MESO-Rx

Oregon High School Mock Trial Competition Demonizes Anabolic Steroids

Oregon High School Mock Trial Competition demonizes anabolic steroids

Anabolic steroids are demonized in case materials used for the 23rd Annual Oregon High School Mock Trial Competition on March 13-14, 2009. The competition is intended to enhance proficiency in “critical thinking skills such as analyzing and reasoning.” However, high students participating in the mock trial contest were not allowed to critically and honestly examine anabolic steroids and their side effects. Challenging the inaccurate steroid information within the case materials was prohibited. The goal of the mock trial was to argue the assignment of fault in the fictitious death of Jordan Simon. Was the defendant responsible for Jordan’s death due to negligence or misconduct? Or was the deceased responsible for voluntarily assuming the risks? The assignment of fault may be in dispute, but one thing was certain – steroids caused Jordan Simon’s death.

The wrongful death case of Simon v. Swift and Eastside High School involves a high school track sprinter who died from a heart attack presumably caused by an anabolic steroid overdose. Student mock trial participants are told that erythropoeitin (EPO) is an anabolic steroid in the case materials. This is false. But the students are not permitted to question this false assumption by calling for information outside the scope of the case materials. EPO is repeatedly identified, albeit erroneously, as an anabolic steroid throughout the case material, exhibits, and expert testimony.

Participants are told that an anabolic steroid overdose can cause heart attacks. Anabolic steroids can NOT cause an acute fatal overdose. There is no direct association between anabolic steroids and heart attacks. While long-term abuse of anabolic steroids can result in serious adverse cardiovascular consequences, an isolated cycle of anabolic steroids is unlikely to cause anything other than transient changes in cardiovascular indicators, and certainly not a heart attack. Yet, the case materials in Simon v. Swift and Eastside High School suggest that anabolic steroids caused the heart attack. The autopsy report lists the cause of death as “heart attack due to accidental drug overdose” noting extremely elevated post-mortem levels of serum erythropoeitin (EPO). EPO has been directly associated with heart attacks in competitive athletes (particularly cyclists). Steroid have not.

Jordan Simon was a 17-year old senior in high school who unexpectedly died of a heart attack. Jordan began running as a youngster, and had real promise. Jordan joined Eastside High School’s track team as a freshman, and quickly developed into a star sprinter. At the time of Jordan’s death, Jordan was competing for a track scholarship to a Division I university.

The autopsy revealed that Jordan’s bloodstream contained the steroid Erythropoietin. EPO is used medically to treat certain forms of anemia. Athletes use EPO to improve performance, because it increases the oxygen carrying capacity of blood. EPO also increases the blood viscosity, which can cause the blood to sludge and clog capillaries, resulting in a heart attack.

Kelly Simon, Jordan’s surviving parent, has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Eastside High School and Terry Swift, the track coach. Specifically, Kelly claims that Terry and the school’s athletic department: (i) encouraged Jordan to use steroids; and (ii) should have known that Jordan was using steroids and taken steps to stop Jordan’s steroid use. Terry and Eastside deny Kelly’s claims, and contend that: (i) Jordan assumed the risk of using steroids; and (ii) Kelly was comparatively negligent in not (a) discovering that Jordan was using steroids, and (b) taking steps to stop Jordan’s steroid use. This is a bifurcated trial on the issue of liability only; damages are not at issue.

The plaintiff’s witnesses are: (i) Kelly Simon, Jordan’s surviving parent; (ii) Morgan Pearce, another student on the track team and Jordan’s close friend; and (iii) Lynn Roper, Ph.D., an expert on the effects of steroid abuse and the use of steroids by young athletes. The defendants’ witnesses are: (i) Terry Swift, Eastside’s track coach; (ii) Jamie Hagar, Ed.D, Eastside’s assistant principal and athletic director; and (iii) Aubrey Brady, a consultant to coaches and athletic departments.

Lynn Roper, PhD., a fictitious scientific expert on performance-enhancing drugs and anabolic steroids, testified on behalf of the plaintiff; the plaintiff’s witness testified that steroid abuse caused Jordan Swift’s death and ignorantly assumed erythropoeitin was an anabolic steroids. Lynn Roper testified that “Jordan was abusing steroids”, that there was “clear evidence of steroid abuse”, and that “Jordan’s use of steroids… ultimately caused Jordan’s death.” The case materials provided no information to contradict the Roper’s misstatements of fact about EPO being classified as an anabolic steroid thereby leaving assertions about steroids causing Jordan Simon unchallenged; the defendant did not have an expert witness to rebute this erroneous assertion.

Roper testified that Winstrol (stanozolol) caused her son to have a heart attack. Roper’s doctoral dissertation at Oregon State University focused on her son’s death and was entitled “Juice Isn’t Just for Breakfast Anymore: The Use of Anabolic Steroids by Amateur Athletes.”

The unsupported assertions were given credence by Roper’s expert qualifications from prestigious academic institutions and post-doctoral employment. The fictitious Roper had been employed as an exercise physiology researcher at the Human Performance Laboratory in the Department of Kinesiology and Health Education in the College of Education at the University of Texas at Austin and as the executive director of the Midwest Institute for Exercise Physiology in Michigan.

High school students competing in the Oregon High School Mock Trial Competition were not allowed to dispute the “fact pattern which contains statement of fact, witness statements, exhibits, etc.” Student attorneys were not allowed to “ask questions calling for information outside the scope of the case materials or requesting unfair extrapolations” nor “raise any new facts.” In other, participants must accept that (1) erythropoeitin is an anabolic steroid; and (2) anabolic steroids cause heart attacks due to accidental drug overdose. Apparently, critical thinking is encouraged as long as it does not challenge the popular anti-steroid propaganda in contemporary society.

Who should be given credit for disseminating misinformation and propaganda regarding anabolic steroids? The 23rd Annual Oregon High School Mock Trial Competition was sponsored by Classroom Law Project and co-sponsored by the Oregon State Bar, Lewis & Clark Law School, and the Oregon Law Foundation. The case materials were based on a related case created by the Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education and the Young Lawyers of Arizona and vetted in mock high school trials in Arizona and Arkansas. Steroid misinformation and steroid hysteria does not appear to concern any of the legal organizations sponsoring the high school mock trial competition.

Photo credit: Pete Erickson / The Bulletin 

  • Dr. Barry Leshowitz
    I find your commentary on the mock jury trial involving steroids accurate and on point. What is not entirely clear is the basis of your conclusion that there is no medical evidence linking steroid use to death or other serious adverse events. I would be interested in knowing how you reached your conclusions about the effects of steroids.
  • Dr. Leshowitz,

    Thank you very much for your feedback and comments.

    I can not deny that there is a relationship between anabolic steroids and some serious adverse events. I take exception to statements asserting that the relationship is direct and causal. Specifically, I am appalled that the assertion that an acute anabolic steroid "overdose" can lead to death.

    For example, an isolated cycle is unlikely to cause heart disease and/or fatal cardiovascular event. However, anabolic steroids, especially medically unsupervised steroid use, are known to have an adverse effect on cardiovascular indicators in many individuals. These are practically always transient and return to normal upon cessation.

    Unfortunately, there are some individuals who are on extreme supraphysiological dosages of various synthetic steroids in addition to testosterone. A lifetime of extreme steroid abuse could have serious consequences even though there is no direct evidence. I think that is a reasonable conclusion.

    More importantly, I think a distinction needs to be made between use and abuse of anabolic steroids, even when indicated for improvement of muscle and body composition. It is my opinion that anabolic steroids can be used safely in moderate, periodic dosages when under knowledgeable medical supervision for the body composition enhancement.

    Just like any other drug, anabolic steroids can be used to cause harm if abused and used irresponsibly. But judicious use of androgens hold potential for many therapeutic indications beyond what has been formally approved by the FDA, including therapeutic effects arising from improvements in body composition.

    Please stay in touch. I think it is critical to have knowledgeable and open-minded involvement from the medical community in the anabolic steroid debate. Otherwise, the therapeutic potential of androgens in medicine could be lost for another decade.
  • anonymousgrantstudent
    Wow.

    I'm actually on the Grant Mock Trials team, and we spent all our time laughing about how silly the case was because of this very point. NOT, however, writing hate articles that effectively demonize the entire Mock Trials system. No one took anything about steroids away from the case. What we learned was limited to basic arguing tactics, rather than that steroids can kill folk.

    No one of any intelligence thought that EPO was an anabolic steroid, and Mock Trials teams are composed mainly of intelligent people. The ones that attempt to participate and are below average intelligence are weeded out early on. As such, no one CARED what the case said about EPO.
  • The mock trial competitions are awesome for students. The criticism is not of the competition and the skills and tactics imparted to participants. It is aimed at disappointing lack of fact-checking of case materials by the organizers of the mock trials.

    I would expect more from the prestigious legal firms sponsoring such competitions.
  • anonymousgrantstudent
    The point of the competition isn't to learn the ins and outs of medicine, the point is to learn how to debate. As such, the accuracy of any statements inside a case doesn't have to be perfect, just as the laws themselves don't have to be perfect.
  • Point well-taken. It just seems odd that the veracity of statements within this context are not subject to debate as well.

    I hope my point about the perpetuation of steroid hysteria and misinformation is not lost.
blog comments powered by Disqus