Swimming has been rocked in 2024 after the World Anti-Doping Agency ( Wada ) and its handling of positive test results from China's swimming team before the Tokyo Olympics in 2021.
The story, reported by the New York Times and German news organization ARD, surrounds 23 Chinese swimmers, 11 of whom will compete at the Paris Olympics , testing positive for the heart medication trimetazidine (TMZ) during a training camp seven months out from the Tokyo Olympics in 2021.
Zhang Yufei, a gold medalist in the women’s 200-meter butterfly and 200-meter freestyle relay, and Wang Shun, who won gold in the men’s 200-meter individual medley, are among those ready to compete in Paris, reports NBC . Crucially, the results only came to light this year, with the China Anti- Doping Agency (Chinada) claiming that the swimmers unintentionally ingested the substance because of contamination.
There have been accusations that some national associations have performed cover-ups countered with “fake news” replies by China. While there is anger after the doping agency cleared the Chinese swimmers but banned Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva, who also claimed contamination with TMZ before competing at the Beijing 2022 Winter Games.
Here’s how the scandal came to light and what we know ahead of the Paris Olympics :
How did it all start?
On 22 April of this year, Wada, courtesy of Ross Wenzel, general counsel and a former outside lawyer at the time, detailed the series of events from 2021.
Wenzel stated that Chinese anti-doping authorities collected 60 urine samples at a national swimming meet on 3 January, 2021. On 15 March, Chinada told Wada that it had discovered 28 positive tests.
In May, Chinada stated it had found trace amounts of the banned substance at a hotel where all 23 athletes were staying. Notably the trace amounts were reportedly found in spice containers in the hotel kitchen and drainage units.
It informed Wada on 15 June that it would not be charging the swimmers with anti-doping violations, stating that the positive tests were caused by contamination.
What is trimetazidine (TMZ)?
Trimetazidine, or TMZ, can be used to treat angina and other heart-related conditions. It has been on Wada’s prohibited substances list since 2014 given its potential to improve endurance and blood flow.
How did it get inside the kitchen of the Chinese swimmers’ hotel?
Wenzel said in his investigation that Chinada did not get individual testimonies from the 23 Chinese swimmers about how the substance appeared in their samples. Athletes who claim contamination usually must provide an explanation for the potential or likely source of contamination.
Wenzel said Chinada “didn’t hypothesize in their report” why trace amounts of a banned heart medication were found in the kitchen of a hotel where elite swimmers were staying during competition.
“The ultimate source, meaning how the TMZ got into the kitchen, was not discovered,” Wenzel said.
What did Wada do and what could it have done?
Wada officials said that due to the widespread cases of Covid-19 in the region at the time, an investigation in China was not possible.
Wada investigated the circumstances and ruled out the prospect of microdosing, while also maintaining that the positive tests were limited to the athletes, according to Chinada, who stayed at the same hotel.
“All of those athletes were in the same place at the same time when the positives arose, and all of these sample results were at consistently low levels,” Wenzel said.
Wada had the option to challenge Chinada at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), but ultimately decided in July not to do so due to insufficient evidence and legal advice surrounding the likelihood of disproving the explanation of contamination.
Wada considered the athletes innocent and did not publicly reveal details of the case before the Tokyo Olympics, where China’s 30-person swimming team won six medals, including three golds.
Why was the case not made public?
Given the presumption of innocence, the national anti-doping body can determine no violation and is not under any obligation to publicly reveal details of a case. Wada would only publicly discuss a case if Chinada did so or it intended to take the case to CAS.
Wada president Witold Banka said: “It’s a question about whether you want or not to expose the innocent athletes, right? We have to take into account that through publishing the names of athletes without anti-doping rule violations, you expose the innocent athletes and you can damage their image. So this is a discussion which is very important, and our role is to protect innocent athletes as well.”
What did the independent investigation say?
The scandal led to an independent investigation, which concluded in July 2024 that Wada did not show bias in the case of 23 Chinese swimmers cleared to compete in Tokyo, despite the athletes testing positive for a banned substance.
Swiss prosecutor Eric Cottier's interim report also stated that it was reasonable for Wada not to appeal the decision by Chinada to not punish the athletes.
Wada's senior director of science and medicine, Olivier Rabin, had “doubts about the reality of contamination as described by the Chinese authorities,” according to the annex to Cottier's report.
But no action was taken due to being “unable to exclude the contamination scenario in a solidly substantiated manner” and ultimately he “saw no other solution than to accept it”.
Wada also explained that it was “not in a position to disprove” Chinada’s story with independent experts and external legal counsel helping to inform the decision to not appeal.
What has been said?
The scandal has seen Michael Phelps , Adam Peaty, Katie Ledecky and others hit out at the anti-doping body with fears that trust has been lost among athletes ahead of the biggest swimming meet of the four-year cycle.
Phelps said athletes can no longer place their faith in Wada: “As athletes, our faith can no longer be blindly placed in the World Anti-Doping Agency, an organisation that continues to prove that it is either incapable or unwilling to enforce its policies consistently around the world,” Phelps said.
“It is clear to me that any attempts of reform at Wada have fallen short, and there are still deeply rooted, systemic problems that prove detrimental to the integrity of international sports and athletes’ right to fair competition, time and time again.”
Travis Tygart, CEO of the United States Anti-Doping Agency, or USADA , called the story “crushing” and claimed that the world and Chinese anti-doping associations had “secretly, until now, swept these positives under the carpet.”
FairSport and Global Athlete insist Wada’s process was “inherently flawed from the outset due to its limited scope and independence”.
The joint-statement added: “Until all related documents are made public, trust in the system will not be regained and Wada’s position as the global regulator will continue to be challenged.”
Allison Schmitt, who was part of the US team which missed out on gold to China in the 800 metres freestyle relay at the Tokyo Olympics, said: “We raced hard. We trained hard. We followed every protocol. We respected (China’s) performance and accepted our defeat. But now, learning that the Chinese relay consisted of athletes who had not served a suspension, I look back with doubt. We may never know the truth and that may haunt many of us for years.”
What happens next?
Wada president Witold Banka welcomed the independent report and its conclusions, while exploring “what measures can be taken against those that have made untrue and potentially defamatory allegations,” and claimed that the case was being used “as a geopolitical tool” in China and the United States’ wider dispute.
Chinese swimmers must also have faced at least eight drug tests this year, according to World Aquatics.
World Aquatics said "a certain number of athletes from specific nations will be tested four times" in 2024 by the Lausanne-based International Testing Agency, which operates anti-doping programs for many Olympic sports.
But the governing body added that Chinese athletes competing in Paris will "be tested by the ITA no less than eight times during this same period.
The samples would ideally not be conducted by Chinada, with the tests also preferably studied in laboratories outside of China.
Most Popular
Comments / 0