UFC Drug-Testing Policy Revealed

Major details:

- USADA will independently run the program with no interference by UFC.
- Kicks in July 1, includes random testing year-round with a minimum of 2,750 tests per year.
--- Represents an avg. minimum of 5.5 random tests per fighter, per year.
- CIR, HGH, EPO will all be testing methods, blood and urine
- Recreational drugs will only be tested in competition

Penalties for PEDs:

1st offense: 2 years (with possibility of 4 years for "aggravating circumstances")

2nd offense: Double the sanction for the 1st offense

3rd offense: Double the sanction for the 2nd offense

Penalties for Specified Substances (Recreational):

1st offense: 1 years (with possibility of 2 additional years for "aggravating circumstances")

2nd offense: Double the sanction for the 1st offense

3rd offense: Double the sanction for the 2nd offense

this is good news for the sport.

there will also be a whistleblower line with the USADA/UFC to point fingers. I imagine Jones will have a field day with this. they should limit his visits to 2 per week

Finally!!

Nick Diaz is crying somewhere right now. 

Nick is probably ****** but I don´t think he gives a ****, the UFC is probably more worried about loosing him for 2 years than Nick is worried about not fighting.

does anyone knows if they are going to test for recreational drugs  outside fo competition?

Supposedly only in competition will they test for recreational drugs. 

It would be nice if they only tested for steroids and left for fun drugs alone.

Commissions everywhere should just step aside and let the USADA handle all the fight night drug testing. Espesially if these commissions aren't going to differentiate between PEDs and recreational drugs.

Even though I disagree with the recreational drug penalties (still think they're too steep), I really like that PED use has double the punishment as recreational drugs ie: weed. At least that makes sense. 

@amp
"Marijuana & other rec drugs are only banned "in competition," which is deemed 6 hours before weigh-ins and 6 hours after the fight." https://twitter.com/arielhelwani/status/606167288878899201

It may have some holes but it's a hell of a lot better than the old system

I don't have an issue with recreational drugs being tested for in-competition. I think if a fighter can't stop smoking Marijuana or using other rec drugs 6 hours before the weigh-ins through their post-fight drug test, that fighters got a real problem and should be suspended until they sort that out.

However Nevada just came out with their new suspension policy and it basically didn't differentiate between PEDs and weed. Plus there was no guarantee by Nevada that they would test fighters by their blood to ensure that fighters would only be suspended for recreational drugs that were taken in-competition rather than weeks out.    

Comparing the two, the UFC/USADA procedures and penalties are more logical than that of the NAC. 

@unbeknownst, they need to stop smoking MJ 3-4 weeks before that 6 hour deadline, not 6 hours (and even then, it's cutting it pretty close and you may still have some metabolites in your blood), but I agree on your point, part of being an elite athlete is the sacrifices you make ... if not smoking a month before your fight is so big a sacrifice for you, you probably don't have what it takes to be great anyways, so no loss.

@yossgold not with blood testing, I believe. I think they can get a pretty good idea when you last smoked or snorted with a blood test. That's one of the reasons it more expensive but essential to catching only those who should be punished.

Ah, I didn't know that.

@yoss I was waiting for the random chance to show this awesome song and video:

HAHA!!! I'm so happy I could give that to you ... you should follow me around more, there's quite a lot I don't know and don't hesitate to say it ;)

While this is an ambitious plan, I worry that it is based on unwarranted confidence in the reliability of positive test results, particularly when the number of tests being performed is so high.

For example, if the false-positive rate were 0.5%, then the chances of any individual positive test result being a false-positive would be extremely low.  But if you perform 2,750 tests, you would have a better than 99% chance of at least six false-positives.  Which is quite a lot, when the penalties are so stiff.

I also wonder about the practicalities of administering all these tests in far-flung locales.  Are USADA field technicians going to show up at the front door a fighter's house in Makhachkala, Dagestan?  If not, how is out-of-competition random testing going to work for fighters living and training there? (which is not to single out our much-beloved Dagestani fighters--similar problems would seem to exist for fighters in China, parts of Brazil, as well as plenty of other locations)

Outrageous said everything I've been thinking brilliantly, this is why I pay the guy 4 butterscotch candies an hour rather than the standard 3 butterscotch candies. 

@outrageous

that is why I am pretty sure they take multiple samples to test from.So though the odds might be decent that someone might get a false positive on one of there samples, the extra sample odds of coming up as a false positive are almost non existent.

* Edited at 06.05.2015, 8:23 AM ET *

I consider testing urine for marijuana to be a false positive if someone is over the threshold when there's not a blood test also.

Urine, sure you can test for inactive secondary metabolites that have zero effect on the way you feel, and stay in your system for anywhere from 5-90 days or so.

Blood you can test for `active` THC still in your system for anywhere from 2-10 days or so.

Doesn't work vice-versa.  Can't test for active THC in urine, can't test for inactive metabolites in blood.

Anyone failing a urine test for pot and facing a couple year suspension and fine when they weren't even administered a blood test, they're basically getting screwed because no urine test could ever be proven to be not-OOC.  Yet when the NSAC for instance gets in their hearing room and starts patting themselves on the back, we end up with a show of power that I hope one day somehow draws the attention of the actual law for the way they handle business at their hearings.

As it stands with marijuana legal OOC, if it's not a blood test, there should be no way to fail a test for pot.  If you don't have active THC in your blood, in the 2-10 days or so after it would still be there, then it doesn't matter what your urine shows, thresholds don't actually mean anything with how many metabolites are in your system.  The amount doesn't give indications on how recent, how much, or how often you smoked anyways.  All that matter is it's obviously OOC use if you pass a blood test and have no active THC even if your urine comes back quadruple the threshold.  

Unfortunately the greed for more purse fines and re-licensing fees is a stronger pull than the need for properly proven justifications of the lengthy punishments and proper testing procedures so generally they only test urine, not urine and blood, because if they tested both they'd have likely less than half as many fines to hand out pot-related since being over the metabolite threshold is not anything close to an indicatior that you also have active THC in your system, which a blood test can easily check.  But if the blood tests cleared fighters from fines/suspensions and the NSAC for instance was handing out half as many fines?   No way!....  as board members of the NSAC, less fines would ruin their plans for the weekend to have all that walking-around-money for snacks and swag at SIx Flags.

* Edited at 06.05.2015, 9:04 AM ET *