I’m fundamentally against the use of state or federal taxpayer funds to finance drug testing for private sports leagues or to finance steroid testing for high school athletes. I am not necessarily against the idea of drug testing for high school athletes. But I am against the type of “feel-good” drug-testing policies that do little to eliminate the use of performance enhancing drugs by teenage athletes.
The Texas University Interscholastic League (UIL) selected the National Center for Drug Free Sport as the private company to administer the UIL Anabolic Steroid Testing Program mandated by Texas State Senate Bill 8. Texas is paying Drug Free Sport $5.6 million to administer steroid tests 40,000-50,000 high school athletes. According the UIL website:
The UIL has been directed to test a statistically significant number of student-athletes in grades 9-12 at approximately 30% of UIL member high schools. The selection process of schools and student-athletes will be random, and approximately 40,000-50,000 student athletes will be tested for anabolic steroids between this spring and the end of the 2008-09 school year.
UIL Assistant Director and Director of Athletics Charles Breithaupt believes Texas massive testing program should be a model for other states!
We look forward to working closely with Drug Free Sport in implementing a first-class steroid testing program that we feel will be a model for other states and organizations to follow.
Why don’t I think this will be effective?
(1) An average of only 3% of student-athletes will be tested each academic year. In 2006-2007 school year, 764,581 students participated in athletics which would be subject to steroid testing. While it may be statistically significant, will it significantly deter or reduce steroid use.
(2) Student-athletes in grades 9-12 are affected “regardless of sport, gender or participation level.” Performance enhancing drug use does not occur equally in all sports, all grades, all genders, and all levels. The likelihood of anabolic steroid use is overwhelmingly more likely in male, varsity level football and baseball. I’m sure there is steroid use by teenage girls and in sports Team Tennis, Cross Country, Volleyball, Swimming & Diving, Basketball, Soccer, Tennis, Golf, Track & Field, Softball. But by diluting the pool subject to testing to include both genders, all sports and freshman, junior varsity, and varsity athletes, it decreases the likelihood that male varsity football and baseball players will be tested, doing little to deter steroid use on the teams where it is most likely to occur.
(3) Less than 400 of the 1300 Texas high schools will be subject to steroid testing. In other words, 900 high schools or 70% of high school athletes will not be subject at all to random testing for anabolic steroids. It seems probable that information about schools that are tested and schools that are not tested will be readily disseminated.
(4) UIL officials are incompetent; they do not understand the concept of “surprise testing.” UIL spokeswoman Kim Rogers told the media:
In keeping with the element of surprise and random nature of the testing program, we are not announcing a starting date. If we did, then a student could know when to cycle off steroids or when to begin a new cycle.
Smart. Logical. But practically in the same breath, she revealed that steroid testing would begin:
…within the coming weeks.
And Patti Ohlendorf, vice president of legal affairs at the University of Texas, told the media that testing would begin in February. The media did their job and reported in newspapers across the state and across the country that testing would begin in a matter of days, weeks, and or in February, effectively telling high school athletes in Texas to “cycle off steroids” right now just in case.
(5) UIL is only testing for “anabolic steroids.” There is no drug testing program for amphetamines, ephedrine, and/or other stimulants, growth hormone, peptides, or other performance-enhancing drugs.
(6) It appears steroid testing will only occur during the academic school year. In other words, no testing in summer off-season.
Basically, the probabilities that this steroid testing program will be effective are low. This has nothing to do with the efficacy of the tests or the Center for Drug Free Sports (which I’m sure will competently administer the program and outlined in their contract).
At least it is better than New Jersey’s steroid testing program for high school athletes. New Jersey only tests athletes whose teams make it to “post-season” competition. Steroid tests are administered randomly to “athletes who have qualified for team or individual state championships.”
Talk about advance notice on when to cycle off anabolic steroids! And to think New Jersey wanted their steroid testing program to be a “model” for the country.
Steroid use by teenagers is a problem. But simply throwing money at the steroid problem will not fix it.
A recent study revealed approximately 25% of popular dietary supplements in the U.S. were contaminated with low levels of steroids; 11% of supplements were contaminated with stimulants, most commonly ephedrine. These steroidal and stimulant ingredients were not declared on the product label.
The study was done by Informed Choice, a nonprofit coalition of dietary supplements, and the analysis was conducted by the British company, HFL, to investigate levels of steroid and stimulant contamination in popular supplements available on the US market. The names of the supplements that were tested were not identified. This is most likely out of fear of legal action against them by any company should it be named in the study results.
Of course, the results shocked Travis Tygart, the CEO of the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA). In recent years, the USADA has asserted, even in the absence of any hard data, that contamination of dietary supplements is not a problem for drug-tested athletes. He further claimed that no American athletes has tested positive for steroids due to contaminated supplements since 2004. He has called for Informed Choice to publish the names of the implicated supplement company so the “illegal activity” can be stopped.
Of course, such assertions have been made in the self-interest of the USADA rather than out of concern for athletes. The presence of undeclared banned substances in dietary supplements could lead the way for significant doubt about the guilt of athletes who fail drug tests, thereby making the job of the US Anti-Doping Agency significantly more difficult.
The present study is only further evidence of the quality control problems in the dietary supplement industry and the risks for competitive athletes subject to doping tests. In recent years, at least one athletes has successfully sued a supplement manufacturer. The IOC conducted a similar study between 2000 and 2002 that revealed 15% of dietary supplements purchased in various countries contained undeclared steroid and/or prohormone ingredients.
There are several explanations for the high incidence of steroids and stimulants found in sports supplements:
- Intentional contamination. There have been allegations that some supplement companies may have added some undeclared ingredients, usually by the addition of a stimulant, so that the consumer actually “feels” that the product is working. The overall success of the sports nutrition supplement industry is due to the “placebo effect” – if the consumer “feels” something from the supplement, they think it is working. If they think it is working, it may actually have benefit (placebo) and they will continue to buy the product.
- Cross-contamination. Many factories manufacturer various different categories of supplements in the same facility. For example, ephedrine products may be processed on the same equipment as vitamin and mineral products; hormonal products may be processed on same line as protein powders. If the equipment is not cleaned properly, contamination could result.
- Contaminated raw material. Supplement manufacturers often import raw materials from Asia, India and Eastern Europe. This could be contaminated with impurities.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hfl-supplement-research-report.pdf
