Greetings, all WAVA has spoken, and it's bad news for Kathy Jager and her cause. WAVA President Torsten Carlius has informed Carl and Kathy Jager that her request for early reinstatement from a two-year drug ban (ending this coming fall) has been rejected by the WAVA Council. This means she can't compete in the World Veterans Athletic Championships in Brisbane, and she'll barred from USATF-sanctioned domestic meets until then as well. Carlius wrote the Jagers thusly: "Kathy's case was discussed at the IAAF Council meeting in August with the decision to submit the matter to WAVA. As I have previously told you, the Olympic Games month was lost as most people were involved in Sydney and I promised you to try to have our WAVA answer ready by end of November. It took two more weeks and I am sorry for the delay. "However, the Council studied the rules and after considering these the WAVA Council could not find any exceptional circumstances in the case and the decision was consequently to reject the appeal -- a decision that was also sent to IAAF to forward to you. "I hope this clarifies what has happened and been done from our side. The decision not to approve of the early reinstatement is final and will not be reopened as the Council has found no exceptional circumstances. I am sorry for this but from our standpoint it is so. "However, I am aware that we owe you an answer on the request for exemption of the two medicines (hormone replacement therapy & diuretic) and this I will answer the next week after having talked to my Council Members - will be away again some days." In light of this decision, Kathy's husband, Carl, has prepared a summary of this case. I share this with the List and egroups in hopes it prompts some enterprising Web site or publication to pursue this matter and ask some hard questions of the IAAF and WAVA -- including: If it's OK to grant early reinstatement for Javier Sotomayor and Merlene Ottey (among others), why is a 56-year-old woman given such a hard time in her request? An Athlete and Her Medicine --- A New Perspective SOME BACKGROUND Kathy Jager is a world class Masters (over age 40) track and field athlete. Her specialty is the 100M and 200M, but she also holds records in the pole vault, high jump and long jump, as well as the field events shot put, javelin, and discus. In Gateshead, England, during an international meet in August of 1999, she broke the world 100 M record for her age group. Kathy began her track career at age 50, entering an Arizona state-level meet---the annual Grand Canyon State Games. Subsequently she competed in several dozens of local, regional, and state competitions. She has also competed regularly in the biennial National Senior Olympic meets and annual National Masters meets. While she was competing at the international Masters WAVA (World Association of Veteran Athletes) meet at Gateshead, she was one of the athletes selected---presumably at random---for drug testing. After the meet, and after she had returned home to the United States, she received a letter from USATF (United States Track and Field---the governing body for both Olympic and Masters athletes from the United States) informing her that she had tested positive for the banned drug methyltestosterone. The letter, citing an originating query from an international regulator, the International Amateur Athletic Federation (IAAF), requested an explanation for the positive test. Unknown to her at the time, this synthetic testosterone is found, in trace amounts, in the hormone replacement medicine called Estratest---a medicine effective in alleviating severe cases of post menopausal distress and prescribed for Kathy by her physician. Also unknown to her, since she had received no information on the subject, was the fact that this medicine is banned for athletes. After receiving the letter Kathy submitted a complete file of information on her personal medical requirements, and also outlined a number of mitigating circumstances relative to the test. Nevertheless, the IAAF rejected her explanation and she was suspended---pending hearings---from competition for two years. In addition, the medals which she had won in England were voided from the record books. What has followed has been an international, hard-fought, and unusually bewildering struggle to gain early reinstatement and exemption for her medicine. The entire battle has been waged within the often arcane and lengthy procedures of three different regulatory bodies. The battle was first waged with USAT&F who administers sanctions on the IAAF’s behalf. Over the course of nine months of constant communication, two hearings were finally held, both of which recommended Kathy’s early reinstatement. These actions culminated with a USATF recommendation for reinstatement, pending IAAF approval of exemption for her medicine. The next phase lasted another three months while IAAF reviewed the case. This group finally concluded that it could not act on the exemption, but instead passed the request to WAVA. In the meantime, Kathy reintroduced her request for early reinstatement. WAVA "reviewed" the case for another five months, finally concluding in mid-January, 2001---a year and a half since the original notification---that it would not grant early reinstatement, citing an inability to find "exceptional" circumstances. Kathy had no opportunity to present information during this "review", and has no assurance that even any of her previously submitted medical documentation was reviewed by the WAVA Council. As of this date, late January, 2001, the associated question of medicine exemption still languishes. Adding insult to injury, Kathy is required to undergo unannounced drug testing for a period of at least twelve months, effectively preventing her from getting the benefits of this required medication, even though she is not competing. KEY IMPACTS There are a number of relevant circumstances surrounding this unique case: --Neither WAVA nor IAAF has ever dealt with an issue of this nature. Consequently, neither has any experience in recognizing---or an inclination to apply---the many mitigating circumstances surrounding the case. --The "Estratest" medicine ban rests on no evidence of a connection with athletic performance enhancement. The policy exists completely apart from any medical rationale or foundation. --The criteria used in testing makes no distinction between (a), high levels of externally administered testosterone and, (b), trace elements of synthetic testosterone widely recognized---and widely prescribed---as necessary for many post menopausal women. --The record is clear that Kathy had no intent to misuse any drug. In fact, she voluntarily disclosed all of her medications, including the medication for which she was later suspended, prior to her drug test. --None of the regulatory agencies provided Kathy any information on banned p rescription medicines. Agreeing with the egregious nature of this failure, the USATF Doping Reinstatement Board found that, "the lack of information and education about the anti-doping requirements provided to master athletes in general, and Kathleen Jager in particular, precluded Ms. Jager from the ability to comply and warrants reinstatement in this situation." --Unequivocal recommendations for Kathy's reinstatement have been issued by two USATF doping review panels in addition to a strong recommendation from USATF staff. One of the exceptional circumstances cited in this review was the fact that Kathy has worked tirelessly with youth sport promotion, including anti-drug efforts. Paradoxically, in two doping infractions in recent years concerning issues far more serious than simple use of a prescribed medicine, the athletes involved were treated quite favorably: --IAAF granted two athletes, who had been suspended for drug use (cocaine, in one instance) early reinstatement last year. Incredibly, a reason given for one of the reinstatements was that the athlete in question "would not have a career interrupted". --Only a few months ago, The United States Olympic Committee confirmed that it had exonerated eight Olympic athletes in 1988 for doping violations because they had used a banned drug "inadvertently". CONCLUSIONS This is an athlete who is suspended and stripped of her records and medals, and branded as a "doper" for using a commonly prescribed, required medication. Moreover, it is a medication which has no established connection with enhanced athletic performance. This biased policy not only adversely affects women, but men as well. There are a number of "restricted" medications often needed by Masters athletes that do not respect gender. It’s indeed difficult to maintain respect for the IAAF and WAVA doping po licies when selected portions of those policies rest on nothing more than expediency. These agencies, long ago, should have risen above this kind of discrimination and bias. Athletes should not have to choose between good health and career. On a global front, the attitude that has surfaced from the IAAF and WAVA leadership does not lead to hope for change. The few public statements that have broken their resolute silence indicate that the issues surrounding this case have enlightened neither organization. That bodes ill for easily effecting the needed reforms. Kathy has joined efforts with other Masters athletes who are now pushing for doping policy reform. She invites participation from anyone who is interested in bringing both rules and administering agencies into the current century. Contact her at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ken Stone http://www.masterstrack.com
