UK Athletics respond to Reed

UK ATHLETICS have hit back at revelations by Olympic athlete Kate Reed over her treatment in the run up to her 10,000m final in Beijing.

In a statement responding to our exclusive interview Reed on Tuesday, UK Athletics accused the 25-year-old Bristol & West AC runner of leading medical staff to believe she had morphine in her possession and that she might use it to overcome a persistent injury which had put her Games in doubt.

It said: “Just two days before the 10,000m final on Wednesday, August 12, (Reed) intimated to at least two members of the medical staff that she might take morphine to kill the pain. It should be noted that this substance is on the banned list for in-competition testing.

“Both members of the medical team independently interpreted her comments to mean that she had morphine in her possession.

“Also, it should be noted that despite being asked on several occasions throughout the trip to declare her full range of medications, as is the norm, the athlete failed to do so.”

Reed strongly denies both these counts and attributes the whole affair to a joke she shared with team physio Neil Black while seeking ongoing treatment for her injury, which has now been diagnosed as Achilles peritendonitis, peroneal nerve entrapment, and a stress fracture in her heel.

The Clevedon athlete said: “I was not aware there were two medics there. We were just having a joke about my leg. I asked for a jab and we joked about taking morphine.

“It was said in jest. You would have to be rather stupid to (think) I wasn’t joking.“It wasn’t until the next day at 10am that I was accused of carrying (morphine). And I had not even said that in the first place.

“The doctor (Paul Dijkstra) said he was in the room with me and Neil and said he overheard it. “I said, ‘for God’s sake, it was hardly a sensible conversation and why didn’t you ask me at the time?’”

Reed was subsequently subjected to two searches of her possessions and was relieved of her supplements and medication by the former UKA performance director Dave Collins, on suspicion of taking morphine.

Reed said: “I arrived at the hotel at 6pm. At 7pm I had a meeting where I declared my medications.

“Dr Bruce Hamilton, my coach Alan Storey, lead physio Neil Black and massage therapist Paula Clayton were all present. I was in there for an hour, so it was pretty thorough. I went down to things like Bonjela. They are not even a banned substance.”

According to Reed she was not asked to declare her medication again but was shocked and distressed when her room was searched.

The UKA statement described the “huge disappointment” among the British Olympic Association (BOA) and UKA medical staff at suggestions of a lack of medical support given in media interviews by Reed after her 10,000m final.

Reed again disagrees and says she was dismayed by the silence she was greeted with after she staggered across the finish line in 24th place. In the wake of her flop she revealed the agonising 2km time-trial she had been subjected to the night before the race to prove her fitness, and now says she believed the medical team blanked her for the rest of the Games.

She said: “I was walking around Beijing in some considerable pain and asked a BOA doctor to look at me because UKA appeared unwilling to help me. I had no idea why this was.”

Although Reed would like an apology, the most important thing in her eyes is understanding the miscommunications, why she feels she was blanked, and to ensure the same thing does not happen to other athletes in the future.

She said: “I will see (the medical staff) at all the championships. We have to work together again so it needs to be sorted out.”

The UKA statement did not detail post-race events but sought to explain the pre-race checks and tests. It said: “Had the doping test, the room search and physical test not taken place to satisfy the various concerns around the case, Team GB would have been sending an athlete to the start line of an Olympic final with serious uncertainties and grave doubts. Quite simply this was a risk that both the BOA and UKA were unwilling to take.”