CAS 2020/A/6892 Andrew Starykowicz v. United States Anti-Doping Agency
Related case:
WTC 2019 WTC vs Andrew Starykowicz
November 25, 2020
In October 2019 the American triathlon Athlete Andrew Starkowics suffered from an acute respiratory infection with bronchoconstriction. He underwent medical treatment and used several prescribed medication including the prohibited substances Methylprednisolone (Medrol), Glucocorticoids and Vilanterol (Breo).
The Athlete applied for a TUE for the use of Medrol and Breo and on 8 November 2019 the USADA TUE Committee granted the use of Medrol.
Previously on 2 November 2019 that Athlete had participated in a triathlon and was subjected to sample collection. In December 2019 the World Triathlon Corporation reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after he tested positive for the substance Vilanterol. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered.
At the time of the notification the Athlete had no TUE for Vilanterol due to his applications for Breo had been repeatedly denied by the USADA TUE Committee and finally by the WADA Therapeutic Use Exemption Committee. Both Committees deemed that suitable permitted alternatives were available but were not prescribed by his pulmonologist.
Hereafter in March 2020 the Athlete appealed with the Court of Arbitrarion for Sport (CAS). The Athlete challenged USADA's rejection of his TUE applications for Breo. He requested the Panel to set aside the decision of the USADA TUE Committee and to grant the use of the medication Breo from 25 October 2019.
The Athlete underlined that his case does not concern the commission of an anti-doping rule violation, but concerns the denial of a TUE for the medication Breo prescribed by his pulmonologist for a severe illness.
He asserted that the only question in this case is whether he could have treated his medical condition with another non-performance-enhancing beta-2 agonist that was not prohibited by WADA. The Athlete argued that he is entitled to such TUE since all conditions prescribed by the relevant rules have been satisfied.
USADA requested the Panel to dismiss the Athlete's appeal because the Athlete was unable to establish the decisions of both the USADA TUEC and WADA TUEC to deny his application for a TUE for Breo (Vilanterol) were without basis.
The Sole Arbitrator, having considered the experts' submissions, finds that other medication were not unreasonable alternatives in terms of therapeutic indications and effects, consistent with the anti-doping rules, to the use of Breo. The Sole Arbitrator concludes that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the existing alternative therapies suggested by USADA were not reasonable.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 5 August 2020 that:
1.) The appeal filed by Mr Andrew Starykowicz against the United States AntiDoping Agency with the Court of Arbitration for Sport on 27 March 2020 is dismissed.
2.) The costs of the arbitration, to be determined and served to the parties by the CAS Court Office, shall be borne by Mr Andrew Starykowicz.
3.) Mr Andrew Starykowicz and the United States Anti-Doping Agency shall each bear their own legal and other expenses.
4.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
