Wang Zian | Chinese Swimming Team Doping Scandal | Text Version

Today we’re going to talk about the Paris Olympics. The Olympics have been open for several days, but the performance of the Chinese team doesn’t seem very ideal, especially the performance of the swimming team, which is very different from previous expectations. The day before yesterday, China’s swimming star Zhang Yufei competed in the 100-meter breaststroke, and finally won the bronze medal with a time of 56.21 seconds. This result is a big difference compared to the Tokyo Olympics three years ago. Zhang Yufei won two gold medals and two silver medals at the Tokyo Olympics, and her results were also better than this time. It is said that Zhang Yufei shed tears on the field after the competition. I look forward to being able to compete with them in better condition at the next world competition. I still think my 100-meter butterfly stroke will not lose to the world record holder. This Olympics may be far more stressful than I imagined. There is also another Chinese swimming star named Qin Haiyang, who participated in the 100-meter breaststroke and 200-meter breaststroke events, but both failed. One won seventh place and the other won tenth place. But just a year ago, Qin Haiyang was the champion of the 50-meter breaststroke, 100-meter breaststroke and 200-meter breaststroke at the World Championships, and he also broke the world record in the 200-meter breaststroke, so Qin Haiyang was called the rising star of Chinese swimming at that time. But in just one year, at the most important Olympic arena, Qin Haiyang’s performance plummeted to this point, and he didn’t even get a bronze medal. You can imagine how it makes people feel. I think it’s a psychological problem for me. I think it’s mainly caused by my personal problems. I think this state hasn’t been adjusted, so the overall performance of my ability is definitely not keeping up.

When the news was sent back to China, many viewers felt very disappointed. At this moment, Gao Min, a famous player from the former Chinese diving team, posted a Weibo. She said that the reason why the Chinese swimming team’s performance was so poor this time was because they frequently underwent doping tests after arriving in Paris, which disrupted their rest and training rhythm. She said that the Chinese swimming team underwent 200 doping tests in about 10 days after arriving in Paris, and the tests were sometimes in the middle of the night, and sometimes at 6 am. Some athletes were resting, and they were woken up during the rest to take the test. Some athletes even took 7 tests a day, isn’t that torture? Gao Min was very angry at the time, saying, “Don’t think that the gold medal is not important, the process is very important. If the gold medal is not important, why do Western countries use this kind of off-the-field tactics to give special care to the Chinese swimming team?” Gao Min’s implication is that this frequent testing of Chinese athletes at the Paris Olympics is an off-the-field tactic, and it is to target the Chinese team. So many people have calculated that the swimming team has indeed received special care this year. For example, Zhang Yufei has received 43 doping tests this year, Qin Haiyang has received 46 doping tests, and Li Bingjie has received 42 tests. You should know that it’s only August now, and you’ve already received more than 40 tests in the first half of the year. You calculate how many tests per month, five or six times a month, right? Such a high frequency of doping tests is obviously because they suspect that you have taken doping but have no evidence, so they start to test you frequently.

So why does the International Olympic Committee, including the World Anti-Doping Agency, specifically target China for such frequent testing? Many Chinese viewers may not know that this is because a major event happened on April 20th this year. On April 20th, the New York Times and the German public television station jointly released the news. This news said that three years ago, 23 athletes from the Chinese swimming team collectively tested positive for doping, but this news was suppressed, and the public did not know. Then the entire WADA, that is, the World Anti-Doping Agency, did not appeal, and the matter was left unresolved. The New York Times believes that this may be the largest collective fraud case in the history of the international swimming world. They highly suspect that these swimming athletes deliberately took such a doping drug under the instructions of the Chinese national team. Then the whole thing was exposed and caused an explosive spread in the international media. When the Chinese team entered the arena at the Paris Olympics, a reporter from German television said, “Did you see that? The Chinese team is the one whose news of 23 athletes testing positive for urine was just exposed, that is, they started to criticize the Chinese team.” So you can imagine that the Chinese swimming team must have been under a very heavy psychological pressure at the Olympic arena. So today we are going to talk about the ins and outs of the news that 23 Chinese athletes tested positive for urine.

Time goes back to January 1, 2021. From December 31, 2020 to January 3, 2021, a swimming competition was held in Zhengding County, Hebei Province, called the Chinese Swimming Championship. It should be said that this competition is not a fixed event, nor is it particularly important. It is neither an Olympic selection competition nor a very important domestic competition. What is its background? It is because China was in the period of the epidemic at that time, and many athletes could not compete, and their training was also affected. But think about it, the Tokyo Olympics, which was postponed for a year, will be held in July 2021, so the national swimming team decided to hold two such swimming championships in China. The first stop was held in Zhengding, Hebei. According to convention, when the competition is held, the China Anti-Doping Center will take samples. A total of 201 athletes from all over the country participated in this competition, that is, the top 16 athletes in each event could participate. Then the Anti-Doping Center will conduct random sampling of those athletes with particularly good results. Then a total of 39 athletes’ samples were drawn. Due to the epidemic at that time, the samples taken were also isolated at that time, and they were put in the refrigerator and frozen for a month before being sent to the laboratory in Beijing, which is the WADA, that is, the laboratory certified by the World Anti-Doping Agency for testing. The test results came out on March 15, and this was a big deal. Because at that time, 60 samples were collected from 39 athletes, and 28 of these 60 samples were all positive, involving 23 athletes. This is big news, you know, 23 athletes on such a large scale, and the samples in the middle are all a kind of prohibited drug, and the name of this prohibited drug is trimetazidine. Here I want to briefly introduce that trimetazidine was originally a treatment drug for heart disease, that is, to treat angina pectoris. But later, some athletes found that if you take trimetazidine, you can increase the oxygen supply of the athlete’s heart, and it will also help those high-intensity athletes to recover their physical strength during training. So some athletes took trimetazidine. The famous Sun Yang was found to have taken trimetazidine in 2013. His explanation at the time was that his heart was uncomfortable, so the team doctor prescribed him this kind of medicine. Because trimetazidine was listed as a prohibited drug in 2014, he didn’t know. As a result, this explanation was also understandable, and he was finally banned for three months. Then this time 23 athletes were found, this is a major case.

Then in early April, the China Anti-Doping Center wrote an email to WADA, that is, the World Anti-Doping Agency, saying that we will conduct an independent investigation of this matter, and you should not announce it first. Because this matter does involve a large area. So from April 2021, China had two departments to start the investigation separately. One department is the Anti-Doping Center of the State Sports General Administration, which gathered those players and questioned them one by one. The other is the Chinese police, and it is said that the national security department also investigated the scene. Then this investigation finally formed a conclusion in June 2021. What does this conclusion say? It says that these 23 athletes all accidentally took it by mistake without knowing it. How did they take it by mistake? It was that the hotel they were staying in was called Huayang Hotel. The food in the kitchen of the Huayang Hotel was contaminated. How was it contaminated? It was said that the police found the residue of trimetazidine in the seasoning bottles in the kitchen of the Huayang Hotel, and they also found the discharge of trimetazidine in the sewers and the exhaust ducts of the range hoods. So in the end, it was determined that this matter was that these athletes were contaminated by food, and then they accidentally (took it), so they didn’t know. Then they have a few points to support this conclusion. They said that the first point is that the concentration of trimetazidine is very low, very, very

low concentration. And some athletes tested negative today, and then they may have become positive in the afternoon, this is one. Another is that these 23 athletes are scattered in the teams all over the country, and they are not entirely the national team. Some are from Guangdong, some are from Hebei, some are from Shanghai, and some are from Beijing. So it is difficult for them to say that the collective coaches colluded to provide them with prohibited drugs. And their concentrations are relatively consistent. So based on these reasons, the China Anti-Doping Center finally came to a conclusion. In July 2021, it was said that this matter was due to food contamination, so it was decided not to punish these athletes. After this result was reported to WADA, that is, the World Anti-Doping Agency, WADA also wanted to come to China to investigate because of the epidemic, which was very difficult, and finally fully recognized China’s report, and finally did not apply to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. So in July 2021, that is, during the Tokyo Olympics, all these Chinese athletes who tested positive for urine participated in the Tokyo Olympics, and also achieved very good results. Among these 23 athletes, they won a total of four gold medals.

Then this matter was later learned by the media in the second half of 2021. How was this media learned? It is said that a whistleblower sent a letter to the German public television station, as well as the New York Times in the United States, saying that such a major case had occurred in China and was suppressed. So the New York Times and the German public television station began to conduct independent investigations. This investigation lasted for two years, and the two media also exchanged some information with each other. So what content did the whistleblower provide to them? What was provided was a 56-page Chinese investigation conclusion book at the time, as well as some transcripts of the police and the China Anti-Doping Center talking with these athletes, and provided these original materials to the German public television station, as well as the New York Times in the United States. The German public television station has always been very concerned about anti-doping issues. Russia used to organize its athletes to take doping drugs on a large scale, which was independently investigated by them. So in the past two years, these two media have been investigating this matter in a combined manner.

Do insiders in the field of international anti-doping know more? David Haumann served as the Director General of the World Anti-Doping Agency until 2016. He continues to handle doping cases around the world. Today, he is the chairman of the Independent Investigation Group of the World Athletics Federation. Athletics Integrity Group. We told him about the Chinese case. I was surprised. I had no idea about this topic. Not from the media, nor from any communication with the World Anti-Doping Agency. Or people from other anti-doping organizations. My first reaction was surprise. Next was concern. We let David Haumann know about the documents related to this case. You see, when you put such a case on the table, you should study it very carefully. An independent investigation may be needed. If the investigators also come from the relevant country, it will immediately give the impression that they are not conducting an independent investigation. You must verify everything they say, and then verify it again. Then you can expect your investigation report to be published. So everyone knows what happened and why. This is a necessary condition for transparency. But the World Anti-Doping Agency decided to remain silent about these events. Some doubts were raised during their investigation. What doubts? First of all, the German television station is very serious, and they also did some restoration experiments.

Now it’s our actual test. The experiment takes several days. Fritz Sörgel, the director of the institute, and Martina Kinzig, the laboratory manager, first asked themselves a question. For example, if the surface of the kitchen comes into contact with spices, can trimetazidine be detected? Experiments have shown that trimetazidine mixed with spices can indeed adhere to the surface of the utensils. Even if this substance is added to liquids such as soup, the effect will be very significant. After the liquid was heated for an hour, traces of doping were indeed found on the hood of the extractor, and subsequent analysis proved this. This seems to support China’s conclusion, but they also found a doubt. What doubt? He said that first of all, you said in the first report that there was trimetazidine in the seasoning bottles in the kitchen. But trimetazidine is a treatment drug for heart disease. Where does the source of this heart disease treatment drug come from? How can trimetazidine appear in your seasoning bottles? China has not explained this. Then they think this is also illogical. This is the first point. Second, they said that the concentration is very low. He said it is also not normal, why?

In our experiment, although only one tablet was added, the concentration measured in the prepared food was very high. In our experiment, although only one tablet was added, the concentration measured in the prepared food was very high. On the other hand, the Chinada report pointed out that the concentration in Chinese athletes’ bodies was very low. If there is contamination, it can also be explained by the fraction of the tablets. But how can the particles be separated from these tablets? Is this possible? Our second practical test. Fritz Sörgel and his team tested whether the residue of commercially available tablets would stick to the hands after vigorous friction. The results of the later laboratory analysis will show that no traces were left on the hands. Moreover, even if subjected to a stronger external force, such as a slate hitting the ground below 7 meters, it is still intact. Conclusion: The possibility of gravel falling off is small. At the end of our experiment, Fritz Sörgel only had one explanation for China’s doping investigation results. The low concentration found in the Chinese laboratory can only be due to the use of doping drugs a few weeks ago. And they also accused WADA, saying that WADA has problems in this process. Why? He said that according to the principle, you should be banned and made public at the first time when such a doping positive event occurs. You neither ban nor make it public, aren’t you on the same side as China? Then he said that in this case, WADA’s credibility has been greatly questioned.

After the media disclosed this on April 20th, many international public opinions began to question WADA at that time, especially the US Anti-Doping Center, which had a lot of opinions on WADA. For clean athletes all over the world, the whole situation is a tragedy. In fact, you know, the rules were not followed. The World Anti-Doping Agency press conference admitted that the China Anti-Doping Agency should have announced this violation. They should have disqualified the athletes, and they should have been temporarily banned. They even advocated to conduct their own independent investigation at the time. And the FBI in the United States is said to have also received this information from a whistleblower in China, and they also want to organize an investigation. What to investigate? To investigate that your WADA organization itself lacks credibility, and believes that WADA and the China Anti-Doping Center have been bought. Then WADA was also very anxious at the time, and they held a press conference on April 22nd to explain in detail why they did not appeal. What did they say?

This is also the reason why a temporary suspension was not implemented in this case. As a preliminary explanation, according to the World Anti-Doping Code and the anti-doping rules promulgated, according to the World Anti-Doping Code, the World Anti-Doping Agency itself has no right to impose a temporary ban on participants. Suspension. This is for the anti-doping organization that has the right to manage the results. Case. In this case, it should be CINADA. The second preliminary point is that, according to the principle, China should announce the ban and cancel the results. Then if China does not cancel it, WADA only has the right to appeal. Then why didn’t WADA appeal? The next step is on June 15th, a few weeks later, Chinada sent the following information to the World Anti-Doping Agency. Its decision is actually to attribute the positive reaction to environmental food contamination. Due to the findings in the kitchen, they decided not to continue with the following work. Case. They will not treat it as an anti-doping or violation case. A few days later, after receiving the notification of the decision on June 15, 2021, the World Anti-Doping Agency requested the case file. The World Anti-Doping Agency case file was quickly sent to external lawyers, including myself, but also to others. Of course, it was also provided to the scientific department of the World Anti-Doping Agency so that it could strongly assess the reasonableness of the accepted contamination situation. Also, I don’t want to stop Professor Raven’s speech. The scientific department finally believed that the contamination situation was not only credible, but there was no specific factor to question it, challenge it. In fact, the legal opinion provided by external lawyers (including myself at the time), as well as a senior barrister from the UK, conducted a comprehensive review of the case, including scientific evidence and according to the opinions of experts, it was not necessary to appeal to the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

In August 2021, at the final deadline for the appeal, WADA gave up the appeal at the time. And WADA and the United States were fighting a war of words these months, because the US Anti-Doping Center organization itself also held hearings and invited WADA to come, but WADA did not go. And WADA also threatened that if the United States continues to do so, then the next Salt Lake City Olympics in the United States may be affected. So internationally, this matter has become a very, very big public opinion surrounding the fact that 23 Chinese athletes tested positive for urine.

Then this matter was fed back to the Paris Olympics this time. Then think about it, why do Chinese athletes undergo such frequent urine tests? In my opinion, it’s actually very simple, because WADA didn’t appeal against the situation of 23 Chinese athletes this time, which led to the dissatisfaction of many international anti-doping organizations, including the dissatisfaction of international athletes. What to do? Then we can only strengthen the doping tests on China at the Paris Olympics. If it is found, then of course it is good. If it is not found, then WADA may also say, “Look, I have done it, frequently testing Chinese athletes for doping.” So China’s special care for doping testing at the Paris Olympics this time is because of such a background.

Next, we are going to talk about what the truth of this matter is. I will also talk about my own views. First of all, I think the first point is that there is indeed not enough evidence to prove that the 23 Chinese athletes collectively took doping drugs. There is indeed a lot of evidence pointing to accidental ingestion. For example, all 23 athletes have low concentrations. What level is it low to? It only contains one nanogram per milliliter of blood, and this level is indeed very low, which is not the same as the doping drugs you usually detect. And these 23 athletes have all the concentration values ​​at the same level. If you take it separately, according to the principle, your concentrations should be different, because there are high and low, and the time you take it is different. So they are all in an interval and must be taken in the same batch. But the problem is that these 23 athletes come from different places, and they are not trained in the same place. So the evidence in this area seems to be favorable to China, but the investigation by the German television station seems a bit strange. How is it a bit strange? He said that these 23 athletes seem to come from all over the country, but the information they received showed that before the competition, the Chinese national team athletes were actually training in Beijing. These athletes who are training cannot go out and stay together. In other words, in theory, they have the possibility of taking trimetazidine at the same time and the possibility of space. It cannot be ruled out, this is a very important piece of evidence that is unfavorable to China. He said that the whistleblower provided them with information at the time. And just after they published the report on April 20th, the German public television station received information from a whistleblower in China. This information shows that it is even more unfavorable to China.

Because what was the favorable information for China at the time? All these 23 athletes came from the Huayang Hotel, and they all stayed at the Huayang Hotel, and there were 3 athletes who were sampled outside the Huayang Hotel at that time. None of the samples of these three athletes were positive. So it is believed that it must be the same hotel that had the problem. But the information provided by the whistleblower to the German television station showed that, as claimed by Chinada and Wada, they all stayed and ate at this hotel. Are the 23 athletes really all staying at this hotel? The affected athletes told me that there were definitely two swimmers, and maybe more, who did not stay at this hotel. They stayed elsewhere. One of the swimmers who tested positive was chatting, “The list of 23 people looks fake. Some athletes didn’t even stay at the hotel.” Of course, the German television station also said that they could not distinguish the authenticity of the whistleblower’s information. It just provided such a possibility, so if this is really such information, then the entire evidence system constructed by China will not be established, and this is a very serious accusation. So in my opinion, the evidence of both sides is basically limited to the state of each side having its own reasons, and it is difficult to form a conclusive evidence chain, and it is also difficult to form a consistent conclusion. This is the first point.

Second, there may indeed be problems with the procedures when WADA handled this matter. Because according to the anti-doping regulations, in addition to the investigation in your own country, WADA must conduct an independent third-party investigation. Then in the process of this 23 athletes testing positive in China, the investigation is either the China Anti-Doping Center, or the Chinese public security department or the national security department. But think about what the documentary said, who is China’s national security department? It is controlled by the Chinese government. The Chinese government actually has major interests in this doping matter. Because everyone knows that Chinese Olympic athletes are fighting for the country’s glory. He is even a part of the country, a part of the national honor. In this case, does the Chinese government want Chinese athletes to have doping problems? Definitely not. If they don’t want to, they will definitely try to conceal it. You can also look at the history. The Chinese swimming team has had very famous scandals in the past. At the 1992 Barcelona Olympics, the five golden flowers of China won the Olympic championship. What was the result? They all took drugs. Later, China’s famous swimmer Luo Xuejuan herself came out and said that the swimming pool behind her was not clean, but she walked out of the swimming pool clean. She said why the results of many Chinese swimmers in domestic competitions are particularly good, but they are not good in international competitions. Everyone thinks about what the reason is. As a result, everyone later knew that the Chinese swimming team took doping drugs and was caught in the act abroad. When they were competing in Australia, some Chinese swimmers brought growth hormone, and some brought diuretics, and they were found by customs and expelled on the spot. So the Chinese swimming team did have an inglorious history. They generally took doping drugs from the 1990s, and then their results plummeted around 2000, but their results have risen again in the past ten years.

Then after the Chinese swimming team has risen again, there are two kinds of statements. One statement is that China has got rid of the past history of doping and finally achieved good results through scientific training. But many peers abroad believe that China is taking doping drugs. You are taking doping drugs, you are not clean. This is the questioning represented by the United States and also represented by Germany. Including this time, after Zhang Yufei won the bronze medal, the fourth place was a German athlete. That German athlete won the championship at the World Championships last year, and this time he only got fourth place. So after the competition, he thought it was unfair. He said that although Zhang Yufei is presumed innocent now, he thinks this matter is incredible. So you can see that the peers in international sports generally do not trust the Chinese swimming team. This is related to the past history. Then it is because of the past history, and also because of the fact that all 23 people tested positive this time, that you have led to everyone’s distrust of WADA. Then the media questioned that WADA’s relationship with China is unclear now. Why is it unclear? Now the vice chairman of the International Anti-Doping Center is Yang Yang, a famous Chinese athlete, and she has also accepted a large amount of donations from China. Then someone found that on the website of the World Anti-Doping Center, they have accepted 990,000 US dollars in donations from China in the past year.

A major Olympic sponsor in China, a sports equipment manufacturer, supports not only the International Olympic Committee, but also the World Anti-Doping Agency. Generous. The Chinese government is also generous. It has provided millions of dollars in funding for the World Anti-Doping Agency’s research projects. Four years ago, China also had a place in the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). Yang Yang was elected as the vice chairman, a former Chinese NPC representative. She is an advocate for clean sports. For example, on the international channel of Chinese state media. Our job is to protect clean sports and clean athletes. If there are cheaters, we

of course, we must try our best to find them. Then on the one hand, you accept donations from China, and on the other hand, your vice chairman is Yang Yang from China, isn’t it that your relationship with China in the International Anti-Doping Center is not good? After it’s good, you don’t want to investigate. Why don’t you conduct a third-party investigation? Even if you are isolated during the epidemic, you can send an investigation team to conduct this third-party investigation, and you can just isolate them. So now everyone has raised very, very big questions about the procedural problems of the Anti-Doping Center.

Then WADA, after April 20th, again conducted a third-party assessment and asked a prosecutor from Sweden to review the entire process of handling this matter in China. After the review, they said that there was no problem. Therefore, in the assessment, our scientific experts and legal experts did not find any signs of manipulation. Our own assessment results show that there are three institutions that have misconduct or collusion. In short, our own assessment shows that three institutions, including ourselves, have received unconfirmed information from a source, but the source refused to be contacted further. This information is not supported by the information we have. Our scientific and legal But, no institution can provide any evidence or contact information. Therefore, we decided to allow me to also express my opinion on our colleagues. Please allow me to also express my opinion on our colleagues. He completely distorted the only communication in this case. In view of the fact that USARA cited an email from our department, I would like to read the following. The part that was omitted. As quoted in the New York Times article, we did suggest that we remember. But we also pointed out that we discussed with ITA about the relevant allegations. However, we also pointed out that we discussed with ITA about the following issues. The same intelligence. We were informed that the source never provided any evidence and could not prove their claims. We followed up with the scientific and legal departments, and they conducted a thorough review.

Yes, we did say that there were no obstacles to the investigation, because this point was omitted. No evidence or compelling evidence or intelligence was presented. Now I would like to quote the last paragraph of our email. Attached to the email is the report previously submitted by USARA on Chinese women. These recent allegations from the same source? If they have any evidence to support their claims, we would be happy to re-evaluate. We will also be willing to talk to them if they can accept an interview. Let us know that we never received any reply before the article was published. Finally, all this information was shared in a confidential manner to protect the source of information, their start of retaliation, and threats to sue the US Anti-Doping Center.

It is under such a tangled situation that this situation has been formed today. So in my opinion, I personally feel that the reason why this matter is unclear now is that WADA’s handling of it was problematic at the time. If WADA could conduct an independent investigation, then the conclusion you form may still have such credibility. If you don’t have such an independent investigation by WADA, so many people are involved in such a large number of investigations, the result is definitely difficult to be convincing. And many media also mentioned that, “Are you using the same standard?” In 2022, a very famous figure skating athlete in Russia, a 17-year-old genius girl, she was also tested for trimetazidine at the time. She explained that her grandfather made her a cake, and then her grandfather made her a strawberry cake because he took this heart disease medicine, and she accidentally took it after eating it. As a result, Russia later ruled that she had no problem, and WADA sued. After being sued, the Russian athlete was banned for four years. Then why did you appeal in Russia, and China was fine? And you didn’t care about these 23 people on such a large scale, so in my opinion, WADA’s procedural flaws are the most important reason why the whole matter is unclear now.

We often say that without procedural justice, the so-called results are sometimes difficult to explain. I don’t know whether the Chinese swimming team took doping drugs. What I want to say is that even if they didn’t take them, the flaws in WADA’s handling of this matter have also led to a situation where it is difficult to speak out. And everyone knows that the Chinese government has always adopted the concealment, non-disclosure, and non-transparency approach when dealing with these matters. Their explanation is that this involves some minors. And it is also unfair to those athletes who completely took it by mistake if it is made public. But the result of not making it public, after being reported by the New York Times and the German television station after a long investigation, isn’t it more passive? There is no transparent handling process, and there is no transparent and open result. To be honest, even if your heart is clean, it is actually difficult for you to prove your innocence to the world. What’s more, everyone knows that Chinese athletes are a part of national honor. When you are carrying such a historical mission of national honor, you are bound to be questioned more by the outside world.

So this matter, on the surface, is a dispute over doping, but we may need to think more about when Chinese athletes will no longer bear the national honor and go to the Olympic arena, and become an athlete pursuing their own future, then this matter will become a pure doping event. Of course, I don’t think that even if these Chinese athletes don’t bear the national honor, doping events will not occur. At the Paris Olympics, the American swimming star Walsh was tested positive for doping. And he had 0 flight drug tests this year and last year. It can be seen that even in a country like the United States, while sparing no effort to oppose China’s collective doping fraud, its own athletes are also inevitably likely to be targeted. In the final analysis, this is a game between the commercialization of sports competitions and personal interests. As long as there are sports competitions, as long as sports competitions are commercialized, as long as athletes can gain honor, money, and social status during the process of sports competitions, the struggle between human society, including our entire sports world, and doping will be long-term. But how can we strip away the political factors in this process? In my opinion, this is the most worthy of our consideration in this news.

所以这件事情表面上看是一次这种兴奋剂的争执，但更多的我们可能要想到的是什么时候中国的运动员他不再背负国家的这种荣誉走向奥运赛场，成为了一个运动员自己追求未来的时候，这件事情才会变成一个单纯的兴奋剂事件。当然我也并不认为就算中国的这些运动员没有背负国家荣誉就不会出现兴奋剂事件。就在这次巴黎奥运会上，美国的这个游泳名将叫沃尔什，他就被检测出来了兴奋剂阳性。而且他在今年和去年的一年，他飞行药检的次数是0。由此可见，即便在美国这样的国家不遗余力的在反对中国的兴奋剂集体舞弊的同时，他其实自己的运动员也难免会中招。说到底，这是一个体育竞赛的商业化跟个人利益之间的博弈。只要有体育比赛，只要体育比赛是商业化的，只要体育比赛在过程中间运动员可以获得荣誉金钱和社会地位的时候，人类社会也包括我们整个体育界跟兴奋剂之间的斗争就是长期化。但是怎么能够把这个过程把它的政治因素剥离，在我看来这是这个新闻中间最值得我们思考的。