Unless We Fight for It, Nothing Will Ever Change" – Lizzy Banks Issues Emotional Plea for Reform in Contamination-Related Anti-Doping Cases

Former professional cyclist Lizzy Banks has made an impassioned public call for sweeping changes in how contamination cases are handled by anti-doping authorities, following the conclusion of her two-year battle to clear her name—a fight she ultimately lost.

From Giro Stage Wins to Courtroom Battles

Banks, 34, who previously rode for EF Education and twice claimed stage victories at the Giro d’Italia Women, tested positive in July 2023 for trace amounts of the banned diuretic Chlortalidone. While the UK Anti-Doping Agency (UKAD) initially cleared her—accepting her explanation that the substance entered her system through contamination—this was not the end of her ordeal.

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed the UKAD decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), and after a prolonged process, succeeded in overturning it. Banks was handed a backdated two-year suspension, ending on June 22, 2025.

An Exhausting Ordeal in Her Own Words

In a 13,000-word document released Tuesday, Banks revealed the full extent of her legal struggle, which she had first partially shared in May 2024 while the case was ongoing. She described the emotional toll as devastating—admitting it had left her battling suicidal thoughts—and said she now feels “empty.”

“I desperately want and need to move on from this now, to put this torrid chapter to bed, forever,” she wrote. “To try to rebuild my health and career, to be able to work again and to rediscover the person I used to be before this process sucked the life and happiness from me.”

She accused WADA of prolonging the process unnecessarily, leaving her unable to resume a normal life.

"They Crush Us" – A Call for Accountability

Banks questioned whether continuing the fight was worth the emotional cost but insisted the system must change:

“I am so empty right now that I barely know what I feel anymore. But this is what they do to people like me. They crush us. They expect that we will just walk away and they will never have any consequences. But there must be consequences.”

She appealed directly to UKAD, British Cycling, and other national anti-doping bodies in France, Germany, and the United States to unite in pressing for reform.

“The rules and the system are simply not good enough and as it stands are not fit for purpose. Unless we fight for it, nothing will ever change. I have done my bit and now it is your turn.”

The Case: From Asthma Tablet to CAS Ruling

Banks successfully convinced UKAD that her positive test likely resulted from a contaminated asthma tablet, supported by hair tests showing no trace of Chlortalidone before or after the single positive sample.

However, WADA—citing concerns about consistency in contamination rulings—challenged the UKAD decision. The CAS panel eventually ruled that Banks had not sufficiently proven the source of contamination under the strict liability principle, and therefore upheld a two-year sanction.

WADA’s Response

In a statement to Cycling Weekly, WADA said:

“In no way did WADA make light of Ms. Banks’ case. WADA diligently prosecuted the appeal based on the facts and in compliance with the rules, with the assistance of external counsel, and was ultimately successful before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).”

The agency added that the appeal was pursued because it believed the World Anti-Doping Code had not been correctly applied initially.

“Speaking generally, the principle of strict liability is crucially important to uphold fairness in sport. Without it the anti-doping system would be inoperative. As the CAS panel observed in its final decision, there is a duty to apply the rules, which were enacted to safeguard the important principle of ensuring a level playing field and fairness to all athletes.”

A Voice for Reform

While her suspension has now ended, Banks says her fight has become about more than her own career—it’s about preventing others from enduring similar drawn-out legal and emotional suffering in cases of unintentional contamination.

Her message is direct: the rules must be rewritten to account for the complexities of contamination, and the system must protect—not destroy—the athletes caught in its net.