JRE MMA Show #53 with Jeff Novitzky

1. 0:00 – 0:36

   Setting the stage: Jon Jones’ 2017 positive and why Jeff’s week has been rough

   1. JRJoe Rogan0:00

      ... four, three, two, one. Boom. Got a little thing going on here now, a little circle. Hello, Jeff. Merry Christmas.

   2. JNJeff Novitzky0:13

      What's up, Joe? You too.

   3. JRJoe Rogan0:14

      How you living? (laughs)

   4. JNJeff Novitzky0:15

      (laughs) Not been the easiest week in, in my life or my career is last week, but hanging in there.

   5. JRJoe Rogan0:20

      To make this a standalone so that people don't have to go r- figuring this out on their own, and I- I'm sure many, many fans that are tuning in already know the, the gist of the details, let's lay this out from the beginning. Jon Jones' initial failed test.

2. 0:36 – 1:24

   July 2017 finding: Oral Turinabol (DHCMT) M3 long-term metabolite and unknown source

   1. JNJeff Novitzky0:36

      Yeah, so that was July of 2017. He tested positive for approximately 20, anywhere from 20 to 60 picograms of a long-term metabolite known as the M3 metabolite of a substance called dihydrocholormethyltestosterone, DH-CMT, also known as oral Turinabol.

   2. JRJoe Rogan0:58

      And this was over a year ago. Um, what was determined to be the source of this stuff?

   3. JNJeff Novitzky1:04

      Never determined what the source was.

   4. JRJoe Rogan1:07

      Hmm.

   5. JNJeff Novitzky1:07

      So Jon went through a full arbitration hearing, um, was never able to determine where it came from. Tested all the supplements he was using, you know, went through many, uh, interviews with USADA, had a full-on arbitration hearing. Uh, the source was never determined where it came from.

3. 1:24 – 4:45

   Why the suspension wasn’t ‘light’: McLaren arbitration, intent, and performance benefit

   1. JRJoe Rogan1:24

      Why was his suspension so low or so short if it wasn't determined?

   2. JNJeff Novitzky1:29

      Well, I mean ... (laughs) So, I mean, there's many factors that, that go into what that suspension was. I w- I would argue in the tota- totality of the evidence that was presented in that arbitration that it, that it wasn't a short suspension, um, because really one key thing came out at arbitration. So Jon went to arbitration before an individual by the name of Richard McLaren. Richard McLaren has an arbitration group up in Canada, and McLaren is probably worldwide known as one of the most credible guys in anti-doping. I know you had the, the Icarus producer, director on.

   3. JRJoe Rogan2:03

      Mm-hmm.

   4. JNJeff Novitzky2:03

      The McLaren report was the report that came from all that. He basically investigated the Russian state being involved in doping in the Sochi games and put out actually a series of reports on it detailing that up to 1,000 Russian athletes, um, you know, were breaking the rules and the Russian laboratory was helping them get around it. So-

   5. JRJoe Rogan2:23

      Right.

   6. JNJeff Novitzky2:24

      ... he's a very, very respected guy. He's independent of, obviously, the UFC. He's independent of USADA. Um, he acts on his own.

   7. JRJoe Rogan2:33

      And his determination was?

   8. JNJeff Novitzky2:34

      His determination, um, and I'll read you kind of what he said.

   9. JRJoe Rogan2:38

      Okay.

   10. JNJeff Novitzky2:38

       He said, "I find that all evidence available to me leads me to conclude that the violation was not intended nor could it have e- enhanced the athlete's performance." So A, non-intentional, so non-intentional ingestion. I mean, there's no argument that it was in his system, but he found the evidence to show non-intentional use, and then he went further saying that based on the numbers of what he saw in the evidence, there was not even a performance-enhancing benefit afforded to Jon for having this long-term metabolite in his system. And I think that's significant when you talk about, hey, 15 months, was that ... That's, you know, kinda light being that this is his second time through. I would argue that if there was an argument, that maybe it's on the higher end. And certainly, you know, we'll talk about the California commission. Andy Foster took that position, uh, in Jon's recent California hearing. He was a little bit critical of USADA. Um, he thought, you know, he's intimately familiar with this evidence, both in the previous case and this occurrence, that, and he also saw that there was no evidence that an independent arbitrator, you know, made this, uh, statement and decision of Jon intentionally cheating. Um, so if anything, you know, I'd say that potentially there could be an argument that, that it was, you know, on the higher end versus the lower end.

   11. JRJoe Rogan3:56

       Because of the fact that it was an unintentional ingestion.

   12. JNJeff Novitzky3:59

       Exactly.

   13. JRJoe Rogan3:59

       Now, what is Jon's excuse? What does, what has Jon said how he got this into his system?

   14. JNJeff Novitzky4:04

       Yeah. Well, look, you know, and it, and it's, it's detailed in the arbitration hearing and all. Jon, Jon fully admits that, you know, some of the lifeti- lifestyle decisions he was making, you know, the partying and things, you know, probably did not lead to, to making smart decisions and making smart choices in terms of what was being ingested in the body. But certainly his testimony was, under oath, that I have never intentionally cheated and did not intentionally put this substance in my body. And not only this case, but as we talk about the subsequent case here, I think you'll see that based on the numbers, you know, coming out of his tests and based on some studies that have been done on some of these substances, it would tend to support that.

4. 4:45 – 5:02

   Negative-then-positive puzzle: metabolite timelines and the ‘pulsing’ theory emerges

   1. JRJoe Rogan4:45

      Okay, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Jon test negative then test positive for extremely low numbers? This is the initial test before we get into the most recent failed test.

   2. JNJeff Novitzky4:55

      He did. So-

   3. JRJoe Rogan4:56

      Test negative, then test positive very shortly after with a very small trace amount.

5. 5:02 – 12:00

   How oral Turinabol testing works: Rodchenkov study, detection windows, and data limits

   1. JNJeff Novitzky5:02

      Correct. So he had two negative tests on July 7th and July 8th, I believe, of 2017. And then weigh-in day, I think it was July 28th, he was positive for a very low level of the M3 metabolite. And, and we might as well start here. So again, going back to Icarus, remember, remember the doctor? I mean, he's the main character in that, Rodchenkov.

   2. JRJoe Rogan5:24

      Mm-hmm.

   3. JNJeff Novitzky5:25

      In 2011, he put out a study on oral Turinabol. Um, he actually, my understanding, has dosed himself and then studied the excretion of his urine and what was coming out of it over the weeks and months after and determined that there were s- multiple, maybe up to 50 metabolites that once this DH-CMT was ingested into the body, the body converted into other substances and these, these metabolites stayed around. He identified some short-term metabolites, some medium-term metabolites.... and some long-term metabolites, specifically the M3 that Jon's tested positive for.

   4. JRJoe Rogan6:04

      So these long-term metabolites would indicate that it was taken a long time ago.

   5. JNJeff Novitzky6:09

      They would stay around for the longest-

   6. JRJoe Rogan6:11

      Why-

   7. JNJeff Novitzky6:11

      Um-

   8. JRJoe Rogan6:11

      ... why was he testing negative and then testing positive for these extremely s-

   9. JNJeff Novitzky6:15

      So, yeah.

   10. JRJoe Rogan6:16

       ... low numbers?

   11. JNJeff Novitzky6:17

       That's a good question, and that's, that's basically the question in point. But what was not occurring, and what has never occurred in any of Jon's samples, is any presence of the short and medium-term metabolites. And if you look at, uh, Rodchenkov's study, he identifies a couple of these medium-term metabolites, Roman numeral one and Roman numeral two, and he says these metabolites, based on his study, will stay in the body at least 22 days. W- well, let's look back to the July 7th and 8th, you know, positive tests. He's negative on July 7th and 8th for everything, for the parent compound, for the short-term, medium-torn- term metabolites, and the long-term metabolites. Go 20, 21 days later, so within that 22-day window, which his study shows the short and medium-term metabolites would still be showing up, and there's no presence whatsoever of the short or medium-term metabolites. Now again, we'll get into this a little bit more, but I think the science, what it's showing is a pulsing effect for this long-term metabolite, meaning once you ingest, whether intentionally or non-intentionally, oral Turinabol into the body, the body breaks it down, produces short-term and medium-term, which is, you know, visible for a short and medium amount of time, and then this M3, which is produced for a long period of time. I think what the issue appears to be, and we'll get into this, the UFC program is not the only program that's seen this. There's another professional sports league that has seen it very frequently. USADA's also seen this on the Olympic side. But we're seeing this strange action with the long-term M3 metabolite, and the theory is, it may be hiding, um, in the fat tissues surrounding organs and maybe have a pulsing effect where it's released at certain times and other times you can't detect it.

   12. JRJoe Rogan8:13

       And this is not the actual substance itself, but it's a metabolite.

   13. JNJeff Novitzky8:16

       Correct, th-

   14. JRJoe Rogan8:17

       Which indicates a reaction to this substance? So a long-

   15. JNJeff Novitzky8:19

       It indicates the body breaking down-

   16. JRJoe Rogan8:21

       Okay.

   17. JNJeff Novitzky8:21

       ... the parent compound, the, the oral Turinabol, and turning it into these other things which are stored in the body.

   18. JRJoe Rogan8:26

       So does-

   19. JNJeff Novitzky8:26

       These metabolites are not performance-enhancing drugs. They're the result of the breakdown of the parent drug in the body. A-

   20. JRJoe Rogan8:33

       Now, what ... How much time is it detectable, the actual drug itself?

   21. JNJeff Novitzky8:38

       So, pretty quick, uh, it's a pretty quick clearance time. I think Rodchenkov's study says, you know, maybe a week. Uh, so it's not-

   22. JRJoe Rogan8:44

       Oh.

   23. JNJeff Novitzky8:44

       ... around for very long, and that's why he conducted the study. Ironically enough, and I was gonna go watch Icarus here last night, and I just, I've had too much going on the last week to kind of refresh my mind. But, um, apparently, he, he knew ... This was part of his protocol for Russian athletes. He knew a coach that was still giving the oral Turinabol to Russian athletes, and he had a falling out with the coach. So he goes off on the side and studies, "Hey, the parent compound's gonna get in and out of the body pretty quick. It's gonna be difficult to detect that. Let's try to figure out what stays around and leaves markers in the body for a long time." And so he developed these short and long-term metabolite tests and was able to catch some of this coach's athletes for using the oral Turinabol.

   24. JRJoe Rogan9:28

       Interesting. So the actual drug itself, it's gone from the system, but the metabolite remains. Now, what is the window that th- this metabolite is supposed to be detectable in the body? 'Cause we're talking now, what are we at, like 18 months?

   25. JNJeff Novitzky9:41

       Yeah. So here, here's the-

   26. JRJoe Rogan9:42

       From initial-

   27. JNJeff Novitzky9:42

       ... here's the problem.

   28. JRJoe Rogan9:43

       Supposed initial ingestion?

   29. JNJeff Novitzky9:44

       Yep.

   30. JRJoe Rogan9:44

       Because my question is, these same long-term metabolites, these existed a year plus ago? It was more than a year? How long ago?
6. 12:00 – 22:24

   How small is a picogram? Interpreting ultra-trace numbers and lab variability

   1. JRJoe Rogan12:00

      And let's explain a picogram to someone-

   2. JNJeff Novitzky12:02

      Yeah.

   3. JRJoe Rogan12:02

      ... 'cause it's a preposterously small thing.

   4. JNJeff Novitzky12:04

      It is. It's insane. And you know, the, the analogy that I heard early on was, and I think Jon used this, throw a pinch of salt in an Olympic swimming pool. And I'm like, "Okay, well that's ... You kind of wrap your head around that." Let's go to the other side. Let's talk about something really small that we know of and how many times you have to break down that small particle to get to a picogram. So one grain of salt, and we all know what that looks like, right? You put that in front of you, and you split that, and I had mentioned this week 50 million. It's actually 58 million. If you split that 58 million times, a grain of salt-... each one is a picogram. I mean, it's incomprehensible, the detection level and how small that is. It really is. It's crazy.

   5. JRJoe Rogan12:46

      And y- y- how many picograms did they find in his system?

   6. JNJeff Novitzky12:49

      So he's gone from, and, and I'll, I'll read through it here. So here's the, here's ... Since the initial appearance of the M3 metabolite, here's what Jon's tests look like and those picogram readings. So the first one was collection date was July 28th, 2017. He had a concentration of 80 picograms. However, let me caution, and I'll read something from, from an expert. When you get down to these picogram levels, um, the science is somewhat inexact because it's such a small amount. So the variable, the plus or minus, you know, can be anywhere from 20, 30. I've seen in, in some instances, 50 or 60. So what this scientist name is, his name is Larry Bowers, um, he was formerly the si- the USADA Science Director. He's currently retired and independently consults. Before that, he ran an Olympic, uh, Olympic committee, uh, accredited laboratory at the University of Indiana. The guy's got 20 to 25 years of anti-doping experience. Here's what he, he told me about, uh, you know, when you're, when you're analyzing small picogram levels. "Although the two lab, uh, respective laboratories report a concentration, I would caution against becoming too fixated on the numbers. First, the numbers are really estimates of concentration and probably should be considered a range of about plus or minus 20 picograms per mL." And he said the December 9th result would be in the range of Jon's, and we'll get to that, between 60 and 100. "Second, while the adjustment of concentration by specific gravity attempts to deal with the variability of urinary excretion rates, it is an exact, it is inexact and adds variability to the estimates. Finally, and most importantly, science has no clear understanding of the variance of urinary excretion of drugs at ultra-trace concentrations." So basically, he's saying, look, I mean, we have a general idea how this works in science, but, and I think this instance comes to play, be real careful if you're gonna be the guy with the pseudoscience out there saying, "Wait a second. Jon jumped from 20 to 60 from September to December, and that means he re-ingested it." What he's saying here is, slow your roll on that. That, that it's such a small, incomprehensible level that we don't really know what those variances are gonna look like. Now, I think if we saw jumps in Jon from single digit, eight or nine picogram to multiple hundred digit picograms, there would be a concern and maybe some re- re-administration. But the experts I've speaking to, when you're talking variability of 10, 20, 30, 40, it's not that significant at the picogram level.

   7. JRJoe Rogan15:29

      What is the window where this long-term metabolite s- starts to express itself? Like, what ... You said there's short term and there's medium term. This is the long term. How long does it take for the long term one?

   8. JNJeff Novitzky15:40

      Yeah. That's, that's a good question. I, I don't have the answer to that. It may be in Rodchenkov's report here. And I, I would encourage those that are at home, you know, playing, playing scientist at, at their computer. Uh, the Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, uh, Rodchenkov writes a report, "Detection and Mass Spec- Spectrometric Characterization of Novel Long-Term Dehydrochloromethyltestosterone Metabolites in Human Urine." I'm not sure when that long-term metabolite, how long it takes to, to show up. Here's the problem though with this substance. He did a real brief study, my understanding he's administered it to himself. That's the only study that exists.

   9. JRJoe Rogan16:20

      Mm.

   10. JNJeff Novitzky16:21

       Oral Turinabol, DHCMT, to my understanding, is not approved for use for human consump- consumption anywhere, anywhere in any country. So you can't have clinical trials ethically in the medical world because it's just not legal to give this to human beings. So, you know, we're, we're already kinda behind the eight-ball here in that, you know, as compared to other substances where you can do clinical trials 'cause they're readily available via pre- prescription or whatever, this substance is not. This substance was created by the East Germans in the '70s and '80s and was part of their state-sponsored doping program where they were doping their athletes.

   11. JRJoe Rogan17:01

       And can you correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe what I've read is that this is particularly effective when people are cutting weight.

   12. JNJeff Novitzky17:09

       Yeah. I mean-

   13. JRJoe Rogan17:09

       Is that true or is this just more-

   14. JNJeff Novitzky17:11

       I don't know about that.

   15. JRJoe Rogan17:12

       ... monologue?

   16. JNJeff Novitzky17:12

       I think some may be confusing Turinabol with oral Turinabol, two completely-

   17. JRJoe Rogan17:17

       Right.

   18. JNJeff Novitzky17:17

       ... different substances.

   19. JRJoe Rogan17:18

       Let's talk about that, 'cause this, that's actually very important.

   20. JNJeff Novitzky17:19

       Yeah.

   21. JRJoe Rogan17:20

       There's, there's very different effects on the body. There's very different windows in terms of detection time. Ex- explain that to me, please.

   22. JNJeff Novitzky17:27

       Yeah. You, you gotta be really careful in this world of performance-enhancing drugs. There's names that are interchangeable. There's different, you know, chemical names where you change a little bit of that chemical name, it could be a m- mean a completely different substance. There's instances where the chemical name is different but the substance is actually the same. So when trying to compare two substances, you know, make sure, if you're at home doing that analysis, you're comparing the right ones. Straight Turinabol is different than oral Turinabol.

   23. JRJoe Rogan17:55

       What is the difference?

   24. JNJeff Novitzky17:57

       Uh, yeah. I c- I can't tell you. I'm not as familiar with Turinabol other than it's not oral Turinabol.

   25. JRJoe Rogan18:02

       So, but there is a difference in terms of the detection window?

   26. JNJeff Novitzky18:06

       Yeah, there would be, and I mean, different substances create and throw out different metabolites, um, and different substances have different detection windows.

   27. JRJoe Rogan18:14

       So-

   28. JNJeff Novitzky18:14

       So I haven't done my study and research on straight Turinabol other than knowing it's different than the substance here.

   29. JRJoe Rogan18:20

       So, uh, Grigory Rodchenkov, that's how you say his last name, right?

   30. JNJeff Novitzky18:23

       Yep. Yeah.
7. 22:24 – 26:02

   Weight cutting, adipose tissue, and chlorinated-drug ‘pulsing’: clomiphene study comparison

   1. JRJoe Rogan22:24

      Is it something that could be accentuated in some way by the weight-cutting process?

   2. JNJeff Novitzky22:30

      I absolutely think that could be a factor. Um, there are studies, not necessarily with this, but a- another substance, clomiphene ... And look, I want that ... While I'm cautioning people to be careful about comparing different substances, the commonality between clomiphene, which there are multiple clinical studies on 'cause it is approved for use to be distributed to humans, and oral Turinabol, is they're both chlorinated. So they both contain a chlorine atom on the molecule. And there is a recently published study on clomiphene and its excretion rates. Um, again, for those at home that wanna look it up, the study was published in the Endocrine Society publication. It's peer-reviewed. The name of it is HPT Access Effects and Urinary Detection Following Clomiphene Administration in Males. So what they did is they basically, you know, got a group of males, um, gave them a th- a one-month, um, cycle of clomiphene, you know, I think 25 milligrams a day, and then had them get off, and then continued to look at their urine up to 261 days after. And what you saw and what you see in this study is that pulsing effect. So, you know, I'm looking at some of the study subjects here. Um, subject one, on day 121, still showed 147 picograms of clomiphene. Day 128 showed 174 picograms. Day 135 shows nothing. He's below the m- the minimum recording, uh, reporting limit. And then day 149 he's back up to 236. There are one, two, three, four, five, six out of, I think, 12 subjects in that study that showed this pulsing effect of this chlorinated substance coming and going. Again, you know, it's- it's different than oral Turinabol, but it has that common factor of being chlorinated. In this study, they do talk about, um, a fat tissue called the ... Let me look this up and make sure I got this right. Adipose tissue.

   3. JRJoe Rogan24:39

      Mm-hmm.

   4. JNJeff Novitzky24:40

      This is fat that surrounds the internal organs. It's one of the last things that the body burns when it's going, you know, starving itself and going to fat. It protects those organs. But yeah, you look at these, you know, extreme weight gains and cuts that the UFC athlete goes through, I don't think you're gonna find ...... possibly another human subject anywhere that goes through putting weight on-

   5. JRJoe Rogan25:02

      Other than Olympic wrestling.

   6. JNJeff Novitzky25:04

      ... cutting up. Maybe, but I don't think Olympic wrestling matches what an MMA fighter, um, goes through at least, you know, in my experience over these three or four years talking to those in the Olympic world. I think we're at the extreme and it's, it's something obviously we've talked about before-

   7. JRJoe Rogan25:17

      Yeah.

   8. JNJeff Novitzky25:17

      ... we're trying to curtail. But, you know, there's, there's clearly never been a study for anybody who dehydrates and rehy- hydrates themselves to the extent that some of our athletes do. You could never find, there would never be anybody with any ethics that would support a study, because some of that dehydration exceeds World Health Organization standards. So there's no studies out there, you know, on this stuff, but clearly, you know, looking from afar, I- I'd say that it likely has some impact over what's being released by this adipose tissue.

   9. JRJoe Rogan25:48

      We should certainly talk about that, um, in the future, about the, the weight cutting aspect of it. So th- but this adipose tissue loss at extreme weight cuts could potentially be the reason why this stuff is excreting itself.

   10. JNJeff Novitzky26:01

       It's, it's definitely a theory out there.

8. 26:02 – 28:37

   Microdosing clarified: endogenous vs exogenous drugs and biological passport logic

   1. JRJoe Rogan26:02

      What about microdosing?

   2. JNJeff Novitzky26:04

      So here's the thing with microdosing. Microdosing is done with endogenous substances. So-

   3. JRJoe Rogan26:11

      Only?

   4. JNJeff Novitzky26:11

      ... test- it, it ... Well, I mean, someone could try it with something else, but it ... the reason you microdose with endogenous substances is they're already produced in the body.

   5. JRJoe Rogan26:20

      Right.

   6. JNJeff Novitzky26:20

      So the theory of, "Okay, I'm gonna microdose oral turinabol." Well, oral turinabol's still producing these short-term and long-term metabolites. In theory, whether you're taking 100 milligrams or one milligram of oral turinabol, those excretion rates of those metabolites are still gonna be consistent. They're gonna be on a much smaller level.

   7. JRJoe Rogan26:42

      Is there a way to bypass those excretion rates? Is there a way to mask that in some way?

   8. JNJeff Novitzky26:46

      I'm not aware of any. Um, I of- I oppose-

   9. JRJoe Rogan26:49

      So the only, the only study-

   10. JNJeff Novitzky26:49

       G- go ahead.

   11. JRJoe Rogan26:50

       I'm sorry. The only study we have is Gregory Riche- Riche-

   12. JNJeff Novitzky26:52

       Correct.

   13. JRJoe Rogan26:53

       That's it?

   14. JNJeff Novitzky26:53

       Correct. But, you know, just taking it from a common sense approach, it's certainly, you know, those that know about microdosing know that you microdose with endogenous substances, things that are already appearing in the body. The the-

   15. JRJoe Rogan27:05

       So your body knows what to do with them.

   16. JNJeff Novitzky27:07

       Knows what to do, and you're fooling, you know ... Not only are these metabolizing and there's no metabolites of them, but you could also be fooling the biological passport. That's the concern, I think-

   17. JRJoe Rogan27:17

       Mm-hmm.

   18. JNJeff Novitzky27:17

       ... and why people microdose. So you saw it as looking not only testing for specific substances, but are testosterone to epitestosterone ratios going up? They're looking at, at blood values. How many young red blood cells, how many mature red blood cells? So microdosing in those two areas wouldn't set off alarms in the biological passport world. Um, I've never heard personally of microdosing of exogenous substances that are not found in the body. Microdosing, in my understanding, is done with things that are endogenous and already found in the body.

   19. JRJoe Rogan27:48

       And again that take ... For people that are not familiar with this terminology, we're just talking about microdosing performance-enhancing drugs. Because, uh, microdosing in today's world is a very common thing with mushrooms and L- LSD and a lot of other things.

   20. JNJeff Novitzky28:01

       Right. I mean, I saw a ton of microdosing in the, in the, the cycling world.

   21. JRJoe Rogan28:05

       Right.

   22. JNJeff Novitzky28:05

       That was-

   23. JRJoe Rogan28:06

       Testosterone?

   24. JNJeff Novitzky28:06

       ... testosterone, EPO, HGH. All those natural, occurring in the body and-

   25. JRJoe Rogan28:11

       And so they don't produce any b- b- really, um, red flag metabolites.

   26. JNJeff Novitzky28:16

       If you do 'em at very, very small levels, they'll ... The parent will cle- quickly not produce any metabolites and will not throw off the biological passport analysis.

   27. JRJoe Rogan28:25

       Um, is there a w- ... I mean, when Victor Conte came out with, uh, the clear and all that stuff with BALCO-

   28. JNJeff Novitzky28:32

       Mm-hmm.

   29. JRJoe Rogan28:32

       ... and they were, they were fooling people. Is it, is it ... I mean, one of the things that we've talked about before-

   30. JNJeff Novitzky28:37

       Mm-hmm.

9. 28:37 – 35:08

   Testing sensitivity arms race: when detection gets ‘too good’ and contamination becomes plausible

   1. JRJoe Rogan28:37

      ... is that it's a constant race to try to keep up with more advanced cheaters.

   2. JNJeff Novitzky28:42

      It is. And, and you know what's interesting in this? I mean, with ... If I were to talk to you ... And maybe the first time we did talk a couple years ago, um, it, it's come a long way from them, but clearly if I were to talk to you 15, 16, 17 years ago when I got my start in the anti-doping world, I would have told you definitively the testing is way behind, you know, what's being used out there.

   3. JRJoe Rogan29:01

      Mm-hmm.

   4. JNJeff Novitzky29:02

      Um, they were testing ... able to test to multiple nanogram, um, limits. That's as far down as we can go. Now, they can go down to single-digit picogram. There's another professional sports league out there that recently had a one picogram M3 metabolite case. I mean, do the math coming down from, you know, four or five nanograms, which used to be the lower limit now to one picogram. 10,000, 20,000 times, I am almost under the theory that the pendulum has swung maybe a little bit too far in the other direction, and that, that certainly is part of my job to the UFC. Look, I want to catch every intentional cheater that's out there. I wanna make sure we have a rock solid program, use all the latest and greatest, you know, um, techniques to do it. But I also want to keep an eye on it to make sure it's being administrated fairly, and when you're getting down to detection of one, you know, single digit picograms, I have a concern that ... What kind of level of sensitivity are we talking about? Are we gonna talk about environmental contamination where you walk, you know, through a room and somebody has just opened a container of something and there's, you know, minuscule powders in the air? There are documented cases that some of the regularly prescribed prescription drugs, specifically, um, diuretics, are getting in water supplies in some areas. You know, you get a lot of old people on them that flush their old, um, pills down the toilet. There's documented cases of it getting into the water supply and being detectable at that picogram level. So you've gotta be really, really careful about that, and I think, you know, this case exemplifies that USADA and, and really the World Anti-Doping Agency world and community are aware of that. Um, you know, with greater sensitivity in testing, in my opinion, bec- you know, makes greater responsibility to be objective and look fairly at what really we're doing here when we're detecting in that small amount.

   5. JRJoe Rogan31:03

      But this, this-... test of Jon's, where he's testing for the same l- level of picograms today as he was in July of 2017, is it safe to say that this is unprecedented?

   6. JNJeff Novitzky31:18

      Uh, r- repeat that again.

   7. JRJoe Rogan31:19

      That Jon's test for the same levels of picograms of these metabolites in 2018 that he was testing for in 2017 wa- this is unprecedented.

   8. JNJeff Novitzky31:31

      No.

   9. JRJoe Rogan31:31

      It's not?

   10. JNJeff Novitzky31:31

       The answer's no.

   11. JRJoe Rogan31:32

       It's not?

   12. JNJeff Novitzky31:32

       So maybe unprecedented in the UFC program, but what the United States Anti-Doping Agency did over these last five or six months is they reached out to the science community outside the scope of the UFC. They reached out to other professional sports organizations, they reached out to other w- WADA laboratories, and what they were seeing was multiple instances of this pulsing effect, where over time you would see a reading.

   13. JRJoe Rogan31:58

       Right.

   14. JNJeff Novitzky31:59

       The next test it would go away, and the next time you'd see that reading again, maybe back up to or even above-

   15. JRJoe Rogan32:04

       This much time?

   16. JNJeff Novitzky32:05

       ... what that was. Correct. Yes.

   17. JRJoe Rogan32:07

       So in the t-

   18. JNJeff Novitzky32:08

       And you see that in the chlo- in the clomiphene study here too.

   19. JRJoe Rogan32:10

       Mm-hmm.

   20. JNJeff Novitzky32:10

       I mean, almost 260... They stopped the study what... It was still appearing in picogram levels in some subjects, and they stopped the study at 261 days.S and you see those numbers I was reading to you. You see this one subject at 174. He's negative the next time, and then he pops up to two- in the 200s after, so it's actually more than the time before. Again, apples and oranges-

   21. JRJoe Rogan32:33

       Right.

   22. JNJeff Novitzky32:33

       ... different substances, but the commonality here is chlorinated substance.

   23. JRJoe Rogan32:37

       Chlorine-based. So is, is it safe to say that this is an emerging science, and that we're still l- learning and understanding this as we go along?

   24. JNJeff Novitzky32:47

       Absolutely. It, it's still very young. Look, the first, you know, the, the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles were, uh, established the first drug testing laboratory by Dr. Catlin. Um, so really, you know, in the scope of science going back to the, the earliest days, then, you're talking about, you know, what? 30, 30 years? 30, 35 years? Um, again, when I started off in this 16 or 17 years, the science still wasn't good. They were unable to detect anything in the picogram level. Um, again, for, for reference, very interesting. So the, the WADA, the World Anti-Doping Agencies, accredits laboratories across the world, and they have certain standards that those laboratories must meet in order to retain that accreditation, um, and keep that accreditation. So they have a technical document called the Minimum Required Performance Levels of their laboratories. So what they tell the laboratories is, "You must detect these substances down to this amount. If you can't get them down to this amount, then you can't have an accreditation from WADA." So, the class of substances that oral turinabol would be in, um, which would be other anabolic agents, the required minimum level that they must detect to is only two nanograms.

   25. JRJoe Rogan34:07

       Mm.

   26. JNJeff Novitzky34:07

       So, look, WADA even says, "As long as you can get to two nanograms, you can retain our accreditation." Well, what's happening is an arms race in these laboratories. They're saying, "Well, two's the minimum standard, but I, I can get down further."

   27. JRJoe Rogan34:20

       Right.

   28. JNJeff Novitzky34:20

       And, you know, these are private entities that, you know, are looking for, for customers, so to be able to reach out and say, "Well, even though WADA tells us two is as low as we need to go, we can go down to one picogram." I think (laughs) in a, in a sense maybe you need to slow the reins on that a little bit, that we're getting too far and too sensitive of a level of detection when it comes to implementing a fair program, because you can't determine where one picogram c- came from. You could be breathing, again, contaminated air, drinking contaminated water. It gets real dangerous when you get down that low.

   29. JRJoe Rogan34:55

       Now, how does this reflect on past suspensions? This is, uh, w- when you, you deal with someone like... L- let's bring up Frank Mir, for example.

   30. JNJeff Novitzky35:03

       Mm-hmm.
10. 35:08 – 37:59

    Why USADA called it ‘not a violation’: WADA double jeopardy clause and re-administration criteria

    1. JNJeff Novitzky35:08

       ... but let's, let's go back to Jon.

    2. JRJoe Rogan35:10

       Okay.

    3. JNJeff Novitzky35:10

       And, and this instance, and why USADA has come out and said, "Look, this is not a violation." So, if you go to the WADA, the World Anti-Doping Code, there's a section, 10.7.4.1. Our UFC program, you know, basically mirrors that, and, uh, we're bringing that up on the screen there.

    4. JRJoe Rogan35:29

       Okay.

    5. JNJeff Novitzky35:29

       So for pur- purposes of imposing sanctions under te- 10.7, an anti-doping rule violation will only be considered a second violation if the anti-doping organization can establish the athlete or other person committed the second anti-doping rule violation after the athlete or other person received notice pursuant to Article seven, et cetera. This is what's known as a double jeopardy clause.

    6. JRJoe Rogan35:53

       Right, so what it means is-

    7. JNJeff Novitzky35:54

       You can't be sanctioned-

    8. JRJoe Rogan35:54

       ... a guy tests positive-

    9. JNJeff Novitzky35:55

       Correct.

    10. JRJoe Rogan35:56

        ... for something, and if he's test positive for the exact same substance that is still in his system a year later, or whatever the amount of time is, you don't include that as a new positive test.

    11. JNJeff Novitzky36:06

        One more thing has to happen. Science has to determine that it... there hasn't been a re-administration. So test positive for the same substance, and science says, "Based on all the numbers we see, there's no evidence of any re-administration."

    12. JRJoe Rogan36:20

        And the non-evidence of the re-administration is the lack of l- short-term and medium-term metabolites.

    13. JNJeff Novitzky36:26

        Bingo. Bingo.

    14. JRJoe Rogan36:26

        Okay.

    15. JNJeff Novitzky36:26

        Never ever in Jon's-

    16. JRJoe Rogan36:28

        Is there an issue though that this is only one test, that Grigory Rodchenko's test is the only study that showed that these medium and short-term metabolites exist?

    17. JNJeff Novitzky36:40

        It, it's the only study, but I think then, if there's only one study, you have to go to anecdotal evidence, right? And I think-

    18. JRJoe Rogan36:45

        W- why don't we just do studies on UFC employees?

    19. JNJeff Novitzky36:48

        Because oral turinabol-

    20. JRJoe Rogan36:50

        Get Sean Shelby to take oral turinabol.

    21. JNJeff Novitzky36:51

        (laughs)

    22. JRJoe Rogan36:51

        He'll do it.

    23. JNJeff Novitzky36:53

        Oral turinabol is illegal-

    24. JRJoe Rogan36:55

        Oh.

    25. JNJeff Novitzky36:55

        ... to distribute and to-

    26. JRJoe Rogan36:56

        Let's do it in Mexico.

    27. JNJeff Novitzky36:56

        (laughs) In any country throughout the world-

    28. JRJoe Rogan36:58

        Oh.

    29. JNJeff Novitzky36:58

        ... it's illegal.

    30. JRJoe Rogan36:59

        Really?
11. 37:59 – 48:59

    Independent experts and credibility: SMRTL’s Daniel Eichner and USADA’s written conclusions

    1. JNJeff Novitzky37:59

       Let me read to you real quick what, what these experts came out at in terms of re-administration. So, Dr. Daniel Eikner runs the Salt Lake City, it's called the Smort- Sports Medicine Research Testing Laboratory, or SMRTL. They're one of two WADA accredited laboratories in the United States. The other one being at UCLA. Um, again, one of the most respected minds in anti-doping, PhD chemist. Um, his answer, in terms of re-administration, um, was this. And you very rarely see scientists at his level talk in, uh-

    2. JRJoe Rogan38:34

       Absolutes.

    3. JNJeff Novitzky38:34

       ... in absolutes. There you go. And here he says, "There is no evidence that DHCMT has been re-administered." That's in writing to us.

    4. JRJoe Rogan38:43

       Okay.

    5. JNJeff Novitzky38:43

       So very definitive on that.

    6. JRJoe Rogan38:45

       Right.

    7. JNJeff Novitzky38:46

       Um, USADA's science director ... Now, Dan- Daniel's independent even of USADA.

    8. JRJoe Rogan38:51

       Mm-hmm.

    9. JNJeff Novitzky38:51

       So those who criticize, "Hey, USADA's in bed with the UFC," Daniel Eikner doesn't work for USADA. He runs an independent laboratory. USADA sends samples there. The NFL sends samples there. Major League Baseball sends samples there. The NCAA. He's independent, owns his own laboratory. Um, USADA also put out, um, a letter to us in, in writing. "Upon careful consideration of the very low concentration of the DHCMT long-term metabolite in Mr. Jones' sample, and taking into account the human pharmacokinetic characteristics of this particular long-term anabolic steroid metabolite, uh, based on data to which USADA has access to, and in consult- in consultation with scientific experts, some of whose opinions are enclosed, USADA has concluded, consistent with prior residual amounts detected in Mr. Jones' sample, that the presence of DHCMT long-term metabolite is consistent with residual amounts from exposure prior to 2- July 28th, 2017." Um, look, I'm n- I'm not an expert.

    10. JRJoe Rogan39:56

        Mm-hmm.

    11. JNJeff Novitzky39:56

        I don't profess to be. Um, my, my background's in finance and accounting. I traced the money back in the old days. But I know who those experts are out there in the world, and these are them. Um, they're, by putting these things in writing, putting their reputations on the line now and forever going forward, um, they're never gonna do something like that because, you know, the UFC pays USADA-

    12. JRJoe Rogan40:18

        Right.

    13. JNJeff Novitzky40:18

        ... to administer our program, or because Jon Jones is, you know, a popular fighter and they wanna see him fight this weekend. That's just not the way this world works.

    14. JRJoe Rogan40:27

        Of course. In, in fact, it works the opposite way. There would be a great benefit if they could catch him cheating.

    15. JNJeff Novitzky40:32

        Absolutely. And, you know, historically, experts like this are very, very conservative when it comes to talking in absolutes like this. They don't normally do it.

    16. JRJoe Rogan40:42

        In all fairness, the real question is guys like you and me, because we are UFC employees. So w-

    17. JNJeff Novitzky40:47

        Yes, I, I-

    18. JRJoe Rogan40:47

        ... are we gonna handle this fairly? And this is ...

    19. JNJeff Novitzky40:49

        I get that argument.

    20. JRJoe Rogan40:50

        Of course. I do too.

    21. JNJeff Novitzky40:50

        That, you know, and I saw that left and right. That, "Hey, Jeff and Joe are paid by the UFC, of course they're gonna come out in this way." But look, all these things that I'm reciting today are-

    22. JRJoe Rogan40:58

        I would never do that in regards to cheating.

    23. JNJeff Novitzky41:01

        I wouldn't either. I've ...

    24. JRJoe Rogan41:02

        I mean, I, I side with the UFC on a lot of things because I support the sport and I want it to excel. I don't side ever with cheating. If I think that there's some way somehow that someone is given an unfair advantage and it's just somehow being covered up, I would rather not work for them.

    25. JNJeff Novitzky41:18

        Joe, my, my seven- my last 17 years of my career, my, my, my, you know, everything that I've worked for is to protect the rights of clean athletes and to eradicate cheating from the sport. I can't tell you how strongly I feel about that. Sport's given me everything in my life. My dad was a high school basketball coach. Um, it paid for my college and, and scholarships. It, you know, at least the good characteristics in me, I can all trace directly to sports. And entering into the equation the issues of breaking the rules, the issues of the health and safety aspects when you have young ... And I talked to many parents whose kids, you know, use steroids because they saw the professional athletes doing. Entering that into the body when your hormonal levels are already out of control is very, very dangerous, both short and long term. Can't tell you how passionate I am about this issue. And, and those out there that s- are saying that I'm corrupt, that my reputation is, is out the window, I would never ever-

    26. JRJoe Rogan42:16

        Well-

    27. JNJeff Novitzky42:16

        ... in a million years sit-

    28. JRJoe Rogan42:17

        ... you can't listen to those people. I mean, you, you, obviously you have, but you (laughs) you-

    29. JNJeff Novitzky42:21

        (laughs)

    30. JRJoe Rogan42:21

        ... you can't listen to those people because they want to find things wrong. Um, y- one of the things that I've said about you is you're a guy who loves to catch people cheating. You like it.
12. 48:59 – 1:01:13

    Comparable cases and sanction differences: Frank Mir, Josh Barnett, contaminated supplements

    1. JRJoe Rogan48:59

       Um, what are... So let's get back to the Frank Mir case. Frank Mir tested positive. Was it also oral turinabol?

    2. JNJeff Novitzky49:05

       Also, same thing, long-term metabolite of oral turinabol. Here's the difference. Frank Mir, the same as Jon Jones, his first time through was sanctioned. Jon didn't get off the first time this showed up in his system. He got, you know, he was looking at potential four years. Went to arbitration, presented evidence, enacted some other clauses in the policy that reduced his sanction. Frank-

    3. JRJoe Rogan49:29

       What does that mean?

    4. JNJeff Novitzky49:30

       Uh, well, one of them was, uh, um, substantial assistance where he assisted USADA in some way, shape, or form and he got a reduction for, for doing that.

    5. JRJoe Rogan49:39

       Assisted in what way?

    6. JNJeff Novitzky49:41

       D- so I don't know. And this is the exact reason why I do this. So I insulate myself from that interaction between USADA and the athlete. They are the sole adju- judicator in this. They do not...... you know, get me on the phone, say, "Hey, we're thinking about going this way." They adjudicate completely in a vacuum.

    7. JRJoe Rogan49:59

       And you are- you're ... Just so- so people know, your title is, uh, s- safety ... Health and Safety?

    8. JNJeff Novitzky50:05

       Athlete Health and Performance.

    9. JRJoe Rogan50:06

       Health and Perfor-

    10. JNJeff Novitzky50:06

        Vice President of Athlete Health and Performance.

    11. JRJoe Rogan50:08

        Okay.

    12. JNJeff Novitzky50:08

        Yeah.

    13. JRJoe Rogan50:09

        So, you no longer work for USADA.

    14. JNJeff Novitzky50:11

        I've never worked for USADA.

    15. JRJoe Rogan50:12

        M- w- uh ...

    16. JNJeff Novitzky50:12

        That's- that's a big misconception.

    17. JRJoe Rogan50:13

        You don't. Okay.

    18. JNJeff Novitzky50:13

        A lot of our fighters think that. I've never worked for USADA. I was a federal agent for 22 and a half years. Um, the latter part of my career, got involved with all these PED distribution cases. 2015, Lorenzo Fertitta and Dana White, through a mutual, uh, friend, contacted me and said, "Hey, would you come out and kind of talk to us? We're contemplating maybe putting our own program together. We've had some recent high-profile positives." So I came out to Vegas, uh, talked with them, and a week later I get a phone call asking if I wanna come work for them and kind of implement this new program. But I've never been an employee of USADA.

    19. JRJoe Rogan50:49

        Okay, so that's, that's good to know because that's been stated by some public figures, that you used to work for USADA and now you work for the UFC.

    20. JNJeff Novitzky50:57

        Never worked for USADA.

    21. JRJoe Rogan50:57

        And that you're a shill.

    22. JNJeff Novitzky50:58

        (laughs)

    23. JRJoe Rogan50:59

        That's one of my favorite words. Um, so you never worked for USADA. You, uh, brought USADA to the UFC, or communicated with USADA and facilitated this agreement?

    24. JNJeff Novitzky51:10

        Correct. So I, I never worked for USADA. I did work very closely with USADA. So USADA, when I first started these series of investigations back in 2002 ... Look, I knew all about how to work a heroin distribution organization, a cocaine distribution organization, methamphetamine. But when it came to performance-enhancing drugs, there was no class that myself or, really, any other federal agent or, or law enforcement agent goes through surrounding distribution of performance-enhancing drugs. So I was examining the discarded garbage of BALCO every week when they put it out to the curb. Began seeing notes, wrappers, all these substances. I had no idea what these things were. I didn't know the difference between testosterone, epitestosterone, erythropoietin, HGH. I knew nothing. So what I did is I figured out who those experts were. Who were the people that could very quickly get me up to speed on what I was looking at? Um, Dr. Catlin, who ran the UCLA Olympic Labs, one of the first, and he started, um, you know, kind of walking me through this. He put me in touch with USADA and, you know, they began educating me as well. So, um, over the course of those investigations, um, I got a lot from them in terms of educating on these substances. They were bringing some of their cooperating witnesses to me, and then we'd go off and running on criminal investigations. Um, but never, never worked for them.

    25. JRJoe Rogan52:35

        So USADA, correct me if I'm wrong, but the way they would work would be very compartmentalized. Like, they would not specifically communicate with you on all of the details of this.

    26. JNJeff Novitzky52:45

        Correct, and they don't now. I mean-

    27. JRJoe Rogan52:47

        They don't now. So you don't know-

    28. JNJeff Novitzky52:48

        That's the independence aspect. I don't ... As these deliberations are going on, what they're looking at, I don't know.

    29. JRJoe Rogan52:55

        S- but cooperation-

    30. JNJeff Novitzky52:56

        Mm-hmm.
13. 1:01:13 – 1:19:18

    Nevada vs California: timeline of 2018 reemergence, expedited test, and why the fight moved

    1. JRJoe Rogan1:01:13

       Now what ... W- why was, why was this moved from Vegas to California and why, why did the California State Athletic Commission, why did they accept this fight taking place here and why did Vegas say no to it?

    2. JNJeff Novitzky1:01:33

       So internally, UFC wise, we first ... In fact, Donna Marcolini, who you know, who works with me, uh, we're kind of-

    3. JRJoe Rogan1:01:40

       Shout-out to Donna.

    4. JNJeff Novitzky1:01:41

       Exactly. (laughs) We're a two-person shop and the woman's a hawk. She's one of the hardest workers I know.

    5. JRJoe Rogan1:01:46

       Love her.

    6. JNJeff Novitzky1:01:46

       So she's-

    7. JRJoe Rogan1:01:46

       She's awesome.

    8. JNJeff Novitzky1:01:47

       She's taking a look at something that we have access to called the Clearinghouse, and it's basically a recording of all the tests on our athletes. So we can get on there if somebody says, "Hey, how many times was Jon tested last quarter?" We can get on there and pull that up. The public also has access to our testing records, not with the specificity that the Clearinghouse has, but the public, uh, can get on and USADA on a weekly basis, um...... updates, how many tests an athlete's done. So there's some of these ... Some guys out there on the internet from the day one of the program have kept track of what week their numbers tick up. So you can go find spreadsheets on the internet, at least from a, from a weekly basis of when our athletes were tested and how many times every week.

    9. JRJoe Rogan1:02:29

       God bless those dorks.

    10. JNJeff Novitzky1:02:30

        Crazy, huh?

    11. JRJoe Rogan1:02:31

        (laughs)

    12. JNJeff Novitzky1:02:32

        So, the clearing house program is very specific. We can get on there and see the actual date of the collection, and next to that we see negative, positive, or pending. So Donna came to me late November, early December saying, "Hey, I'm looking at, you know, Jon's tests and I'm seeing pending still back from ..." I think it was maybe August, September. "You think something's going on here?" And of course I'm like, "Okay, well, he's fighting pretty soon. I, I hope not. But let me reach out to USADA." So I reach out to them. They said, "We're working on something. We're, you know, conducting a study. We're talking to other professional sports leagues. We're talking to the laboratories out there and don't have an answer for you now, but, but stand by." So I think it was Sept- uh, December 6th they sent a letter to us, and they sent a letter to the Nevada State Athletic Commission saying, "Just so you're aware, over the last six months, um, early in this six months, we've seen a reemergence of this long-term metabolite, uh, in Jon's samples. We've als-"

    13. JRJoe Rogan1:03:35

        So when was this?

    14. JNJeff Novitzky1:03:36

        So this was early December, December 6th-

    15. JRJoe Rogan1:03:38

        Okay.

    16. JNJeff Novitzky1:03:38

        ... um, we and the Nevada Athletic Commission were notified.

    17. JRJoe Rogan1:03:41

        You were notified, but the test was from previous?

    18. JNJeff Novitzky1:03:44

        Just ... So the tests, these tests, um, covered from August through November-

    19. JRJoe Rogan1:03:53

        Okay. So there's more than one test.

    20. JNJeff Novitzky1:03:55

        ... of 2018. Several of them.

    21. JRJoe Rogan1:03:56

        Oh. So more than one test showed this metabolite.

    22. JNJeff Novitzky1:03:59

        So what they said was August 9th, negative. August 29th, eight picograms.

    23. JRJoe Rogan1:04:06

        Eight.

    24. JNJeff Novitzky1:04:06

        September 18th.

    25. JRJoe Rogan1:04:07

        Eight.

    26. JNJeff Novitzky1:04:07

        Eight. September 18th. So, I mean, there's a, there's a good ... So he's negative on the 9th. 20 days later, so inside-

    27. JRJoe Rogan1:04:15

        The 22-day window.

    28. JNJeff Novitzky1:04:16

        ... Prochenkov's 22-day window, he shows an eight picogram, no short-term metabolites, no long-term-

    29. JRJoe Rogan1:04:23

        No medium.

    30. JNJeff Novitzky1:04:23

        ... no parent.
14. 1:19:18 – 1:29:56

    Prevention going forward: more testing, supplement ‘platinum standard,’ and approved lists

    1. JRJoe Rogan1:19:18

       Going forward, is there any way we could ever prevent something like this from happening again with a similar situation in a place like Nevada?

    2. JNJeff Novitzky1:19:25

       So here's ... I think we have a couple solutions to that, and it's not necessarily relative to the commission, but one thing that obviously protected Jon a lot in this was the frequency of testing. You know, if you look at his numbers, and- and these were, these were instances where they collected samples, but in many of these cases, they did multiple tests on him, and that means ... You know, the tests I'm reading were for the anabolic steroid panel, but in addition to that, they may have done biological passport tests on that same collection. They may have done an HGH test, an EPO test.

Episode duration: 1:50:10