Jeff Novitzky’s résumé speaks to the primary reason the UFC hired him last year to help craft and implement the drug-testing program it unveiled in July, headlined by random year-round testing by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. As a special agent with the Internal Revenue Service and then the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Novitzky led high-profile investigations into suspected steroid use by Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong and many others. While it’s his role now in combating PED use that rightfully has garnered the most attention, Novitzky deals with a range of issues related to the care of the UFC’s more than 500 competitors spread across the globe.
“
What I understood by the end of my law enforcement career was the ‘why.’ … I always took the opportunity when I talked to athletes who had chosen to use performance-enhancing drugs to ask why they did it, and it almost always came down to one word — and it was trust. They didn’t trust that their opponents weren’t using, they didn’t trust that teammates weren’t using and, most importantly, they didn’t trust that their sports organizations really cared enough, based on the lack of strength of their anti-doping programs and the loopholes that were available. That’s what we looked at in developing this program. We needed to develop that trust.”
 |
Photo by: GETTY IMAGES
|
On outside administration: We have USADA carrying out all the decisions on who is being tested and how often. There is zero business interest involved in the administration of this program. That goes back to trust. … Until you have independence, you’re never going to gain that trust.
On risk vs. reward: I’m well aware that these drugs will make you a better fighter. They will make you bigger, stronger, faster and with more endurance. So that reward is always out there. We needed to put something together where they … saw that the risk outweighed the reward. In our program, the sanctions for a first-time offender are anywhere from two to four years. That’s when you start getting to a risk level, based on my prior experience, that athletes will start paying attention to.
On weight cutting among compeititors: We have had quite a bit of interaction with world experts on dehydration, rehydration and nutrition. We didn’t want to take something away from our athletes without giving them the tools to deal with it. I am very pleasantly surprised to see what has happened since the implementation of the IV ban [which limits the amount of fluids given by IV after a weigh-in]. Statistically, our athletes are coming into the week of a fight much closer to the weight they have to meet on Friday. It’s more healthy and safer to do more gradual weight cuts. And performance is better.
On concussions: You have to take advantage of advances in technology today that weren’t there 10 years ago. Maybe there’s the same realization of potential brain injury [acknowledged in combat sports for decades], but as technology evolves, we need to be on top of that and figure out what type of analysis we need to do.
On dietary supplements: That is one of the scariest areas out there right now in terms of our program and our athletes. There are hundreds of products out there that an athlete could use and unknowingly be using a banned substance. It’s very scary. I worked with the FDA my last seven years, and I saw that industry from the inside out, and it scares me a lot.
