Duhon says he accepted drug-testing, but not unprofessionalism
In response to an email query, B.J. Duhon wrote me today with this eye-opener: āWell, to make a long story short, I did not refuse [a drug test at Sacramento worlds]. I took the test, but they said I did not give enough of a sample. But the way the test was conducted, very unprofessionally, I refused to give more of a sample until it was handled in a more professional manner. I said I would retake it but was refused. I work in law enforcement (probation). And I know how urine tests are supposed to be conducted. I wrote about the whole incident to the [National Masters News] newspaper. I can run in all-comers meets, but nothing under masters.ā This changes things. Big time. B.J. has a case for appeal. The proper venue for this might be the international Court of Arbitration for Sport. This outfit doesnāt put up with unprofessional crap.
17 Responses
Thanks, Ken, for following up on this case. Certainly makes me want to know more. This thing (drug testing of men and women aged 30 to 100 or so) sure has a lot of variables, doesn’t it?
Will be looking forward to the reactions of other readers (I won’t give mine at this point because I don’t know enough).
I appreciate BJ sharing his side of the story.
Hopefully only what is fair will prevail in situations such as this. I would imagine that BJ has passed many of these tests for his work. And I would imagine these tests could confirm what the truth is in this matter.
Me personally . .
I have had to take many of these tests for work, and have been asked to re-take tests when the lab doesn’t have enough of a sample, or loses a sample. Thankfully I have passed ever test I have taken.
Whatever. The man might have a case, might not. There is a precedent and I mentioned it in an earlier blog. āWorld Championā is asked for a test, creates holy hell for hours, gives the samples, gets tested, test is positive, champ asks to re-measure samples, measurement is a cm3 short, test is invalid, champ remains World Champion, nobody can even mention his name. One fact was obvious to everybody involved, the champ knew what he was doing. Looks like this time the testers also knew what they were doing. Whatever.
Sorry, I should stick with the issue. It is still a good idea, Ken. The CAS even provides you a lawyer if you don’t bring your own. The hearings are public and the whole wonderful story unfolds for all of us to read. Go ahead Mr. Duhon, let’s justice prevail!
B.J., you’re a Probation Officer? you wanted to control how the test was done? I’m pretty sure many of your “clients” make the same complaints you do. Their options: go to jail or fill the cup.
Me, nothing to hide so I’d take option B. If I didn’t like the way the test was handled, I’d complain AFTER I proved I wasn’t trying to cover something up.
Sometimes pride get in the way at foolish times.
Oh you americans.You make everything so complicated.You grab on to anything to get away from everything.
Interesting.
Problems with the testing are obviously problems for potentially anybody, including the completely drug-free, as I stated on another thread:
“Iām lucky personally because I donāt have to worry about any of thisāsave for a botched testāas Iām totally drug-free.”
What is important in the testing protocol is not “professionalism”, but adherence to the established and applicable rules.
The immediately relevant agency is the USADA, which is the National Anti-Doping Organization of the USA, as contemplated in the WADA International Standards for Testing and the World Anti-Doping Code. Please don’t ask me to explain how and to what extent it has become the law of the land in the USA.
The USADA testing protocol, which can be found here:
http://www.usada.org/files/pdfs/usada-protocol.pdf
,states in paragraph 7 that USADA sample collection protocol will conform to the standards set forth in the WADA International Standard for Testing, which can be found here:
http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/World_Anti-Doping_Program/WADP-IS-Testing/WADA_Int.Standard_Testing_2009_EN.pdf
in case anybody was wondering.
Deficiencies in testing protocol in a test performed in the USA, especially if they potentially violate US constitutional protections, can be very interesting fodder for a legal challenge.
Mr. Duhon, Did you really have to make the testing procedure that difficult for yourself? The only way I can think of that the testers are in the wrong are in a few areas.#1 If when upon contact by the officials that you were to be tested you asked to drink fluids prior to the sample while staying in their presence the entire time to give a proper sample size due to dehydration and they refused, then gave them a small sample because of it, asking again to drink fluids while waiting in their presence to hydrate and give a proper sample and they refused, then saying you refused to test. #2 They somehow where not sealing samples properly immediatley after the test to prevent tampering or contamination.#3 This one is questionable but I’m adding it…You were not allowed to wash your hands or use a sanitary wipe to not possibly contaminate the sample through transfer of urine. Reason #2 shouldn’t have effected you because you never got to that point in testing (giving a proper sample size), so how would you know if they were not handling your sample properly. Being frustrated with the testers is one thing, not following procedure is another and being a Probation Officer, you should know better. You could have hydrated , given the proper sample, then filed a formal complaint with the appropriate people at the meet and afterwards in phone calls, e-mails and letters, then have Ken Stone write a story about the events that occured and by God, we’d all know about it and be in your corner 100%. You’re also pretty vague in what testing officials did that was so disrespectful for you to threaten them in not giving another sample, which signals a red flag for some, if not most. Unless they physically assaulted you, or they were somehow physically sexually inapropriete, which I doubt because as you state , you were willing to give another sample at some point after and you didn’t call police to file charges if the problem was that serious. This kind of sounds a bit suspect. I’m not insinuating you had/or have something to hide, but by your own actions you stopped the testing process of proving your drug free status. Like #5 stated, ” …you wanted to control how the test was done? Iām pretty sure many of your āclientsā make the same complaints you do. Their options: go to jail or fill the cup. Me, nothing to hide so Iād take option B. If I didnāt like the way the test was handled, Iād complain AFTER I proved I wasnāt trying to cover something up. Sometimes pride get in the way at foolish times.” Obviously you are not a criminal and jail is not an obtion as #5 states in his reply, but there are concequences for our actions in life by not following the rules in life and you of all people should know that. So I go back to my opening statement, “Did you really have to make the testing procedure that difficult for yourself?” and now that you’ve had time to reflect, was it all worth it? At least this a learning experience for all to see in what NOT to do when dealing with Drug Testing officials at meets. Good luck in your appeal Mr. Duhon.
I do know through my training partner (currently on a cruise), a retired police lieutenant for 30+ years, that law enforcement is randomly tested and steroids are part of that battery. Food for thought since BJ is in law enforcement and involved in drug testing.
I also know it took Ben Johnson almost three beers to be able to produce enough of a sample because of ānatural dehydrationā of the competition day and event. Yes ā they offered beer in the drug testing area at Seoul.
Mr. Sparks, Good points. Then more the reason to give the sample and be over with it and be found clean, unless since he’s a Probation officer, he is not tested the same as actual Police officers. I have a friend who is a probation officer here in Colorado and they work for a private company, in coordination with the Government. So all policies don’t all crossover to the private company. As for Ben Johnson, that’s erelevant becasue he was a PED user. Anyone can say they can’t sample a test because they’re dehydrated and be not truthful about it, or cut off their stream in the middle of a sample and say they can’t produce anymore just to throw a wrench in the testing procedure, though all of it is useless because one way or another , you either produce a sample, and pass or fail, or don’t and fail. This almost reminds me of when a Drunk driver is pulled over and refuses to give a breath sample in the hopes that they are found innocent of it in a court trial. So Again, same thing applies in that. Is hiring an attorney for thousands of dollars, having your license taken away, the stress of it all and possibly losing your case worth it, just becasue you didn’t want to blow into a tube for 15 seconds if you had nothing to hide??
I’m with you 100% Milton. Give the sample and then file a complaint.
I’m with Milton & Bubba here
you prove your innocence first
you then complain after so it carries more weight.
If you complain & protest before establishing your innocence it merely looks like you are guilty.
and Bubba you might be interested to know some drug tests supposedly can be beat by ingesting a large amount of water.
Professional cyclists commonly drink a liter of water prior to testing specifically for this purpose.
One cyclist (who’s name escapes me at present) claimed to have gotten lazy and neglected to drink his liter of water and got caught for EPO. He confessed that he had beat the test many times using that method and he knew plenty of other cyclist who did the same.
Maybe Ben Johnson was drinking not to rehydrate but hoping to beat the test…
Colorado Springs, Colo.
October 27, 2011
USADA announced today that Frederic Kieser of Cleveland, OH, an athlete in the sport of track and field, has tested positive for a prohibited substance and accepted a suspension for his doping offense.
Kieser, 40, tested positive for methylhexaneamine, a stimulant, as a result of a sample collected at the USA Masters Track & Field Championships, in Berea, OH on July 28, 2011. Stimulants are prohibited under the USADA Protocol for Olympic and Paralympic Movement Testing and the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) anti-doping rules, both of which have adopted the World Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Agency Prohibited List. Methylhexaneamine is classified as a Specified Substance, and therefore the presence of that substance in an athleteās sample can result in a reduced sanction.
Kieser accepted an eight-month period of ineligibility, which began on September 22, 2011, the day he voluntarily withdrew from scheduled competitions pending the resolution of this matter. As a result of the sanction, Kieser is also disqualified from all results obtained during the USA Masters Track & Field Championships, which began on July 28, 2011, as well as any other competitive results obtained subsequent to July 28, 2011, including forfeiture of any medals, points, and prizes.
I was tested in Sacramento upon finishing my 800m finals. I won’t say that is was a great experience, but the staff that I worked with was very professional and meticulous as I took the better part of an hour to complete the process. I departed with full confidence in the process.
I have wanted to run in the same race with BJ.Duhon for the last 3 years does any one know how this effects the rankings or does nothing change sorry to hear any M50 runners in my event going out like this I for one want to see all top M50 hurdlers in the same track meet,when BJ gets back ill be in M55 Hurdles,ken E PLEASE keep it clean,we got work TO do 2012.lol
Keith,
Any banned athlete will have their results removed from the rankings as of the banās effective date.
thanks john S
Leave a Reply