The Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) is in the middle of yet another Olympic doping scandal. One of ROC’s women’s figure skaters, Kamila Valieva, tested positive for the medication trimetazidine. She was favored to win gold before the Games started. Trimetazidine (TMZ), a metabolic modulator, has been banned by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) since 2014. The medication is listed under the section non-specified Hormone and Metabolic Modulators, S4.1. The substances listed under this section are prohibited at all-times, both in and out of competition. Russia is not allowed to compete as a country and is competing as the ROC due to a history of doping. A disqualification would move the United States team into the gold medal position. Prior to the World Championships, Valieva tested positive for this medication through random testing that Olympic-level athletes are subjected to. There is little information on how she was reprimanded then, but no official warning or ban was issued. Additionally, she was still able to compete at the World Championships and qualify for the 2022 Winter Olympics. The official results of the drug test did not make it to the IOC until after the Olympics had started, even though the Russian Anti-Doping commission was aware of the substance in her system. Valieva faced up to a two-year ban from competition as a result of this infraction. However, she was allowed to continue with her Olympic competition.

Trimetazidine, also known as TMZ, is commonly used to treat coronary heart diseases such as angina or to assist with blood flow through stints. The idea behind banning this medication is that TMZ helps your heart to function better under immense stress. Athletes during competition are often putting their heart under stress and TMZ could help performance by pushing more blood to the rest of the body. The IOC does have medical allowances for use of TMZ, but no news of a medical exemption request on behalf of Valieva to the IOC has surfaced. The IOC has previously given warnings about banned drug use to competitors. Those times are limited to “protected persons” (those under the age of 16) who can prove that their use of the banned medication is “unintentional.”

The standard of proof for unintentionality is handled on a case-by-case basis to allow for the inclusion of emerging technology and medications as well as extenuating circumstances. I find it hard to believe that a 15-year-old would not be able to find the prohibited medications list. In a matter of five minutes and a google search, I was able to find a complete list of all banned substances with all necessary qualifiers. Additionally, as tensions rise between Russia and the United States, disqualifying Russia and keeping them from two gold medals might increase tensions. Especially because this could lead to the United States taking home both medals. It is entirely possible that the warning or ban might be kept from the public as it has been for other competitors. The difference between previous instances and the present one is the national news coverage Kamila Valieva has received for her excellence and Russia’s current ban from competition.

In the end, the IOC has specifically listed TMZ as a banned substance for four Olympic cycles. Many doctors believe that TMZ would not have actually advantaged a competitor, but that does not change its status as a banned substance. As the United States saw with the disqualification of favored sprinter Sha’Carrie Richardson, in the 2020 summer Olympics, using a banned substance is taken very seriously. Sha’Carrie Richardson tested positive for cannabinoids prior to the Olympics and was banned from competition. Cannabinoids are only banned while an athlete is competition season. TMZ is banned at any point throughout the year before an athlete retires, regardless of the competition season. While many will say that cannabinoids and TMZ are not similar in any way, the previous Olympic cycle set a precedent to ban competitors for testing positive with a substance on the banned list. Following this precedent, Valieva should be stripped of her medals and receive a ban from competition. However, there are extenuating circumstances such as Valieva’s age and Russia’s history of doping. This was the result of the arbitration. Vaileva has started competition and will not be banned from further competition citing that she is under 16 years old and qualified as a “protected person.” While that is technically correct, it is not the only thing necessary to escape reprimand. There is no news on how Vaileva proved this was unintentional. We do know, however, that Valieva did appear virtually at the arbitration and was able to plead her case.

This decision has angered many former and current Olympians that have been training and preparing the correct way for years. TMZ in particular is banned both in and out of competition. The focus has shifted in the IOC’s view from Valieva to her coaches and Russia. The IOC plans to launch an independent investigation of the coaches, but it doesn’t satiate the anger from other Olympians who feel that she was handed a gold medal unfairly. ROC is expected to make a podium sweep in Women’s individual figure skating. This Olympic cycle has been riddled with accusations of corruption and this situation is no different.

Allowing Valieva to skate was a slap in the face to every athlete that competes clean and every athlete that hasn’t. It goes against the spirit of competition that the IOC has stated they want to see from all competitors. In the end, Valieva did not get gold. She finished in fourth place. Her teammate, Anna Shcherbakova, won gold. This was the most heartbreaking of circumstances. Valieva fell four times during her performance, solidifying her teammate’s gold medal. However, ROC’s coaches did not celebrate with Shcherbakova. She was shown on camera, alone, clutching a teddy bear while her coaches tended to a dejected Valieva after her performance. I can only suspect that the arbitration and uncertainty around the competition affected Valieva’s mental ability to skate. However, that does not excuse the way Valieva and the ROC coaches reacted when she didn’t win. They should have celebrated with their teammate, another young girl. Another ROC skater, Alexandra Trusova, was consoled when she found out she could not win silver saying that she “never [wants] to skate again.” Ignoring the win of one teammate and participating in a doping scandal reiterates that ROC’s coaches have failed to protect their young skaters. The coaches were the only people these skaters could depend on at the Olympics especially because coronavirus prevented many people from traveling. ROC’s coaches failed these skaters in every way, and I look forward to seeing the results of the coaches’ investigation.

The prestigious Health Law Fellows Program provides DePaul College of Law Students with opportunities to participate in the substantive work of the Jaharis Health Law Institute (JHLI). Students can apply to become Fellows by submitting an application, and they maintain fellowship status by participating in a variety of activities throughout the academic year, including attending the lunch lecture series events, posting on our blog, research and writing, mentoring, planning and attending the annual symposium, and various health law program social events. One of the many benefits of maintaining fellowship status is that Fellows are eligible to apply for the JHLI Summer Scholars Program. This Program provides students with paid legal internship placements at a variety of health law job sites that run the gamut between positions in-house with health systems and corporations, to law firms, to policy and direct legal service organizations. Often times these positions are unfunded, but the Summer Scholars Program allows students interested in health law to pursue their interests and gain valuable legal experience without financial barriers.

As a JHLI Fellow and Summer Scholar in both 2020 and 2021, I worked in the Medical Prosecutions Unit at the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR) and received a $5,000 stipend from JHLI each summer as compensation. My work at IDFPR helped me gain valuable knowledge about health law generally and further allowed me to hone my reading, writing, and researching skills. Some of the work I performed included drafting, issuing, and filing discovery motions and consent orders, compiling and sending file materials to medical experts for review, and performing and collecting medical literature and case research. This position also allowed me to connect with other established attorneys in field of health law, including my supervisor and other attorneys in the office. These newfound relationships have resulted in letters of recommendation, referrals for other positions, and will undoubtedly benefit me in my career path after graduation. Although this job at IDFPR was of interest to me, I was initially hesitant to accept the position because it was unpaid. However, the Summer Scholars Program stepped in and allowed me to pursue my passion in health law while still receiving a wage. Other placements this summer include Sinai Health System, The American Medical Association, Walgreens, Shirley Ryan Ability Center, iRythym, HillRom, Malecki and Brooks, Legal Aid Chicago, and many more. I encourage any DePaul College of Law students interested in health law to learn more about the Health Law Fellowship and Summer Scholar Program.

For more information or to submit your application, please email our Executive Director, Alice Setrini.