MacLeod was found to have an elevated testosterone level (or T/E – the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone) in the A sample he provided during unannounced out-of-competition testing earlier this year.
Now the doping charge against him has been discontinued and he is free to resume training with his club and playing with immediate effect.
This decision follows a meticulous inquiry and is based on UK Sport’s changed view of the case and that of their expert panel, after analysis of MacLeod’s B sample and their consideration of submissions by the player.
MacLeod submitted that his elevated T/E ratio was due to his consumption of a significant amount of alcohol the evening before the doping test.
Scientific research referenced by UK Sport’s expert panel (and also in the 2006 case of Northern Irish athlete Gareth Turnbull) has indicated that acute ingestion of alcohol can temporarily elevate the T/E ratio significantly.
It was initially considered by UK Sport, and consequentially by an independent review panel, comprising – Stewart Hillis, director of the sports medicine centre and professor of cardiovascular and exercise medicine at Glasgow University: Sheriff Bill Dunlop; and Michelle Jeffrey, a sport and exercise doctor with the Scottish Institute of Sport – that MacLeod had, based on the A sample, a “case to answer” per the World Anti-Doping Agency’s protocols. This was all prior to analysis of the B Sample by UK Sport’s laboratory. It was analysis of the B Sample, which first confirmed the existence of alcohol in the player’s system.
These protocols state that when an athlete’s T/E ratio is above 4:1 and it also deviates significantly from the normal range of values (reference is made to a 30% upper limit on the normal variation), then this is proof of the administration of a source of testosterone even when, as in MacLeod’s case, the testosterone has the same carbon signature as natural testosterone. The burden then falls on the athlete to prove that the elevated level is due to a physiological cause or pathological condition. It is now accepted by UK Sport that, in light of the results of the B sample analysis, MacLeod has satisfied that burden and Scottish Rugby has accepted that decision.
Scott MacLeod said: “I am glad that this ordeal is finally over and look forward to resuming my playing career with Scarlets and Scotland. I never thought that an impromptu night out to celebrate the news that I was going to become a dad for the first time would lead to all this.
“Nevertheless, I feel very frustrated that my sample was not tested for alcohol at an earlier stage of these proceedings – given the severity of the charge that I was facing, I would have expected that the alcohol test should have been performed as a matter of routine. Had that been the case, I would have been able to establish my innocence at a much earlier stage, I would not have been suspended and the details of this case would not have become public.”
Gregor Nicholson, Scottish Rugby’s International Administration Manager, said: “It has been a long and frustrating case for Scott MacLeod, some aspects of which demonstrate an urgent need for a review of T/E protocols and whether A samples should be routinely analysed for the existence of alcohol, ultimately by WADA but also by UK Sport.
“Scottish Rugby is also making representations to the IRB in relation to how the IRB’s anti-doping regulations (and therefore our own anti-doping regulations) deal with the complicated and uncertain nature of such cases.
“Until then, all players who are subject to doping control, including out-of-competition unannounced testing, should take heed of the very real danger of acute alcohol ingestion causing a temporary elevation of their T/E level, to the extent that they could face having to formally explain, to a legal standard, the reason for the finding in order to avoid a doping charge.”
