by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright December 7, 2004
All Rights Reserved.

urning up the heat Major League Baseball, Congress threatened to take action against the Players' Assn. unless they adopted tough new rules on “performance- enhancing” drugs. Recent disclosures about steroid use by home run king Barry Bonds and New York Yankee slugger Jason Giambi was the last straw pushing Exceutive Director Donald Fehr and the MLB Players' union into making concessions. Instead of avoiding the issue, the union's executive board “authorized us to attempt to conclude an agreement,” said Fehr, modifying the existing collective bargaining contract. When U.S. Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) threatened action, the Players Assn. finally got the message. For years, Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig voiced concern about the widespread use of steroids and supplements. Congressional muscle finally got Fehr's attention.

      In today's high-tech nutritional world, steroids and supplements are used for enhancing performance, immunity and longevity. Should Viagra, or herbal products, be banned because, all things considered, it puts users on an uneven playing field? All kinds of drugs and supplements are used to enhance performance but none have been shown to increase hand-eye coordination or athletic skill. Body-builders have used anabolic steroids for years to reduce fat, increase muscle mass and improve definition. Yet when the same drugs or precursors are used in competitive sports—especially amateur athletics—it's somehow considered cheating. Back in the early ‘70s, blood-doping was commonplace among certain European long-distance runners. Since no drugs were involved, few people took notice or objected. Yet increasing hemoglobin clearly gave elite runners an unfair advantage.

      No one argues today about allowing athletes to use illicit or commonly abused drugs like cocaine or methamphetamine. Steroids carry myths about improved strength, endurance and skill. But there's no evidence that steroids help athletes throw, catch, hit, kick, shoot or swing more accurately in baseball, football, soccer, basketball, golf, tennis or any other sport. Talking about placing an asterisk on Bonds' records, or any other pro athlete suspected of using steroids or supplements, is ludicrous when there's no scientific proof that steroids helped his achievements. Now that Bonds closes in on Hank Aaron's MLB career homerun record, steroids hit the headlines. No one complains about professional golfers, bowlers or pool players using common blood pressure drugs called “beta-blockers” to steady nerves. Calling certain drugs “performance-enhancers” doesn't tell the whole story.

      Objections to steroid or supplement use remain ambiguous. Some object because they see steroids giving athletes an unfair advantage. Others object simply because they're concerned about possible adverse side effects. Still others have no clue why they oppose steroid or supplement use. Letting the federal government butt-in to the private affairs of baseball owners, professional athletes and their legal representatives crosses the line. Steroids are legally approved and prescribed drugs, irrespective of whether they actually have “performance-enhancing” or negative side effects. “Baseball is so out of the ballpark that they can no longer continue to stonewall this,” said Dr. Gary Wadler, a Long Island physician and New York University medical professor, considered an anti-doping expert. But it's precisely “anti-doping” experts that fail to see the difference between steroid use in professional sports and amateur athletics.

      Concerns about steroid use giving athletes in endurance and strength events unfair advantages might be well-wounded. But professional sports involve much more than strength and endurance. Professional sports typically involve complex skills that aren't affected by properties contained in steroids or its precursors. Instead of caving-in to misguided pressure from Congress or the White House, the MLB Players Assn. should make its best case before accepting any agreement that compromises medical privacy. Major League baseball players are entitled to the same privacy rights as any other patients given legal prescriptions. “We're pleased the union has decided to join us in an effort to reach an agreement on a very serious issue,” said Rob Manford, lead negotiator for the commissioner's office. Fehr does a disservice to the union by capitulating to steroid hysteria and outside pressure.

      Before the MLB Players' Assn. agrees to any deal with respect to steroids, it's necessary to (a) explore current medical necessity and (b) determine whether they actually have “performance-enhancing” effects in professional sports. There's no scientific evidence yet proving that steroids improve any athletic performance involving more than strength and endurance. Calling steroids “performance-enhancing” drugs doesn't take into account key differences between professional sports and certain athletic events. Without pinpointing “performance-enhancing” effects, it's inappropriate to ban steroid use under doctors' orders. As long as steroids are legal, it's appropriate for physicians to prescribe them as they see fit. Banning steroids or nutritional precursors involves the slippery slope of determining when supplements become drugs. One thing's for sure: Steroid hysteria is out of control.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2002 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.