Drug-testing around the corner for USATF masters nationals?
|
I hope this is a false alarm, but a pot of money is being dangled in front of U.S. masters track — and some of our leaders are reported to be thinking: Let’s look good to WMA and commence drug-testing at USATF masters nationals! I’m not kidding. For decades, leaders of American masters track have refused to waste precious money by drug-testing masters tracksters. For one, it’s expensive (between $100 and $400 a pop, depending on what you test for). And second, it’s merely a scare tactic, since no way could USATF test adult age-groupers the way they test elites and Olympic-class athletes. But the recent disclosure that the USATF Masters T&F Committee could get its hands on $50,000 through a grants process has led some to think we can use that money to catch all the geezer dopers in our ranks. This is wrong-headed and self-defeating.
First, such a program would catch far more athletes on doctor-prescribed, life-enhancing medications than actual cheaters.
And second, you might panic athletes and lead them to quit taking needed drugs.
Finally, some athletes might just quit the sport.
Is this what we want?Â
Think about it, guys, before accepting this Faustian bargain.
31 Responses
I would welcome drug testing in our sport.
If there is any “Faustian bargain” involved, it would be those who take illegal, performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) and do, indeed, enhance their performance, and pay a medical price down the road. It is obvious that athletes at all levels in all sports cheat by taking illegal drugs and lying about it, or we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
When I line up on the track or on the roads and compete, I would like to think that the athlete who finishes ahead of me did so on his/her own natural ability and training, not because he/she took some illegal substance that was available to me as well, but which I didn’t take because doing so would be cheating.
While I think it is crazy and self-defeating to take these drugs, I also think it is a bit crazy as well to get your kicks by running 12 or 25 laps around a 400 meter track in 90 plus degree heat, as I do several times each year. Medals DO mean something, and taking PEDs likely help get them, or we wouldn’t see so many cases of elite athletes getting caught EVEN WHEN THERE IS TESTING.
At the moment, there is NO chance that a Masters athlete who chooses to take these drugs for whatever reasons will get caught. In the same way that IRS audits and the threat of audits cut down on income tax cheating, random testing will cut down on PED use.
Speeding on the highway is stupid and dangerous. But without the threat of getting a ticket for this behavior, everyone would be whizzing by me at 90 mph. (Even with this threat, many whiz by me on the highway, but I think the speed limit, enforced, certainly has a deterrent effect .)
I would submit that a few random drug tests with enforcement would provide a disincentive to cheat by taking PEDs. Catch one cheater and punish him/her, and a lot of the cheating would stop. This would be GREAT for the sport in the long run (and in the sprints, jumps, and throws, as well).
As for “catching more athletes on doctor-prescribed, life-enhancing medications than actual cheaters,” I have no problem with a system that might permit certain banned drugs provided their use is DISCLOSED in advance. At least I would know that the competitor who beat me had this advantage. You cannot know a priori that such a program would catch more athletes who are not cheaters, but I would submit that this WOULD likely be the case if cheaters knew they would have some chance of being caught. At the moment, there is no chance of being caught.
Yes, some athletes might quit the sport.
Cheaters who can no longer get the advantage of cheating without the risk of being caught and humiliated, and those who feel they must cheat in order to have the performances they are used to might quit. I would welcome that. I don’t think anyone else would quit. Perhaps more would join, now that they know that the sport is doing something to stop cheaters and now these new participants feel that they can compete on a level playing field instead of losing every meet to those who can cheat with impunity and do so.
I compete at the national level occasionally in middle distance. While I don’t thinks PEDs are a large problem in my own competitions, I think drug testing (or the threat of it) would go a long way in diffusing any whispering that the reason I or those who are beating me might be doing so well at our advanced age is that we are cheating by using PEDs.
The only downside to me beyond the costs of instituting a testing program is the possibility of false positives. But I don’t see that as happening too often, if any. If drug testing is okay for elite athletes, then I don’t see why we resist this for us. And if we provide exemptions for “needed drugs,” that an athlete declares in advance, no one would “quit taking needed drugs.”
I support PED testing for Masters athletes. I also support drug testing for those who are involved in making decisions for USATF about records to determine whether they are on PDDs (Performance Detracting Drugs).:)
More drug-testing is welcome.Should be done even more.Hope there is even more testing at Sacramento Worlds 2011 than at Lahti Worlds this year
I finished 2nd in the WAVA decathlon 3 times, 3rd once and 4th once. In each competition this same German athlete won. I had a good friend who was a German who told me years ago that this athlete had a reputation as a “druggied”. Sure enough, he was found out and banned for life by the German federation. In the 1979 worlds a friend of mine who held the American record in the shot finished 4th and was beaten by 5 to 7 feet by 3 German athletes. I’m not picking on the German athletes. That is just the way it happened to be in these two instances.
For drug testing to work you have to do it like the NCAA does it. Test every first place finisher and another of the top four in every event at every nationals. For drug testing you can’t be politically correct and just test a few poor performing, skinny runners. You’ve got to test the sprinters, throwers and anyone whose performance puts them way ahead of the average.
St. Louis has a terrific Sr. Olympics end of May. I put olive oil on my legs and arms before races. It keeps the skin warm and supple. The Greeks definitely had something going. At a recent St. Louis meet, it was raining, athletes were under cover, one saw my small bottle of olive oil, and asked about it. I said, “It’s my urine sample.” (^_^). Jerry
I doubt this rises to the level of serious consideration.
We attract at most 1000 athletes to nationals, compete in a few more events, I believe, than real nationals, and we can have about fourteen age groups per sex per event. Do we matter that much?
Look, I’ll gladly submit to testing as a USATF medal means a lot to me, but when I get beat- which is always, thus far- it’s because I’m not as good as the other guy.
Perhaps it would make sense to specifically test anyone setting a World record in competition, particularly if it was a much better mark/time than that person had ever accomplished before.
There really is no need to be politically correct and test people who haven’t performed exceptionally well in their age group, particularly since the testing costs are prohibitive. If common sense is utilized, by the folks in charge of any drug testing program and they have wide latitude ( within reasonable parameters) it could accomplish it’s purpose which is to stop masters from even thinking about cheating.
As far as allowing masters to continue to take legitimate prescription medication that would otherwise be banned…I don’t have a problem with that issue as long as there is a strict evaluation effort to prove the medication is necessary for the master’s health.If they need it, so be it.
We all have been exposed to situations where masters competitors appear to have had
“extra help” in winning or setting records, and it is frustrating…even more so when one finishes second to the person in question.
I don’t believe it would be that difficult to implement a reasonable drug policy and program for masters.
I don’t think however, we need any USATF offer of any amount of cash with restrictions on us making requirements such as they have for the Open Competitors. We can implement a better policy than that, and not spend anywhere close to the vast amounts USATF gives to the Drug testing Organizations. The money we save in that effort could be used to enhance our own sports program.
As usual, Roger Pierce comes up with a fantastic observation. Thanks Rog. Maybe USATF should use the money to help our Maters elites participate in the Worlds. Once there, the WMA can test them at their cost if they desire.
The only way the tests will work is if they don’t tell us exactly ahead of time what they are testing for. The mysteriousness must be in place in order to stay ahead of the cheaters. In truth, I think that only about 5% of the Masters elite (those who usually medal) using any performance enhancing substance. But we need to root out that 5%. Some bubbles are going to get burst and I can’t wait to see the aftermath…in other words, substantial performance drop-offs from this year to next.
Roger has a good point. Anyone who sets new record either American or World should be tested. Just becasue someone wins a medal doesnt mean to waste money on a test for them. But if they break a record they should definetly be tested. This would be a good use of any extra money we may get and it would discourage cheaters too.
But we can’t stop at those who only set a record that day. The testing itself will be so infrequent that when a user shows up, there is a reasonable possibility they are tested…and there is no incentive for them to let up a little before the finish line or not attempt a record height if they are a jumper. By definition, cheaters are deceptive so like I say, they need to get surprised….unless we start to do random testing.
It’s a much better idea to take into consideration those people who seem to improve at an unlikely rate from the 40’s to their 50’s for example. Case in point….Barry Bonds in baseball. A perfect example of what I am talking about. In baseball, a player peaks out between 28-32 yrs old. At 36-40, Bonds was just getting started (at drugs) and he obliterated everything he did ten years younger. That’s why we need to consider yearly performance improvements as a criteria to test.
Roger and others have some very good points. It’s no fun to train and train and get beaten by a cheater. Winners should be prepared. Believe it or not, there are those for whom this is the only thing they have going in their life.
I/we have no problem with more testing but if the goal is to look better to WMA, why don’t we get our records situation cleaned up so worthy athletes can actually get credit for what they did. Bubba
I think we should test on records and winners or 1-2 at nationals. Just randomly pick a certain number of events instead of all to keep the cost down. In terms of those athletes improving from their 40’s to their 50’s I plan on getting better and wont mind being first in line.
Testing under the current WADA protocols should not be acceptable at any level because the current protocols reverse the burden of proof. Self-incrimination is mandatory, and the athlete is then considered guilty until proven innocent. The appeals process is a joke. No sport at any level should subscribe to this sort of draconian protocol. Human rights must always trump administrative convenience.
Quick Silver
Hong Kong
The drugs exemption set-up with Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUEs) – “I am requesting approval to use a Substance or Method from the WADA Prohibited List” – is basically flawed. I will never understand how you can expressly permit people taking prohibited performance-enhancing drugs to compete against people not taking drugs. If someone has a health condition and needs drugs that are prohibited as performance enhancing, then that person should not be allowed to compete. That person is too ill for athletics. Simple as that. Dismantle the drugs exemption set-up and TUEs.
As to testing – athletes are people with rights too. What they do in their free time is up to them. Only at competitions do people – particularly masters – become athletes. So abolish in-between competition drug testing. It is an infringement of our civil liberties. Use the resources to drug test athletes at competitions as much as you like and can afford. But don’t let anyone come with a TUE as an excuse – TUEs are ridiculous.
Great to see your name back on the board, Aaron (Thigpen). Maybe in a few years you will be a superstar in M50, just as you have been in M40.
I sincerely hope that some day in the future you will be credited with the 10.60 (FAT, wind legal) that you ran on April 15, 2007, in the 100 meters at the Mt. San Antonio College (Mt. SAC) Relays. It would be nice to have that record shown in the M40 slot on usatf.org. You deserve the recognition; after all, you ran the time, and in a big meet, no less.
I agree with the last comment. Because all it would take is a doctor to “prescribe it” to you, in order to be insulated from the penalties of getting caught. There are obviously doctors who will do this for you, so it just becomes another game. You have to ban any performance that may have been assisted by drugs that enhance performance.
Some testing at big US-meets is a good idea. At world championships it is done, at European championships and the Germans do it too. So the addition of the US would be great. (The US athletes, non masters, don’t have a very good reputation.)
It are not much tests, hopefully just enough to let the cheaters reconsider their cheating.
Now it is done at random, as far as I know, but most cheaters are male throwers. Maybe some more ‘random’ tests at them?
The idea of testing world record breakers is a good idea, but in practice maybe very complicated. Where to find an opportunity to be tested within 24 hours?
An d although the reversed burden of proof is a bad thing, I would be ready to be tested when it happens that I break a world record. (Beware next year.)
I have heard of physicians in another state who prescribe hormone replacement for those with off the scale lower levels. I understand that he monitors monthly to keep the athlete at the median level for the average person in his age group. His objective is “not to offer an advantage but rather to put the person on a level playing field instead of penalizing him for clinically lower levels”.
My business is to work with physicians and physical therapists (business side contracting) and a therapist in this state had asked me if I had ever heard of this practice. Of course I had not and still know nothing about it other than what this guy told me. But I’m assuming that it could be a fairly common practice for someone with a deficiency to be brought up to average readings and never be noticed even if tested. Food for thought. Bubba
BTW – at the World Masters Games in Sydney, medal winners had to exit the field through drug testing where they chose people at random to test. The event results were turned in and then you were either selected or not. If anyone in your group was selected then you all waited to go to the awards stand.
As a follow up to my own post, I don’t know this physician/group but I do know they work with athletes in another sport, not ours. I also know that they only offer this service through health insurance. I’m told that their reasoning is that if the blood tests don’t clinically indicate the need, they will not prescribe. If it does then insurance will pay so they feel that is the only ethical way to assist.
I asked some of the physicians I know well and they had not heard of this either. They only see what we all see; ads in the paper where you pay cash for some program that promises to raise your levels to where you were in your 20s.
I think the difference is one group will not test positive and because they are kept at an average reading and the other group will bury the needle over the limit. So I’m doubting the first group is setting any records.
When you say, “hormone replacement”, to me that sounds like injecting synthetic drugs, which have markers that drug tests test for. You are complicating the issue by saying men are just taking it so they can recoup the levels that had in the 20’s. The reasons don’t matter, that’s the point. Cheaters would try anything to talk their way out of doing synthetics. But the tests are either positive (you take it) or negative (you didn’t). There is no grey area.
Bubba. Thanks. You put your finger on something important. I also understand the logic – and the humanity – behind using drugs to bring people up to ‘average levels.’ But permitting performance-enhancing drugs to enable people to compete in athletics goes beyond the humane. It is also counter to the basic ethos of athletics. And it is unfair on other competitors. It is crazy and I simply do not understand how we have got here. Abolish the TUE set-up now – or tell me why not.
‘Normal levels’? Ageing is that things go down, in every indiviual in another pace. Every athlete will experience periods with accelerated ageing, so be it.
Yes Weia, I know. You are right. But what conclusion do you draw? Are you in favour of TUEs, or not?
Don’t shoot the messenger. I have no idea how the program works nor do I care.
FYI – out of curiosity I Googled normal levels by age and got this –
http://www.mens-hormonal-health.com/normal-testosterone-levels-in-men.html
My personal view: some TUE’s are OK some not. Diuretics for example are forbidden because they are used to mask anaboles, but when older people use diuretics for their proper use, no problem, give them a TUE.
But anaboles? When you use them do not compete. The love for the sport can be canalised in training kids or whatever.
(And I do not shot messengers!)
Back to the issue. Your arguments do not make much sense, Ken. If you take your sport and your health serious, you know what to do. There are written rules for drug testing procedures, athlete’s rights, athlete’s responsibilities… this is not rocket science. And why should an educated athlete panic and stop taking life enhancing drugs? Just ask the shear unbelievable number of Major League Baseball players who are using aerosolized steroids for asthma treatment. If you don’t want to disclose your hourly use of medical marijuana, quit the sport. I might miss your big smile but so be it.
Most bloggers suggest we should test the medal winners and nobody else. Another contributor mentions a few Germans cheaters who luckily got caught. Well I don’t see a need to test the same old medal winners over and over again. It does not make much sense to test one of our true champions, even less so if his/her results over many years show a natural decline along the statistic lines of all aging athletes. In reality, we meet the same folks at the same meets at the same time of the year over a period of many years. We closely watch our competitors, don’t we? If a dude runs the 100 in 12.6 at age 50 and in 11.53 at age 55 and suddenly looks like a Maserati instead of a Volkswagen, we notice it and it is high time to get out the test kit. Most, if not all athletes in Germany got caught because of suspicious results, behavior and physical changes. Is this profiling? Sure, why not. Even better, a clean athlete will welcome the opportunity to demonstrate that he/she is clean to put rumors to rest and restore reputations. Drug testing is a good thing. Include the threat to test anybody, any time, anywhere.
Question to “Anonymous” who was beaten by the German Decathlete, who was banned for life: are we talking about Werner Schallau?
And why anonymous?
Another case of foot in mouth.
OK!!
Leave a Reply