The case centers on an appeal by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) against a decision by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) concerning Zachery Lund, a member of the U.S. Skeleton Team, who tested positive for Finasteride, a prohibited substance, during a World Cup race in November 2005. Lund had been using Finasteride to treat male pattern baldness and disclosed this on his Doping Control Form but lacked a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE). USADA initially issued Lund a public warning and disqualified his competition results, but WADA appealed, arguing for a two-year ineligibility period under the FIBT Doping Control Regulations. WADA contended that Lund failed to exercise due diligence by not checking the updated Prohibited List, despite his responsibility to do so. Lund admitted he had checked the list in previous years but neglected to do so in 2005, though he consistently declared his medication use.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) panel examined whether Lund could claim "No Fault or Negligence" or "No Significant Fault or Negligence." They ruled that Lund could not avoid fault entirely, as he neglected his duty to monitor the Prohibited List, but acknowledged his history of compliance and transparency, reducing his sanction. This decision excluded him from the Olympic Games but avoided a full two-year ban. WADA also argued that Lund’s use of Finasteride did not qualify for a TUE, as it was not medically necessary, and the panel agreed, dismissing an "Abbreviated TUE" issued by the USBSF. The case highlights the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations, emphasizing athletes' responsibility to stay informed while considering mitigating factors in sanctions.
Lund’s defense argued that he was misled by conflicting information on the FIBT website, which listed Finasteride as both prohibited and a "Specified Substance." However, the panel rejected this, noting Lund had not checked the website in 2005 and thus could not claim confusion. They also dismissed arguments that WADA should be estopped due to FIBT’s errors, as Lund had not relied on the website at the relevant time. The panel upheld WADA’s appeal, disqualifying Lund’s results and reinforcing athletes' obligation to verify prohibited substances annually.
In its final ruling, the CAS panel rejected Lund’s arguments about conflicting rules and deferred authority to USADA’s prior decision, asserting its independent fact-finding role. It also declined to assess whether Finasteride should have been prohibited, deferring to WADA’s jurisdiction. While the panel found Lund guilty of a doping violation due to his admitted negligence, it reduced his ineligibility from two years to one, considering his honesty and the oversight by anti-doping organizations. This allowed Lund to resume competition sooner but excluded him from the Winter Olympics. The panel denied WADA’s request to disqualify Lund’s post-test results, citing fairness. The final decision partially upheld WADA’s appeal, overturned USADA’s prior ruling, and imposed a one-year ineligibility period without disqualifying subsequent results. The panel expressed sympathy for Lund, noting systemic failures, but reiterated that athletes bear ultimate responsibility for prohibited substances in their systems.