What Vitor Belfort Needs To Prove For a TRT Exemption in Nevada

Posted: January 8, 2014 in Uncategorized
Tags: ,

4 hydroxytestosterone

Presently there is perhaps no greater controversy in professional combat sports than Therapeutic Use Exemptions for anabolic steroids.  A bright spotlight will shine on this issue again with many asking whether Vitor Belfort will receive a Therapeutic Use Exemption for TRT by the Nevada State Athletic Commission for his upcoming middleweight title fight which is rumoured to take place in Las Vegas.   Below is the test Belfort needs to pass for clearance.

NAC 467.850 adopts the WADA criteria for granting a TUE.  The four criteria that must be fulfilled before a TUE is granted are set forth in the International Standard for TUEs which are as follows:

1. “The Athlete would experience a significant impairment to health if 
the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method were to be withheld in 
the course of treating an acute or chronic medical condition.” (Article 
4.1 a. of the International Standard for TUEs.)

2. “The Therapeutic Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited 
Method would produce no additional enhancement of performance 
other than that which might be anticipated by a return to a state of 
normal health following the treatment of a legitimate medical 
condition. 

3. “There is no reasonable Therapeutic alternative to the Use of the 
otherwise Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.” (Article 4.1 
c of the International Standard for TUEs.)

4. “The necessity for the Use of the otherwise Prohibited Substance or 
Prohibited Method cannot be a consequence, wholly or in part, of 
prior non-Therapeutic Use of any Substance from the Prohibited 
List.” (Article 4.1 d. of the International Standard for TUEs.)

Given that TUE’s for TRT have been handed out in the past we can safely assume the NSAC can be persuaded with respect to the first three criteria.  The fourth will be the focus of controversy.  In 2006 Belfort tested positive for anabolic steroids, specifically for 4-hydroxytestosterone which is a WADA prohibited substance.

Belfort’s excuse for using this anabolic steroid (ingesting a supplement which, unknown to him, contained it) is irrelevant in the TUE analysis.  All that matters is that it was ingested for “a non-therapeutic use” which it was by his own admission.  From there evidence must focus on why Belfort has the need for TRT in the first place.

To follow the letter of the law the NSAC must be presented with evidence that the cause of Belfort’s TRT needs is not even “in part” related to his previous anabolic steroid use.   Given that a known consequence of anabolic steroid use includes decreased testosterone production it will be an uphill battle for the NSAC to justify a TUE in Belfort’s circumstances.  Unless a doctor can provide persuasive medical evidence explaining the cause of Belfort’s low testosterone production and further ruling out the previous 4-hydroxytestosterone use a TUE cannot be granted under WADA standards.

I reached out to Dr. Benjamin about whether medical evidence can meet this test to which he provided the following candid reply:

Dr Benjamin Tweet Belfort TRT TUE

Comments
  1. […] Vitor Belfort’s controversial use of Testosterone Replacement Therapy will be in the spotlight again if his title shot takes place, as rumoured, in Nevada.  Belfort has never been granted a Therapeutic Use Exemption in Nevada with NSAC Executive Director Keith Kizer stating it is doubtful one would be granted.  This is a well grounded comment given the test Belfort would need to pass to receive a TUE in Nevada. […]

  2. […] Not so fast says Commission chairman Francisco Aguilar.  Outside the lines reports that Aguilar “cautioned, however, that a prior failed drug test is not an immediate disqualifier and that any request from Belfort would be heard and decided upon by the full five-member commission, with input from Trainor.”  That much is true, a failed drug test is not a barrier to a TUE, however, the legal test for a TUE is almost insurmountable in these circumstances under NSAC Rules. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s