be airlifted to hospital. However, he amended his position in an interview with Sky Sports News three weeks later, as the pressure on him over his relationship with Salazar intensified. The legendary athlete gave a more accurate response, this time, stating;
“I’ve had two, I’ve had one recently in Park City and one in 2008,” Farah said. Asked whether he had applied for TUEs to help with his asthma, Farah replied: “I’m not on TUE for asthma, I’m just on the normal, regular asthma [inhaler]. I just take it before exercise.”
His response is consistent with the records released by the Fancy Bears group. The 2008 TUE relates to an injection of the anti-inflammatory triamcinolone days before he raced in Newcastle. A spokeswoman for Farah stated:
“As Mo has previously stated, he has got nothing to hide,” a spokeswoman said, “and doesn’t have a problem with this or any of his ADAMS [Wada’s anti-doping administration and management system] information being released – as evidenced by the fact that he voluntarily shared his blood data with the Sunday Times last year.
Advertisement
“Mo’s medical care is overseen at all times by British Athletics and over the course of his long career, he has only ever had two TUEs. The first was back in 2008 for a one-off anti-inflammatory treatment to an injury. The second was in 2014 when Mo collapsed and was airlifted to hospital for emergency care, which consisted of painkillers and being placed on a drip.”
INTRAMUSCULAR INJECTIONS
Further news that Farah received intramuscular injections of Tetracosactide- a stimulant that generates the production of corticosteroids, and named in several doping cases involving cyclists, is likely to give rise to further scrutiny of the world accomplished athlete.
Tennis legend, Rafal Nadal has not been particularly impressed with the drama that has accompanied leaks and revelations about the supplements he uses.
In March, Nadal threatened to sue former French sports minister, Roselyne Bachelot, over doping allegations. The week before that he said: “I am a completely clean guy. I work so much during all my career, and when I get an injury, I get an injury. I never take anything to be back quicker.”
On Monday night Nadal told Spanish media: “When you ask permission to take something for therapeutic reasons and they give it to you, you’re not taking anything prohibited. “It’s not news, it’s just inflammatory.”
Nadal is right that if permission is given for an athlete to be exempted from certain prohibitions, they have committed no offence. The question becomes why these exemptions are being granted, and whether they are justified. Twice granted a TUE, Nadal insisted he had never taken anything to improve his performance but took what doctors advised him was the best medication to care for his troublesome knee.
PUBLIC
He added: “It would be much more beneficial for sportsmen and women, spectators and media that every time a drug test is taken the news is made public and two weeks later there are the results. This would end the problem. The sport has to take a step forward and be totally transparent. I have been saying this for years.” Very true, so why is this not the case?
The steady flow of leaks by the Fancy Bears group appears to be an attempt somehow to equate the use of TUEs by western athletes with the state‑sponsored doping documented in Russia over the past 18 months by two independent reports commissioned by Wada.
HYPOCRISY
Former professional Joerg Jaksche, who once admitted blood doping, accused Sky of hypocrisy.
“To be honest, we had the same excuse,” he told the CyclingTips website. “I personally did it, as well as a lot of cyclists that I know from my era. We always said we had the same thing, the same allergy, but it was actually just for performance-enhancing.”
The cyber espionage group, Fancy Bear, are believed to be exposing all this information in order to show the West to be hypocritical, especially in light of the ban imposed on Russian athletes preventing them from participating at the Rio Olympics this year. Whatever the motive, if the allegations are true and raise legitimate issues, they must be thoroughly investigated.
The cycling’s world governing body has defended the way in which it granted TUEs and, it is understood, is not minded to review the process.
In a press statement, they stated : “The management of therapeutic use exemptions in cycling is robust and fully safeguarded. The UCI TUE Committee (TUEC) is composed of independent experts and the coordination of the committee is handled by the Cycling Anti-Doping Foundation (CADF), the independent body mandated to carry out anti-doping in the sport. A TUE can only be granted if there is unanimity amongst the panel of three TUEC members, which constitutes an additional level of rigour and goes beyond the applicable international standards. In addition, the UCI is one of the few international federations who has been recording the TUEs in ADAMS since the inception of ADAMS. Whilst this was not mandatory at the time, the UCI made that choice for transparency reasons considering that it enables Wada to review TUEs granted by the UCI TUEC.”
With all these revelations out, we must wonder how much more revelations is on the way. One certainty is that there needs to be more transparency in sports, as well as a more unified rule for the sake of fairness. Favouritism cannot be justified without open discussion and properly presented grounds.