The Man Who Exposed the Russian Doping Scheme
Interview about Paris Olympics – and More
Just before the start of the Paris Olympics, I interviewed one of the most renowned whistleblowers of our time, Grigory Rodchenkov. The former director of the Moscow Anti-Doping Laboratory once exposed the grand state-sponsored doping system in Russia. In our new interview, he revealed which athletes are still using performance-enhancing drugs, why WADA cannot stop it, and how his battle with the Russian authorities continues.
Mikhail: Grigory, greetings, and congratulations on the release of your new book which is now published in Russian.
Today, I hope we will talk a lot about what is written in it, as well as the latest news. We are speaking just a week before the start of the Olympics in Paris. We will talk about the latest doping scandals. But the first question, of course, must be about what we see on the screen, because this is not a very familiar picture for any of our viewers. What's going on with you? Can you comment a little on how you are hiding from the whole world?
Grigory: Well, I can't give details. Of course, we can show. You can see my hands.
Mikhail: So, you are under a witness protection program?
Grigory: I am protected from all sides, in other words.
Mikhail: Alright then, let our viewers get used to it. Can I ask you to speak a little louder so that the disguise doesn't affect the sound? Look, in the past weeks and months, there have been many new doping scandals ahead of the Olympics. Chinese swimmers, a big scandal between the Chinese swimmers, WADA, and the US Anti-Doping Agency.
Mikhail: What do you expect from the Olympics in Paris? Will it be another super scandalous doping Olympics?
Grigory: Mikhail, readers and viewers need to be told what WADA is, how it got to this point, what big mistakes it made, and what role USADA, the American anti-doping agency, plays in this. It was all leading to this. What's happening now is, of course, WADA, you could say, is digging its own grave.
We need to know that WADA and the IOC used to participate in the selection of samples for the Sochi Olympic Games. Now, this is handled by the International Testing Agency, which split off from WADA. And, by the way, not a single word has been said in support of WADA regarding the 23 swimmers. So, the situation is like this.
January 2021, the 2020 Olympic Games in Tokyo were postponed by a year, so it became 2021. In some hotel, there are athletes, swimmers, about 60 of them, some competitions... On the first day, many had one positive test, confirmed by another. Then more tests came. Then more samples were taken. Some had both positive and negative results. In the end, 23 swimmers had 28 positive samples. Nobody knew about this. The explanation became known, at least to WADA and the International Swimming Federation—it was then called FINA—somewhere only in mid-March. And at the same time, the Chinese anti-doping agency, called CHINADA, did nothing. It did not suspend the 23 swimmers; they should have been immediately suspended as soon as the positive test appeared, and hearings should have been held. The athletes were not suspended. The worst part is that no one is saying that when the samples arrived at the laboratory, they arrived with a two-week delay, in mid-January. Then the samples were frozen for a whole month, literally. Allegedly they were being cleaned from COVID, some disinfection was happening, the samples were frozen for two months, then analyzed for two months. And instead of confirming the positive result, instead of entering this into ADAMS, they sent the results to the Chinese anti-doping agency, which is a violation. The anti-doping agency should learn from ADAMS that the sample is positive. Then more.
*ADAMS is WADA's database with information about athletes and their doping tests
Grigory: For two weeks, they were in line, then for a month they were put in a freezer, then they were fiddled with for a month, confirming them, then the results, as far as I know, went to the Chinese Anti-Doping Agency, although they should not have. This should have appeared in ADAMS, become known. And the most important failure of WADA is that the 23 Chinese athletes, some of whom later won medals in Tokyo, were not suspended. What do we have? We have a delay from January to mid-March? After this, the samples taken from these athletes in December were destroyed. I also took samples, delaying time to destroy them. Well, not delaying: samples are destroyed after three months. Instead of taking the samples and reanalyzing them more carefully, not just doing the preliminary analysis, which is called screening, initial testing procedure, they should immediately go for confirmatory analysis for trimetazidine to see if there were positive samples or not.
Then another issue arises that complicates the situation even more. WADA says that the sample was positive for athletes, then it became negative, and then positive again. This is absolute nonsense. This is not an argument at all. Then more.
Then they conduct some investigation, and we want to say that it was... The main claim is what? That Chinese athletes, like Soviet and Russian ones, were sitting in advance on some program and using trimetazidine. You yourself said: Valieva had a positive sample.
Grigory: She was also somewhere there, in November, thinking her sample would be clean. WADA says: "This was accidental. And on the same day. And the concentration is so low, microdoses." As RUSADA correctly says: "Until we see the correspondence, until we see the full report of the Chinese laboratory..."
Mikhail: You mean USADA, right?
Grigory: Yes. Travis Tygart, my big friend for a long time, since 2008.
Grigory: And WADA says, "We are not going to show anything." And USADA says, "You must show it because these are public violations." Not just public violations. Why didn't you suspend the athletes? Now, 11 people are going to compete. And what do we see now from the perspective of the "Rodchenkov Act"?
Mikhail: Hold on, hold on, hold on. I ask you to interpret this a little more generally. So, is it stupidity or betrayal? Why is WADA covering for the Chinese athletes? Is it negligence? Are they incompetent? Because in your book, there are many examples and a lot of evidence that WADA works very poorly because there are no professionals there. In this situation, is it unprofessionalism, or is WADA really playing along with the Chinese?
Grigory: The fact that it protected the Chinese swimmers is a mistake, it is suicide, and not just suicide—it is a loss of reputation. Moreover, WADA writes, "We did not go to CAS because we would lose.
We did not go to China because COVID is rampant." And what can we do? Yes, you should have insisted that the swimmers be suspended. As a result, the swimmers were not suspended, they continued to train, and they competed in the Tokyo Olympics. In Tokyo, they won gold medals that could have gone to other swimmers, including American swimmers. What does this mean? It means that the actions of both WADA and CHINADA—the laboratory has nothing to do with it: it gave the result—harmed the interests of American athletes. As a result, all these figures—both CHINADA and WADA—if the FBI indeed begins an investigation under my law, it will no longer be correspondence with USADA.
*The Rodchenkov Act is a U.S. law passed in 2020 against those involved in organizing doping programs at the state and international levels. Violators face up to 10 years in prison
Grigory: Thus, WADA threatens USADA, saying directly, that we'll make you pay for this!
*After the Paris Olympics, WADA plans to file a lawsuit against USADA with the Independent Compliance Review Committee. This could jeopardize the hosting of the 2028 and 2034 Olympic Games in the United States
Grigory: Then it turns out that the results that were hidden showed that these were not contaminations, but a consequence of hiding the traces of doping use systematically. Then, according to the Rodchenkov Act, they will pay the due $10,000,000 as compensation to American athletes.
So, what are the three main problems of WADA and the three mistakes? The first problem of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is that it trusts international federations. And international federations are those guys. For them, doping control is a headache. Especially considering that WADA, to its credit, added the biological passport.
*The athlete's biological passport includes data on the athlete's biomarkers and how they change over time. For example, a change in blood testosterone levels or the number of erythrocytes may indicate doping
Grigory: The federations sabotaged, imitated, and covered up as best they could. We see what scandals occur in athletics, especially in weightlifting, especially in biathlon. It was believed that the International Federation is a top-level testing organization, followed by national anti-doping organizations, then the organizing committees of some Olympic Games. So, the first mistake is relying on the idea that international federations fight doping. They would do anything to get rid of this headache.
Second. WADA believed that the laboratory fights doping. Yes, how does the laboratory fight doping? It analyzes what is brought to it. In my book, I write, and we have returned to this more than once: you can buy huge, incredible equipment, expensive, have world-class specialists, but if samples are taken not from those who need it, not where it is necessary, at the time, say, in remote camps. Laboratories report: 1% positive samples. For decades, world laboratories reported false positive test results. There simply were no repeat analyses, this analysis after eight years was introduced, by the way, after my appearances in The New York Times. After this, a wave began, and now many samples are stored long-term to be re-analyzed later.
What else is very important about laboratories. If you look—WADA cannot stand this—at surveys of athletes in 2011 (this was done by the Lausanne laboratory): athletes were asked: "Did you use doping this year or recently?" 35 athletes said, "We used doping." Why do you have 1% in the laboratories? At least achieve five or ten. So, what we see in the paper reports, that supposedly the fight against doping continues, actually leaves many questions, about which, frankly, I will say, there are no solutions in sight.
In order to uncover all these structures that abuse doping, two things are needed. First, I can't stand this word, the Whistleblower who blew the whistle and showed "here they are," and then fled, hid in America, who knows the situation from the inside. Or WADA should have some resources to conduct investigations, somehow track down this mafia that distributes doping, which is really not caught, but it doesn't have the resources. And thanks again, I won't say thanks to them, thanks to the terrible loss of WADA and the IOC in 2018, on the eve of the Olympics in Korea, at this grand arbitration court, 39 athletes, at least America understood that within the framework of civil law, what the judges do, how the CAS judges judge, you won't achieve anything.
*In 2018, the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne upheld the appeals of 28 Russian athletes whom the IOC had banned from the Olympics for life after the Sochi Games. CAS also returned their Sochi medals. The punishment of another 11 athletes was mitigated
Grigory: And the "Rodchenkov Act" was created, which allows for document seizures, investigations, arrests, and so on, fines, and imprisonment.
And the third: WADA itself has outlined a circle of opponents—coaches, doctors, athletes. But most importantly, it's the Ministries of Sports. I don't know, federations, many people who are behind the scenes are not subject to it. And what are the two mistakes of WADA that, in my opinion, not just worry me—they have left the deepest scars in the history of the fight against doping, first of all. Why am I sitting in front of you, Mikhail? Because Hajo Seppelt, a journalist, conducted an investigation. And the main material was given to him by Vitaly Stepanov and his wife Yulia.
Grigory: By the way, they had their second son born last year. After that, I was removed from the laboratory, it became clear that I wouldn’t live long, and I left. But it was 2015—the film. And Vitaly Stepanov started writing to WADA in 2010. WADA: "Oh, we don't know this, we don't have the resources, what to do?" They have nothing to respond to Stepanov's letters. Athletes came to Vancouver—these can't be touched. They are preparing for Vancouver, and these arrived a little later. Five years have passed. If all this had been investigated... By the way, it's very difficult to do this within the framework of civil law again, when everyone in Russia is lying. If it had started earlier, at least, I think, I would have been removed from the laboratory director position in 2012/13, especially considering my criminal case. WADA did not want to go for it. And then there would not have been the Sochi scandal, Russia's suspension, which before the war was a result of systemic doping and subsequent falsification of laboratory data. So everything is mixed up. WADA's mistake was ignoring Vitalik Stepanov.
In its 25 years, it has not created a single specialist capable of speaking at the level of Manfred Donike.
Grigory: There is no opinion leader. Absolutely none. A scorched field.
These 23 Chinese athletes... If the directors of accredited laboratories had spoken up, they would have immediately said, "Guys, are you serious?" But WADA forbids laboratory directors from saying a word until the investigation is over. That's the problem. And as a result, we have an even bigger problem. There are no documents, no books, no textbooks where you can understand what doping control is, where it comes from, why these were disqualified retroactively, and those... And these are constantly tested. Nothing. My book was the first to at least compile the entire history of doping control and the relationships between testing organizations, the IOC, and WADA, with the accredited laboratories. And this is my happiness, not happiness, this is my advantage—that I was an athlete myself, and I know what and how things are done. Donike had the same advantage. He was a professional cyclist; he raced in the Tour de France, his bike stood in his laboratory, we bumped into it. And there are no such people in WADA. Who are WADA's presidents? John Fahey—a great guy, received me very well in Sydney.
Grigory: Craig Reedie, yes, he comes, smiles, looks at my employees.
Grigory: Witold Bańka. I'm afraid he will resign because of the Chinese swimmers.
Grigory: They have no analysis, no relation to doping control. How can they lead WADA? It's like appointing me as the director of the Bolshoi Theater. I know how to train. But that's something else entirely. Amazing, amazing.
Mikhail: Grigory, your book addresses a much broader topic than just the history of the fight against Russian doping. For example, I can list several... And what you just said, that WADA has always relied on international federations, and the federations sabotaged the fight against doping. I can cite several quotes. "I don't understand why WADA has tolerated weightlifting in the Olympic program for so many years," you write, implying that weightlifting worldwide is one of the most doping-heavy sports. And you list other sports: athletics, skiing, biathlon, which sabotage the fight against doping. So, it turns out that, I don't know, a large part or most of the world's athletes who are at a high level in these sports can be suspected of doping.
Grigory: If we start with weightlifting, you can remove the top ten altogether, absolutely no one, no clean one was and never will be. I struggled with these weightlifters, it's written in the book, for so many years. They don't have their own steroids because they ruined their endogenous system with their exogenous steroids, that is, anabolic steroids. But in general, how will you manage? If he is clean, then he has nothing in his urine, no steroids—he is like an infant. Therefore, weightlifting is a complete failure of WADA. Does WADA not know what's happening in weightlifting? They knew everything. They do nothing. Moreover, the president of the Athletics Federation, Tamas Ajan. I know him, by the way. He sat in WADA on the executive…
Mikhail: In the executive committee?
Grigory: In the executive committee. It's just, it's unbelievable! And I write a lot about him. They simply fell under the influence of the Chinese, by the way. And the situation in weightlifting has changed in recent years, especially with the Chinese laboratory. Next—track and field. Look at how many positive samples there are after retesting. What does it mean? Together with Cologne and thanks to the outstanding Russian scientist Timofey Sobolevsky, we discovered long-lasting metabolites.
*Timofey Sobolevsky is a former colleague of Grigory Rodchenkov, deputy director of the Moscow anti-doping laboratory, left Russia in 2015
Grigory: If before, substances were detected for 20 days, now it's 70-80 days. So, the entire previous doping control was giving false-negative results in track and field. This database—5.5 thousand biological passports of track and field athletes—was not investigated. But the situation in biathlon and skiing was even worse. If the athletes' biological passports, blood indicators, that is, what? This means the use of blood transfusions and, of course, erythropoietin. If they had been properly investigated, more than half of the Russian ski and biathlon teams would not have been allowed to compete in Sochi. And do you think anyone completed the investigation? Nothing like that. All these results were passed to RUSADA because they understood that the situation was heating up, leaks were happening, and Vitalik also raised a wave. RUSADA did nothing because WADA suspended it, nullified RUSADA, and nothing was investigated.
Mikhail: Am I right in understanding that this concerns not only Russian athletes but also international athletes?
Grigory: International, of course. Take the same things with Russian and international athletes. Maintaining a biological passport. In skiing. By the way, in skiing, there was the same database as in track and field, showing the results of maintaining a biological passport. Yes, there it's terrible—Norwegians and Italians, including women. Our Danilova and... who ended up in Salt Lake City, are below them.
Grigory: But they were told: "Girls, guys, stop! Here's their biological passport." And they all stopped. But ours, whatever you say, they were absolutely sure that they would be covered, and at a high level, everything would be negotiated. This is by the way. Let's move to biathlon. Biathlon... You know, there was a trial recently, Mikhail, against, what's his name? Besseberg, right?
Grigory: I participated in this trial somewhere at the beginning of the year, maybe in February. So he somehow held on. And I was not in the leadership, but in such actors, WADA experts. They were sitting there... How do you know that everything is on pharmacology and sit, listen to people... I can't imagine. No, I can imagine, as I imagined when I was in Russia. Now, of course, my mind has been set right in the United States, and everything is straightened out for me. But now I especially look through the eyes of Travis Tygart—he is the head of the US Anti-Doping Agency—at all these things. But so far, my hair is standing on end—I don't have much left. But this is impossible for a normal person. So which other federations? Swimming. Let's keep quiet. So which federations do I mention in my book? Of course, weightlifting, athletics, biathlon. Naturally, swimming, speed skating. There are also enough wonders there.
Mikhail: Do you think the time will come when we will know the truth about these sacred monsters of the past years, when it will become clear who among the champions of the past was on doping?
Grigory: Mikhail, you are asking a very naive question. Take these stars... Do you want me to tell you one name in Russian athletics that I know was a clean athlete?
Mikhail: Let's hear it.
Grigory: Yaroslav Rybakov, high jump. And the rest, figure it out for yourself. Next question.
Mikhail: Alright. Let's talk about a more specific situation that you have already mentioned. The famous case in the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, the complaints of Russian athletes led by Legkov, who appealed against the stripping of their gold medals from the Sochi Olympics, and some of them were justified, and some got their medals back.
Mikhail: What do you think will happen next? Is this the final decision or not? Or will the situation continue to develop? And explain why there are such different assessments of what happened in different media? In the Russian media, they write that they were acquitted, while in the Western media, they write that they were not. You write a lot about this in your book.
Grigory: First of all, no one was acquitted because those investigating the case—CAS, WADA, and the IOC—didn't have enough power. And I alone couldn't outweigh this excellent group of German lawyers who turned everything upside down. I talked about Sochi in May 2016 after two of my friends were killed or died under strange circumstances. Well, it's all clear.
Grigory: I told about the sample swapping, the creation of the urine database, my cocktail, how we swapped everything at night through a hole in the wall. McLaren investigated all this, right?
Grigory: Here are the lists of athletes, here we found scratches on the vials. And how many were there? 39, plus some biathletes, 4 or so. 43 in total? They were investigated by a specially created IOC commission, Oswald.
Grigory: And naturally, all of them were protected athletes, all of them used prohibited substances. Maybe some didn't use anything, but they were all beyond the reach of doping control. Naturally, they were all disqualified, and their medals were annulled. Out of 33 medals, Russia was left with only 20, I think. This is the Oswald commission. The commission confirmed that samples were swapped, athletes participated in the scheme, and if a sample is scratched—that's the only evidence. Scratches mean the sample was opened. This means dirty urine was poured out, and clean urine was poured in. And why was clean urine poured in? Because the athlete knew in advance. They provided urine in advance, understanding that their dirty urine would be replaced. It's clear.
Now the athletes appeal the Oswald decision to CAS. A huge number of falsifications. Lies from the Russian side. By the way, the lawyers there played very well. This can be talked about endlessly. And you ask me questions. Completely silly. Why? How does my cocktail work? Why was there growth hormone in my cocktail?
*The Rodchenkov cocktail is a mixture of anabolic steroids with alcohol (whiskey or martini), invented by Rodchenkov and used by Russian athletes during the Sochi Olympics
Grigory: I say: "Let me tell you how it was created, what its purpose was. The goal was to avoid the formation of long-lasting metabolites." But I wasn't given five minutes. The connection with Geneva was very bad for an hour. The Soviet press immediately wrote: "Rodchenkov forgot the composition of the cocktail." Do you understand at what level this is happening? I forgot the composition of the cocktail! I can draw you the formula of any drug!
What's most interesting, if you read, are Zubkov and Legkov. What is written about Legkov. This is a classic case, it will be studied. That he participated in all these activities, and there is no doubt about it. The other question is, how to prove it. How to prove it? They got to Legkov. "Yes, of course, he could. Yes, there's a scratch, but what... Well, yes, Oswald showed that scratches mean the sample was swapped, but." Well, a person is stripped of such achievements, the most important in his life. And what do they write? It's a kind of sliding scale, which in such cases, truly great ones like Alexander Legkov, rises so far that it requires evidence beyond reasonable doubt. But how can you get beyond reasonable doubt evidence? Only through a criminal investigation.
Naturally, all these athletes, 28, their appeals were satisfied, no one was acquitted. WADA, the IOC screamed: "Oh, how can this be? They are all guilty! We'll get back to this." What do you think? They didn't get back to it. And there were only three or four months left to deal with the LIMS database.
These are all our analyses since 2012. And there are all these athletes whose urine we swapped at night, they are all in LIMS.
How did we know the athletes' numbers and their names? This means they provided their numbers and names to the laboratory to cover them up. So if LIMS data had been available in January 2018, everyone would have been disqualified, possibly. Because Russia either resisted to the end, saying this LIMS was falsified, that I falsified it. I don't even know how to access it. It's not my job—I'm the director. And then WADA went to Russia twice in 2020 to get the clean LIMS database to say: "We don't have Rodchenkov's falsified one, we have the real one." The first time they were sent far away, the second time they were given a completely distorted sample. A distorted version of LIMS. Read the arbitration court decision, it's 180 pages. A huge number of fake facts. And they said this copy is in the Investigative Committee. Our LIMS generated a copy every day. What copy in the Investigative Committee? We had 400-500 copies of this LIMS. Where are they all? Who took them all? And the cherry on top is that they made a film with Ksenia Mashkova, supposedly a lawyer, who was almost the deputy minister for some time.
Grigory: They say all sorts of things about me, complete fabrications, like we took money to scare athletes that we would make their samples positive, and some semi-literate phrases that I never wrote, allegedly written in this LIMS, some kind of forum. I never even logged in there. Well, it's just... how to say? Such slander that... And if I had made even one positive test for someone, said, "Come on, bring $10,000, otherwise, your sample will be dirty," I wouldn't have made it home.
Mikhail: I want to talk about a philosophical question that you cover quite a bit in your book. And the question is: "Is it necessary and to what extent is it right to fight doping?" I'll quote some of your thoughts. "I've been reading scientific literature," you write about yourself, "on steroids for 30 years, and there is no data that a few milligrams of steroids per day are powerful substances. Of course, if you take hundreds of milligrams daily, in pills and injections, it's dangerous. But drinking a liter of whiskey and smoking two packs of cigarettes a day is also dangerous. However, this hasn't led to their ban." And you further write: "My cocktail is a huge step forward. It allowed us to reduce steroid consumption tenfold, and we got rid of their side effects. I am sure that in 10 years, when steroids are calmly understood, my cocktail will be sold in pharmacies to people over 40 for improving well-being." Does this mean that the current attitude toward doping in the world and in international organizations is not entirely correct from your point of view? Should we fight doping differently? And are some currently banned substances actually beneficial, not harmful?
Grigory: Mikhail, you always need to draw a line. I don't like the word "doping" and "doping substances."
Mikhail: I said "banned substances."
Grigory: And I say this is called "violations of anti-doping rules." Violations of anti-doping rules should be separated from the practical benefits of anabolic steroids. Yes, great athletes—of course, it gives an advantage, no doubt. But when there are some allowed substances. For example, my favorite athlete, Simone Biles—she's beautiful, not just beautiful, but has a unique charm, like from ancient sculptures, her eyes.
Grigory: She takes substances that are on the banned list based on medical professional indications. Why should we deprive an athlete of substances that help them survive? Imagine she hits her head on the beam? It's a disaster! By the way, she recently got married, won all the qualifying competitions before the Paris Olympics. And her husband is such a wonderful person. I love watching university gymnastics in the USA. It's a fantastic show. And Biles has blossomed again and become even more beautiful. But here, they just mix her with mud at every turn.
Mikhail: Yes, they write that she's an open doper, it seems, they call her that.
Grigory: They themselves are open dopers. Calling a person an open doper when everything is legal for them. Period. Now take anabolic steroids. You know that the entire Bolshoi Theater, the Bolshoi Theater, the doctor. My mom knew him. They were all on Retabolil, nandrolone. How? Such loads on ligaments, muscles. How can it be without anabolic steroids? Obviously, there was no doping control. And how many singers? How many people use anabolic steroids? What about the use of anabolic steroids in the military and police? Yes. Well, that's all, as they say, primitive, all pills, all high doses. You turn your body into a filter, it gets absorbed. There are different theories. I won't go into them now. And the most important thing, when you have my cocktail sublingually, dissolving under the tongue, anabolic steroids are an order of magnitude more effective because they don't deposit in fat tissue. In the intestines, there are a lot of fatty... bacteria sit there. It goes straight into the bloodstream and starts working right away. And it clears out quickly. And these were practically the safest substances with no side effects. Oxandrolone is a miracle of nature. If you look at the literature on oxandrolone, American literature, it's sold in pharmacies. If children have weakness, especially after burns, 40% of the body, what comes first? Oxandrolone. If a person can't get out of bed, something... Oxandrolone is a great substance.
Mikhail: Does this mean that the current anti-doping rules are incorrect and it would be right to review them and allow some substances?
Grigory: I'm telling you about life. I'm an elderly person; I want to feel better. I take steroids. I don't have this exhausting... what is called fatigue. Loss of feeling... How to say it? Loss of inspiration. What are anabolic steroids for men? Aging is the loss of testosterone. It's weakness. Anabolic steroids like oxandrolone don't affect your hormonal system, they don't affect testosterone production. But they give good... good feelings. We are talking about things that no one has tried. I'm saying simple words that I didn't dare to say in the book, but respecting your... and thanking you for finally publishing my book, which lay for four years without movement. If my cocktail were officially sold now, it would be as profitable as Viagra.
Mikhail: Do you have such plans, I want to ask?
Grigory: If I sell it, I'll go to jail. Because in the USA it's banned. But there should be some lifting of the taboo on substances that are simply slandered. Look at marijuana. In how many states is it allowed! And WADA banned marijuana—people switched to these salts. We studied them first. With Cologne. People die from them. They have terrible side effects. And what does WADA do instead of saying "yes, we were wrong"? It raises the upper threshold for marijuana detection from 115 to 150. Just like that—bam. And those guys who were disqualified a month ago for 15 ng/ml? Maybe we should reinstate them? Well... That's the first thing. Now marijuana, eye clinic. How to fight glaucoma? Why marijuana? Again. I'm not a doctor; I'm just an emotional person. And again, my cocktail—if not the pinnacle of pinnacles. But it's a very elegant and effective solution that practically requires no costs. Just clean anabolic steroids. Anabolics are produced in tons per year. And here, one half-liter bottle is enough for a whole year. And its cost is less than $50.
Mikhail: So it turns out that you criticize the existing anti-doping rules established by WADA. On the other hand, there's a known case: several businessmen, including PayPal founder Peter Thiel, are planning to hold so-called Enhanced Games, where doping will be allowed. And you're against it?
Grigory: I'm absolutely against it.
Mikhail: Explain.
Grigory: Because, first: athletes. I'm talking about my cocktail. This is for a person who sits in an office at 45, comes home tired, needs to go to the gym, has no strength, the cocktail will help. That's what we delayed. Now we move on to Enhanced Games. What's there? Weightlifting, which is entirely based on anabolics. There's running, track and field, swimming, and boxing. What is boxing? Anabolics. You hold a stone in your hand and break someone's jaw. That's the first.
Second. How will these people... Let's say an athlete now uses everything they want. The most interesting thing, who will advise them? There are very few people who know how to use substances for high-level athletes, not for gyms. And chaos will begin. Athletes will poison themselves. And when they poison themselves, they will do it recklessly, like children, putting everything in their mouths. This can't be allowed. I would allow, to some extent... I won't say, okay...
Third. How will these athletes train? Here I fully support WADA. If an athlete preparing for Enhanced Games on steroids comes to the gym, pool, or stadium, athletes under WADA's umbrella in Olympic sports should not train with them. How can you bring your child to the stadium, and there are people... and in the locker room, a whole bucket of anabolics like in the old days? Enhanced Games... I wrote some things... as always, only 20% of what I write is taken. If you want, I can send everything. But again: this will be indiscriminate use, harmful to athletes. Real harm to athletes because injuries, ligaments, knees will fly. And the lack of any control and leadership. So if you want to engage without doping, without anything, with everything, build your stadiums, training bases first, and train there, don't come to us. I fully support WADA in this matter.
Mikhail: Okay, now let's talk about you, because in the book you talk a lot about yourself and your journey, starting from how you trained, how your mother gave you your first injection of a now-banned substance. Then there's the story of your work and your move to America. You are well aware of how the current Russian media refer to you. How they accuse you of being a traitor. And you write about this in the book. In the book, you write about what prompted you to switch sides. What made you finally break away from the system, a very active part of which you once were? Can you tell our viewers about this?
Grigory: Even when I was working in Sochi and during the closing of the Olympic Games, when Legkov was celebrating, and I was replacing his sample, I knew that sooner or later I would reveal this. Later, when the report came out, and Mutko didn't fire me the next day but asked me to resign, I immediately received a call telling me that I was in trouble. And thank God, at that time, we were working on a film about Lance Armstrong, and I had an American visa, so I left and flew away immediately.
Grigory: And when Nikita Kamaev was killed, I said, "That's it, guys, it's over between us." Although the first time I felt "it's over between us" was when Boris Nemtsov was killed. That's all. I switched to the side of the light.
Mikhail: Okay. The Rodchenkov Act. How do you evaluate how it works? It seems to work... Since it's an American law, it essentially works in the interests of American athletes. It was designed to protect American athletes from their competitors around the world. Doesn't that bother you? It bothers many.
Grigory: No, the Rodchenkov Act is about protecting clean athletes. It targets countries that violate... countries that support doping schemes, or individuals who are not under WADA's control, such as coaches and athletes—they will go to jail, regardless of the country. And since Americans are a leading country in sports, naturally, sooner or later, it can always be said that we got into trouble because of an American. The Rodchenkov Act is a major achievement. My second achievement is my first book, which won the award for the best sports book of the year—William Hill Award, in 2020.
*William Hill Sports Book of the Year is an annual British award in the field of sports journalism
Grigory: And finally, the film "Icarus." I am an Oscar laureate.
Grigory: So I have these three. And the Rodchenkov Act, read it, it's straightforward.
Mikhail: No, I read it, it wasn't passed yesterday, and in all this time, its enforcement has been relatively small. Recently, a man who helped a Nigerian runner was found guilty. But where is everything else? Where are the other cases?
Grigory: That was Dr. Lira, whom my law recognized... The most important thing is — let's wait for the 23 swimmers. There are more cases. American investigations last for years. You'll see.
*Eric Lira is a Texas doctor, the first person charged under the Rodchenkov Act. In February 2024, he was sentenced to three months in prison for distributing doping substances
Wait ... and he's not in jail (yet !)
;-( (from Paris)
but bravo for this remarkable chronicle, Mikhail !