No Steroids Here: U.S. Grocery Store Meat Passes OIympic Doping Test

LOS ANGELES — That excuse about eating contaminated meat causing a failed drug test? Not gonna fly anymore – at least not for athletes competing in America.

New research led by Texas Tech University and supported by UCLA’s Olympic Analytical Laboratory and the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) shows that virtually no banned performance enhancers exist in U.S. beef, pork, and chicken supplies.

A Closer Look At Supermarket Meat

“This study provides the first nationwide surveillance data on animal growth promoter residues in U.S. meat,” writes Texas Tech researcher Cade Snethen in the report, which was also his master’s thesis. His findings indicate that our food safety regulations effectively keep harmful substances out of supermarket meat.

Scientists conducted a year-long surveillance of meat samples purchased from grocery stores in eight cities: Atlanta, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Lubbock, San Antonio, Seattle, and West Lafayette. They tested for 13 substances, including both legal growth additives and banned performance-enhancing drugs.

Researchers at the UCLA Olympic Analytical Lab, which typically screens athlete blood and urine for banned substances, tested the meat sample using the same high-resolution testing methods deployed in Olympic anti-doping efforts.

Most telling? Researchers found no evidence of prohibited substances like clenbuterol, stanozolol, or selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) in any meat samples.

“The findings suggest that positive tests resulting from meat consumption are highly unlikely when consumed in amounts consistent with typical daily diets,” study authors write.

Legal Substances Within Limits

Some approved substances did appear in beef. Ractopamine – a feed additive used to promote lean muscle growth – was found in 22% of muscle samples and 33% of liver samples. The highest concentration detected (14 nanograms per gram in liver) was still well below the FDA’s limit of 90 nanograms per gram.

Trenbolone, a legal steroid implant used in cattle, turned up in roughly 10% of beef muscle samples and 17% of liver samples, with maximum levels at just 0.1 nanograms per gram—again far beneath international residue thresholds.

Pork and chicken fared even better. No performance-enhancing residues were detected in pork muscle or liver. One pork kidney sample had trace levels of nandrolone and estradiol—likely the result of natural hormone production in uncastrated male pigs. Chicken samples were similarly clean, with only small traces of naturally occurring estradiol.

High-Profile Athletes and Contamination Claims

The study takes direct aim at the common defense used by athletes who claim they tested positive after eating contaminated meat. Snethen writes: “The argument that professional athletes’ positive drug tests result from meat contamination with anabolic agents not used in livestock production lacks scientific support. Strict regulations and surveillance effectively mitigate the risk of such contamination.”

The research mentions several well-known cases. During the 2011 Gold Cup, Mexican soccer players successfully argued they had consumed contaminated meat—an explanation supported by known clenbuterol use in Mexican livestock at the time. German table tennis player Dimitrij Ovtcharov made a similar defense after competing in China, where clenbuterol has also been detected in meat.

In contrast, Spanish cyclist Alberto Contador’s defense was rejected in 2010, as clenbuterol is banned from livestock in the European Union. The Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled that a contaminated food supplement was a more plausible explanation.

Advanced Detection Technology

The testing employed liquid chromatography with high-resolution tandem mass spectrometry—allowing scientists to detect minuscule levels of prohibited substances, down to 0.002 nanograms per gram. That’s the equivalent of spotting a grain of salt in an Olympic swimming pool.

Dr. Elizabeth (Ellie) Ahrens, director of UCLA’s Olympic Analytical Laboratory, led the analytical work and emphasized that the tools used were the same as those applied to elite athlete testing.

The study is ongoing, with researchers planning to expand their sample pool to include imported meats. “This study reinforces the effectiveness of current regulatory practices in limiting growth promoter residues in commercial meat,” the team concluded.

Bottom Line

For American consumers and athletes, the message is clear: the U.S. meat supply is extremely unlikely to trigger a doping violation. While trace amounts of some approved growth promoters can be found in beef, the levels are far below safety limits. And the banned substances that athletes fear? They’re not showing up at all.

If you’re an athlete competing in the United States who tests positive for banned substances, you’ll need a better excuse than blaming your dinner.

---