Updated late May 5
LOS ANGELES, California, May 4. ACCORDING to a press release sent out by Jessica Hardy's legal representation, Hardy's suspension for a positive test for Clenbuterol has been reduced to one year. Hardy tested positive for the banned substance at the 2008 U.S. Olympic Trials in Omaha, Neb., setting off a firestorm of controversy regarding who would replace her on the U.S. Olympic roster.
The press release states that the American Arbitration Association (AAA) found that Hardy's positive test came from a contaminated supplement sample.
Additionally, should Hardy's one-year suspension fall under the auspices of the new rule where any doping ban for longer than six months would preclude Hardy from competing at the 2012 London Games, the AAA would consider further limiting the suspension.
This is the second high profile doping case for the U.S. ending in a contaminated supplement. Kicker Vencill once drew a four-year suspension, later reduced to two years, before winning a lawsuit to prove his innocence of intent to dope.
Here is the full press release from lawyer Howard Jacobs:
Los Angeles (May 4, 2009) – The American Arbitration Association today issued its decision suspending Jessica Hardy from competition from August 1, 2008 through July 31, 2009 for her inadvertent use of a contaminated supplement, thereby allowing her to return to competition this summer. The positive test occurred at the 2008 U.S. Olympic Trials, where Jessica Hardy qualified for the U.S. Olympic team in four events. As a result of the positive test, Jessica Hardy voluntarily withdrew from the Olympic team.
In its decision, the AAA Panel found that a longer sanction would be disproportionate to the facts of the case, relying in part on the following:
-The arbitrators found that Jessica Hardy's positive test was caused by a contaminated Advocare Arginine Extreme supplement.
-Jessica Hardy received personal assurances from Advocare regarding the purity of its supplements.
-The arbitrators found that under all of the circumstances, Jessica Hardy should receive the shortest possible suspension allowed under the rules
-The arbitrators also considered the possible application of a new rule of the International Olympic Committee ("IOC"), which could potentially preclude Jessica Hardy from competing at the 2012 Olympic Games, since her penalty is longer than 6 months. The arbitrators stated that such a result would be "grossly disproportionate," and stated that they would retain jurisdiction to reconsider the length of the penalty if the IOC did not waive the application of its new rule to Jessica Hardy.
In responding to the AAA decision, Jessica Hardy stated as follows:
"I am extremely happy that the Arbitration Panel was persuaded by my scientific proof of supplement contamination, and that they believed me when I told them that I never have and never will use performance enhancing drugs. I look forward to returning to competition as soon as possible and proving that my prior successes, including at the Olympic Trials, were achieved solely through hard work and discipline, with no shortcuts. The past year, including missing the 2008 Olympic Games, has been heartbreaking, the most difficult year of my life. It was made more tolerable by the numerous expressions of support I received from teammates, competitors, and fans all over the world, for which I will always be grateful.
I look forward to again representing my country, and will prepare for the upcoming season with the utmost determination."
USA Swimming released the following statement regarding the ruling:
We are glad that this situation has been resolved. Jessica has served a significant penalty and has taken responsibility for her actions, which were ruled unintentional. The importance in being diligent in following the anti-doping rules cannot be overstated, and this case should serve as a stern reminder to all athletes to take extreme care with everything they put into their bodies.
USADA also released the following press release:
Colorado Springs, Colo. (May 4, 2009) – An independent, three-member American Arbitration Association/Court of Arbitration for Sport (AAA/CAS) panel issued its decision today in the case of U.S. Swimmer Jessica Hardy, from a positive drug test during last year's U.S. Olympic Trials.
On July 4, 2008, Ms. Hardy tested positive for the anabolic agent, clenbuterol. Following proceedings, instituted pursuant to the USADA Protocol on August 1, 2008, Ms. Hardy voluntarily withdrew from the 2008 U.S. Olympic Team, reserving her right to seek a reduction to her period of ineligibility.
The AAA/CAS panel heard evidence in January and March of this year concerning Ms. Hardy's claim that her supplements were contaminated with clenbuterol. Ms. Hardy fully accepted responsibility for her negligence in taking supplements in light of education and warnings provided by USADA regarding the associated risks. The AAA/CAS panel credited Ms. Hardy's evidence of contamination and determined that she had exercised sufficient diligence in her investigation of the supplements to be entitled to a reduction of her period of ineligibility. The AAA/CAS panel assigned a one-year period of ineligibility to conclude on July 31, 2009.
The panel also retained jurisdiction for possible consideration at a later date of the potential impact of the International Olympic Committee's (IOC) Rule 45 on Ms. Hardy. The IOC's Rule 45, effective July 1, 2008, prohibits an athlete who has been sanctioned by more than six months from competing in the next two Olympic Games.
In an effort to aid athletes, as well as all support team members such as parents and coaches, in understanding the rules applicable to them, USADA provides comprehensive instruction on its website on the testing process and prohibited substances, how to obtain permission to use a necessary medication, and the risks and dangers of taking supplements as well as performance-enhancing and recreational drugs. In addition, the agency manages a drug reference hotline, conducts educational sessions with National Governing Bodies and their athletes, and proactively distributes a multitude of educational materials, such as the Guide to Prohibited Substances and Methods, easy-reference wallet cards, periodic newsletters, and protocol and policy reference documentation.
USADA is responsible for the testing and results management process for athletes in the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Movement, and is equally dedicated to preserving the integrity of sport through research initiatives and educational programs.
AdvoCare, the company listed in the Hardy arbitration, has disputed the findings of the panel. Here is AdvoCare's response to the decision:
May 5, 2009 – On May 4, 2009, the arbitration panel presiding over Jessica Hardy's appeal of her suspension reduced Ms. Hardy's suspension to one year, finding that Ms. Hardy met her burden of proof in showing that an AdvoCare supplement she consumed was contaminated with a slight trace of clenbuterol, a banned substance.
The arbitration panel's finding is in direct conflict with testing conducted by two independent laboratories, both of which found no evidence that clenbuterol was present in the AdvoCare supplements consumed by Ms. Hardy. Every single raw material used in the specific lots consumed by Ms. Hardy also tested negative (Not Detected) for Clenbuterol.
NSF International, an independent laboratory licensed to test for controlled substances, certified these test results. The results were also certified by HFL Sports Science, a leader in nutritional supplement testing with a WADA-experienced laboratory that adheres to ISO 17025 standards for sports supplements and has analyzed more samples for banned substances than any other lab in the world. Moreover, the arbitration panel's finding that Ms. Hardy had met her burden of proof in showing supplement contamination was based solely upon information presented by Ms. Hardy and her legal team. AdvoCare was not permitted to participate in the arbitration proceeding. AdvoCare was not allowed to question witnesses or present any evidence to the arbitration panel. The arbitration panel also denied AdvoCare's requests to attend the hearing and have the proceedings transcribed by a court reporter.
For these reasons, AdvoCare believes that the arbitration was severely flawed and the panel's finding regarding the purity of AdvoCare's products is not supported by the facts or evidence. As noted previously, AdvoCare has instituted a lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas against Ms. Hardy in which AdvoCare is seeking a judicial determination that the AdvoCare products consumed by Ms. Hardy did not contain clenbuterol. AdvoCare believes that after consideration of evidence presented by both AdvoCare and Ms. Hardy that it will prevail in the lawsuit.
AdvoCare International, LP is a health and wellness company headquartered in Carrollton, Texas that markets nutrition and skin care products through independent distributors throughout the United States. For more than 15 years, AdvoCare has offered nutritional supplements and vitamins of the highest quality developed through comprehensive research and backed by a Scientific Medical Advisory Board. For more information on AdvoCare, visit www.advocare.com or call 800-542-4800.
Search For More News About: Jessica Hardy
Reaction Time Comments
Reaction Time responses do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions
of Swimming World Magazine or SwimmingWorldMagazine.com.
Reaction Time is provided as a service to our readers.
May 4, 2009 Unless she can get some kind of saiver or something she has NO chance of swiming @ Rome as Trials precede end of her suspension.
Too bad.
We could use her. Submitted by: slickwillie32
May 4, 2009 USA swimming clearly states on their website..."take supplements at your own risk". Even though the Advocare supplelments were proven to be tainted, Jessica should not have been using them according to intelligent thought knowing USA swimming protocol. Reducing her suspension sends the wrong message contradicting all that USA swimming is teaching young swimmers. If this were a swimmer without the resources to "fight" this, I doubt the outcome would have been the same. Submitted by: chapter13
May 4, 2009 This is ridiculous. There is no way she didn't know what she was doing. What a crock. Kicker Vencill should throw a fit.
What happened to the rule of "strict liability"? Submitted by: jeffyfit
May 4, 2009 If the suspension is retroactive to the date of the positive test (July 4, 2008) she CAN swim at Nationals. If they follow the schedule I expect them to follow (the same as '07 Nats and '08 US Open), the 100 Breast is July 5 and the 50 Free July 6. Really sucks if she can't swim 'til Aug. 1. Maybe she'll do what Mellouli (another Salo product - boy, do drug testers have it out for them) and swim in a bunch of meets this fall, like World Cup. All I know is Rebecca Soni has her training partner coming back!
BTW, does anyone know the Nationals schedule? Submitted by: SwimDER94
May 4, 2009 They didn't go to the date of the ban, apparently. She should be missing Worlds, but back for US Open Submitted by: jeffyfit
May 4, 2009 It is so interesting to read the comments. There is a reason body builders and gym rats take all these supplements. They are legal steroids or contain compounds that do the same type thing when they metabolize. Guess why? Because they often contain trace or more amounts of ... take your pick.
Ms. Hardy gained the benefits of the drugs even if she did not realize she was ingesting them. I it clear the strength and muscle gain was not permanent? Doubtful. I feel bad for her. Maybe FINA and especially USA swimming needs to sit down and really hammer out (meaning eliminate) the use of most over the counter/GNC style supplements. Or test a bunch in our labs and approve only those. Easier to just not allow any of that type of supplementation. Meaning you can take vitamins and amino acid tabs of a basic nature. Those are easier to pick for a usage list. Same with basic whey protein or vegetarian protein powders. I guess Hardy gets to swim again. Wish her well. But lets do better in the near future. I also believe she is credible in that she named her supplement. Most track and field cheats like Marion Jones et all never do.
This is similar to the suit controversy. Just make people use the suits ( 1 only) that were used at the Beijing games. Keep that in effect until Jan. 2010 when new suits can be tried out by designated test swimmers in test meets and decided fairly over several months on several sexes and body types what is fair. Maybe even go back and start using the flume again to to real tech. research on various bodies in different suits. Supplements are different for everybody. So are suits. Even in Beijing not everybody wore full bodies. Not everyone takes mega protein etc. etc. Lets move to keep it simple and clear.
People control technology. Not the other way around.. unless we choose the other. This is for suits, supplements, even stroke innovations. Submitted by: swimmcatt1
May 4, 2009 USA swimming clearly states.....DO NOT TAKE SUPPLEMENTS....YOU RISK TESTING POSITIVe! Submitted by: chapter13
May 4, 2009 Some of these comments are entirely misinformed. After reading the article it seems that Jessica had the exact sample of the supplement she was taking. Some simple research and you will learn that clenbuterol is effective in "micro"doses. We are talking about micrograms... That could be in ANY of their PRODUCTS!!
I hope for all Olympic Sports that Advocare gets researched very carefully and dealt with accordingly.
There are hundreds of Olympic Athletes that are taking their supplements in confidence that Advocare manufactures clean products. It was a shock that Jessica was the one to take the brunt of the hit simply because she is at a level so much higher than many other of our country's best swimmers.
Hopefully they can figure out the suspension window so she can swim for Rome this season. I couldn't imagine going through a year knowing that you obeyed the rules and trusted what were thought as a "reputable" supplement company, and to be made fun of and ridiculed by media, old teammates and the world.
I would like some of these people to show me World Class Athletes that ARE NOT taking supplements. You must be foolish to say "DO NOT TAKE SUPPLEMENTS". At a world class level you are pushing your body beyond its "normal" limits. You develop vitamin/mineral deficiencies that have to be dealt with using supplements. And when a company guarantees that ALL of their products are legal for USADA testing, then the Athlete has done all they need to be complaint on their part.
She had her supplements named and declared. This is a magic story of some baseball saying they magically found a small canister of a "clear" gel that says "THE CLEAR" that they think is a anti-inflammatory clean. That guy gets by easy, but yet someone like Jessica who has the evidence and research still receives flack.
I can't wait for her to take it to the World!
Congrats Jessica, I'm so pumped for you!!
Adam K Submitted by: discus240
May 4, 2009 I also want to add another thought if I might. I basically think that people do lie and cheat sometimes to win. I think most athletes caught with positive drug tests actually did use drugs knowingly. Ms. Hardy has had her several days in court and so it goes.
I do question a few things however. Did Advocare test hundreds or more random boxes, or whatever of their product from similar batch numbers as what Ms. Hardy would have purchased? Various locations. You would think they would be zealous to recall or find "tainted" product. Is that what they did? Just wondering. I am not sure what form the product she took came in. It might not be hard to add some clenbuterol in some form to it either directly, or even a tiny syringe inserted into a fold in the box or can somehow - enough to "taint" her samples.
If you think I am crazy - possibly. But look at the world of cycling, track and field, cross country skiing. Rampant drug use. Some of those athletes and entire teams competed for years without getting a positive test.
I know that from high school onward Ms. Hardy was fast and gifted. Her times were not that much better than anyone elses all in all. She was not light years ahead of the pack. But still there was a rapid progression in speed and power for the freestyle. All logically possible. But like I said, there are positive drug tests and usually it is not by accident, oversight or a tainted (truly) product.
I hate to say it, but I have become jaded and I am not a true believer. I am very curious to see what kind of times Ms. Hardy can produce over the next 18 months now that she has been cleared.... no pun intended.
Submitted by: swimmcatt1
May 5, 2009 I disagree with all the comments above. Jessica is a victim of tainted supplements and she has paid dearly for it - and still paying for it until August. The best female breast stroker in US and was not able to attend the Olympics in Beijing.
It is high time to let her go back to the pool and do the things she does best. What more your guys want? Some people sound like AAA/CAS have just committed some crime.
Yes, as an elite swimmer, Jessica should be more careful but she paid. Please give yourself a break and do the same to Jessica Hardy. Submitted by: slowsnail
May 5, 2009 Last year I was pretty vocal about this topic and about the use of supplements.
This issue has raised an interesting point in my mind, regardless of which side of this issue you sit.
In the United States should you take a supplement blindly or with a "promise" that they are clean (as Advocare obviously gave Jessica)?
NO!
Do pretty much most of the elite athletes in our sport use some sort of supplementation with some having to use products that are probably sketchy at best and could lead to a positive test because they need some form of training aid that regular diet is not giving them?
YES!
Here is my issue. No one at the USOC, USA Swimming or any other body, if you sit in their meetings will give you any "specific" information on this topic. All you get is "supplements....bad.....take at your own risk". Why? Because they are afraid if they start naming names of supplement companies either way (good or bad) they will get sued by the other side. The supplement industry is a very strong and wealthy one in this country right now.
But that doesn't help our athletes.
Not when we all know that elite athletes in Europe have had a system in place for years where they can buy guaranteed clean supplement products made from an endorsed medical lab and then their own federations make testing labs available for these athletes to be able to send tests of their supplements to ensure their purity. We KNOW this goes on. We KNOW they do this in Europe. Countries and Federations protecting their athletes but at the same time ensuring that they have the best training advantages they can have.
I know this may sound like I am endorsing systematic state sponsored doping of a sort (and this definitely could be abused), but that's not my intent. My intent is to point out two things:
1) Most elite swimmers are using a supplement of some sort in this day and age and are doing so with no safety net in the U.S.
2) Why isn't our NGB or the USOC stepping up to the plate and offering the same type programs to PROTECT our athletes from using something from a company that may be less than reputable?
Doping is one thing, but a positive test from a supplement doesn't have to happen. Submitted by: rcoach
May 5, 2009 Adam K... I am a world class swimmer and guess what..... I do not use supplements! None not one, I don't even take a multi vitamin, so what do you have to say about that?
I am actually very disappointed in USA swimming for Jessica only getting a one year ban, the old excuse it was in my supplements is tiresome, and lets be honest, I would say 90% that she knew what she was taking and was loving the fact that she got faster, stronger and better all the while not getting caught.
USA swimming covers up so much cheating on their behalf, when are they going to own up and punish like they should be punishing?
IOC rules state that she shouldn't be in the 2012 Olympics but who wants to bet that USA swimming will somehow get that overturned for her and sure enough she will be there (unless she is beaten, which lets hope she is).
Face the truth, she is a cheater and always will be, sure she was a good swimmer before but that was in breaststroke, but then last year all of a sudden she goes from a 57 100 free to a 53?? GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!! Submitted by: anonswiming
May 5, 2009 Of course you would be an Anonymous swimmer.
Submitted by: discus240
May 5, 2009 If someone from a country other than the USA were to accuse the American swimming/sports fan of turning a blind eye in FAVOR of the American athlete, all they have to do is read this forum to get a balanced viewpoint. The American athlete does not always get a "get out of jail card" very easily. I applaud this. Submitted by: paddles
May 5, 2009 Agreed paddles; I like Hardy and feel bad for her as we've all made dumb mistakes in our lives. But I don't think the rules should be different for different countries or for folks with the best lawyers.
In the absence of a fool-proof system such as that described by rcoach (and I'm skeptical that it's actually fool-proof as European swimmers have also had poz tests), people are crazy to take supplements anymore, especially after what happened with Kicker Vencill and others. But rcoach's last question is a valid one. Submitted by: liquidassets
May 5, 2009 Amen to that, liquid. Submitted by: paddles
May 5, 2009 To "Anonswimming": The case was not a USA Swimming ruling. It was an AAA/CAS ruling. Important distinction.
I do disagree with a reduced penalty. The sport should always enforce a "strict liability" penalty. The risks of taking supplements are well known to athletes. Submitted by: ShortChange
May 26, 2009 Excuse me - SUPPLEMENT ruled as "contaminated". Enough with this special treatment of Ms. Hardy. Enough.
Who is she, her legal representative and/or those that worked with her kidding.
She is done credibility wise. She may get preferential treatment here - a better knowing swim community being hard pressed to do anything about that - but there is no presumption that by KNOWINGLY taking "supplements" in a Olympic year she is crystal clear in all of this.
Two year suspension is what she deserved. Anyone else would be serving it - completely.
Anything less is a travesty of our country's supposed drug testing protoctol and supposed
consequence".
Wow.....and Tara Kirk is still her victim today. And Lara Jackson, too. Nice, Jessica. real, real nice. Submitted by: lorraine
August 3, 2009 Ah, short of USA Swimming and/or FINA admitting the substance was NOT in her body at the express time she was trying to achieve her "dreams" how is it that the rest of the swim community is ever supposed to be sympathetic at all to what Ms. Hardy chose to put her body through.
Most swimmers with goals as high as the Olympics shy away COMPLETELY from "supplements".
To suggest she inadvertantly ingested a commercial supplement that was somehow, someway "contaminated" by a very well establisehd BANNED SUBSTANCE at the express timing of the Olympic trials is a stretch. A far, far, far stretch.
Wish her well. But don't think this gets "cleaned" up and/or easily appreciated by anyone else. Her issue. Her consequence. Her choice to consume supplements - controversially - in the first place.
I just don't see any other swimmer in this day and age setting themselves up for as huge a downfall as Ms. Hardy in the manner and means in which she did. And that does not even
"hit" upon the very real suspicion by some out there forevermore that all of her consumption of this supplement and its added banned performance enhancing "contaminants" was not deliberately done by Ms. Hardy.
Simply will never, ever unequivocally know. None of us, that's for sure. Submitted by: Lorraine
Reaction Time responses do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions
of Swimming World Magazine or SwimmingWorldMagazine.com.
Reaction Time is provided as a service to our readers.
|
Photo By: Long Photography
Subscribe Now!
|
