Gustafsson Releases Statement on Jones VADA Test

Alexander Gustafsson and his team are not happy about Jon Jones’ VADA test, and they are further unimpressed by the response to it.

The Dec. 28 sample Jones gave to VADA came back positive for a trace amount of an oral Turinabol metabolite, the same metabolite that has haunted Jones since his UFC 214 fight with Daniel Cormier, and the same metabolite found in his system between August and December 2018. This includes a Dec. 9 test that caused the UFC to move UFC 232 from the T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas, Nevada, to The Forum in Inglewood, California on six days’ notice.

Jones defeated Gustafsson via third-round TKO to win the UFC light heavyweight title at the event on Dec. 29, and he passed drug tests conducted by the UFC and USADA.

In the statement, Nima Safapour, Gustafsson’s manager, said that Jones’ legacy needs to come into question, as Jones “essentially received a use exemption on a strict liability violation.” Safapour and the rest of Gustafsson’s team call the situation “an absolute mess.”

You can read the full statement below:

The inconclusive and inconsistent results that are repeatedly occurring with Jon Jones, at the very least, should compel our industry to have a greater, deeper, and more impartial discussion about the legitimacy of Jon’s defense. Jon has gone out publicly boasting when some of his results come back negative. However, he remains silent when his test results come back positive. You can not have it both ways and cherry-pick the results that are favorable for you, and insist that we disregard the results that go against your interests.

Jon has essentially received a use exemption on a strict liability violation. The science is not certain on the defense he has taken. Furthermore, science is always in a state of change. So the science we rely on today is different than the science we relied on from just a few years ago. It will probably change again going forward. Jones is also creating a precedent that will go beyond his personal interests in the sense that now other fighters will also seek use exemptions on a strict liability violation based on an issue that the science community is still divided on. It’s an absolute mess.

Original Story: MMA Fighting

You might also like

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More