Advertisement
UFC middleweight Anderson Silva. AP/Press Association Images

UFC star blames his failed drug test on sexual performance medication

Anderson Silva faces a disciplinary hearing tomorrow.

USING MEDICATION TO enhance his sexual performance was partly to blame for Anderson Silva’s failed drug tests earlier this year.

That’s according to the UFC star’s defence, which will be put forward tomorrow at a Nevada State Athletic Commission disciplinary hearing.

Silva, an MMA legend and former UFC champion, tested positive for steroids on the day of — and also 22 days before — his 31 January win against Nick Diaz in Las Vegas.

The 40-year-old, who’s serving a temporary suspension pending the results of the hearing, denies that he knowingly took any banned substances, insisting that his test results were contaminated by sexual performance medication and another supplement.

Brazilian media outlet Combate is reporting that, according to the fighter’s lawyer Michael Alonso, ”Silva was administering or using a supplement for the purpose of enhancing sexual performance and testing of the supplement revealed that the supplement was contaminated with an Exogenous Anabolic Agent: Drostanolone metabolite.”

Alonso also wrote that another supplement Silva was taking could have contained androstane. The Brazilian star also tested positive for temazepam and oxazepam — sleep and anxiety medication — which are not prohibited for in-competition use without an exemption.

Silva’s defence team is asking the Nevada State Athletic Commission to take no disciplinary action against the fighter, including any kind of fine or suspension. They also hope to ensure that the result of the fight against Diaz is not overturned as a ‘no contest’.

H/T: MMAFighting.com

Book your flights because Aldo vs. McGregor is now official for Vegas in December

MacDonald describes brutal UFC 189 loss as ‘the greatest moment of my life’

Author
Paul Dollery
View 36 comments
Close
36 Comments
    Submit a report
    Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
    Thank you for the feedback
    Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.