|

Stian Angermund’s Timeline of Events

Share the love:

On February 10th, 2024, the trail running world was rocked by news out of Norway – the two-time World Champion, Stian Angermund, had tested positive for the diuretic chlorthalidone. In the initial interview given to NRK, Norway’s state-owned broadcasting company, we learned that Stian received the news of the adverse finding 50 days after the in-competition test performed at OCC – the day he and his partner got home from the hospital with their second child. It was heartbreaking and confusing for not only Stian and his family but also for fans of the sport. How could this have happened? 16 months after he received the initial email from the French Anti-doping Agency (AFLD) and an uphill battle later, there has been movement on Stian’s case. The AFLD and Stian have reached an agreement. Signed on the cusp of Christmas, both parties have agreed to a 16-month ban (back-dated to the date of the sample collection), a reduction from the four years he was set to face if it was concluded that he had deliberately taken the drug. Pending no appeal from WADA (the World Anti-Doping Agency), a resolution is on the horizon for Stian and he will be officially allowed to return to training and competition.

While Stian will most likely be allowed to compete this season, it is not without the significant financial and psychological burden he and his family took on trying to prove his innocence. Freetrail’s Dylan Bowman sat down with Stian to hear directly from the source and to try to gain an understanding of how the last year and a half unfolded for Stian and his family. You can listen to that conversation here or you can watch the interview on our YouTube channel.

What follows below is the timeline – key date by key date – in Stian’s words. Consider this the companion reading guide to the conversation over on the Freetrail Podcast.


Stian Angermund

 

On August 31st, 2023, I did an in-competition anti-doping test in Chamonix, France.  A urine sample was collected after finishing the UTMB OCC competition. I gave the urine sample collection with no personal assistance. The Agence Francaise de Lutte Contre le Dopage (AFLD) witness was present. 

I participated in the Ironman-owned event, UTMB, at the long-distance trail running race called OCC. OCC is 55 km in distance with 3400 vertical meters of gain and loss. The OCC race has five refreshment points [aid stations] where no athlete support personnel are permitted. I won the OCC race after 4 hours, 42 minutes and 40 seconds of running, and I did the pre-announced anti-doping control just after leaving the finish area. 

The urine sample has reference numbers 7191572 A and 7191572 B. 

In the doping control form, I declared I don’t use any medications or supplements. 

I permitted my urine sample to be used for scientific research. 

On Friday, October 20th, at 5:03 pm, 50 days after the anti-doping control collection and 14 days after the laboratory confirmed the finding results internally, I received an email from AFLD. The 7191572 A sample contained the prohibited substance chlorthalidone [a diuretic]. I was given five days to request an analysis of the 7191572 B and/or a written explanation within 15 days. 

On October 24th, 2023, I requested all information and laboratory documentation packets for sample A, and I requested an analysis of sample B. I also requested a DNA analysis of sample B. 

I requested more time to investigate the source for chlorthalidone contamination. 

On October 30th, 2023 I signed the provisional suspension form advised by my lawyer. 

On November 6th, 2023, The UTMB organisation informed me that my anti-doping urine sample was clean. 

On November 7th, 2023, AFDL analyzed urine sample B: 7191572 B. 

On November 8th, 2023, I received the laboratory documentation packet for sample B including the analyzed result finding of 31ng/ml chlorthalidone. 

On November 8th, 2023, I received the laboratory documentation packet for sample A, finding 41 ng/ml chlorthalidone. 

I also found that the Laboratory Documentation Package for urine sample A had the wrong collection date.

The Chain of Custody lacks information about the location, place, storage and AFDL personnel needed to secure the security of the urine sample from August 31st, 2023, until September 5th, 2023. 

On December 8th, 2023, I requested more time to investigate the source of contamination. 

On December 22nd, 2023, the AFLD gave an extension of 45 days. 

Scientific measures and research show that, depending on the dosage, chlorthalidone could have entered my body one hour before testing. 

Sample Specific gravity 1.018 shows no fluid overconsumption or excessive fluid intake. 

I had seven products tested negative for chlorthalidone at the WADA-approved Laboratory in Oslo. I received the results on February 20th, 2024. 

UTMB failed to deliver batch numbers on products served at refreshment points at the OCC event on August 31st, 2023, where no athlete’s support personnel was allowed. 

I’m a genetic carrier of increased risk of heart attack and am not advised to use medications or diuretics. 

On March 26th, 2024, the AFLD denied DNA analysis of the urine sample. 

On March 26th, 2024, the AFLD sent a second version of the documentation packet A, updating the collection date, and attached further information about the Chain of Custody. In this information, the AFLD informed that the urine sample was stored in the AFLD witness’s refrigerator at his home from Thursday, August 31, 2023, to Monday, September 4, 2023. 

On March 28th, 2024, I contacted a handwriting specialist to evaluate the chain of custody form. The specialist had no inside knowledge of the case and was objective and neutral. The specialist found that the dates on the chain of custody had been altered by the same person who wrote the AFLD witness’s name. 

On April 4th, 2024, I asked for an extended deadline to April 24th, 2024, citing article R232-89 of the French Code du Sport. 

On April 5th, 2024, this request was granted by the ALFD. 

On April 11th, 2024, I received the analytical test report from X-Pertise Consulting indicating that chlorthalidone was not detected in my hair and toenail samples. 

On April 24th, 2024, The first version of my written statement and lawyer Andreas Ekker’s statement was submitted to AFLD. 

On April 25th, the AFLD confirmed that it had received both my written statement and lawyer Andreas Ekker’s statement.

On June 10th, 2024, the AFLD informed me that all products for analysis must be validated by the AFLD, a process I initiated on February 26th (see above). 

On June 12th, 2024, the AFLD approved further analysis of the nutrition products, a process I initiated on February 26th (see above). 

On June 13th, 2024, lawyer Andreas Ekker requested that the AFLD conclude on the written statement from April 24th, 2024. 

On July 9th, 2024, the AFLD confirmed the analysis of the nutrition products, noting that chlorthalidone was not found. 

On July 11th, 2024, lawyer Andreas Ekker requested that the AFLD provide information about the process, dates, and feedback on the written statement and case resolution. 

On August 6th, 2024, lawyer Andreas Ekker requested that the AFLD provide information about the process, dates, and feedback on the written statement and case resolution. 

On September 2nd, 2024, lawyer Andreas Ekker requested that the AFLD provide information about the process, dates, and feedback on the written statement and case resolution. 

On September 11th, 2024, the AFLD answered lawyer Andreas Ekker’s letter from April 24. 

On October 16th, 2024, lawyer Andreas Ekker requested that the AFLD provide information about the process, dates, and feedback on the written statement and case resolution. 

On October 23rd, 2024, the ALFD sent me a report by Professor Michel Audran. The report, dated September 11th, 2024, was initiated by the AFLD. 

On October 23rd, 2024, the AFLD informed me that the AFLD College would meet on November 7th to examine this case. 

On October 31st, 2024, Lawyer Andreas Ekker answered the AFLD. 

On November 22nd, 2024, the AFLD sent me the settlement offer, which includes an 18-month ban, with 20 days to accept or decline. 

On December 12th, 2024, lawyer Andreas Ekker agreed to the possibility of a video meeting with the AFLD. 

On December 17th, 2024, the AFLD, lawyer Andreas Ekker, and I had a video meeting. This was the first time I had a verbal dialogue and saw AFLD personnel ‘face-to-face’. 

On December 19th, 2024, lawyer Andreas Ekker sent the AFLD the meeting summary, including the main arguments for a no-fault decision.  

On December 24th, 2024, the AFLD sent me a new settlement offer with a 16-month ban, giving me 20 days to accept or decline. 

On January 7th, 2025, I signed the settlement offer. 

On January 9th, 2025, Lawyer Andreas Ekker sent the AFLD the signed settlement offer. 

Coming process: 

The AFLD College will have to approve or decline the settlement offer. 

If the AFLD approves the settlement offer, WADA has 21 days to appeal the decision. 

Stian Angermund WMTRC 23

Keep exploring

|

For the Love of Coaching: Running as Freedom with Carolina Rubio-MacWright

|

For The Love of Coaching: Finding Confidence with Lindsey Herman

|

Trail Runner of The Year 2024

Become a Freetrail Pro member

Get exclusive access to premium content, our private trail community, and more. Just $10/month or $96/year.