You’re training hard, fueling well, keeping your supplement routine clean—and still, there’s a lingering question for elite runners: could a random steak dinner lead to a failed drug test?
A new study suggests the answer is “no,” but the concern isn’t totally unfounded.
Why This Even Matters
If you’re just logging your daily miles and chasing a PR at your next local half, this might sound like overkill.
But for pro runners, Olympic hopefuls, or even age-groupers competing at international events, anti-doping rules are strict, and the thresholds are shockingly low.
In fact, some athletes have claimed they tested positive not because they doped, but because they ate tainted meat.
This new research, a collaboration between UCLA’s Olympic Analytical Laboratory and Texas Tech University, took a serious look at that claim. Using high-powered testing methods usually reserved for elite athlete samples, scientists tested beef, pork, and chicken from grocery stores across eight U.S. cities to see if there were trace amounts of performance-enhancing drugs.
Spoiler: they found some, but not nearly enough to get anyone flagged.
The Details: What They Tested and What They Found
Researchers used the same testing setup that’s used to catch athletes who cheat—liquid chromatography paired with high-resolution mass spectrometry (the gold standard in anti-doping). They tested meat for substances like:
- Ractopamine: A growth promoter that helps animals build lean muscle.
- Trenbolone: A powerful anabolic steroid used in livestock.
- Estradiol: A naturally occurring hormone, but still on the banned list in sport.
All of these are legal (to some extent) in U.S. meat production.
The FDA regulates how much of these substances can be in meat, and producers are supposed to follow withdrawal periods before slaughter to make sure residue levels stay low.
So what turned up?
- Some beef samples had low levels of ractopamine and trenbolone.
- Pork and chicken were almost completely clean—most tested negative altogether.
- None of the meat had drug levels anywhere near the amount that could cause a positive test under World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) rules.
Dr. Elizabeth Ahrens, director of the UCLA Olympic lab, summed it up like this: “Positive tests from eating store-bought meat are highly unlikely—assuming you’re eating like a normal person.”
But Wait—Haven’t Athletes Failed Tests Because of This?
Yes, they have. And that’s why the fear lingers.
In 2011, several Mexican soccer players were suspended after testing positive for clenbuterol, a banned steroid sometimes found in meat. WADA eventually cleared them, acknowledging that meat contamination was real and widespread in Mexico at the time.
Track and field hasn’t been immune, either. A few years ago, Colombian race walker Lorena Arenas blamed tainted beef for her positive test—an explanation WADA later accepted. And more than 100 Chinese athletes were let off the hook in 2017 after testing showed high rates of clenbuterol in China’s meat supply.
So while it’s rare, it’s not just paranoia, especially for athletes competing internationally.
Why Runners Should Care (Even If You’re Not Elite)
Most runners won’t ever have to worry about this.
But for those in USADA testing pools, or chasing national team spots, it’s a legit concern. A false positive could mean a temporary suspension, loss of income, or months of legal headaches.
This study offers some peace of mind for U.S.-based runners. It shows that U.S. meat, particularly pork and chicken, is generally safe from a doping standpoint.
Still, some smart habits can go a long way:
- Be extra cautious when traveling abroad—especially in countries with looser food safety standards.
- Stick to domestic meat when preparing for major events.
- Favor pork or chicken over beef if you’re deep in competition season.
- If you’re in the testing pool, let USADA know if you’re traveling somewhere where contamination has been a past issue.
How This Connects to the Bigger Clean Sport Picture
For years, athletes have been told “you’re responsible for anything in your body.” That still holds true. But studies like this suggest anti-doping agencies are starting to take real-world factors, like diet and regional food differences, more seriously.
It’s also part of a broader push for smarter, more evidence-based enforcement, rather than just punishing athletes based on black-and-white test results.
The study was funded by the Partnership for Clean Competition, and researchers are already working on a follow-up that looks at imported meat sold in the U.S. That could be the next frontier in preventing false positives and supporting clean athletes.
So, if you’re a competitive runner in the U.S., you can probably enjoy your post-race burger without stress. The chances of it causing a doping issue are basically zero, based on what this study found.
But it’s a good reminder of just how fine the line is at the elite level. In a sport where a trace amount of a substance can derail a career, being educated and cautious is part of the job.
