Major League Baseball plans to question Dr. Neal ElAttrache, one of the most prominent sports physicians in the country, over reports that he supported UFC fighter Conor McGregor's use of performance-enhancing drugs. ElAttrache serves as the team physician for both the Los Angeles Rams and the Los Angeles Dodgers, placing two of the biggest franchises in professional sports at the center of a growing controversy.
Major League Baseball plans to question Dr. Neal ElAttrache, one of the most prominent sports physicians in the country, over reports that he supported UFC fighter Conor McGregor's use of performance-enhancing drugs. ElAttrache serves as the team physician for both the Los Angeles Rams and the Los Angeles Dodgers, placing two of the biggest franchises in professional sports at the center of a growing controversy.
The inquiry, first reported by Michael Schmidt of the New York Times and detailed by USA Today, centers on why ElAttrache allegedly backed McGregor's decision to use PEDs and whether similar support extended to any baseball players under his care.
MLB investigators have a two-part objective. First, they want to understand the nature and extent of ElAttrache's alleged support for McGregor's PED use. Second, and more critical for the league, they want to determine whether ElAttrache ever encouraged or facilitated PED use among baseball players.
For now, MLB has no indication that ElAttrache engaged in any such conduct involving baseball players. The investigation appears to be precautionary, driven by the seriousness of the allegation and by ElAttrache's direct access to players on one of the league's flagship rosters.
That distinction matters. There is a wide gap between a doctor allegedly supporting a combat-sports athlete's PED regimen and actively pushing banned substances on baseball players subject to the sport's joint drug agreement. MLB's inquiry will need to establish where ElAttrache falls on that spectrum.
ElAttrache is not a fringe figure. He holds dual physician roles with the Rams and the Dodgers, giving him a footprint across two major professional leagues. His patient list reportedly includes some of the biggest names in sports. That profile is precisely what makes the allegation so consequential.
When a team physician is accused of supporting PED use in any context, the integrity questions ripple outward. Every athlete who sat on his exam table becomes a potential subject of speculation, fair or not. That is the institutional problem MLB now faces.
The situation echoes the broader pattern of internal investigations triggered by misconduct allegations against trusted officials, as seen in a recent Washington probe that placed thirteen officers on leave. When someone with institutional authority faces credible scrutiny, the organization has little choice but to act quickly or risk looking complicit.
The NFL's response, or lack of one, stands out. The league did not respond to an email from the New York Times seeking comment on whether it plans to interview ElAttrache. That silence is notable given that ElAttrache serves as the Rams' physician and the NFL maintains its own strict policies on performance-enhancing substances.
MLB moved first. Whether the NFL follows suit or stays quiet will say something about how each league weighs reputational risk against the discomfort of investigating a high-profile medical partner.
The New York Post reported that MLB's decision to question ElAttrache followed the initial report linking him to McGregor's alleged PED use. The Post described the PED use in question as "therapeutic," though the precise meaning of that characterization in this context remains unclear.
Performance-enhancing drug enforcement is one of the few areas where professional sports leagues have built genuine credibility with the public over the past two decades. Baseball, in particular, spent years rebuilding trust after the steroid era of the late 1990s and early 2000s. The league's joint drug agreement now includes rigorous testing protocols and stiff penalties for violations.
A team physician allegedly supporting PED use, even outside baseball, threatens to undermine that framework. It raises the obvious question: if a doctor is comfortable endorsing banned substances for one athlete, what assurance does the league have that the same doctor drew a hard line with others?
MLB's investigators will need to determine exactly what ElAttrache knew, what he recommended, and whether any of that conduct touched baseball players. Those are factual questions that should have factual answers. Authorities have not publicly confirmed whether ElAttrache has cooperated with the inquiry or retained legal counsel in connection with it.
High-profile figures facing expanding investigations is a recurring theme in recent months. NBA guard Terry Rozier recently pleaded not guilty to new federal charges in a sports betting case that grew well beyond its original scope, illustrating how quickly these probes can escalate once investigators start pulling threads.
The immediate next step is the MLB interview itself. Investigators will presumably press ElAttrache on the timeline and nature of his involvement with McGregor, any communications about PEDs, and whether any baseball-related conversations about banned substances ever took place.
Investigators will also need to determine whether ElAttrache's alleged support for McGregor's PED use was a one-off opinion or part of a broader medical philosophy that could have influenced his treatment of other athletes. That question sits at the heart of the inquiry.
The Dodgers and Rams have not publicly commented on ElAttrache's status with their organizations. Whether either team takes any interim action, such as placing ElAttrache on leave or limiting his access to players pending the investigation's outcome, remains to be seen.
Large-scale institutional responses to misconduct allegations have become more common across sectors. Federal agents recently raided 22 Minnesota businesses in a sweeping fraud probe, demonstrating that investigators are increasingly willing to act aggressively when institutional integrity is at stake.
This case raises a question that extends beyond any single doctor or any single league. Professional sports organizations place enormous trust in their medical staffs. Team physicians control injury timelines, treatment protocols, and return-to-play decisions. They operate with a level of access and authority that few other non-coaching personnel enjoy.
That trust comes with a corresponding obligation. When it fractures, the damage is not limited to one relationship. It calls into question every medical decision the physician made and every clean bill of health he issued.
The public has seen what happens when new evidence surfaces in cases involving prominent figures. Initial reports often represent only the first layer of a deeper problem. Whether that pattern holds here depends entirely on what MLB's investigators find.
ElAttrache has not been charged with any crime. The MLB inquiry is an internal league matter, not a criminal investigation. But internal league investigations carry their own weight. A finding of wrongdoing could end a career, reshape two franchises' medical operations, and reopen questions about every player ElAttrache treated.
Professional sports spent years convincing the public that the PED era was over. If a team doctor was quietly supporting banned substances on the side, that promise starts to look a lot thinner than the leagues would like.
