Yes, I read the article. I am not defending the test. I said it was the strangest or most suspect thing to come out of this. I only asked about the disclosure to USADA at the time. Here is how Salazar described it in his rebuttal (below). He says he called a hotline then ran the experiment. So as I read it he reported a concern but did not disclose the experiment at the time. It sounds like Brown might have legal / ethical issues but presumably there was informed consent fro Salazar's sons.
According to the filing, USADA reached out to Brown this February and then filed this action last week.
-------------------------------------------------------
The Sabotage Test
Our testing was conducted to ensure our post-race protocol was structured to eliminate the risk of sabotage.
There was never intent to do anything illegal.
Magness has disregarded the facts and circumstances of what actually occurred.
Magness also makes baseless attacks about a test that I conducted on testosterone years before he joined the Oregon Project. Magness did not participate in the test and did not see the test parameters or the test results. He had a brief conversation about the test. Now, years later, he claims in the BBC/ProPublica stories that the purpose of the test was “ludicrious†and then alleges an alternative motive directly contrary to why the test was run and how it was designed. Here is what really happened.
In 2006, Justin Gatlin tested positive for exogenous testosterone. Gatlin asserted that he had not knowingly taken testosterone and claimed that he had been sabotaged by his massage therapist, Chris Whetstine. The Gatlin story was extremely well known throughout the track world. Rumors about whether athletes could test positive by having something rubbed on them after a race and before going to doping control were rampant. See
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/06/sports/othersports/06gatlin.html?_r=1&
On May 9, 2009, Galen Rupp’s University of Oregon 4x1 mile relay team set a new NCAA record. Shortly after the race while talking to the press, Galen felt someone rubbing his shoulders. He turned around and it was Chris Whetstine. Galen had heard the stories. He was extremely concerned and called me. I called the USADA hotline to report it. USADA may still have the tapes or notes of my call. Nothing came of it but it caused us grave concern.
Having experienced this scare, we decided to conduct an experiment to determine if it was possible for someone to rub something on an athlete after a race that would cause that athlete to test positive. If it was possible, we wanted to make sure our post-race protocol was structured to eliminate this risk. I was a bit naive and let my paranoia get the best of me here but there was never intent to do anything illegal.
The Gatlin case involved testosterone so we decided to see if rubbing Androgel on an athlete after a race could cause a positive test. Dr. Jeffery Brown set up the experiment. Existing medical literature indicated that eight squirts of Androgel would cause a marked increase in male hormones within 15 minutes of being placed on the skin. Eight squirts, however, is a lot of Androgel and would be clearly noticed by the person on which it was being rubbed. The experiment was designed to see if lower amounts, which the athlete may not notice being applied could trigger a positive test. The subjects for the experiment were my sons, who are the same approximate age as typical elite athletes and are in good physical condition. But are not elite athletes subject to USADA or any other elite testing pool.
In early July 2009, the parameters of the experiment were set and the first part of the test conducted. The initial protocol was to take a urine sample at the beginning as a control. The subjects then ran for 20 minutes on a treadmill at a brisk pace at an ambient temperature of 85ºF to create an aggressive sweat to simulate having run a 5k race or longer. One squirt (1.25 grams) was applied to one subject and two squirts (2.5 grams) was applied to the other sweaty subject. Another urine sample was then taken an hour later. The urine samples were then sent to the Aegis Sciences Corporation for testing. The T/E ratios for the subjects were in the normal range.
After receiving the test results, we re-ran the experiment in late July using the same protocols except this time four squirts (5 grams) of Androgel were applied to the subjects after they had played one-hour of full court basketball at a high level. Again the urine samples were tested by Aegis. This time one of the subjects had a T/E ratio of 2.8:1, which approaches the threshold of 4:1 that could trigger a positive doping violation. See Exhibit 17.
On July 31, 2009, after reviewing the second test results, Dr. Brown emailed me to see if we wanted to run the test a third time using six squirts. I responded that I did not think it was worth it as “The four squirts was an enormous amount that was easily noticed and had to be applied carefully to keep it from falling off.†See Exhibit 17. Dr. Brown agreed and noted that published data indicated “that eight squirts would throw the 4/1 ratio. I responded: “I’ll sleep better now after drug tests at big meets knowing someone didn’t sabotage us!†See Exhibit 17.
On August 5, 2009, Dr Brown noted that while the experiment had demonstrated that it was unlikely that a male athlete could be sabotaged by secretly rubbing Androgel on him after a race, it could take far less Androgel to cause a woman to test positive. We did not test this hypothesis. Instead, Dr. Brown recommended that to avoid the possibility of sabotage, female athletes should not have any physical contact with anybody until after drug testing had been completed.
The above-described evidence makes it abundantly clear that the focus of this experiment was to determine whether or not an athlete could be sabotaged by someone rubbing testosterone gel on the athlete after an event before the athlete reports to doping control. These documents and the experiment’s protocol also make it abundantly clear that this test did not in any way contemplate micro-dosing as alleged by the BBC/ProPublica stories and Magness. If one was testing for micro-dosing as they imply, the protocol would be different and an athlete would be given the gel before exercising.
Bottom line, Magness appears to have imagined a scenario to fit his narrative about the Oregon Project and me without regard for the facts and circumstances of what actually occurred.