Alexander Gustafsson’s team: Jon Jones ‘essentially received a use exemption’ for turinabol

Bloodyelbow.com

Alexander Gustafsson’s team have expressed their distaste at the results of Jon Jones recent UFC 232 drug test, stating the light heavyweight champion has basically been granted a use exemption.

News broke Wednesday that Jones had again tested positive for metabolites of turinabol, this time stemming from a sample he provided on the day of the UFC 232 weigh-ins prior to his rematch with Gustafsson. Jones tested positive for the same M3 metabolite in three other tests dating from August to early December of last year.

The California State Athletic Commission decided not to ban Jones for his positive test on December 28th, essentially stating the metabolite had stayed in Jones’ system since his failure for it in July 2017 due to a ‘pulsing’ effect.

Gustafsson’s team released the following statement to MMA Fighting on Thursday, with the Swede’s manager Nima Safapour referring to the situation as “an absolute mess.”

“The inconclusive and inconsistent results that are repeatedly occurring with Jon Jones, at the very least, should compel our industry to have a greater, deeper, and more impartial discussion about the legitimacy of Jon’s defense. Jon has gone out publicly boasting when some of his results come back negative. However, he remains silent when his test results come back positive. You can not have it both ways and cherry-pick the results that are favorable for you, and insist that we disregard the results that go against your interests.

“Jon has essentially received a use exemption on a strict liability violation. The science is not certain on the defense he has taken. Furthermore, science is always in a state of change. So the science we rely on today is different than the science we relied on from just a few years ago. It will probably change again going forward. Jones is also creating a precedent that will go beyond his personal interests in the sense that now other fighters will also seek use exemptions on a strict liability violation based on an issue that the science community is still divided on. It’s an absolute mess.”