U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

99–915PDF 2005

STEROIDS IN SPORTS: CHEATING THE

SYSTEM AND GAMBLING YOUR HEALTH

JOINT HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

AND THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MARCH 10, 2005

Serial No. 109–65

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

JOE BARTON, Texas, Chairman 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida 

Vice Chairman 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky 

CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia 

BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

CHARLES W. ‘‘CHIP’’ PICKERING, 

Mississippi, Vice Chairman 

VITO FOSSELLA, New York 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MARY BONO, California 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

C.L. ‘‘BUTCH’’ OTTER, Idaho 

SUE MYRICK, North Carolina 

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan 

Ranking Member 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York 

FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

BART STUPAK, Michigan 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

TED STRICKLAND, Ohio 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

TOM ALLEN, Maine 

JIM DAVIS, Florida 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

JAY INSLEE, Washington 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

BUD ALBRIGHT, Staff Director 

JAMES D. BARNETTE, Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel 

REID P.F. STUNTZ, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida, Chairman 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MARY BONO, California 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

C.L. ‘‘BUTCH’’ OTTER, Idaho 

SUE MYRICK, North Carolina 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

JOE BARTON, Texas, 

(Ex Officio) 

JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

Ranking Member 

MIKE ROSS, Arkansas 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

TED STRICKLAND, Ohio 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

JIM DAVIS, Florida 

CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan, 

(Ex Officio) 

(II)

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia, Chairman 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio 

CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia 

BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

CHARLES W. ‘‘CHIP’’ PICKERING, 

Mississippi 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MARY BONO, California 

MIKE FERGUSON, New Jersey 

MIKE ROGERS, Michigan 

SUE MYRICK, North Carolina 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

JOE BARTON, Texas, 

(Ex Officio) 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

Ranking Member 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York 

FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

TED STRICKLAND, Ohio 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

TOM ALLEN, Maine 

JIM DAVIS, Florida 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan, 

(Ex Officio) 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page

Testimony of: 

Birch, Adolpho, Counsel for Labor Relations, National Football League .... 69

Coonelly, Francis X., Senior Vice President, Major League Baseball .......... 97

Goldberg, Linn, Professor of Medicine, Division of Health Promotion and 

Sports Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University .......................... 29

Hale, Ralph W., Chairman, United States Anti-doping Agency ................... 66

Hooton, Donald M. ............................................................................................ 24

Kanaby, Robert F., Executive Director, National Federation of State High 

School Associations ....................................................................................... 34

Ryun, Hon. Jim, a Representative in Congress from the State of Kansas .. 17

Wilfert, Mary E., Chief Liaison, Committee on Competitive Safeguards 

and Medical Aspects of Sports, the National Collegiate Athletic Association ................................................................................................................. 101

Worth, Sandra, Head Athletic Trainer, University of Maryland, on behalf 

of the National Athletic Trainers Association ............................................ 39

Yesalis, Charles E., Pennsylvania State University ...................................... 44

Additional material submitted for the record: 

Birch, Adolpho, Counsel for Labor Relations, National Football League, 

response for the record ................................................................................. 117

Coonelly, Francis X., Senior Vice President, Major League Baseball, response for the record ..................................................................................... 118

Hale, Ralph W., Chairman, United States Anti-doping Agency, response 

for the record ................................................................................................. 119

Kanaby, Robert F., Executive Director, National Federation of State High 

School Associations, response for the record .............................................. 120

Wilfert, Mary E., Chief Liaison, Committee on Competitive Safeguards 

and Medical Aspects of Sports, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, response for the record ........................................................................ 121

Worth, Sandra, Head Athletic Trainer, University of Maryland, on behalf 

of the National Athletic Trainers Association, response for the record ... 123

Yesalis, Charles E., Pennsylvania State University, response for the 

record ............................................................................................................. 124

(V) 

(1)

STEROIDS IN SPORTS: CHEATING THE 

SYSTEM AND GAMBLING YOUR HEALTH 

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2005

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY

AND COMMERCE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION, AND SUB- COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 10:34 a.m., in 

room 2123 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Cliff 

Stearns (chairman) presiding. 

Members present Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection: Representatives Stearns, Upton, Deal, Radanovich, Bass, Ferguson, Myrick, Murphy, Blackburn, Barton (ex officio), Schakowsky, Brown, and DeGette. 

Members present Subcommittee on Health: Representatives 

Deal, Upton, Gillmor, Shimkus, Buyer, Ferguson, Myrick, Burgess, 

Barton (ex officio), Waxman, and DeGette. 

Staff present: David Cavicke, chief counsel; Chris Leahy, policy 

coordinator; Brian McCullough, professional staff; Ryan Long, professional staff; Will Carty, professional staff; Chuck Clapton, chief 

counsel; Jon Tripp, deputy press secretary; Billy Harvard, clerk; 

Jonathan Cordone, minority counsel; John Ford, minority counsel; 

Jessica McNiece, research assistant; and David Vogel, staff assistant. 

Mr. STEARNS. Good morning, everybody. We are going to not 

start the committee until after the journal vote, and the swearing 

in of the new gentlelady from California. So, we will just be back 

probably in about 25 minutes, 20 to 25 minutes, so I seek your indulgence here, and your patience. Thank you. 

[Brief recess.] 

Mr. STEARNS. Good morning. The subcommittee, the joint hearing between Health and the Commerce, Consumer Protection, and 

Trade, will come to order. 

I have talked to the Ranking Member Schakowsky, and she 

agreed that we could go ahead, even though the swearing in is not 

complete. In fact, it is in the midst, because we do have a hearing, 

the Telecommunications, using the same room, later—early this 

afternoon, so we thought we would go ahead. 

I will start with my opening statement. Like many of you, I am 

a big sports fan. I grew up playing sports, and competed in high 

school as a high school athlete. I watched my favorite football and 

baseball and basketball players, learned a lot about life lessons 

through sports and team competition. The training also involved 

2

closely following the extraordinary careers of the many gifted athletes who have become legends, Muhammad Ali, Mickey Mantle, 

Mr. Brown, Unitas, and the list goes on and on. 

Those greats, like the vast majority of the stars today, were a 

testament to true character, hard work, and determination to succeed against all odds. Their performances, victories, records, and 

careers seem to capture the straightforward honesty and integrity 

that is at the heart of sports. The ideal that sports allow success 

based upon merit and God-given talent, whether it be on the court, 

gridiron, or track. My colleagues, that is why the committee’s focus 

today, both committees, today is on illegal drug use, specifically 

steroid and performance-enhancing drug use. It seems almost out 

of context with my deep sense of reverence for sports and competition. 

As we will learn, anabolic steroids are basically manmade compounds that mimic the effects of testosterone, the male hormone 

that stimulates muscle and bone growth. Steroids allow users, both 

male and female, to build strength, body mass, and increase injury 

recovery time artificially, thereby giving them an advantage over 

their competitors. Steroids are the tools of the cheater. Steroids are 

the tools of the cheater. 

Sadly, the scourge of these drugs is not simply a footnote in the 

history of sports in America. Steroids use goes much deeper, to the 

basic integrity of sports and the athletes themselves. At the most 

fundamental level, steroid use is just plain cheating and furthermore, it is quite illegal. Steroids are classified as Schedule III controlled substances under the Controlled Substance Act. Those 

caught in illegal possession of steroids without a prescription face 

arrest and prosecution. Dealers face a Federal felony charge and up 

to 5 years in prison. As we also will learn, steroid use involves significant health risks for our athletes, because these substances are 

dangerous. Studies suggest that use of them can lead to stunted 

growth in adolescence, increased risk of heart and liver disease, as 

well as cancer and hormonal problems for both men and women. 

That is why I believe these and other factors demand that our 

elite athletic organizations, both professional and amateur, establish uniform world-class drug testing standards that are as consistent and robust as our criminal laws in this area. Nothing less 

should be tolerated. 

Steroid use in sports is not new. Cheaters have been using these 

drugs ever since the Soviet bloc International Olympic teams first 

embraced them during the 1950’s. Today, steroids are a big business. In many cases, these drugs are cooked up in domestic and 

international clandestine labs, smuggled from legitimate pharmacies or foreign countries, and they are sold on the black market. 

And unfortunately, my colleagues, this market is growing. 

As we will hear today, steroids are now not only infiltrating the 

professional and the elite amateur leagues, they are finding their 

way into middle school and high school sports programs, and in 

fact, and according to the most recent Monitoring for the Future 

survey, funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, 3.5 percent of high school seniors have used steroids with similar percentage for eighth and tenth graders. Those are alarming numbers that 

represent just a part of the susceptible youth population. These esVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
3

timates suggest that the high school steroid problem is just as 

great, if not greater, than it is in the professional leagues. 

As any parent knows, high school is a trying time for any kid, 

let alone student athletes. These exceptional kids now face yet another hazard along the way to adulthood, that is trying to claim the 

safe haven of sports as its next growth market. We must take an 

aggressive stand against this plague before these pressures lead 

young student athletes to steroid use, its destructive effects on honesty and fair play, and ultimately, their very health, and very wellbeing. We will hear today from a parent of a young man who tragically took his own life when that pressure to succeed, coupled with 

steroids, became too much. In my opinion, our professional leagues 

have an obligation to be the gold standard with regard to education, detection, and sanctions for the illicit use of steroids and 

other performance-enhancing drugs. 

I would also like to clarify for all of us here today that this committee and the Health Subcommittee, did not call, invite—did call, 

we did call and invite the Commissioners of the NFL, MLB, NBA, 

as well as the NCAA. We invited all of them. While we are happy 

to have guests from these organizations, and look forward to their 

testimony, the Commissioners are noticeably absent today. It is my 

strong feeling that the Commissioners of the professional sports 

leagues must take ownership of this issue, and lead at the highest 

level if we are to succeed in this nation. 

This committee will expect their presence when we reconvene to 

further investigate our options in this area and continued additional oversight. We are signaling today that we may have another 

hearing on this matter. The recent scandals in baseball, the Olympics, and other professional and amateur sports have served to 

highlight the significance of the steroid problem. However, the 

scandals themselves are not the direct focus of this hearing today. 

This committee is attempting to look beyond headlines and sensationalism to drill down into the core of the very serious problem 

that is having such a corrosive effect on the integrity of sports in 

America today. 

My colleagues, this is not a witch hunt. The committee wants to 

learn the facts surrounding the steroid problem, its scope in amateur and professional sports, and what is being done to reestablish 

integrity and honor in American sports with a consistent and robust solution. And finally, I would like our witnesses to consider 

the following questions. If steroids are illegal and banned, why do 

athletes, particularly young athletes, continue to take steroids and 

other performance-enhancing drugs in increasing numbers? Is it societal pressure to succeed and win at all costs that is causing this? 

Why do largely amateur athletic organizations like the NCAA and 

the Olympics have more, tighter, stringent testing and sanctioning 

policies than any of the professional sports leagues, including the 

NFL, MLB, and the NBA? For example, a positive test under an 

NCAA policy, yields an automatic 1 year suspension, while under 

the MLB agreement, it warrants a 10 day suspension. What message do these inconsistencies between the professional and amateur 

programs send to our athletes today? 

And finally, can we expect to see substantial improvement on the 

part of these Commissioners, or does Congress, last, have to act 

4

and become involved? I would again, like to again graciously thank 

our distinguished panel, our colleagues, and Mr. Ryun, for coming 

forward to witness today, and we look forward to their testimony. 

And with that, the ranking member of the Subcommittee on 

Health, Mr. Sherrod Brown. 

[The prepared statement of Hon. Clifford Stearns follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CLIFFORD STEARNS, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON

COMMERCE, TRADE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

Good Morning. I’m a big sports fan. I grew up playing sports and competed as 

a high school athlete. Like many kids, I followed my favorite ball players and teams 

and learned of lot of life’s lessons through sports and team competition. That training also involved closely following the extraordinary careers of the many gifted athletes who have become legends—Ali, Mantle, Brown, Unitas, and the list goes on. 

Those greats, like the vast majority of the stars today, were a testament to true 

character, hard work, and determination to succeed against difficult odds. Their performances, victories, records, and careers seem to capture the straightforward honesty and integrity that is at the heart of sport—the ideal that sports allow success 

based on merit and God-given talent, whether it be on the on the court, gridiron, 

or track. 

That is why the Committee’s focus today on illegal drug use, specifically steroid 

and performance-enhancing drug use, seems almost out of context with my deep 

sense of reverence for sports and competition. As we will learn, anabolic steroids are 

basically man-made compounds that mimic the effects testosterone, the male hormone that stimulates muscle and bone growth. Steroids allow users, both male and 

female, to build strength, body mass, and increase injury recovery time artificially, 

thereby giving them an advantage over their competitors. Steroids are the tools of 

the cheater. 

Sadly, the scourge of these drugs is not simply a footnote in the history of sports 

in America. Steroid use goes much deeper—to the basic integrity of sports and the 

athletes. At the most fundamental level, steroid use is just plain cheating, and furthermore, quite illegal. Steroids are classified as schedule III control substances 

under the Controlled Substances Act. Those caught in illegal possession of steroids 

without a prescription face arrest and prosecution. Dealers face a federal felony 

charge and up to five years in prison. As we also will learn, steroid use involves 

significant health risks for our athletes because these substances are dangerous. 

Studies suggest that use of steroids can lead to stunted growth in adolescents, increased risked of heart and liver disease, as well as cancer, and hormonal problems 

for both men and woman. That is why I believe these and other factors demand that 

our elite athletic organizations, both professional and amateur, establish uniform, 

world-class drug testing standards that are as consistent and robust as our criminal 

laws in this area. Nothing less should be tolerated. 

Steroid use in sports is not new. Cheaters have been using these drugs ever since 

Soviet Block international and Olympic teams first embraced them during the 

1950s. Today, steroids are big business. In many instances, these drugs are cooked 

up in domestic and international clandestine labs, smuggled from legitimate pharmacies or foreign countries, and sold on the black market. Unfortunately, that market is growing. As we will hear today, steroids are now not only infiltrating the professional and elite amateur leagues—they are finding their way into middle school 

and high school sports programs. In fact, according to the most recent Monitoring 

for the Future survey, funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), 

3.5% of high school seniors have used steroids, with similar percentages for eighth 

and tenth graders. Those are alarming numbers that represent just a part of the 

susceptible youth population. These estimates suggest that the high school steroid 

problem is just as great if not greater than it is in the professional leagues. As any 

parent knows, high school is a trying time for any kid let alone student athletes. 

These exceptional kids now face yet another hazard along the way to adulthood that 

is trying to claim the safe haven of sports as its next growth market. We must take 

an aggressive stand against this plague before these pressures lead young student 

athletes to steroid use, its destructive effects on honesty and fair play, and ultimately their very health and well-being. We will hear today from a parent of a 

young man who, tragically, took his own life when that pressure to succeed coupled 

with steroids became too much. 

In my opinion, our professional leagues have an obligation to be the gold standard 

with regard to education, detection, and sanctions for the illicit use of steroids and 

other performance enhancing drugs. I also would like to clarify for all here today, 

5

that this Committee did call and invite the commissioners of the NFL, MLB, and 

NBA as well as the NCAA. While we are happy to have guests from those organizations and look forward to their testimony, the commissioners are noticeably absent. 

It is my strong feeling that the commissioners of the professional sports leagues 

must take ownership of this issue and lead at the highest level if we are to succeed. 

This Committee will expect their presence when we reconvene to further investigate 

our options in this area and continue additional oversight. We are signaling today 

that we may have another hearing on this matter. 

The recent scandals in baseball, the Olympics, and in other professional and amateur sports have served to highlight the significance of the steroids problem. However, the scandals themselves are not the direct focus of this hearing today. This 

Committee is attempting to look beyond headlines and sensationalism to drill down 

into the core of a very serious problem that is having a corrosive effect on the integrity of sports in America today. This is not a witch-hunt. The Committee wants to 

learn the facts surrounding the steroid problem, its scope in amateur and professional sports, and what is being done to reestablish integrity and honor in American 

sports with a consistent and robust solution. Finally, I would like our witnesses to 

consider the following questions:

• If they are illegal and banned, why do athletes, particularly young athletes, continue to take steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs in increasing 

numbers? Is it societal pressure to succeed and win at all costs? 

• Why do largely amateur athletic organizations like the NCAA and the Olympics 

have more stringent testing and sanctioning policies than any of the professional sports leagues, including the NFL, MLB, and the NBA? For example, a 

positive test under NCAA policy yields an automatic one-year suspension while 

under the MLB agreement it warrants a ten-day suspension? What message do 

these inconsistencies between the professional and amateur programs send to 

our young athletes? 

• Can we expect to see substantial improvement on your part or will Congress need 

to become involved? 

I would again like to again graciously thank our distinguished panel of witnesses 

for joining us today. We look forward to your testimony. Thank you.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to let Mr. Waxman go 

first, because he has another hearing, if that is okay. 

Mr. STEARNS. Yes. Mr. Waxman, the gentleman from California. 

Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Brown, for your 

courtesy in allowing me to deliver my opening statement. I have a 

conflict in my schedule, and I have to go to another committee 

meeting. 

But I wanted to be here to commend this committee for holding 

this important hearing. It is an important public health issue. The 

sharp rise in steroid use among athletes, including teenage athletes, over the last decade. In 1993, 1 of every 45 high school students reported ever using illegal steroids. By 1999, 6 years later, 

this rate had increased to 1 in every 27 high school students. In 

2003, the last year for which data is available from the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention, 1 in every 16 high school students 

reported illegal steroid use. This trend is alarming, because these 

drugs are so dangerous. 

Anabolic steroids are related to testosterone, a hormone that 

plays a critical role in normal adolescent development. But teenagers don’t take a natural amount of these hormones. They take 

10, 20, or even 50 times the normal doses. At such high levels, anabolic steroids can signal to the bones to stop growing, cause premature heart disease, lead to life-threatening liver problems, and 

cause significant emotional disturbances, personality changes, psychiatric diseases, suicide. In addition to these risks, some steroids 

are administered by hypodermic syringes, and if that is the case, 

when teenagers share their hypodermic needles, they run the risk 

of being infected with HIV/AIDS and hepatitis. 

6

So this is a very serious public health issue, but it is also a 

touchy subject. Recently, the Dallas Morning News reported about 

a mother who found a vial of clear liquid and some syringes in her 

son’s closet. He confessed to having used steroids to become a better athlete. He told her he had obtained the steroids from a player 

on his high school football team. She called the assistant principal. 

The assistant principal called the football coach, who angrily denied that there was even a problem. He told the newspaper this 

lady is a liar. There is nobody in my program who uses steroids. 

But to his credit, the coach didn’t let it end there. He met with his 

players and demanded to know the truth. Eventually, 9 athletes 

admitted to steroid use. The community is now aware of its problem, and is already taking action. 

Investigating steroid use is as difficult as it is necessary, both for 

a high school football team in Texas, and for major league sports. 

There are some who don’t want to investigate these issues. They 

would prefer that we look the other way and we not ask hard questions. I think the chairman of this committee is doing the right 

thing in holding today’s hearing, and Chairman Tom Davis, the 

Chair of the Government Reform Committee, is doing the right 

thing in holding a hearing next week. The American people deserve 

the truth, and we have a responsibility to help them find it. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Brown. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank my colleague. Mr. Deal, the chairman of 

the Health Subcommittee, is recognized. 

Mr. DEAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for 

holding this joint hearing today with our two subcommittees, and 

I want to thank the witnesses for coming. I know many of you have 

come great distances, and we will try to be respectful of your time. 

I think it is appropriate that we hold a hearing on this issue of 

growing steroid use. Many of us believe, however, that we should 

try to shift the emphasis away from the sports page back to the 

dining room table in homes and in the classrooms where children 

can be taught about the adverse effects of these illegal substances. 

It is very difficult, though, to become real enamored about whose 

bat is going to be in Cooperstown, when children are being the victims of the suffering of trying to duplicate the use of those illicit 

substances. 

I believe we are sending the wrong message to young people 

when they see these people who now are self-proclaimed entertainers being lauded for efforts as a result of illicit drugs, and children not being told about the emotional and physical conditions 

that can result from their duplication of those uses. I seriously 

doubt that the sports channels or the sports magazines will pay 

much attention to the athlete whose heart and liver is failing, or 

to the young athlete who winds up in jail simply because he 

couldn’t control his anger, as a result of the use of these drugs. 

In the future, I think young people should continue to be given 

as much information as possible about these substances, and the 

lack of accurate information is a real danger to our communities. 

It is a serious problem. I thank the witnesses for their time and 

effort in being here, and we look forward to continuing the dialog 

and debate that will begin in this discussion today. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

7

[The prepared statement of Hon. Nathan Deal follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. NATHAN DEAL, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON

HEALTH

Let me start by thanking our witnesses for appearing before us today. We value 

your expertise, and we are grateful for your cooperation and attendance at today’s 

hearing. I know several of our witnesses have traveled great distances and put their 

busy lives on hold in order to be with us today, and I think we should be respectful 

of their time and devote as much of this hearing as possible to listening to what 

they have to say. 

I am very glad we are having this joint hearing today to address the growing 

problem of steroid abuse in this country. We are here to help shift the dialogue 

about this problem away from the sports page and back into the classroom and 

around the kitchen table at home. 

It is hard to care about whose bat is on display in Cooperstown or whose name 

is in the record books when so many young lives are being destroyed in this country 

by steroid abuse. 

I believe our young people are receiving the wrong message when they see that 

these self-proclaimed ‘‘entertainers’’ are able to achieve great accomplishments on 

the playing field through the aid of these illicit substances without being told of the 

potential damage that can done to their physical, mental, and emotional health. 

I doubt the all-sport channels will be there to cover these once-famous athletes 

after their hearts and livers have started to fail them, and I don’t think the sports 

magazines will write a story about a young amateur athlete who is sitting in a jail 

cell because he could not control his anger. 

If, in the future, young people continue to abuse these substances due to a lack 

of accurate information about the dangers of steroid abuse, then we have all failed 

in our responsibilities. 

Steroids and the serious health effects they are having on our children deserve 

a serious and substantive discussion, and I would like to again thank our witnesses 

for coming here today to discuss this important issue.

Mr. STEARNS. I thank my colleague. The gentleman from Ohio, 

the ranking member of the Health Subcommittee, Mr. Brown. 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased we are focusing today on this public health threat, but like so many issues 

before this committee, we cannot responsibly consider this issue 

without placing it in the larger and the appropriate budget context. 

Our committee has jurisdiction over the National Institutes of 

Health, over CDC, over SAMHSA. Among their numerous responsibilities, these agencies have each played an important role in 

countering the growing use of steroids. The question is, will they 

have enough resources to continue fighting steroids and other public health threats. 

The President’s budget cuts CDC, cuts SAMSA, funds NIH well 

below the level needed to simply maintain the current level of research. The total cuts to public health programs contained in the 

President’s budget total over a billion dollars for next year alone. 

Is our committee holding this hearing and approving that budget, 

determining that these agencies are spending money hand over fist 

on unnecessary public health initiatives. SAMHSA administers the 

Athletes Training and Learning to Avoid Steroids program, 

ATLAS, which uses team dynamics and positive peer pressure to 

reduce steroid use among student athletes. CDC provides vital surveillance of risk behavior among youth, including steroid use, so we 

can understand trends and changes in use, and direct our resources 

to where they are the most effective. 

NIH, largely through the National Institutes on Drug Abuse, 

funds several initiatives, including public education campaigns and 

websites designed to alert people to the dangers of anabolic steroid 

8

use. Are we saying these initiatives are a waste of money? If we 

are going to stand idly by while appropriators starve the agencies 

under our jurisdiction, I hope we are prepared to take the blame 

when these agencies abandon meaningful public health initiatives, 

like those aimed at protecting kids from steroids. 

We have all seen, as the chairman said, the news stories in the 

last few months on steroids in professional sports. It seems that 

with the increased combination of—the right combination of increased public scrutiny and professional accountability, we can 

begin to identify and deal with these problems better than our society has. But perhaps the most disturbing consequence of steroid 

use at the professional level is the trickle down effect that it has 

on athletic programs in our minor leagues and our universities, 

and especially in our high schools. Among teenagers in this country, as we know, steroid use is more widespread, and is growing 

at an alarming pace. In the last 14 years, the use of steroids among 

teens has increased by 50 percent. Teens have regularly identified 

steroids as far easier to obtain than other illegal drugs. 

Using steroids makes the average teenager far more likely to engage in other risky behaviors. Use of these drugs can lead to disastrous side effects, include rapid weight gain, blood clots, liver damage, premature heart attack and stroke, depression, and increased 

aggression, as Chairman Deal said. Thee consequences are a problem at any level, high school, college, and pro, but it is critical that 

professional athletes, who we still say set the example for performance and integrity at all levels, be held to a much higher standard. 

We can be certain if steroids are effectively eliminated from professional sports that fewer kids will use them. The reverse is also 

true. If we fail to hold our professional athletes accountable, if the 

biggest stars in sports are allowed to violate the rules of the game 

and Federal law over and over and over, then kids will obviously 

follow suit. 

Mr. Chairman, we must work to improve the rules regarding 

steroid use, and we must fight to strengthen the enforcement of 

those rules. Beyond that, we must endeavor to change the culture 

that surrounds our athletes, from high school students to professional stars, that leads them to jeopardize their health in the name 

of another home run or a tenth of a second off their time in the 

40-yard dash. 

I look forward to our witnesses’ insights on this issue. Thank 

you. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank my colleague. The chairman of the full 

committee, Mr. Barton, from Texas, is recognized. 

Chairman BARTON. We thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

When I grew up, Babe Ruth was the standard in baseball. He 

had hit 60 home runs, and people didn’t worry about him taking 

steroids. They worried about him eating another hot dog. My heroes in my generation were guys like Willie Mays and Hank Aaron 

and Mickey Mantle, and those kind of guys. And again, there 

wasn’t any concern about whether they used steroids. 

Well, unfortunately, because of what has happened in the last 5 

to 10 years, we have to worry about did Barry Bonds do that legitimately, or was it chemically enhanced, and so we are here today 

to say enough is enough. And it is not just baseball. We have got 

9

panelists from the NFL and the NCAA and high schools. We have 

got a parent on the next panel whose son committed suicide under 

the influence, apparently, of steroids. Enough is enough. Now, you 

know, you can hold a hearing and grandstand on this. This is not 

a grandstand hearing. We have an Olympian and a former world 

record holder in the mile, Mr. Ryun, who has made this a personal 

issue of his for a number of years. He is now a Member of the 

House of Representatives. We thought at one time Senator Jim 

Bunting was going to come over on this hearing. 

We want to get to the bottom of this. And I say we, the Energy 

and Commerce Committee on a bipartisan basis, and this is the 

first of what could be a number of hearings. I have 3 subcommittees that could be in this. We have got the Health Subcommittee, 

Mr. Deal is the chairman. We have got this subcommittee. Mr. 

Stearns is the chairman. We have the Oversight and Investigations 

Subcommittee, and Mr. Whitfield of Kentucky is the chairman. 

This committee has already done something. In the last Congress, we passed the Anabolic Steroid Control Act. It was signed 

into law by the President on October 22 of last year. It makes illegal the precursor steroids. It awards grants to carry out educational programs in our elementary and secondary schools, and it 

sets up a National Survey on Drug Use to determine just how pervasive steroid use is. So, this committee has already acted, and I 

am here to tell you as chairman, if we need to act again in this 

Congress on a bipartisan basis, we will. But we are going to get 

the facts, and we are going to get them at every level, from junior 

high and high school, up through the pro sports. We have not 

issued any subpoenas. We are trying to ask people to come forward 

voluntarily, but if we need to issue subpoenas, we will, and that 

goes at every level, from the pro sports commissioners, down to 

folks in the NCAA, and if necessary, in high school education. 

The President put this on the table 3 or 4 years ago in his State 

of the Union, and people kind of scratched their heads. Well, he 

was ahead of his time, but the time has come to put an end to this 

mess, to reclaim sports for true competition and in the spirit of 

what sports are supposed to be. I am sick and tired of hearing 

about somebody who may have taken this drug or may have taken 

that drug, and helped them in the Olympics, or helped them in the 

whatever the level of sports is, so I am just here to tell everybody 

in this audience that this is not a grandstand hearing. This is a 

real hearing, and whatever we need to do, when the appropriate 

time comes, if it is in the jurisdiction of the Energy and Commerce 

Committee and it needs to be done, on a bipartisan basis, we are 

going to do it. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Hon. Joe Barton follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOE BARTON, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY

AND COMMERCE

The sports of our lives are a wonder, but steroids in sports are a killer. Their 

presence ruins bodies and careers, and gives lie to the achievements of people we 

thought were heroes. Babe Ruth has been gone for 57 years, but he’s as much an 

idol to me and to millions of other Americans as he was in his prime. Would he 

still be our hero if we suddenly discovered that a drug helped him hit those 60 home 

runs? 

10

As you can tell, I’m an old baseball player. I’ve probably thrown my last fast ball, 

but I never lost my love of the game and the people who play it. I am outraged that 

because of steroids and the people who peddle them, the achievements of Babe 

Ruth’s modern successors are in doubt. If the Babe appeared today and began hitting the cover off balls, people would automatically believe he was on drugs. That’s 

what it’s come to. 

We all understand what’s required because it has happened before. The Black Sox 

threw the World Series in 1919, but the discovery that players sold out to gamblers 

produced draconian reforms that probably saved my sport. Without a new restitution of trust, the game I love may wither and die. I don’t mean that to happen without a fight. 

As a recreational activity, they promote healthy living, provide social interaction, 

and provide an arena for personal achievement. At the higher levels of athletic excellence, competition is a great source of entertainment. Sports are deeply ingrained 

in our culture and our economy; professional leagues are billion dollar businesses 

with million dollar athletes, college athletics are now covered by their own cable station, and high schools are put on national TV if advertising can be sold. 

Unfortunately, the growing body of evidence indicates athletes at all levels are 

willing to take steroids and subvert the integrity of sports to achieve success, regardless of the potentially life-threatening consequences. I believe such athletes are 

misguided about the meaning of sport. Achievement found in a syringe or a pill is 

not achievement at all: it is cheating. 

This is not a new problem. Nor is it confined to professional sports. Men and 

women, boys and girls, are using steroids. It is a problem that has been relatively 

unnoticed despite all the warning signs and our reluctance to acknowledge it. Some 

professional athletes have admitted to using steroids, and others are alleged to have 

used steroids. They are not my primary concern because they are not the first, nor 

will they be the last athletes to cheat the system. 

I am most concerned about the effect steroid use is having on our children. They 

look to professional athletes as their idols and are influenced by what they see and 

hear. My fear is that a society that accepts steroids as a part of sport is sending 

a very dangerous—and wrong—message. Our children need to know it is wrong and 

why we won’t tolerate it. We have seen the carnage wrought by corporate scandals 

in recent years when shortcuts and deception took precedent. A similar culture 

seems to be growing in sports; a recent study showed steroid use among all high 

school students is on the rise while only 55% of 12th graders perceived a great risk 

with steroids. 

We may not be able to change society’s attitudes in one day or one year, but we 

have to increase our efforts. We have been fighting illegal drug abuse for decades, 

saving countless lives. We have to do the same with steroids. 

We will change the momentum and direction of sports and its effect on youth, 

even if it includes drastic measures. This Committee has the jurisdiction to make 

changes, whether it is in the business practices of sports organizations or the health 

aspects. It is my desire that it does not come to that. 

I look forward to hearing from the witnesses and discussing options to address 

these problems.

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the distinguished chairman. The 

gentlelady, Ms. Schakowsky, the ranking member of our committee. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Thank you, Chairman Stearns. I would also 

like to thank Ranking Member Brown and Chairman Deal for 

working with us today—on today’s hearing about the growing use 

of steroids by athletes. 

Representative Ryun, I also appreciate your taking time out of 

your schedule to share your perspective on this issue, being one of 

the few Olympians and world record holders in Congress, I believe 

your insights will be quite helpful for us as we try to grapple with 

this problem. 

While we are going to be discussing steroid use on all levels of 

sports, from high school to professional athletes, I am especially 

concerned about young athletes, the high school and college students. According to a study by the National Collegiate Athletic Association, steroid use among athletes increased by 27 percent from 

11

1996 through 2000. A survey by the University of Michigan found 

that 54 percent more high school seniors took steroids in 2003 than 

they did in 1996. And the Center for Disease Control reported in 

May 2004 that approximately 800,000 high school students have 

used or are using anabolic steroids. 

These young athletes are taking steroids to meet body ideals and 

physical performance standards that cannot be achieved without 

artificial enhancement. They are judging their abilities and their 

appearance on curves where the highest standard is set by synthetic performance boosters. They are trying to be superhuman. 

What they don’t realize or appreciate are the deleterious effects of 

steroids. While they think they are building themselves up, they 

are tearing their health down. Of particular concern is the permanent damage that the very young competitor who uses steroids experiences. For example, although steroids deliver lean muscle mass 

and strength, the terrible irony is that the use also promotes premature skeletal maturation, and their growing bones are stunted. 

They also are putting themselves at greater risk of ligament and 

tendon injury, not to mention heart attacks, liver failure, infertility, and other permanent and irreversible problems. 

It is our responsibility to ask why our young athletes are doing 

this to themselves. I believe part of the cause is that there is a ripple effect through the athletic world around steroid use. High 

schoolers and college players are seeing professional athletes make 

millions of dollars off of their steroid-enhanced performances, and 

know that use is rewarded. Today’s corked bat is a juiced up player. I believe that when they call out play ball, the playing field 

should be even, safe, and healthy. However, professional steroid 

abuse is not the only reason that young athletes are turning to 

steroids, and we need to explore the other factors that may be contributing to it. 

I think we need to look at whether the students are seeing their 

only means to get to college is through an athletic scholarship, and 

the only way to get an athletic scholarship is if they are the biggest 

and the best. And how can they be the biggest and the best if one 

of their teammates is pumped up? I think we need to look at the 

pressures that parents, coaches, and peers are putting on young 

athletes to look and do better than is naturally possible. And I also 

think that we need to get to the bottom of where the steroids are 

coming from, and how their use is mostly unnoticed until it is too 

late. 

Mr. Hooton, I appreciate you being here today to share your son 

Taylor’s story. You have turned your personal tragedy into a muchneeded public awareness campaign that will help us get to the bottom of this and save lives. 

Thank you. And again, Chairmen Stearns and Deal, I appreciate 

your calling today’s hearing, and am glad that we have witnesses 

from the various sports, medical, and research organizations, to 

provide a comprehensive view of what steroids are doing to athletes. I also hope that we can show the same commitment to getting a complete picture when we consider cuts to Medicaid this 

year. 

Thank you. 

12

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the gentlelady. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized. 

Mr. UPTON. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I appreciate 

having this hearing, and I look forward to working with you and 

Chairman Barton to continue to pursue this very important issue. 

Sports is a big part of America. Let us face it. Every weekend, 

tens of millions of Americans watch in person, watch on TV, let 

alone those of us that often read the sports pages first. The fundamental principle of sports participation is that the rules are the 

same. They are the same for every team and every player, and that 

is why we have umps, that is why we have referees. That is why 

we have time folks clocking, whether it be in swimming or running, 

and if they haven’t done the job, they are not—they are done. And 

that is why we have allegedly commissioners for all these sports. 

They are to look out for the best interests of those sports, and to 

make sure that they perform., the athletes, as well as the teams. 

Sports are not for cheaters. Ask Sammy Sosa, with a corked bat. 

Ask a hockey player who has too much of a curve in his hockey 

stick. He is removed from the ice. Sammy Sosa was suspended for, 

what, 8 games, as I believe. Too many men on the field. You break 

the rules, your team is going to be penalized. You may lose the 

game because of it. The rules are supposed to be the same for every 

competitor that is on the field. I am a dad. I played high school 

sports. I am married to a woman who was asked to try out for the 

Olympics. And thank God my 13-year-old son has her abilities and 

not mine. And as a spectator now, to the sports that he plays, 

whether it be basketball, football, lacrosse, baseball, I want the 

teams and the outcome to be fairly settled. 

I have got no tolerance for anybody that cheats, whether they be 

on the job, or whether they be on the field. Steroids are not only 

unhealthy, they are for cheaters. What kind of signal does it send 

to amateur sports if professional sports don’t play by the same 

rules. They have got to get their act together, and if they can’t do 

it on their own, then this committee needs, and this Congress 

needs to get it done for them. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. STEARNS. The gentlelady from Colorado, to seek, opening 

statement. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Mr. Chairman, I will waive my opening statement. 

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. The gentlelady waives her opening statement. Mr. Murphy is recognized. 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for having this hearing. 

I just quickly want to say, as a person who has spent his career 

working with youth, what has concerned me, as this discussion has 

opened up on steroids is athletes who say they don’t want to be role 

models, but they are. And athletes who say they don’t want to be 

seen as ones to influence the behavior of our kids, but they are 

eager to take millions of dollars in product endorsements, specifically to influence the actions of our youth. And I am concerned that 

we see comments coming out that can best be described as callous, 

self-centered, and greedy, that pervades sports and athletes, when 

they make comments such as saying it is entertainment, and the 

fans are expecting us to get out there and have some hits and score 

13

touchdowns, and to make goals. This attitude of blaming fans and 

absolving themselves of responsibility, and somehow should be responded to by fans who, at games, should sit on their hands, or 

leave out resounding boos when they see athletes out there trying 

to pull a scam on the fans, and saying we can give you what you 

want if you let us cheat on the way. 

Likewise, owners, managers, and commissioners use the same 

kind of distorted thinking and reasoning when they say the fans 

made us do this. I am hoping that hearings such as this, and actions taken by this committee, can really work toward helping us 

to make sure that sports are played fair, that the role models are 

out there for youth, and that we can, indeed, save the health and 

lives of our youth and other athletes. 

I yield back. Thank you. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank my colleague. The gentleman from New 

Jersey, Mr. Ferguson. 

Mr. FERGUSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Steroids have been a scourge in the sports world since their first 

use, dating back to the 1960’s. Since then, sports organizations of 

all varieties, beginning with the International Olympic Committee, 

have launched testing regimes to curb and hopefully eliminate illegal steroid use in athletes. In many respects, we have seen a decrease in steroid use in professional athletes under the watchful 

eye of regulators and league officials. 

What is scary, though, is that we have seen steroid use increase 

in high school and amateur athletes, far from the watchful eye of 

scrutiny provided by a testing program. Unfortunately, reports 

have stated that upwards of 300,000 high school students in our 

country use steroids. Yet, according to a study by the University 

of Michigan in 2003, only 5 percent of schools test for steroids. I 

look forward to hearing today from our esteemed colleague from 

Kansas, Congressman Ryun, and other panelists, to see what steps 

can be taken to give proper notice to our communities and our children that steroid use is wrong and deadly. 

The representatives from our professional sports leagues and the 

NCAA have a responsibility to the youth of our country to be an 

example that wrongdoers will be caught and will be punished. The 

NFL has been testing their players since 1987. Major League Baseball has just put in place a much tougher testing regime, the mere 

prospect of which lowered positive results fivefold. But the team 

that everyone roots against, the combination of rogue science and 

athletes bent on breaking the rules, is motivated to keep steroids 

viable in athletics today. We must do everything we can to fight 

this battle, and educate people about the dangers of illegal steroid 

use by our young athletes. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. STEARNS. The gentleman, thank you. Mr. Radanovich, 

waives. Mr. Bass, not here. Mr. Buyer. 

Mr. BUYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for 

this hearing, and I look forward to the testimony of the panelists. 

I want to thank our colleague, Jim Ryun, for being here to testify. 

Jim, I believe that you have been an inspiration to generations, 

and it deals with how you have handled yourself, not only as a professional athlete, but as a person. And you have, in fact, been a 

14

role model for many in our society, and for that, I want to thank 

you. And your words will carry a lot of weight, you see, because 

your words are far more powerful to us, not only because you are 

our friend and a colleague, but you were in a system, and you also 

were an elite athlete, at a time when the system was more pure 

than it is today. And that is really unfortunate, because we could 

have some professional athletes here, and we would have to do a 

vetting process to find the credible athletes that we could listen to. 

And that is unfortunate. We ought to be able to just do a random 

sampling, right? And we ought to be able to find that athlete that, 

in fact, is not only that role model, but also, a pure system. 

And so, I want to thank you for coming forward and giving your 

testimony and your thoughts, and I am disturbed about baseball. 

I am disturbed about baseball, and other sports, and how this has 

this downward pressure, everything to win. And it is almost as if 

the owners are also absolving themselves. Well, you know, we got—

there is a union we have to deal with, or collective bargaining 

agreements, and excuse after excuse after excuse, as they then, 

also, then turn to place pressures upon cities to build their stadiums for them, as they continue to reap their profits, and what, 

they also don’t care about the health effects it is having upon players? And then, the detrimental effect that has upon kids, children 

in our societies? 

No, I think this is a very serious problem. But there is enough 

responsibility out there that needs to go around, and I noticed some 

articles in some sports pages that were even questioning Congress 

as to why they should even look at this issue. What, as though we 

should turn a blind eye? I don’t think so. 

So, I want to thank you, Jim Ryun, for many things. More importantly, for being here to provide this testimony, to give your insights and your wisdom to how we can bring purity to a system. 

And it sure is sad that we have got some individuals now who love 

to talk about hitting home runs, breaking records, about to break 

records, yet we are now, they find themselves in a scandal. And, 

as though that has no impact upon kids. I believe it does. 

I yield back. 

Mr. STEARNS. Gentleman, thank you. The gentleman from Ohio, 

Mr. Gillmor. The gentleman passes. Ms. Myrick. 

Ms. MYRICK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the witnesses for being here, and I don’t mean to sound like a broken 

record, because I wanted to say to Jim some of what Steve has already said. We thank you for the good example you have set, Jim, 

not just what you did in sports, with the incredible, incredible 

records that you had, but the example you set every day in your 

life, and with working with young people, like I know you do. And 

you can have an incredible influence in this issue, if you are willing, as you are today, to stand up and to speak out. Because it is 

something that concerns all of us. 

My kids are grown. I now have grandkids who are into sports. 

We didn’t have to worry about this problem to this extent when our 

kids were growing up, so it is a very real issue that is a very—of 

deep concern to us. And I thank you for your willingness to participate. 

15

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the gentlelady. The gentlelady from Tennessee is recognized. With that, I think we have finished our opening statements. 

[Additional statements submitted for the record follow:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLIE NORWOOD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS

FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

While steroid use has been banned in the United States since the passage of the 

Anabolic Steroids Control Act of 1990, the illegal use of these drugs continues to 

be a serious problem. 

When professional athletes admit to using steroids to enhance their athletic skills, 

children receive the message that drugs are OK. I suspect this fact is in no small 

part related to the high rate of steroid use among high-school-aged students. 

Steroid use is a problem that affects athletes and non athletes alike, impacting 

both our sons and our daughters. Steroids can create serious health problems, including heart attacks, liver damage and high blood pressure. 

I fully support the goals of this hearing as we work to send a clear message to 

children and adults across the country that steroids are dangerous, illegal, and morally offensive to this country’s competitive spirit. 

I am looking forward to our witnesses’ testimony and guidance. I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA CUBIN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS

FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. 

I would like to welcome the distinguished witnesses before us today, including our 

colleague Mr. Ryun. The committee has worked to bring together three panels of 

witnesses who will offer diverse views on steroid use. I look forward to a hearing 

that will provide a forum for honest discussion about the use of steroids and other 

performance enhancing supplements and what the roll of Congress should be to curb 

the dangers associated with the increasing use of these illegal substances. 

We are all starting to become too familiar with the prevalence of steroid use by 

professional athletes. Most concerning to me is the fact that many of the athletes 

being accused of and even condoning steroid use are the same ones who serve as 

role models for America’s youth. There is no question the nature of youth sports and 

activities has been dramatically altered in the last decade. It is hardly enough anymore for a child to participate in sports to develop a new skill or make new friends. 

You can see it at any gym or park on a given Saturday morning: kids today are 

being pressed at young ages to dedicate their time, mind and body to being faster, 

stronger and more competitive. It’s hardly a surprise that this pressure on today’s 

kids coincides with an increase in performance-altering supplements. 

Today I hope to hear an honest assessment of steroid use by amateur athletes. 

With the accessibility of these illegal substances via the internet or through mail, 

steroids have clearly become a potential threat to all regions of America, even rural 

areas like the state of Wyoming which I represent. Media attention to steroid use 

by professional athletes glamorizes the affects steroids have on one’s physique, yet 

often neglects to inform amateur athletes about the negative physiological or behavioral side affects. I want today’s hearing to initiate a public discussion of the negative side affects of steroid use before this habit becomes an unofficial standard for 

amateur athletes. 

Again, I thank the chairman and I yield back the balance of my time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ED TOWNS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM

THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very pleased that the Committee is holding this 

hearing. As the details emerge of how widespread steroid abuse in this country has 

become, I am becoming increasingly upset for a number of reasons. However, upon 

reading Mr. Hooten’s prepared remarks, my anger quickly turned to sadness. 

Mr. Hooten mentions that because our young people are so enamored with today’s 

athletes and their achievements, they will do anything to emulate them and get 

ahead in their own school sports programs. As we have learned, they don’t need to 

go too far to get illegal help. The unfortunate reality of the internet is that for all 

of its benefits, it also has a great number of downsides. With a click of the mouse, 

16

our children can choose from a buffet of illegal steroids, most of which are dangerous and potentially life-threatening. I sit on the committee’s panel that oversees 

the internet, and I hope my colleagues and I can come up with some sort of legislation that stems this black market tide. The pressure to succeed that our children 

endure can be overwhelming, and if we need to go to the source to curb their behavior, then so be it. 

It seems that the culture of our professional athletes and their steroid use has 

become somewhat ‘‘en vogue’’ and alluring to our young people. The current controversy involving Major League Baseball and some of its players has highlighted 

the epidemic, but I firmly believe that the league is not blame. Rather, we should 

applaud the big league’s efforts to crack down on usage, and we need to give Commissioner Selig’s new steroid prevention program a chance to work. Since its implementation, steroid use is down from 11% to 1.7%. The commissioner heard our complaints about the league’s previous program and took action—so far the results are 

encouraging and I hope the trend continues. 

Let me also mention how sickened I am by the primary reason for steroid use. 

As I hope you would all agree, cheating in any form is despicable. America is about 

giving everyone an equal chance to succeed, and putting all of our young people and 

professional athletes on the proverbial level playing field should be priority #1. But 

as I said previously, peer pressure and the desire to be a winner can be crushing 

during the teenage years, and I wish these substances weren’t available to our kids. 

The sad truth is that they are, and we must figure out a way to stop their widespread distribution. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GENE GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM

THE STATE OF TEXAS

Good Morning. I like to thank Chairman Stearns, Chairman Deal, and Ranking 

Members Schakowsky and Brown for holding a hearing on this important issue. 

Since Congress banned anabolic steroids in 1990, it seems the pressure to have 

the perfect body or the perfect performance has only increased. Often, the steroids 

used by athletes or individuals with a distorted body image are taken in doses up 

to 100 times the dose used to treat a medical condition. Steroid users also frequently 

mix oral and injectable steroids and will add stimulants to the mix to have a greater 

effect on muscle size. 

Unfortunately, this quest for perfection has serious negative health consequences. 

Oral steroids, in particular, increase LDL and decrease HDL, leading to hardening 

of the arteries and eventually heart attack or stroke. Steroids also disrupt hormonal 

production, resulting in stunted growth when taken during puberty. Many of the 

detrimental health effects caused by steroids are reversible if we can get the users 

off steroids. But we face an uphill challenge when instant gratification and quick 

fixes outweigh long-term health in the minds of steroid users. 

Last April, the Full Committee heard and passed HR 3866, the Anabolic Steroid 

Control Act of 2004. In doing so, we doubled the maximum penalty for selling 

steroids near athletic facilities and we expanded the definition of ‘‘anabolic steroid’’ 

to include steroid precursors such as THG. 

I believe the legislation we’ve passed was a good start in addressing the problems 

with steroid abuse; however, we have a long way to go. 

Many of you have at least heard of the film ‘‘Friday Night Lights’’. This film was 

based on a book by the same name which portrays what people do to win high 

school football championships in my home state of Texas. In Texas, it is not uncommon for crowds of over ten thousand people, sometimes as high as twenty thousand 

to attend a high school football game. The culture revolving around these games 

often brings communities together, but also places immense pressure on student 

athletes to perform. 

Young men are made local heroes by running a touchdown or making a key play. 

Given the amount of pressure there is to perform, I was not surprised to read a recent article in the Dallas Morning News stating nine players at a North-Texas high 

school admitted to using steroids. 

Coming from an area that has produced several Championship Football teams, 

I’m sure this problem is not limited to this region of our state. I am troubled by 

the idea that High School students are using steroids during a phase of their lives 

when their body is continuing to mature. The health risks are great and as we’ll 

hear today, may not appear until years after a person has started to use them. 

In collegiate sports, this issue has been addressed by the NCAA and in professional sports, individual governing bodies police athletes through random testing. 

17

However, it seems that no one is doing enough to keep steroids out of the hands 

of athletes, and penalties are not a strong enough deterrent to keep those who are 

determined to use them from doing so. 

Sports is big business in the United States. I think we all agree that the most 

important part of this problem is ensuring the health of athletes in all levels of competition. However, it’s also important that when we take our families to sporting 

events, our children and grandchildren know that there is such a thing as a level 

playing field. 

Thank you Mr. Chairman. I yield the balance of my time.

Mr. STEARNS. At this point, we welcome our colleague, Congressman Jim Ryun, one of the greatest middle distance runners of all 

time, and as a 17 year old junior, became the first high school student to break the 4 minute barrier in the mile, and we welcome, 

Jim, your opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JIM RYUN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS 

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Chairman, thank you. It is a great honor to be 

here, and I want to thank you for asking me to participate in this 

most important and timely hearing. 

As a 3 time Olympian and former professional athlete, I take this 

issue before us today both personally and seriously. During my career, I ran over 100 miles a week training twice a day. I believed 

then, as I do today, that there is no acceptable substitute for hard 

work when it comes to sports, or for that matter, anything really 

in life. 

I was fortunate to run at a time before performance-enhancing 

steroids became a real issue in the professional sports arena. In 

fact, during my athletic career, I did not know of any long distance 

runners that were using steroids. Sadly, the running world has not 

kept that up, and we have been hit with steroids, blood doping, 

through the use of EPO and other forms of performance-enhancing 

drugs. 

While most athletes refuse to use performance-enhancing drugs, 

steroid use has become a serious problem in professional athletics 

today. I find this trend very disturbing. Like it or not, professional 

athletes, as has already been enumerated by some of you, are natural role models for our young people, and it is time they begin to 

take this responsibility seriously. Today’s athletes are sending the 

wrong message to their young fans, a dangerous message that 

stands not only to have a negative impact on their future lives, but 

also on the rest of their lives as a whole. It is encouraging for me 

to see that many professional athletes who have admitted their 

steroid use are now working to educate others on the dangers associated with them. 

Using performance-enhancing drugs, in a way, is a way of trying 

to get something for nothing. For many, it is the easy road to more 

fame or money. Steroid use is a method to bypass the blood, sweat, 

and tears of training, and is really nothing less than cheating to 

achieve unnatural results. And as Chairman Stearns and I were 

talking on the way over, to the vote, I know my trainer in high 

school and coach in college would say, you know, you are stiff and 

sore. You get that soreness and stiffness out, and you have a good 

recovery by the same way you got it in, and that is to go out and 

warm up, run again, and you will eventually work it out. 

18

Today, I am speaking as a representative of those who have done 

it the right way. I trained, expecting hard work to reach the high 

level of performances that I achieved. I spent an average of 4 to 

5 hours a day, each day, working to improve upon the God-given 

skills that I was blessed with, ran thousands of miles in all kinds 

of conditions, and was proud to compete with so many athletes who 

were doing the same thing. 

When others cheat, it robs those who compete fairly of reaping 

the benefits of their hard work. In addition to the negative influence steroid use is having on the mindset of our society, it also does 

not come without significant physical risks. Athletes are trading a 

few years of marginal performance enhancement for a potential 

lifetime of negative health effects. 

In fact, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the 

major side effects, which some of you have already recounted, I 

want to touch on those again, for abusing anabolic steroids can include liver tumors, cancer, jaundice, fluid retention, high blood 

pressure, increase in LDL, which is the bad cholesterol, decrease 

in HDL, which is the good stuff, the good cholesterol. Other side 

effects include kidney tumors, severe acne, trembling, and not to 

mention several other gender and age specific problems. In addition, people who inject anabolic steroids run the added risk of contracting or transmitting HIV/AIDS or hepatitis, which causes serious damage to the liver, of course. 

In conclusion, I strongly believe that, if unaddressed, this problem will only escalate into a greater problem for athletes and millions of others influenced by them. It is time that we start sending 

a positive message to our young people, while at the same time, 

protecting the health and integrity of our athletes and the sports 

they compete in. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared remarks. I would like 

to respond, if I may, to one of the questions you actually asked earlier. 

Why take drugs? I know as a young athlete, I wanted to make 

an athletic team. There is a tremendous amount of pressure, I 

think, on athletes today to excel. My first venture was not extremely successful. I tried to make the baseball team, and I went 

from the outfield to the infield to the bench. I was cut from the 

team, and it was the church baseball team. So, it wasn’t exactly a 

stellar start. But I think it represents what I wanted to do. I wanted to be involved in sports, so I kept trying different sports. 

Eventually, I found the sport of running, which, you know, was 

the talent God gave me, and I had a wonderful coach, who knew 

how to take that talent, and really develop it into what I am today. 

But one of the things that he did, and I think this is paramount 

in what we are dealing with now, is he set standards, that if I 

broke those standards, I would no longer be a part of that team. 

In my day, it wasn’t so much steroids as it was alcohol. He made 

it very clear. He said if you get involved in any kind of alcohol, if 

you drink, you are off the team. And he cut people from the team. 

I knew the boundaries that I was faced with. I stuck with those 

boundaries. 

There is pressure on young people to succeed today. I think that 

is one of the reasons they are willing to take that risk, but they 

19

need to recognize that there are penalties that go with it. I knew 

the penalty that I would be faced with was a very stern one. I 

would no longer compete in athletics. I would be finished, because 

that was his boundary. That was his standard. That would help me 

in the years to come, and that is why this is such an important lesson for all of our young people. 

So, those are the end of my remarks, and I thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Hon. Jim Ryun follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JIM RYUN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM

THE STATE OF KANSAS

Mr. Chairman: It is an honor to be here, and I would like to thank you for asking 

me to participate in this most important and timely hearing. 

As a three-time Olympian and former professional athlete, I take this issue before 

us today both personally and seriously. During my career I ran over 100 miles a 

week, training twice a day. I believed then, as I do today, that there is no acceptable 

substitute for hard work when it comes to sports, or for that matter, anything in 

life. 

I was fortunate to run at a time before performance enhancing steroids became 

a real issue in the professional sports arena. In fact, during my athletic career, I 

did not know of any long distance runner that used steroids. Sadly, the running 

world has now been hit with steroids, blood doping through the use of E.P.O., and 

other forms of performance enhancing drugs. 

While most athletes refuse to use performance enhancing drugs, steroid use has 

become a serious problem in professional athletics today. 

I find this new trend to be very disturbing. 

Like it or not, professional athletes are natural role models for our young people, 

and it is time that they begin to take this responsibility seriously. Today’s athletes 

are sending the wrong message to their young fans, a dangerous message that 

stands not only to have a negative impact on their future athletic lives, but also 

on the rest of their lives as a whole. 

It is encouraging to see that many professional athletes who have admitted their 

steroid use are now working to educate others on the dangers associated with them. 

Using performance enhancing steroids is a way of trying to get something for 

nothing. For many, it is the easy road to more fame or more money. Steroid use 

is a method to bypass the blood, sweat, and tears of training and is really nothing 

less than cheating to achieve unnatural results. 

Today, I am speaking as a representative of those who did it the right way. I 

trained exceptionally hard to reach the level of performance that I achieved. I spent 

an average of 4 to 5 hours each day working to improve upon the God given talent 

that I had been blessed with. I ran thousands of miles in brutal conditions and was 

proud to compete with so many athletes who were doing the same. 

When others cheat, it robs those who compete fairly of reaping the benefits of 

their hard work. 

In addition to the negative influence steroid use is having on the mindset of our 

society, it also does not come without significant physical risks. Athletes are trading 

a few years of marginal performance enhancement for a potential lifetime of negative health effects. 

In fact, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse: the major side effects 

from abusing anabolic steroids can include liver tumors and cancer, jaundice, fluid 

retention, high blood pressure, increases in LDL (bad cholesterol), and decreases in 

HDL (good cholesterol). Other side effects include kidney tumors, severe acne, trembling, and not to mention several other gender and age specific problems. 

In addition, people who inject anabolic steroids run the added risk of contracting 

or transmitting HIV/AIDS or hepatitis, which causes serious damage to the liver. 

In conclusion, I strongly believe that if unaddressed, this problem will only escalate into greater problems for athletes and millions of others influenced by them. 

It is time that we start sending a positive message to our young people while at 

the same time protecting the health and integrity of our athletes and the sports 

they compete in. 

Thank You.

Mr. STEARNS. I thank my colleague, and I just appreciate his 

comments about setting the standards and the boundaries, so that 

young people, and obviously, amateur athletes as well as profesVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
20

sional athletes. And I think that is part of the core of this hearing, 

is to see why haven’t these boundaries been established. 

Any member who wish to seek, to ask questions to our colleague, 

Mr. Ryun. Mr. Buyer. 

Mr. BUYER. I would ask, Mr. Ryun, would you advocate a no tolerance policy for steroid use for professional athletes and college, 

and high school? 

Mr. RYUN. I would. I believe once you set that standard, it begins 

to be the standard, not only for professional athletes, but it sends 

the message to the younger generation that if they break these 

standards and cross over that boundary, then there is a penalty 

that goes with it. 

You know, we often talk about the rewards of hard work and performance, and that there are tremendous accolades that go with it. 

We also need to emphasize the tremendous problems that come 

with the use of drugs, and if we have a no tolerance policy. Now, 

let me qualify that by saying this. If you have someone—I know 

today, for example, you can buy over the counter medications. If 

you innocently somehow have done that, there is a process I know 

in the sport of running where you are tested, and if it can be proven that there was some innocence involved, then you are given, you 

know, if you will, a moment to recoup from that. But I believe the 

message needs to begin with no tolerance, if you cross this boundary, there are penalties that go with it. 

Mr. BUYER. You know, we give a lot of deference in our society 

to governing bodies, such as in amateur sports, and for the professional bodies to police themselves. How well do you think that 

these organizations are performing? 

Mr. RYUN. Well, let me try and answer your question by actually 

making a statement at the same time. I think they are doing—

some of them are doing a reasonable job. But I think they need to 

have encouragement, perhaps sent by this body, that oversight and 

other options are available, should they not create a standard that 

encourages and doesn’t allow professional athletes to break these 

boundaries. 

I prefer that the governing bodies would establish those standards, and work with them, and—as opposed to Congress getting involved. As much as I love the governing body we are involved in, 

I would prefer that would be the second option, as opposed to the 

governing bodies making that decision, setting the boundaries, living by them, and doing the appropriate thing. 

Mr. BUYER. We have some of these governing bodies, or professional sports, that an athlete would even commit a crime, whether 

it is the use of cocaine, whether they can be tested for those types 

of—they can do drug testing. They have been arrested for marijuana use. They get them into a drug program, rehabilitation. They 

don’t kick them off the team. They say they are a professional athlete. This is their job. The owners—you know, they don’t want to 

lose their star athletes. So, even for when they commit crimes, they 

say oh, you know, I can play basketball a lot better when I am on 

cocaine. Really. And yet, we—those governing bodies permit them 

to stay as athletes. And now, you know, it is kind of strange, if we 

are going to get involved in their business, and they say well, you 

21

can go ahead and keep your athletes if they commit crimes, but 

with regard to steroid use, we are going to kick you out. 

How—do you have a comment? 

Mr. RYUN. My comment would be that the message that they are 

sending to our younger generation, to our amateur athletes, and to 

our young high school and junior high athletes is that there really 

aren’t any boundaries. That if you are good enough, or if you can 

maybe be the exception to the rule, and I don’t believe there should 

be exceptions. I think we need to enforce those rules. I think we 

need to move forward to sending a message that we won’t have 

that sort of tolerance in the future. 

Mr. BUYER. So, in high schools in America, they are trying to do 

that. Would you agree? 

Mr. RYUN. I think many high schools are. I would go back to——

Mr. BUYER. And they are going to no tolerance policies today on 

alcohol and drug usage. And then, when we get into the college 

ranks, something is slipping pretty fast here. 

Mr. RYUN. I think it is that pressure to succeed. And often, we 

lose that—the importance of what it establishes for the future generations. I go back to the example I gave a moment ago of my high 

school coach. Anybody participating in one of his sports, he had 

cross country, he had track, and he had swimming, knew in advance when going in what the boundaries were. And they also 

knew that if you crossed that boundary, you were off the team. It 

may mean the team would lose, but the standard was held, and I 

think that is important, because it sends the right message that we 

need to have for future generations. 

Mr. BUYER. Is it fair for me to infer now from your testimony 

that your counsel to us is, is if these governing bodies do not do 

well in their oversight to set the standards, whether they are professional or in amateur sports, that they are inviting the scrutiny 

of the U.S. Congress, or even the drafting of standards for them. 

Mr. RYUN. I would prefer that we work with the governing bodies, but should they prove ineffective in what they are doing, then 

yes, I believe scrutiny is appropriate. Oversight is appropriate as 

well. 

Mr. BUYER. Thank you, Mr. Ryun. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank my colleague. The gentlelady from Colorado. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t usually get recognized as the young lady, so that is good. 

Congressman Ryun, I really want to thank you for coming today, 

and sharing some of your thoughts. I was particularly struck when 

you talked, in your opening statement, and again, just now, about 

your coach, who talked about knowing the boundaries, and sort of 

a zero tolerance policy. 

The thing I have been concerned about the last few years, and 

I have had it in my backyard at the University of Colorado, not so 

much with steroids, but with sex and underage drinking, and it 

seems to me the culture that grew up there was this culture of 

well, everybody is doing it. This is what we have to do to recruit 

football players to our program, and so, we are just going to go 

along with it. And it took a lot of effort by a lot of people, including 

me, to sort of break them of that attitude of well, everybody is 

22

doing it, so we have to do it. The thing I am concerned about is 

if all of the coaches don’t have that same view that your coach had, 

that we are not tolerating this, we are not doing this in this program, and you are off the team if you are taking steroids, I mean, 

it is a zero tolerance approach, then what happens is a culture 

builds up where people start surreptitiously doing this, because 

they understand it is not a level playing field if they don’t. 

I am wondering how we can break that mentality, if you have 

any thoughts on that. 

Mr. RYUN. First of all, I don’t think there are any easy answers. 

Leadership is a very lonely position, but doing the right thing, 

there is good fruit for the future, especially for our younger generations, and you know, as you have more and more coaches that are 

willing to take that standard and use that as a standard, then I 

think we will start to see some reverses here. I am optimistic 

enough to believe that as those that are willing to stiffen the spine 

and do the right thing, that ultimately, it will pay great dividends. 

Ms. DEGETTE. I am wondering, we talked about the governing 

bodies, the bodies that oversee these various activities, particularly 

with young people, and is there more that they can be doing to discipline coaches or coaching staffs that allow the unauthorized use 

of steroids? 

Mr. RYUN. I think sending the right message, again, the zero tolerance policy——

Ms. DEGETTE. But I mean, is there more enforcement that—is 

there more incentive they can—either a carrot or a stick approach, 

that they can give to send the right message? 

Mr. RYUN. I would have to think about that some. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Yes, that would be—I would love to talk to you 

about that. And the last question I have is, is there any role in all 

of this for Congress, either funding more public education of the 

risks of steroids, or putting—or giving incentives to programs that 

have sort of a zero tolerance program? Is there something we can 

do? 

Mr. RYUN. Well, I mentioned earlier to Chairman Stearns that 

I would prefer that the governing bodies of each of the individual 

sports be those that set the standard, but set it high enough that 

you really do have a no tolerance policy. But if they aren’t able to 

enforce that, and choose not to, then meetings like this do a lot to 

bring public attention, and in many cases, ridicule to a double 

standard. And it is important that you use this as an option. I 

would prefer that government not get involved with those standards. At the same time, that becomes a fallback, should they not 

follow through. 

Ms. DEGETTE. But what about, though, funding of public education, or anything like that? Is there any role—do you really see 

Congress’ role purely as sort of a bully pulpit? 

Mr. RYUN. Yes, I think bully pulpit to begin with, and again, 

going back to looking for those individuals who would hold that 

standard, the coaches that are willing to stand alone, and to say 

this is what we will do, and these are the results of your decision 

to get involved in steroids. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

23

Mr. STEARNS. I thank you, and I just remind my colleagues, we 

have two other panels, and second, we have to try to vacate this 

room for Chairman Upton, who wants it at 1, I believe. So, anyone 

else would like questions, obviously, Mr. Upton. 

Mr. UPTON. I have a question. We are ready to put this under 

our jurisdiction as well, Telecommunications. Mr. Jim, it is—again, 

we welcome you here, and I just have a brief comment, and a short 

question. That is, this issue of steroids has been festering for some 

time. Let us face it. And there are a number of us in the Congress 

who I think over the last number of months, even I would put it 

into sports technology, seasons, trying to tell particularly professional sports to get it right. We have tried to use the bully pulpit. 

I would be interested in your answer. Did baseball get it right? 

MLB? 

Mr. RYUN. I have my questions as to whether they did. It doesn’t 

seem to me that it is a consistent policy. 

Mr. UPTON. I agree with you. I yield back. 

Mr. STEARNS. The gentleman yields back. The gentlelady, Ms. 

Blackburn. 

Mr. BLACKBURN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to our colleague, 

I say thank you. As my son, who is now 24, was training and becoming the State 1-mile champ, we used you as an example many 

a time, and I just do have one question for you. 

When we hear sportscasters go about debating well, maybe we 

should just put an asterisk by someone’s name to note that they 

were a record-breaker, but—or they were a champion, but they 

were either convicted or a found or a confirmed user of steroids, 

and knowing how powerful your witness has been, as someone who 

trained and did it right. You and Chariots of Fire got us through 

a lot of tough times, as Chad trained. 

So, I would just like for you to comment, if you would, about how 

it makes you feel when you hear this debated about putting an asterisk by someone’s name, and do you think that those individuals 

just should be stricken from the record books? 

Mr. RYUN. Thank you for your question, Marsha. And I, first of 

all, I believe that it is cheating those who did it right, who have 

worked, often don’t get the acclaim that they should, but they 

played by the rules. Yes, I think there should be maybe an asterisk, but also, you know, when you list the accolades, world record 

holder, put down steroid user, whatever it might be, because if that 

can be proven, then that should be a part of their resume as well. 

Mr. STEARNS. The gentlelady. Anyone else seeks recognition. Yes. 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Real quickly, Congressman, it is a—I remember my motivation, back when I was in high 

school, as my track coach, when I was running the mile, always berated me I was nowhere near your time. And so, it is—I won’t give 

you any tough questions in revenge here, but it was good to see 

this, and I was—it is good to know you did this the honorable way. 

It is so important. 

A quick question for schools. You mention about the aspects of 

the student athletes. What recommendations would you have for 

school boards, coaches, and PTAs, to also get the message out of 

the importance of this? And the reason I bring this up is an event 

I have had the honor of volunteering on the last several years has 

24

been a children’s triathlon, that we are raising money for Habitat 

for Humanity. And in that, we emphasize the point that every kid 

should finish, and every child who finishes gets a medal, and the 

top ones get awards, et cetera. And of course, there are differences 

in there, in terms of some parents are there to encourage the kids 

every step of the way, and there are some who, perhaps, push a 

little bit too much. But it seems to me we also need to get this message out to parents. 

What would you recommend, again, for school boards, superintendents, coaches, and parents? 

Mr. RYUN. That they need to establish a standard, just like the 

coach does, of zero tolerance. It is not easily established, and it is 

not very popular at times, perhaps, but it is the message that I 

think we all want to send from here, and you can do that in a lot 

of different ways, and that is one way of doing it as well. 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you very much, and thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. STEARNS. Anyone else seeks recognition? If not, we will go 

to our second panel, and thank Mr. Ryun for his able testimony, 

and appreciate his time. 

The second panel consists of Mr. Don Hooton. He has also started the Taylor Hooton Foundation, which is fighting steroid abuse. 

Dr. Linn Goldberg, Professor of Medicine, Division of Health Promotion and Sports Medicine, at Oregon Health and Science University, in Portland, Oregon. Mr. Robert Kanaby, Executive Director, 

National Federation of State High School Associations. Ms. Sandra 

Worth, Athletic Trainer Commission, Head Athletic Trainer, University of Maryland, on behalf of the National Athletic Trainers Association. And Dr. Charles Yesalis, Professor at Penn State, dealing 

with sports medicine. 

I want to welcome all of you here, and Mr. Hooton, we will start 

with you, and thank you very much for coming. Welcome. 

Mr. HOOTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. STEARNS. And we probably just need you to put your speaker 

on, and just move it a little bit toward you. Staff can help you. 

Mr. HOOTON. Oh. Excuse me. 

Mr. STEARNS. There you go. 

STATEMENTS OF DONALD M. HOOTON; LINN GOLDBERG, PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE, DIVISION OF HEALTH PROMOTION 

AND SPORTS MEDICINE, OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE 

UNIVERSITY; ROBERT F. KANABY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF STATE HIGH SCHOOL ASSOCIATIONS; SANDRA WORTH, HEAD ATHLETIC TRAINER, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL ATHLETIC TRAINERS ASSOCIATION; AND CHARLES E. YESALIS, 

PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY 

Mr. HOOTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, distinguished members, 

Mr. Barton from my home State of Texas. 

20 short months ago, my youngest son, Taylor, took his own life. 

He was just 2 weeks away from beginning his senior year in high 

school. This past spring, he would have been a pitcher on his varsity baseball team, which had been one of his dreams. During the 

fall of his junior year, his JV coach told a 6’3’’, 175 pound young 

25

man that he needed to get bigger in order to improve his chances 

of making the varsity team. Taylor took his coach’s advice seriously, and he resorted to using anabolic steroids as a shortcut to 

reach his goal. 

I am absolutely convinced that Taylor’s use of anabolic steroids 

played a significant role in causing the depression severe enough 

to result in suicide, and I have learned that what happened to Taylor, the events leading up to and including his suicide are right out 

of the medical textbook on steroids. And we have also found out 

that Taylor is not the only young person that this has happened 

to. Since going public, we have been contacted by a number of families from across America whose stories are very similar to Taylor’s. 

I would ask you to look at the front page of the New York Times 

today. There is another tragic story today from a young man 

named Efrain Marrero, from the State of California. 

Well, just how widespread is steroid use amongst our youth? The 

question is extremely difficult to answer, because the users are so 

secretive about their usage. According to Dr. Yesalis, who is here 

on the panel, and I quote: ‘‘In my 58 years, other than pedophilia, 

I have never seen a behavior as secretive as this.’’ Well, with this 

secrecy in mind, and based on what I have learned from talking 

with the kids, I believe the studies that have been quoted here underestimate the usage amongst our kids. Experts in general put the 

usage rate at somewhere between 5 and 6 percent of the total high 

school population. Some studies put the use of steroids at about 11 

to 12 percent of the junior and the senior male high school students 

in some parts of the country, especially the South, where I come 

from. 

During the days following Taylor’s funeral, we had a little window open, when the kids told us the secrets about what was going 

on. They opened up to my wife and I. They told us that there are 

a lot more kids doing steroids than the percentages I just shared 

with you. Some estimate that at least a third of the young men 

that show up to play high school under the lights on Friday night 

are juicing. 

Many factors contribute to the high usage of steroids amongst 

our kids, including the pressure to win and earn a scholarship, 

combined with heavy peer pressure. I believe a major contributor 

is the example, the poor example being set by our professional 

teams, athletes and management. Our kids look up to these guys. 

They want to do the things that the pros do to be successful. 

When I looked for a quote to illustrate the messages that are 

being sent to the kids, I really didn’t have to look far. All I had 

to do was pick up Jose Canseco’s new book. He tells the world: ‘‘I 

truly believe that because I have experimented with it for so many 

years, that it can make an average athlete a super athlete. It can 

make a super athlete incredible, just legendary.’’ He attributes his 

success in baseball to his use of steroids, and the kids know that 

Jose is not the only big league player that has used steroids to help 

them get to the top. 

Let me take this opportunity to speak directly to players like 

Barry Bonds and others, who insult our intelligence by claiming 

that they do not know what they have been taking to improve their 

performance. Barry, gentlemen, the next time you are wondering 

26

what the stuff is that is causing you to gain the muscle and 

strength that allows you to hit so many home runs, just ask any 

high school baseball player in America. They know exactly what 

you have been taking to get those results, and they are following 

your lead. Our youngsters hear the message. It is loud, it is clear, 

and it is wrong. If you want to achieve your goals, it is okay to use 

steroids, because the pros are doing it. 

Major League Baseball and other sports need to take serious 

steps to solve this steroid problem. To use steroid sports is cheating, in addition to being a felony. Slapping a player on the wrist 

with a 10 game suspension sends just one more signal to the kids 

that management is not talking seriously about ridding the game 

of this junk. Forcing a player to miss just 6 percent of the season 

is equivalent to forcing a high school kid to sit out just one game 

during a season. And we really shouldn’t be talking at all about 

putting asterisks next to these guys’ records. We are missing the 

whole point. They ought to be thrown out of the big leagues. 

Over 80 percent of the steroids that are sold illegally to our kids 

in the U.S. come across the border from Mexico. They are of very 

questionable quality. Most are veterinary grade at best, designed 

for horses, pigs, and cattle. They are very easy to buy. They are 

sold by drug pushers at most local gyms. Taylor met his dealer at 

our local YMCA, and yes, they can easily be purchased over the 

Internet. 

So, what do we do about it? I believe testing is a crucial way of 

controlling steroid abuse amongst our athletes, because it is the 

only way to know for sure whether or not these kids are using this 

drug. In addition, a random testing program can act as a deterrent 

against our kids using steroids. Today’s high school student has no 

fear of getting caught. There is no testing. Most coaches are not 

taking active steps to stop this usage. Parents don’t know what to 

look for, and neither do many family physicians, and our law enforcement officials are not paying serious attention to this illegal 

use by our kids. A testing program will create the risk of getting 

caught, and will at least give the kids an excuse to say no when 

they are pressured to use steroids. 

Another weapon that we have is education. Students need to understand that these drugs can seriously harm them. But warning 

a 16-year-old about the dangers of having a heart attack or developing liver cancer when he is 40 years old is probably going to fall 

on deaf ears. That is why I believe our coaches are the most serious 

target for this education. They are the key to solving the problem. 

Coaches are positioned to reward the behavior of the steroid user. 

For example, a young man may earn a starting position on the defensive line, because of the increase in weight and strength that 

the kid developed when he used steroids over the summer. Coach 

may not know that the player used steroids to achieve the result, 

but believe me, the other kids on the team know how the result 

was achieved, and they get another clear message that they need 

to take steroids in order to compete. 

With this in mind, I believe that we must take steps to make 

coaches more responsible and accountable for supervising the situation with the teams. They need to be trained to recognize the symptoms of steroid abuse. They need to be trained to know what to do 

27

about it, and they need to be held accountable for ensuring that 

their teams are steroid-free. Coaches should be forced to implement 

a zero tolerance policy against steroid abuse, and our coaches need 

to be certified. They need to have to pass a test to prove they are 

competent to supervise our kids. 

In addition, the medical community needs to step up to this problem. Many doctors have told me this is not a subject that they are 

trained on in medical school. Our clinics are not prepared to handle 

steroid abusers. I have heard a number of steroid users that were 

thrown out of traditional drug clinics because of their aggressive 

behavior. 

To help fill the education void, we are working in conjunction 

with experts in this field, like Dr. Gary Wadler and others, and 

have formed a non-profit foundation, the Taylor Hooton Foundation, for fighting steroid abuse. The only private group that we 

know of that is organizing to fight this battle, and we would love 

to explore ways to work with you to make our foundation part of 

your efforts moving forward. There are other things that you can 

do, such as strengthening the penalty for distribution and possession, and ensuring that existing laws are enforced. And we need to 

find ways to stop the flow of steroids across the borders from Mexico. 

Creative legislation is needed now. Doing nothing will ensure 

steroid use will grow. Pros continue to use, coaches continue to look 

the other way, and parents continue to push the kids to get that 

scholarship. Knowingly or unknowingly, our kids continue to be 

pressured into using steroids. 

[The prepared statement of Donald M. Hooton follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DONALD M. HOOTON

20 short months ago, our youngest son Taylor took his own life. He was just 2 

weeks away from beginning his senior year in high school. This past spring, he 

would have been a starting pitcher on his varsity baseball team. 

During the fall of his junior year, his JV coach told this 6’3’’—175 pound young 

man that he needed to ‘‘get bigger’’ to improve his chances of making varsity. Taylor 

took his coach’s advice seriously, and he resorted to use of anabolic steroids as a 

short-cut to reach his objective. 

I am convinced that Taylor’s secret use of anabolic steroids played a significant 

role in causing the severe depression that resulted in his suicide. I have learned 

that what happened to Taylor—the events leading up to and including his suicide—

are right out of the medical ‘‘textbook’’ on steroids. 

And, Taylor is not the only young person that this has happened to. Since going 

public with Taylor’s story, we have been contacted by a number of families from 

across America whose children have met the same fate as Taylor. 

How widespread is steroid usage amongst our youth? 

This question is difficult to answer because the users are so secretive about their 

usage. According to Dr. Chuck Yesalis of Penn State University, ‘‘In my 58 years, 

other than pedophilia, I’ve never witnessed a behavior as secretive as this.’’

With secrecy in mind and based on what I have heard directly from kids, I believe 

most studies underestimate actual usage rates. 

Experts put the usage rate at about 4-5% of the total US High School population. 

Some studies have put the use of steroids at about 11-12% of the junior/senior HS 

male population in some parts of the country—for example, the South. 

During the days following Taylor’s funeral, many of Taylor’s friends opened up to 

my wife and I about what’s really going on amongst their peer groups. They told 

us that there are more kids doing steroids than the percentages that I just shared 

with you. Some estimated that at least a third of the high school players that show 

up to play football under the lights on Friday nights are ‘‘juicing.’’ 

Many factors contribute to the increase in steroid usage amongst our kids including the pressure to win and earn a scholarship, combined with heavy peer pressure. 

28

I believe a major catalyst is the poor example being set by our professional teams—

athletes and management. Our kids look up these guys—they want to do those 

things that the pros do to be successful. 

When I looked for a quote to illustrate the messages that the pros are sending 

to our kids, I didn’t have to look far. In Jose Canseco’s new book he says, ‘‘I truly 

believe that because I’ve experimented with it for so many years that it can make 

an average athlete a super athlete. It can make a super athlete incredible. Just legendary!’’ He attributes his success in baseball to his illicit use of steroids. 

And, the kids know that Jose is not the only big league player that has used 

steroids to help them get to the top. Let me take this opportunity to speak to players like Barry Bonds and others who insult our intelligence by claiming not to know 

what it is that they’ve been taking to improve their performance—‘‘Gentlemen, the 

next time you are wondering what that stuff is that is causing you to gain the muscle and strength that allows you to hit so many home runs, just ask any high school 

baseball player in America. They know exactly what it is that you’ve been taking 

to get that kind of results and they are following your lead.’

Our youngsters hear the message: it’s loud, it’s clear, and it’s wrong—‘‘if you want 

to achieve your goals, it’s okay to use steroids to get you there because the pros are 

doing it.’’

Major League Baseball and other sports need to take serious steps to stop the use 

of steroids by the players. To use steroids in sports is cheating in addition to being 

a felony. Slapping a player on the wrist with a 10-game suspension sends just one 

more signal to the kids that management is not serious about ridding the game of 

this junk. Forcing a pro to miss just 6% of the season is equivalent to forcing a high 

school kid to sit the bench for one of his games! And, we shouldn’t be talking about 

whether to put an asterisk next to these guys’ records! We’re missing the whole 

point. We should be throwing them out of the big leagues. 

Over 80% of illegally sold steroids our kids are buying come across the border 

from Mexico. They are of very questionable quality—most are veterinary grade at 

best, designed for use in horses, pigs, and cattle. They are very easy to buy. They 

are sold by drug pushers at most local gyms—Taylor met his dealer at our local 

YMCA. And, yes they can even be easily purchased over the Internet. 

Now, what can we do about it? 

I believe testing is a crucial way of controlling the abuse of steroids among athletes—it is the only way to know for sure whether kids are using these drugs. In 

addition, a random testing program can act as a deterrent against kids using 

steroids. Today’s HS student has no fear of getting caught—there is no testing, most 

coaches are not taking active steps to stop usage, parents don’t know what to look 

for and neither do many family physicians, and law enforcement officials are not 

paying serious attention to the illegal use of steroids by our kids. 

A testing program will create a risk of getting caught and will give the kids a 

good excuse to say ‘‘no’’ when they are pressured to use steroids. 

Another weapon that we have in this fight is education. 

Students need to understand that these drugs can seriously harm them. But 

warning a 16-year-old about the dangers of having a heart attack or developing liver 

problems when he turns 35 or 40 will probably fall on deaf ears. 

That’s why I believe that our coaches are the most important first target for this 

education—they are the key to solving this problem. Coaches are positioned to reward kids that take steroids. For example, a young man may earn the starting position on the defensive line because of the increase in weight and strength that resulted from secret steroid use. The coach may not know that this player used 

steroids to achieve this result. But believe me, the other kids on the team know how 

the result was achieved and they get a clear message that they need to take steroids 

in order to compete. 

With this in mind, I believe that we must take steps to make coaches more responsible & accountable for supervising this situation with their teams. Coaches 

need to be:

a) Trained to recognize the symptoms of steroid abuse, 

b) Trained to know what to do about it, and 

c) Held accountable for insuring that their teams are steroid-free. 

Coaches should be forced to implement a zero tolerance policy against steroid 

abuse. 

In addition, our medical community needs to step up to this problem. Doctors 

have told me that this is a subject that they are not trained on in medical school. 

Clinics are not prepared to handle steroid abusers—I have heard about a number 

of steroid users that were thrown out of traditional drug treatment centers because 

of their ‘‘aggressive behavior.’’

29

To help fill the education void, we have formed a non-profit foundation—The Taylor Hooton Foundation for Fighting Steroid Abuse, the only private group that is 

organizing to help fight this battle. We would like to explore ways to work with you 

make our Foundation part of your efforts moving forward. 

There are other things that you can do such as strengthening the penalties for 

distribution and possession and insuring that existing laws are enforced. And we 

need to find ways to stop the flow of steroids across our borders. 

Creative legislation is needed NOW. Doing nothing will insure that steroid use 

will grow. Pros continue to use, coaches continue to look the other way for whatever 

reason, and parents continue to push their kids to get that scholarship. Knowingly 

or unknowingly, our kids continue to be pressured into using steroids.

Mr. STEARNS. Thank you very much. Dr. Goldberg. 

STATEMENT OF LINN GOLDBERG 

Mr. GOLDBERG. Mr. Chairman and committee members. Thank 

you for the opportunity to testify on this critical issue. 

I am a practicing physician and professor of medicine in the Oregon Health and Science University. I have worked with young 

athletes for two decades. I am the father of 5 sons. So for me, this 

has—problem has significance, both personally and professionally. 

It is difficult to be a teenage athlete today, but when winning 

turns into a win at all costs mentality, it can be destructive. Anabolic steroid use has invaded the world of adolescent sport. The 

NIDA-funded University of Michigan study shows that past year 

and past month use among twelfth graders is at an all-time high. 

Well-publicized problems of high school athlete steroid use in Utah, 

Arizona, today in Connecticut, and in Texas, are troubling reminders that this problem can occur anywhere. 

Although there is a focus on steroids in professional sport, and 

the President correctly said we need to solve this problem, the vast 

majority of steroid users are attending our Nation’s high schools as 

we sit here, and many don’t have the tools to refuse an offer. Having just been to Texas last week, and speaking to coaches and administrators, it is clear that these school representatives want to 

rid their sports programs of this growing problem. 

Steroid use has many origins. They include steroid abuse both by 

the high profile athlete and local athletes. There are gender and 

media pressures as well. For females, there is a link between disordered eating and depression. For males, there are links between 

unreasonable expectations of becoming a professional athlete, risktaking, impulsivity, and poor decisionmaking. 

One specific influence that promotes the tacit acceptance of steroid use has emerged through advertisers who glibly use the term 

‘‘on steroids’’ to market their products, literally saying that their 

merchandise is bigger and better, as if it were on steroids. This includes the 3M corporation’s ad stating that its ‘‘Post-it Easel’’ is 

like a ‘‘Post-it Note’’ on steroids, the U.S. Satellite Broadcasting’s 

boast that its digital picture and sound are like ‘‘putting your TV 

on steroids,’’ and Saab, comparing its car engine to the muscles created from steroid use. 

Anabolic steroid use has numerous physical and psychological 

risks, and these risks may be even greater among adolescents, due 

to differences in physiology, lower body mass, and lack of hormonal 

maturity. So, what is the solution? With funding from the National 

Institute on Drug Abuse, we have studied this problem, and developed two specific programs. Initially, we learned what would not 

30

work. We found that scare tactics, just say no, informational pamphlets, and adult lectures do not deter steroid use. High school students don’t typically listen to lectures, they don’t read pamphlets, 

and they often feel invulnerable. But what we did find that did 

work, we learned that we had to separate girls and boys, as their 

reasons for using these drugs differ. Second, the information discussions need to be led by peers, not coaches, because kids listen 

to kids. Third, there needed to be younger and older students 

present, so the more mature athletes could serve as role models. 

And last, the instructor, the facilitator, needed to be someone the 

students respect, in and out of the classroom, and those are the 

coaches. These necessary components are present in nearly every 

sports team in the United States. 

Armed with NIDA’s support, ATLAS, the program for young 

men, and ATHENA, the program for young women, were born. 

These programs provide healthy sports nutrition, strength training 

as alternatives to athletic-enhancing and body-shaping drugs, while 

reducing the risk factors that promote use of alcohol and other 

harmful substances. The messages are clear and tailored to each 

gender, and students really enjoy the activities. Peer leaders do the 

bulk of the teaching, and the coaches assist them. 

After ATLAS, athletes had reduced alcohol and illicit drug use, 

more than a 50 percent reduction in steroid use, reduced sports 

supplement use, and less drinking and driving. ATHENA athletes 

had reductions in new sports supplements, diet pills, amphetamines, and steroid use, lowered alcohol and marijuana use, that 

was long-term, and less riding in cars with drinking drivers. 

ATLAS was awarded the Model Program status by SAMHSA, 

and recognized as exemplary by the U.S. Department of Education. 

ATLAS and ATHENA are the feature prevention programs listed 

in the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004, and these education 

initiatives require funding. During high school, students establish 

habits that can last a lifetime. To prevent steroid use, schools need 

to do what they do best, educate. They need to educate parents, 

teachers, coaches, and athletes. 

ATLAS and ATHENA are examples of rigorous research-based 

programs being used for public service. They improve the health of 

young athletes, and recapture the healthy mission of sport. 

[The prepared statement of Linn Goldberg follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LINN GOLDBERG, PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE, DIVISION OF

HEALTH PROMOTION AND SPORTS MEDICINE, OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY

Mr. Chairmen and members of the committees: Thank you for the opportunity to 

testify on this critical issue. I am a practicing physician, professor of medicine and 

Head of the Division of Health Promotion & Sports Medicine at the Oregon Health 

& Science University in Portland, Oregon. For nearly two decades, I have worked 

with young athletes and have been engaged in the study of anabolic steroids and 

other performance enhancing drug use. I also am the father of five sons. For me, 

this problem has significance, both personally and professionally. 

It is difficult to be a teenage athlete today. More than 50% of high school students 

participate in school-sponsored athletics, and these student-athletes face the pressure to succeed, perform at a high level, and win for themselves, their team, parents, schools and communities. When winning becomes more important than developing well-adjusted student-athletes, this often translates into substance abuse and 

antisocial behavior. 

31

Anabolic steroid use has invaded the world of adolescent sport. Despite a perception that student-athletes are not involved in unhealthy behaviors, young athletes 

participate in substance abuse at a rate similar to that of non-athletes and they 

have even higher rates of performance enhancing drug and supplement use. The 

most recent Monitoring the Future survey shows that past year and past month 

steroid use among high school seniors is at its highest level since self-reported use 

was first assessed over a decade ago. The arrest of Utah high school students traveling in a van loaded with steroids, and the recent admitted use of these drugs by 

high school teams in Arizona and Texas, are reminders that this problem requires 

immediate action. 

Despite the focus on steroid use among selected professional and Olympic athletes, and news reports of use by police officers, the vast majority of steroid users 

are in our nation’s high schools. Based on the May, 2004 Centers for Disease Control 

report, there are more than 800,000 high school students who have used or are currently using anabolic steroids. Also, because steroids have not been a focus of youth 

drug prevention, and since high school drug prevention is limited, young athletes 

are unprotected at a time when they are particularly vulnerable to the inducements 

and risks of these drugs. 

Steroid use among children and adolescents has several origins. Besides the significant role model effect from high profile steroid abusing athletes, there are gender 

and media pressures. For adolescent females, the desire toward being thin is compounded by the needs of their sport, resulting in disordered eating, depressive symptoms and use of body-shaping drugs, including steroids. For young male athletes, 

there are unrealistic expectations for their future as collegiate and professional athletes, coupled with risk-taking and impulsive behaviors that lead to performanceenhancing drug use. Adolescent male steroid use has been found to be related to 

anti-social behavior, and use of alcohol and other drugs. 

Another critical influence toward the acceptance of steroid use may have emerged 

among advertisers who glibly use the term, ‘‘on steroids’’ to market their products. 

These strategies promote the idea that being ‘‘on steroids’’ relates to their merchandise being bigger and better. This includes the 3-M corporation’s ad stating that its 

‘‘Post-it Easel’’ is like a ‘‘Post-it Note’’ on steroids, or U.S. Satellite Broadcasting’s 

boast that its digital picture and sound are like ‘‘putting your TV on steroids.’’ A 

recent shoe ad describes its cross training athletic shoe to be ‘‘cross trainers on 

steroids,’’ while a Saab automobile advertisement compared their vehicle’s engine to 

the large muscles derived from steroid use with the title, ‘‘Saab vs Steroids.’’ Could 

anyone imagine marketing strategy that makes the analogy that their product is 

‘‘on’’ any other drug of abuse, like cocaine, LSD, or marijuana? In our society, only 

steroid drugs are associated with being bigger and better and used in ad campaigns. 

Anabolic steroid use has numerous risks. These risks may be even greater among 

adolescents, due to differences in physiology, body mass, and maturity. Current scientific data probably underestimates the actual harmful effects of steroid use because of the low doses studied in most research, which do not approach the typical 

doses used by steroid users. Because there are no long-term scientific studies of use 

at the extreme levels taken by athletes, research into the effects have been left to 

animal studies, case reports, and lower dose use. These documented harms include: 

1) increased risk for cardiovascular disease, including heart attacks and strokes; 2) 

the risk of various liver diseases, especially for those who use the oral steroids; 3) 

tumors, including those of the prostate and liver; 4) tendon rupture; 5) kidney failure; 6) masculinization of women; 7) stunting the height of children and adolescents; 

and 8) psychological disturbances ranging from suicidal depression to uncontrolled 

aggression. In addition, because of needle sharing, the risk of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, 

and serious infections are ever-present. 

So, what is the solution? To combat the growing use of steroids and associated 

behaviors, my colleague Diane Elliot and I engaged in 4 years of formative research. 

Initially we learned what would not work. We found that scare tactics, informational pamphlets and adult lectures would not deter students from steroid use, since 

high school students don’t enjoy lectures, don’t read pamphlets and often feel invulnerable. What we did learn however, was that an effective prevention program 

would need four major components. First, we needed to separate the girls and boys, 

because their risk and protective factors for harmful behaviors differ. Second, the 

information and discussions needed to be led by peers, because kids listen to kids, 

and the venue should be a place where students work together and share common 

goals. Third, there needed to be younger and older students present, so the more 

mature students could serve as role models. Fourth, an instructor needed to be 

someone the students respect, in and out of the classroom. As you can see, these 

necessary components are present in every high school sport team. 

32

After learning these lessons, we applied for and were awarded funding from the 

National Institute on Drug Abuse. With NIDA funding, ATLAS, the program for 

young men, and ATHENA, the program for young women, were born. ATLAS and 

ATHENA are team-centered, programs, with most of the teaching performed by student-athletes, and facilitated by the coach. These programs provide healthy sports 

nutrition and strength-training as alternatives to use of athletic-enhancing and 

body-shaping drugs, while reducing risk factors that promote use of alcohol and 

other illicit substances that can harm sport performance. The messages and activities are clear and tailored to each gender. Not only are these programs successful, 

kids really enjoy them. Today, schools from 29 states and Puerto Rico have selected 

these programs for use. 

Athletes Training & Learning to Avoid Steroids 

Athletes Targeting Healthy Exercise & Nutrition Alternatives 

The results of ATLAS and ATHENA have been published in prestigious, peer-reviewed scientific journals, including JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) and the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. Findings for ATLAS 

include:

• Significant decreases in alcohol and illicit drug use • More than 50% reduction in new anabolic steroid use • More than 40% reduction in performance enhancing supplement use • 24% reduction in drinking and driving • Improved dietary behaviors, increased physical capacity, and reduced body fat 

For ATHENA, the changes include:

• More than 50% reduction in new sport supplements, amphetamines & steroid use • More than 50% reduction in new and ongoing use of diet pills • Long-term reductions in alcohol and marijuana use • A reduction in riding in cars with drinking drivers, and an increase in seat belt 

use • A reduction in new sexual activity • Improved nutrition and strength training behaviors • Fewer sports injuries 

After careful review by federal agencies, ATLAS was awarded Model Program status by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and was 

recognized as one of only nine Exemplary Programs by the United States Department of Education. ATLAS and ATHENA are the only featured prevention programs 

listed in the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004. 

The high school years represent a critical window of opportunity to prevent the 

use of steroids, alcohol and other drugs. During this period, students are establishing habits that will last a lifetime. Schools need to do what they do best—educate. They need to educate coaches, parents and their athletes. ATLAS and ATHENA are examples of rigorous research initiatives that have turned into important 

public health interventions that can be easily implemented by school districts 

throughout the United States. ATLAS and ATHENA and programs modeled after 

them, can improve the health of young athletes and recapture the healthy mission 

of sport. 

SUMMARY OF MAJOR POINTS

• Student-athletes face pressures to succeed in their sport. For some schools winning appears more important than developing well-adjusted student-athletes. When 

this occurs, it can lead to substance abuse and antisocial behavior. 

• Monitoring the Future reports that past year and past month steroid use among 

high school seniors is at its highest level since steroid use was first assessed. Although there has been a focus on Olympic and professional athletes’ steroid use, 

most users are high school athletes. The CDC suggests over 800,000 teens report 

current or prior use. 

• Male and female adolescents use steroids for different reasons. For females, it 

is related to disordered eating practices and depressive symptoms; whereas for 

males it is more related to being muscular, risk-taking, anti-social behavior and use 

of alcohol and other drugs. 

• Steroid use can cause significant physical and psychological harm. Risks include 

heart attacks, strokes, certain tumors, liver disease, depression and uncontrolled aggression. These drugs can stunt the height of growing adolescents and masculinize 

women. The unhealthy effects of steroids are more likely to occur among adolescents 

than adults. 

• ATLAS and ATHENA are two NIDA funded, gender-specific, sport team programs that use peer teaching and a coach facilitator. These research-tested, interactive programs provide sports nutrition and strength training as alternatives to use 

33

of athletic-enhancing and body-shaping drugs, and reduce risk factors that promote 

use of other substances that can harm sport performance. ATLAS and ATHENA 

athletes showed reduction of steroids, alcohol and other drug use, and improved 

health behaviors. 

• ATLAS and ATHENA are easily implemented into schools, are enjoyable to students, improve the health of young athletes and recapture the healthy mission of 

sport. 

References 

Aaron, D.J., Dearwater, S.R., Anderson, R., Olsen, T., Kriska, A.M., & LaPorte, R.E. (1995). 

Physical activity and the initiation of high-risk health behaviors in adolescents. Medicine and 

Science in Sports and Exercise, 27, 1639-1642. 

American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) (1997). Position Stand on the Female Athlete 

Triad. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 29, i-ix. 

Bagberi, S. (1974). Peliosis hepatic associated with anabolic-androgenic steroid therapy. A severe form of hepatic injury. Annals of Internal Medicine, 81, 610-618. 

Bell, R.M., Ellickson, P.L., & Harrison, E.R. (1993). Do drug prevention effects persist into 

high school? How Project Alert did with ninth graders. Preventive Medicine, 22(4), 463-483. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Surveillance Summaries (2004). Mortality and 

Morbidity Weekly Report, May 21, 53, 15. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/SS/SS5302.pdf 

DuRant, R.H., Escobedo, L.G., & Heath, G.W. (1995). Anabolic-steroid use, strength training, 

and multiple drug use among adolescents in the United States. Pediatrics, 96(1), 23-28. 

DuRant, R.H., Rickert, V.I., Ashworth, C., Newman, C., & Slavens, G. (1993). Use of multiple 

drugs among adolescents who use anabolic steroids. New England Journal of Medicine, 328, 

922-926. 

Elliot, D., Goldberg, L., Moe, E., et al (1996). The ATHENA (Athletes Targeting Healthy Exercise and Nutrition Alternatives) Program: characterizing those predisposed to drug use & eating 

disorders. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 28, S155. 

Elliot, D.L., Goldberg, L., Moe, E.L., DeFrancesco, C.A., Durham, M.B., Hix-Small, H. (2004). 

Preventing Substance Use and Disordered Eating: Initial Outcomes of the ATHENA (Athletes 

Targeting Healthy Exercise & Nutrition Alternatives) Program. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 158, 1043-1049. 

Elliot, D.L., Goldberg, L., Wolf, S.L., & Moe, E.L. (1998). High school coaches underestimate 

female athletes’ drug use and disordered eating. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 

20, 31-34. 

Goldberg, L. (1996). Adverse effects of anabolic steroids. The Journal of the American Medical 

Association, 276, 257. 

Goldberg, L., Bents, R., Bosworth, E., Trevisan, L., & Elliot, D.L. (1991). Anabolic steroid education and adolescents: Do scare tactics work? Pediatrics, 87, 283-286. 

Goldberg, L., Elliot, D., Clarke, G.N., MacKinnon, D.P., Moe, E., Zoref, L., Green, C., Wolf, 

S.L., Greffrath, E., Miller, D.J., & Lapin, A. (1996) (b). Effects of a multidimensional anabolic 

steroid prevention intervention. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 276,1555-

1562. 

Goldberg, L., Elliot, D.L., Clarke, G.N., MacKinnon, D.P., Zoref, L., Moe, E., Green, C., & 

Wolf, S.L. (1996) (a). The adolescents training and learning to avoid steroids (ATLAS) prevention program. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 150, 713-721. 

Goldberg, L., MacKinnon, D.P., Elliot, D.L., et al. (2000). The adolescents training and learning to avoid steroids program: Prevention drug use and promoting health behaviors. Archives 

of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 154, 332-338. 

Hurley, B.F., Seals, D.R., Hagberg, J.M., Goldberg, A.C., Ostrove, S.M., Holloszy, J.O., Wiest, 

W.G., & Goldberg, A.P. (1984). High-density-lipoprotein cholesterol in bodybuilders v 

powerlifters: Negative effects of androgen use. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 

252, 507-513. 

Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G. & Schulenberg, J. E. (December 21, 2004). 

Overall teen drug use continues gradual decline; but use of inhalants rises. University of Michigan News and Information Services: Ann Arbor, MI. www.monitoringthefuture.org; accessed 

MM/DD/YY. 

MacKinnon, D.P., Goldberg, L., Clarke, G.N., Elliot, D.L., Cheong, J., Lapin, A., Moe, E.L., 

& Krull, J.L. (2001). Mediating mechanisms in a program to use anabolic steroids and improve 

exercise self-efficacy and dietary behavior. Prevention Science, 2, 15-28. 

McNutt, R.A., Ferenchick, G.S., Kirlin, P.C., & Hamlin, N.J. (1988). Acute myocardial infarction in a 22-year-old world class weight lifter using anabolic steroids. The American Journal of 

Cardiology, 62,164. 

Middleman, A. B., Faulker, A. H., Woods, E. R., Emans, S. J., & DuRant, R. H. (1995). Highrisk behaviors among high school students in Massachusetts who use anabolic steroids. Pediatrics, 96, 268-272. 

Miller, D. et al. (1998). The ATLAS program: effects on body composition and athletic performance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 30, S241. 

Miracle, A.W., & Rees, R. (1994). Lessons of the Locker Room: The Myth of School Sports. Buffalo, NY: Promethius Books. 

Moe, E.L., Goldberg, L., MacKinnon, D., Elliot, D., Cheong, J., & Yoon, M. (2002). Nutritional 

supplements: are they precursors to anabolic steroid and other substance use? Presentation: Society for Prevention Research National Meeting. Seattle, WA: Prevention Research. 

National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS), Participation Sets Record for 

Sixth Straight Year 2004 (http://www.nfhs.org/scriptcontent/Valcustom/valcm/

contentpagedisplay.cfm?contentlID=485 

34

Pope, H.G. Jr., & Katz, D.L. (1989). Affective and psychotic symptoms associated with anabolic steroid use. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 146, 679. 

Shope, J.T., Copeland, L.A., Kamp, M.E., & Lang, S.W. (1998). Twelfth grade follow-up of the 

effectiveness of a middle school-based substance abuse prevention program. Journal of Drug 

Education, 28(3), 185-197. 

Skolnick, A.A. (1993). Studies raise doubts about benefit of athletics in reducing unhealthy 

behavior among adolescents. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 270(7),798-799. 

Yoshida, E.M., et al. (1994). Severe cholestasis and jaundice secondary to an esterified testosterone, a non C17 alkylated anabolic steroid. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, 18, 268-270.

Mr. STEARNS. Thank the gentleman. Mr. Kanaby, Dr. Kanaby. 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT F. KANABY 

Mr. KANABY. Thank you, Mr. Stearns. I want to thank you, 

Chairman Stearns, Chairman Deal, Ranking Member Schakowsky, 

Ranking Member Brown, and the distinguished members of these 

combined subcommittees, for the opportunity to testify today, pardon me, on the issue of steroid use amongst our young athletes. 

I have served as Executive Director of the National Federation 

of State High School Associations for the past 12 years. Also in my 

background, I served 13 years as the Executive Director of the New 

Jersey High School Athletic Association, and before that, some 19 

years, in the New Jersey public schools, as a teacher, coach, and 

high school principal. The membership of the NHFS, our organization, are very aware and concerned about this growing problem of 

steroid and performance-enhancing drug distribution, and use in 

high schools, and the ever growing influence of the use in higher 

levels of competition. The average high school student has little 

sense of mortality, but a huge sense of where he or she stands 

within their peer group context. That is an explosive combination 

when products exist and are easily obtained that can make a young 

person stronger, faster, and more athletic. 

Permit me to give you just a brief background on the NFHS and 

its role in high school sports and activities. It is the national service and administrative organization for high school athletics, fine 

arts, and programs in speech, debate, theater, and music. Its purpose is to provide leadership and coordination of these activities, to 

enhance the educational experiences and the educational purposes 

to high school students, and to reduce the risks incident to their 

participation. We promote inclusiveness and sportsmanship in all 

that we do, and its paramount goal is to develop good citizens 

through sports and activities. Its independent members, the 50 

high school associations in each State and the District of Columbia, 

conduct championships and enforce eligibility rules in their own respective jurisdictions. The NHFS promulgates voluntary rules of 

play for the Nation’s 7 million high school student athletes, and unlike the NCAA, the NHFS does not perform enforcement functions, 

nor sponsor any national events. 

We know steroids are harmful, terribly harmful, but unfortunately, in a society where a bigger, faster, and stronger mentality 

prevails, young people often turn to steroids and performance-enhancing drugs to get the edge, often unaware or ignoring the potential health risks essential and associated with such products. These 

health risks range, as you have so accurately stated, from the mundane to the absolute lethal. 

Over 1 million young people in the United States have used 

steroids at least once in their lifetimes, according to our statistics, 

35

and more than one third of high school steroid users do not participate in interscholastic sports. So, it is a problem that transcends 

even the issue of which we have been speaking about here. 

Our difficulty is to inhibit usage. That is the challenge before us, 

to answer the question what can be done to discourage their usage 

and distribution amongst our young people. Unfortunately, like 

most things, there is no one quick fix. Anabolic steroids pose as 

complicated an issue as all the other drugs and social welfare problems that plague our society today. 

But there are things that are being done. Dr. Goldberg just mentioned the conference. One of the cosponsors of that conference a 

week ago in Dallas, Texas, which I also attended, is the UIL, which 

is our member State association in Texas. Many other State associations are taking action on these issues. The California Interscholastic Federation provides an excellent example of what can be 

done in the way of education. The CIF, in cooperation with the 

United States Drug Enforcement Agency, held a Steroid Summit 

last fall, and distributed health bulletins to its member schools. Additionally, this month, the CIF will send almost 1,400 member high 

schools an educational PowerPoint presentation which emphasizes 

the dangers of anabolic steroids. We have provided the committees 

with a copy of that program. Through an aggressive plan of coachstudent, coach-parent, school administrator-student meetings and 

presentations, the full truth about steroids must reach their target 

audience. 

Other things that are occurring as we speak. At the Virginia 

General Assembly, recently passed a bill which is currently awaiting the Governor’s signature. The legislation will allow our Virginia 

High School League to establish rules whereby a student, who has 

used steroids, unless prescribed by a licensed physician for a medical condition, would be declared ineligible for a minimum of 2 

years. Additionally, the Michigan State legislature is currently conducting hearings on a bill that would require each local board of 

education to have a policy that includes a prohibition of performance-enhancing drugs, but leaves the period of ineligibility determination to the local schools. The prohibited drugs are those that 

are banned by our partners, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, including steroids. This approach is important to note, for 

the committee to understand, because neither the National Federation, nor our member State associations, have the authority to 

mandate adoption of such a rule at the local school level. This remains a local school prerogative. 

What do we recommend? Well, the Anabolic Steroid Control Act 

of 2004 is certainly a step in the right direction, and we have supported that from its early initiation, and we applaud Congress’ efforts thus far. But we believe that for high schools, it is important 

to continue and enhance the efforts currently underway to educate 

students on the dangers of using these products. 

Testing can work, but we believe it can work to a degree. As the 

American Academy of Pediatrics notes, random drug testing is a 

deterrent at the Olympic level, the NCAA level, and professional 

sports levels, but it is probably too costly for widespread use in 

high schools. Bluntly stated, high schools lack the money to test, 

an ongoing testing program, for steroids. To put the cost issue in 

36

perspective, the NCAA spends about $4 million each year on drug 

testing for its 360,000 student athletes. There are 20 times that 

number of student athletes at the high school level, not to mention 

those who are not involved in interscholastic sports. 

One of the good things about teenagers, and there are many good 

things about teenagers, is that they are trusting of adults who 

don’t abuse such trust. They are more likely to believe us when we 

tell them both sides of the story. Much as they would like bigger 

muscles, they already know enough about acne to understand that 

they don’t want more of it, and they certainly don’t want the other 

short-term problems, too. 

But we must focus not only on educating our young people, but 

we must focus on educating our coaches, our school administrators, 

parents, and the community at large, in order to deal with this 

issue. The NHFS Coaches Education Program, which annually 

trains 40,000 to 50,000 coaches a year, including on this subject, 

is a good example, but it is far too little, in terms of meeting and 

heading off this problem. 

Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Kanaby, I will ask you——

Mr. KANABY. I am sorry. 

Mr. STEARNS. [continuing] to sum up. We are——

Mr. KANABY. I apologize. 

Mr. STEARNS. No, it is okay. We are generally keeping it within 

the range of 5 minutes, as an opening statement. So, if you could. 

Mr. KANABY. Let me conclude by simply saying that we stand 

ready and prepared to work with this committee, as well as Congress and our government, to try to deal with this issue, through 

our member State associations. We have a network in place, and 

we do a good job of delivering information, or can do a good job of 

delivering information to students and coaches and administrators. 

And we are prepared to assist in any way that we possibly can to 

do that. 

[The prepared statement of Robert F. Kanaby follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT F. KANABY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL

FEDERATION OF STATE HIGH SCHOOL ASSOCIATIONS

Introduction 

Thank you Chairman Stearns, Chairman Deal, Ranking Member Schakowsky, 

Ranking Member Brown and distinguished Members of the Subcommittees for the 

opportunity to testify today on the issue of Steroid use among our young athletes. 

My name is Robert Kanaby and I have served as the Executive Director of the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) for the past 12 years. 

Prior to that, I served 13 years as the Executive Director of the New Jersey State 

Interscholastic Athletic Association. I have also been a high school teacher, coach, 

vice principal and principal. 

The Problem 

In my role as the Executive Director of the NFHS, I have become keenly aware 

of the growing problem of steroid and performance enhancing drug distribution and 

use in high schools and all levels of athletic competition. Last week, as it happens, 

I attended a conference in Houston, Texas focusing on this very problem. 

The average high school student has little sense of mortality, but a huge sense 

of where he or she stands within a peer group context. That is an explosive combination when products exist that can make a young person stronger, faster and 

more athletic. The products, anabolic steroids and their ilk, are effective; let’s not 

delude ourselves on that point. Thus, the key questions we face in considering this 

problem are the following: 1. Are steroids harmful? and 2. If so, how can we discourage their use by teenagers? These questions have long been of interest to the NFHS. 

37

Who Are We? 

Let me give you some background on the NFHS and its role in the high school 

sports and activities community. 

The NFHS is the national service and administrative organization for high school 

athletics and fine arts programs in speech, debate, theater and music. Its purpose 

is to provide leadership and coordination of these activities to enhance the educational experiences of high school students and reduce the risks incident to their 

participation. The NFHS promotes inclusiveness and sportsmanship, and its paramount goal is to develop good citizens. Its members, the 50 high school associations 

in each state and the District of Columbia, conduct championships and enforce eligibility rules in their respective jurisdictions. 

The NFHS promulgates voluntary rules of play for the nations 7,000,000 high 

school student-athletes. (Unlike the NCAA, the NFHS does not perform enforcement 

functions.) In coordinating a variety of activities incident to high school sports, one 

of its key functions is to obtain and disseminate health and safety-related information. For example, the NFHS has promulgated a statement on drug and supplement 

usage and supplement that has been adopted as policy by many of the nation’s 

18,000 high schools. 

Are Steroids Harmful? 

With respect to the first question, whether steroids are harmful, the answer is an 

unequivocal yes. But unfortunately, in a society where a ‘‘bigger, faster, stronger’’ 

mentality prevails, young people often turn to steroids and performance enhancing 

drugs to get the ‘‘edge,’’ often unaware or ignoring the potential health risks associated with such products. These health risks range from the mundane to the lethal. 

According to the American College of Sports Medicine, ‘‘anabolic steroid use has 

been implicated in early heart disease, including sudden death, the increase of bad 

cholesterol profiles (increased LDL, lower HDL), an increase in tendon injuries, liver 

tumors, testicular atrophy, gynecomastia (abnormal enlargement of breast in 

males), male pattern baldness, severe acne, premature closure of growth plates in 

adolescents, emotional disturbances and other significant health risks.’’ The National Institute on Drug Abuse adds to this list many behavioral side effects of anabolic steroid use including, paranoid jealousy, delusions, increased irritability and 

aggression (often called ‘‘roid rage’’). 

Facts/Studies Regarding Anabolic Steroid Use 

Over one million young people in the United States have used steroids at least 

once in their lifetimes. And more than one-third of high school steroid users do not 

participate in interscholastic sports. A ‘‘Monitoring the Future’’ survey, funded by 

the National Institute on Drug Abuse, reported an increase in anabolic steroid use 

and a decrease in perceived harm among 10th graders from 1998 to 1999. This same 

survey annually measured whether 8th, 10th and 12th graders had ever used anabolic steroids, used anabolic steroids in the past year, and used anabolic steroids 

in the past month. The 2003 survey indicated 2.5% of 8th graders, 3.0% of 10th 

graders, and 3.5% of 12th graders had used anabolic steroids at some time. 

Inhibiting Usage 

The more problematic issue we face in dealing with anabolic steroids, after determining harm associated with them, is what can be done to discourage their usage 

and distribution among our young people? Unfortunately there is no one quick fix, 

anabolic steroids pose as complicated an issue as all of the other drug and social 

welfare problems that plague society. While complicated and difficult, it is imperative we address these issues and be committed to making a change. 

What is Already Being Done? 

Many state high school associations are already taking action. For example, the 

California Interscholastic Federation provides an excellent example of what can be 

done in the way of education. The CIF, in cooperation with the United States Drug 

Enforcement Agency held a ‘‘Steroid Summit’’ last fall, and distributed health bulletins to member high schools. Additionally, this month the CIF will send to almost 

1400 member high schools an educational Power-Point presentation which emphasizes the dangers of anabolic steroids. The power-point presentation is attached. 

Through an aggressive plan of coach-student, coach-parent, school administratorstudent meetings and presentations, the full truth about steroids will reach the target audience. 

Other member state associations are looking towards their local legislatures for 

assistance. The Virginia General Assembly recently passed a bill which is currently 

awaiting the Governor’s signature. The legislation will enable the Virginia High 

School League to establish rules whereby a student, who has used steroids, unless 

38

prescribed by a licensed physician for a medical condition, would be declared ineligible for two years. 

Additionally the Michigan state legislature is currently conducting hearings on a 

bill that would require each local board of education to have a policy that includes 

a prohibition of performance enhancing drugs, but leaves the period of ineligibility 

determination to the local schools. The prohibited drugs are those banned by the 

National Collegiate Athletic Association, including steroids. 

What does the NFHS recommend? 

The Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004 is a step in the right direction. The 

NFHS was one of the early supporters of that legislation and we applaud Congress’ 

efforts thus far, but more needs to be done. We believe that for high schools it is 

important to continue and enhance the efforts currently underway to educate students on the dangers of using these products. 

Testing 

Testing works. As the American Academy of Pediatrics notes, ‘‘random’’ drug testing is a deterrent at the Olympic, NCAA, and professional sports levels, but it is 

probably too costly for widespread use in high school. It is expensive, both from the 

standpoint of the tests themselves, and because of the litigation that can ensue from 

positive tests. 

Bluntly stated, high schools lack the money to test for steroids. To put the cost 

issue in perspective, the NCAA spends $4,000,000 each year on drug testing for its 

360,000 student-athletes. There are twenty times that many student-athletes at the 

high school level. There are also potentially difficult legal issues to consider relating 

to minority, privacy and informed consent. All that aside, however, we must recognize that in an era of scarce resources, steroid testing is way down on budgetary 

pecking order for most school districts. This is particularly true if there is another 

good way to address the problem, and there is. 

Education 

One of the good things about teenagers, and there are lots of good things about 

them, is that they are trusting of adults who don’t abuse such trust. If we are honest with young people about the positive aspects of steroids (which they already 

know), they are much more likely to believe us when we tell them the other side 

of the story. Much as they would like bigger muscles, they already know enough 

about acne to understand they don’t want more of it. They certainly don’t want the 

other short-term problems either. The long-term problems are even worse. 

But we must focus on educating not only coaches and athletes, but school administrators, parents and the community at large. Fortunately, there are some good 

sources of education about steroids. One of the best on-line services for the studentathlete audience is the Resource Education Center maintained by the National Center for Drug Free Sport [www.drugfreesport.com]. There are also excellent programs 

for coaches and administrators, and various educational programs have, in fact, 

been implemented to address the use of steroids and performance enhancing drugs. 

The NFHS Coaches Education Program is a good example. 

From a delivery standpoint, the NFHS and its members are experienced providers. We are very good at putting useful information in the hands of high school 

coaches and athletic directors. Assuming they have developed the relationships of 

trust referenced above (and most of them have), the truth about steroids WILL resonate with the target audience. 

Steroids are a problem at the high school level, but we are dealing with it. Coaches and other educators have the relationships of trust necessary to deliver difficult 

information. They are doing it now, and they will keep doing it as time goes on 

The Role of Congress 

If the Congress wants to help us, we would welcome your support. As an educator, 

I urge that any such help be focused primarily on education rather than on mandates relating to testing or other punitive measures. An example would be funding 

the development of deterrence strategies which target not only student-athletes but 

non-athletes as well. 

At our level, education is the right answer. 

I’d like to thank both Subcommittees for the opportunity to be here today. I look 

forward to answering your questions.

Mr. STEARNS. Thank you. Ms. Worth. 

Ms. WORTH. Mr. Chairman. 

39

Mr. STEARNS. I think you will need a microphone, and you will—

have it brought over to you. 

Ms. WORTH. Thank you. 

Mr. STEARNS. Put it nice and close, if you don’t mind. 

Ms. WORTH. Very good. 

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. 

STATEMENT OF SANDRA WORTH 

Ms. WORTH. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. On 

behalf of the National Athletic Trainers Association, and the more 

than 25,000 licensed and certified athletic trainers that we represent, I want to thank you for this opportunity to testify at today’s 

hearing, ‘‘Steroids in Sports: Cheating the System and Gambling 

Your Health.’’ 

My name is Sandy Worth. I am a certified athletic trainer, and 

the head athletic trainer at the University of Maryland. I am also 

the head athletic trainer for our football team. Our athletic training staff for the football team is comprised of me, two full-time certified athletic trainers, one certified athletic training intern, and 10 

to 12 undergraduate student athletic trainers. 

Certified athletic trainers work with high school, collegiate, and 

professional athletes, as well as weekend athletes who are seen in 

private physician offices. We are licensed and certified health professionals. We are educated and trained in the prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation of injury that occurs during athletic competition, or general physical activity. The athletic trainer wears 

many hats. We are emergency first responders, we are health counselors, and we are rehabilitation specialists. We are not personal 

trainers. 

The title of this hearing is most appropriate, and while I agree 

that the use of performance-enhancing drugs is cheating, the focus 

of my remarks will be on the health and safety issues related to 

steroid use. As I stated, we are health care professionals charged 

with ensuring the well-being of student athletes in our programs. 

Part of this responsibility includes being familiar with performance-enhancing drugs, signs of use, and the side effects of that use. 

The NATA, the National Athletic Trainers Association, recognizes the myriad problems associated with steroid and other performance-enhancing drugs used in sports today. The health risks 

associated with steroid and other performance-enhancing drug use 

simply do not justify their use to improve athletic performance. The 

NATA considers this one of the most important issues facing the 

sports world today. 

Many athletes competing at the collegiate level, whether Division 

I or Division III, believe that they can play at the professional level 

if they just get a little bit bigger, a little bit stronger, and a little 

faster. And to accomplish that goal, they have been programmed 

from a very early age to push their bodies to the limit. They will 

do most anything to make the dream a reality. For many, this is 

their mindset and their motivation. 

Today, we have the tools and support of school administrations 

and coaching staffs to realistically prevent steroid use at the collegiate level, but we face an even more difficult challenge. Today, we 

know more about the long-term health effects of steroid use, and 

40

we can do more to educate our athletes about the harmful side effects of using performance-enhancing drugs. But really, who is the 

young football player or baseball player or basketball player more 

likely to listen to, me, or a former professional athlete and admitted steroid user, who has been saying publicly that if you are good 

and want to get better, use steroids. And if you are great and you 

want to be incredible, use steroids. 

And finally, as if that wasn’t enough, it has been reported that 

he has also said, in addition to all the wonderful things that can 

happen to you athletically, your peers will find you ‘‘sexier.’’ Unfortunately, what that drug abuser fails to tell these young athletes 

is that they also increase the risk of serious medical problems. 

What the former athlete also fails to mention to these young men 

or women, who may now believe that use of steroids will make 

them sexier, is that use of steroids can lead to testicular atrophy 

and impotence in men, and for women, there is hirsutism, or increased facial and body hair, and alopecia, which is baldness. So 

I suppose if his definition of a sexy male is an impotent 30 year 

old man with atrophied testicles, or a bald 30 year old female with 

a mustache, then perhaps steroid abuse can make you sexier. But 

if we can get Congress and the media to get out the real story, to 

deglamorize steroid use, then perhaps we can succeed in our public 

education efforts. 

Mr. Chairman, it is not enough the athletes. We must also educate the parents. During a recent NATA-sponsored conference on 

the topic of steroid use, a colleague of mine related a recent situation he had encountered at his university. The university requires 

all athletes to undergo mandatory, periodic, unannounced drug 

testing. The athletes sign a waiver agreeing to submit to drug testing as a precondition for playing. Parents and/or guardians of the 

athletes are also informed of this policy. During one of the university-sponsored drug tests, two athletes tested positive for steroids. 

As is the university policy, the parents were brought in for drug 

counseling with the athletes. During the course of the counseling, 

it was discovered that not only were the parents aware that the 

child, their children were using steroids, but they were the ones 

who had actually purchased the drugs for their children. In both 

cases, the parents believed their children had an outside chance of 

playing professionally, and that in order to make that possibility a 

reality, supported the use of steroids, so the athletes could get bigger, could get stronger, and faster. If our education programs are 

going to be effective, we must start at a younger age with the athletes with the athletes, and we must also include educating the 

parents, not just the students, about the long-term health consequences of steroid use. 

Late last year, the Congress passed, and President Bush signed 

into law, the Anabolic Steroid Control Act. This landmark legislation added anabolic steroids and a host of pharmacological agents 

related to testosterone to the list of controlled substances. This will 

make it more difficult for athletes to obtain these substances, but 

it won’t completely prevent a determined athlete from procuring 

these drugs. That is why education is so important and why we 

were pleased that the legislation included a section on prevention 

and education. 

41

As you know, Section 4 of the new law authorizes the Secretary 

of Health and Human Services to ‘‘award grants to public and nonprofit private entities to enable such entities to carry out sciencebased education programs in elementary and secondary schools to 

highlight the harmful effects of anabolic steroids.’’ The NATA fully 

supports this legislation and strongly urges the Congress to fund 

this new initiative to the full amount authorized by law, $15 million. 

Today, we know better, or we should know better. We have the 

data, and we have the cover stories to bring this data to life, or 

death, as the case may be. 

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to present these 

views on behalf of the NATA. 

[The prepared statement of Sandra Worth follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SANDRA WORTH, HEAD ATHLETIC TRAINER, UNIVERSITY OF

MARYLAND, REPRESENTING THE NATIONAL ATHLETIC TRAINERS’ ASSOCIATION

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. On behalf of the National Athletic 

Trainers Association and the more than 25,000 licensed and certified athletic trainers we represent, I want to thank you for this opportunity to testify at today’s hearing: Steroids in Sports: Cheating the System and Gambling Your Health. 

My name is Sandy Worth. I am a certified Athletic Trainer and the Head Athletic 

Trainer at the University of Maryland. I am also the Head Athletic Trainer for our 

Football team. The Athletic Trainer staff for the football team is comprised of me 

and 2 full time certified athletic trainers, 1 certified athletic training intern and 10-

12 undergraduate student athletic trainers. 

The Sports Medicine Department at my university provides athletic training services for 25 sports that includes more than 700 athletes participating in a very successful Division I intercollegiate athletics program. This is typical of many Division 

I schools. As assigned, one or more staff members will attend home contests and 

as able, one or more staff members will attend away games. 

In addition to our game day activities we also are responsible for evaluating player injuries and recommending and supervising treatment and rehabilitation. The 

athletic trainer makes the final determination to return an athlete to the field, the 

court or rink following injury. When needed, this determination is made in conjunction with the team physician. Finally, we are the primary point of contact for both 

the University of Maryland and NCAA drug testing programs. 

Certified Athletic Trainers work with high school, collegiate and professional athletes as well as the weekend athletes who are seen in private physician’s offices. 

We are licensed and certified health care professionals. We are educated and trained 

in the prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of injuries that occur during athletic 

competitions or general physical activity. The athletic trainer wears many hats. We 

are emergency first responders, we are health counselors and we are rehabilitation 

specialists. We are not personal trainers. 

The title of this hearing is most appropriate and while I agree that the use of 

performance enhancing drugs IS cheating, the focus of my remarks will be on the 

health and safety issues related to steroid use. We are health care professionals 

charged with ensuring the well being of the student athletes in our programs. Part 

of this responsibility includes being familiar with performance enhancing drugs, 

signs of use and the side effects of this use. 

The NATA recognizes the myriad problems associated with steroid and other performance enhancing drugs use in sports today. Legal, ethical and sportsmanship 

boundaries quite frankly are being obliterated. The health and safety of all student 

athletes is a guiding principle of the NATA and used of these substances compromises that one very simple tenet. The health risks associated with steroid and 

other performance enhancing drug use simply do not justify their use to improve 

athletic performance. The NATA considers this one of the most important issues facing the sports world today. 

Many athletes competing at the collegiate level—whether Division I or Division 

III—believe that they can play at the professional level if they just get a little bigger, a little stronger, or a little faster. To accomplish that goal, they have been programmed from a very early age to push their bodies to the limit. They will do most 

anything to make the dream a reality. For many, this is their mindset and motivation. 

42

Mr. Chairman, my colleagues and I are on the front lines. We are involved in the 

education of our student-athletes about the adverse health effects of performance 

enhancing drugs such as steroids. As I mentioned earlier, we are the principle point 

of contact for drug testing programs at the collegiate and professional levels. Finally, because of our close contact with high school, collegiate and professional athletes, we often see the first signs of drug use, whether it is performance enhancing 

drugs or so-called recreational drugs. Today, we have the tools and the support of 

the school administration and coaching staffs to realistically prevent steroid use at 

the collegiate level. But we face an even more difficult challenge. 

Today, we know more about the long-term health effects of steroid use and we 

can do more to educate our athletes about the harmful side effects of using performance enhancing drugs. But really, who is the young football or baseball or basketball 

player more likely to listen to, me or a former professional athlete and admitted 

steroid user who has been saying publicly that if you are good and want to get better, use steroids. If you are great and want to be incredible, use steroids. And finally, as if that wasn’t enough, it has been reported that he has said that in addition to all the wonderful things that can happen to you athletically, your peers will 

find you ‘‘sexier’’. Unfortunately, what that drug abuser fails to tell these young athletes is that you will also increase the risk of serious medical problems. I have attached a list of known side effects of steroid use from an article entitled, ‘‘Steroid 

Use and Long-Term Health Risks in Former Athletes’ published in 2002 in the Journal Sports Medicine (Miia Parssinen and Timo Seppala Sports Medicine 2002: 32(2): 

83-94). 

Here are a few of the nearly 40 problems associated with steroid use: Myocardial 

Hypertrophy, Depression, Suicide, Hepatic tumors, possibly cancer, Hyperinsulinism, and Aggressive Behavior. 

And, what that former athlete also fails to mention to those young men or women 

who may now believe that use of steroids will make them ‘‘sexier’’, is that use of 

steroids can lead to testicular atrophy and impotence in men and for women there’s 

Hirsuitism (mustaches) and Alopecia (baldness). So I suppose if his definition of a 

sexy male is an impotent 30 year old man with atrophied testicles or a bald 30 year 

old female with a mustache, then perhaps steroid abuse can make you sexier. But 

if we can get Congress and the media to get out the real story, to deglamorize steroid use, then perhaps we can succeed in our public education efforts. 

Mr. Chairman, it is not enough to educate the athletes, we must also educate parents. During a recent NATA sponsored conference on the topic of steroid use, a colleague of mine related a recent situation he encountered at his University. 

This particular University requires all athletes to undergo mandatory, periodic, 

unannounced drug testing. The athletes at this University sign a waiver agreeing 

to submit to drug testing as a precondition for playing in a Division One sport. The 

parents or guardians of the athletes are also informed of the policy. 

During University sponsored drug tests, two athletes tested positive for steroids. 

As is the University’s policy, the parents were brought in for drug counseling with 

the athletes. During this counseling session, it was discovered that not only were 

the parents of these athletes aware of their child’s steroid use, but were the ones 

who had actually purchased the drugs for their children. In both cases, the parents 

believed their children had an outside chance of playing professionally and that in 

order to help make that possibility a reality, supported the use of steroids so the 

athletes could get bigger, stronger and faster. If our educational programs are going 

to be effective, we must start at a younger age and we must also include educating 

the parents—not just the athletes—about the long-term health consequences of steroid use. 

As bad as things sometimes may seem, it is still better than when I first started 

as an Athletic Trainer. Twenty years or so ago a young man reported to our program standing 6’6’’ and weighing 250 pounds. Now for you and me that might seem 

big but given this young man’s height he was rather light—at least for the position 

he played in his sport. A comment was made that the young man really needed to 

get bigger if he wanted to survive Division One football. I saw this young man about 

3 months later. He had not only gained over 30 pounds, but he was ‘‘chiseled’’. How 

did this happen in just a short period of time—aggressive weight lifting—change in 

diet—or use of an anabolic steroid? Unfortunately at the time we did not have the 

authority to test but we all suspected he was using steroids—we just couldn’t do 

anything about it. Today, there are procedures in place that would permit personnel 

to recommend testing. As with all testing, if the test did come back positive, the 

administration and coaches would be notified and the athlete would be subject to 

University and team sanctions. 

NATA’s 30,000 members, many of whom work with secondary school or collegiate 

students, are especially concerned with steroid use among young athletes. The longVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
43

term, irreversible, negative effects of banned substances on a young athlete’s growing body are a frightening repercussion not worthy of improved athletic performance. The NATA supports any and all governing body’s—high school, college, amateur and professional and international—bans on steroids and other controlled substances not prescribed by a physician for therapeutic purposes and more severe penalties for those who violate these rules. While a broad ban on such substances is 

a start, an equally important weapon in the battle against steroid use is more thorough education of our student-athletes and parents. On going research on the dangerous side effects of steroids combined with more intense dissemination of the facts 

about the extreme health risks—to athletes of all ages, coaches at all levels and parents of all young athletes—may once and for all send the message that no on-field 

victory is worth serious health problems later in life. 

Late last year, Congress passed and President Bush signed into law the ‘‘Anabolic 

Steroid Control Act’’. This landmark legislation added anabolic steroids and a host 

of pharmacological agents related to testosterone to the list of controlled substances. 

This will make it more difficult for athletes to obtain these substances but it won’t 

completely prevent a determined athlete from procuring these drugs. That is why 

education is so important and why we were pleased that the legislation included a 

section on Prevention and Education. 

As you know, Section Four of the new law authorizes the Secretary of Health and 

Human Services to ‘‘award grants to public and nonprofit private entities to enable 

such entities to carry out science-based education programs in elementary and secondary schools to highlight the harmful effects of anabolic steroids.’’ NATA fully 

supports this legislation and strongly urges Congress to fund this new initiative to 

the full amount authorized by the law—$15 Million. 

We also support the addition of questions concerning anabolic steroid use to the 

National Survey on Drug Use and Health. 

Today, we know better—or we should know better. We have the data and we have 

the cover stories to bring the data to life—or death, as the case may be. 

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to present these views and I would 

be happy to answer any questions you may have. 

ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE OF ANABOLIC ANDROGENIC STEROIDS

Cardiovascular system 

Myocardial hypertrophy, QT dispersion, Increased risk of thrombosis, Decreased 

HDL, Increased LDL, Increased triglycerides, Elevated blood pressure, Risk of myocardial infarction, Risk of sudden death 

Behavior 

Increased aggressive behavior, Depression, Mania, hypomania, Psychotic episodes, 

Suicides, Dependence, Mood swings, Increased irritability, Euphoria 

Cancer 

Increased risk of hepatic tumors, Increased risk of malignant tumors 

Skin 

Acne, Male pattern baldness 

Hormonal system 

Testicular atrophy, Impaired spermatogenesis, Transient infertility, Decreased testosterone production, Gynaecomastia, Impotence 

Musculoskeletal system 

Premature epiphyseal closure, Increased risk of tendon tears 

Immunological system 

Decrease in immunoglobulins 

Metabolic system 

Altered glucose tolerance, Hyperinsulinism 

Effects in women 

Altered menstruation, Clitoral enlargement, Hirsutism, Decreased breast size, Alopecia, Deepening of the voice

Source: ‘‘Steroid Use and Long-Term Health Risks in Former Athletes, Miia Parssinen and 

Timo Seppala, Sports Medicine 2002: 32(2): 83-94

Mr. STEARNS. I thank you. Dr. Yesalis, welcome. 

Mr. YESALIS. Thank you. 

44

Mr. STEARNS. Just turn your mike on. There you go. 

STATEMENT OF CHARLES E. YESALIS 

Mr. YESALIS. Thank you, Chairman Stearns. I appreciate this opportunity. 

If you look at the work of investigative journalists, the 

testimonials of athletes, the work of sport historians, as well as 

government investigations and hearings, you quickly come to the 

conclusion that doping has been epidemic in elite sports since 1875. 

None of this is new. It has been a sustained epidemic. 

In regard to the interest of government in this matter, this is the 

fourth time in 17 years I have been asked to testify. I looked, the 

first hearing on steroid use and amphetamine use in sport, was in 

1973, in front of the 93rd Congress, when Olympic athletes and 

professional athletes openly testified about steroid use and amphetamine use of that era. They were very open about it. 

While this epidemic continues, while it hasn’t changed, what has 

changed, and I respectfully disagree with you, Congresswoman 

Schakowsky, I think the figure is closer to a million kids who have 

used, in their short lives, anabolic steroids. And anabolic steroids, 

you don’t just take one pill or one injection. You go on a cycle, an 

episode of use of 6 to 12 weeks or more. 

Well, what can we do about it? One alternative is education. I 

think education at the elite levels really holds no promise whatsoever. There is too much money involved. Clearly, education, as my 

good friend Dr. Goldberg said, holds promise with kids. He has 

wonderful programs, in the ATLAS and ATHENA program. Admittedly, they have not spread like wildfire across the country. They 

are expensive, time-consuming, but I would propose that one of the 

reasons why school districts haven’t wanted to spend that money 

is they are in denial. If I could tell you how many times I have 

heard Doc, it is a problem, but not in our school. Doc, it is a problem, but not in our university. Or not in our sport league. 

Another alternative is interdiction. Could use law enforcement. 

The Balco investigation is a great example of that. Balco had little 

to do, or nothing to—virtually nothing to do with drug testing. It 

was high-powered police investigation, as you all know, DEA, IRS, 

FBI. Do we have the fire in our belly to do sting operations against 

universities and colleges, or high school teams and pro teams? I 

don’t know. But clearly, I know that our law enforcement resources 

are stretched, with the war on terror, and fighting other drug problems. 

Drug testing. If there is one point I would like to drive home, ladies and gentlemen, drug testing is no panacea. The most rigorous 

drug testing systems have loopholes through which I could drive 

every M1 Abrams tank we own, and not scrape the body armor. It 

is full of loopholes. Just because you test negative does not mean 

you are a clean athlete. And I would be glad to articulate those 

loopholes in the questioning period. 

In the late 1980’s, there was a major meeting on anabolic 

steroids, and the scientific group concluded, while this is a public 

health problem, it is more of an ethical and moral problem, and I 

agree with that. In an era where moral relativism, situational ethics, you know, late Senator Moynihan, who I admire greatly, said 

45

1Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 

2 Human Kinetics, Champaign, Illinois 

we have down-defined deviance, and we certainly have. You know, 

everyone does it. If you subscribe to it is only cheating if you get 

caught, if you subscribe to win at all costs, if you subscribe to all 

that, ladies and gentlemen, drug use is really very rational behavior. 

And while I am not going to tolerate it in elite athletics, I certainly will not accept that among our children. I will fight as long 

as I take breath, I am not going to give up on our kids. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Charles E. Yesalis follows:]

SOCIETAL ALTERNATIVES TO PERFORMANCE-ENHANCING DRUG AND SUPPLEMENT USE

IN SPORT

Charles E. Yesalis, Sc.D.1 and Michael S. Bahrke, Ph.D.2

In 2001, as former International Olympic Committee President Juan Antonio 

Samaranch 1 said when he relinquished his position, ‘‘In doping, the war is never 

won’’. It appears Mr. Samaranch’s prediction was correct. In 2002 and 2003 alone 

the public was bombarded with a constant stream of doping scandals 2,8 that included among others:

• Australian swimmer Andrew Burns banned from the sport for three months after 

testing positive for ecstacy, a stimulant. • Colombian soccer player Rene Higuita testing positive for cocaine. • United States javelin thrower Emily Carlsten suspended after testing positive for 

amphetamine, a stimulant prohibited under international athletic rules. • Three players in the Greek first division soccer league testing positive for 

nandrolone, an anabolic steroid. • South Korea confirming speed skater Paek Eun-bi tested positive for the banned 

stimulant strychnine after winning silver and bronze at the Winter Asian 

Games.

Portions of this manuscript are from: ‘‘Winning and Performance-Enhancing Drugs—Our Dual 

Addiction’’ by CE Yesalis, The Physician and Sportsmedicine, 1990;18(3):161-163, 167. Published 

by McGraw-Hill. Copyright 1990 by McGraw-Hill, Inc. Adapted by permission of McGraw-Hill, 

Inc. ‘‘Societal Alternatives’’ by CE Yesalis, MS Bahrke, and JE Wright. In: CE Yesalis, ed. Anabolic Steroids in Sport and Exercise, Second Edition, published by Human Kinetics, Champaign, 

Illinois, 2000.

• Two South African sprinters testing positive for the banned substance, 

androstenedione, an anabolic steroid. 

• The United States losing two gold medals at the recent Pan American Games held 

in the Dominican Republic when sprinter Mickey Grimes was found to have excessive levels of ephedrine, a banned stimulant. 

• In addition to drug use, the range of so-called supplements available to athletes 

has increased dramatically over the past few years with increased technology 

and with the loosening of regulations regarding their sale. Exacerbating the 

drug vs. supplement problem is the confusion surrounding what exactly is a 

prohibited substance. For example, most elite sport governing bodies have already declared androstenedione (Andro) a banned substance. The International 

Olympic Committee, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, and the National Football League have banned androstenedione use among players, and 

recently the National Basketball Association included androstenedione on a list 

of nine newly prohibited substances. However, the NBA Players Association has 

been fighting the androstenedione ban. The NBA Players Association only recently agreed to add marijuana to the NBA list of banned substances. Major 

League Baseball does not ban androstenedione. To add to this confusion, there 

is scant research to support the notion that androstenedione enhances performance, while there is a number of studies that support the performance effects 

of creatine—a supplement that is not on any banned substance list. 

When discussing the problem of performance-enhancing drug and supplement use, 

it is important to remember sport is a microcosm of our society and the problems 

surrounding sport are by no means limited to drug and supplement use. During the 

1980s, 57 of 106 universities in Division I-A were punished by the National ColleVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
46

giate Athletic Association via sanctions, censure, or probation for rule violations.9. 

The perpetrators of these offenses did not involve illicit drug use by athletes but 

rather the unethical behavior of coaches, athletic administrators, staff, and faculty, 

the very men and women who should be setting the example. More recently, U.S. 

collegiate athletes have been convicted of criminal offences related to sports gambling.10,11 In addition, an NCAA survey of 2000 Division I male football and basketball players found 72% had gambled in some form and 25% reported gambling on 

collegiate sports: 4% bet on games in which they played.11,12 Among members of the 

IOC, bribery, graft, and other corruption appear entrenched in the culture of the 

organization.13,14 A common factor among all these scandals is money. In the new 

Millenium there is no doubt sport has become a multinational industry of huge proportions. The IOC, NCAA, NFL, NBA, and MLB, among others, are all billion dollar 

businesses.15,16

A free society often relies on the news media to inform the populace regarding 

the incidence and magnitude of problems such as doping in sport. Even though the 

epidemic of drug use in sport has been common knowledge among insiders, many 

in the news media, especially in the United States, have not appeared to have engaged in a widespread concerted effort to chronicle the true magnitude of this issue. 

Unfortunately the media, in particular television news, are often influenced by conflicts of interest within their parent companies, between those reporting the news 

and those responsible for the broadcast of major sporting events. Few would argue 

that an in-depth expose of drug use, in for example the NFL or the Olympics, would 

enhance the marketing of these highly lucrative sporting events. 

Before any effort can be made to address the issue of doping in sport, it is critical 

all of the stakeholders acknowledge a problem exists. In this regard we need to fully 

appreciate the high entertainment value placed on sport by society. Some go so far 

as to argue sport is the opiate of the masses—a contention made earlier by Karl 

Marx regarding religion. If sport has become the opiate of the masses, then we must 

be prepared for indifference on the part of the public regarding drug and supplement use in sport, at least at the elite level. Moreover, it could be argued that if 

substantial inroads are made regarding the epidemic of doping, fans may express 

anger towards those fighting drug use, rather than appreciation. Many people view 

competitive sport to escape from the problems of daily life and do not wish to be 

confronted with the moral and ethical aspects of doping. Besides, if anti-doping efforts are successful, the once bigger-than-life idols could begin to appear all too 

human in stature and the eclipsing of records at national, Olympic, and world levels 

could become so rare that the fervor of fans will wane and the sport business will 

suffer. In the U.S., even high school sport appears to be expanding as a source of 

entertainment for adults, as shown by the increasing level of television coverage of 

the USA Today’s Top 25 high school football and basketball teams featuring players 

such as Lebron James, among others. Consequently, it can be argued that the 

growth of the high school sport entertainment business is contributing to the continued increase in performance-enhancing drug and supplement use, even among adolescents, that has been observed during the late 1990s and early 2000s. 

Sport has also been used by governments as a tool to control the masses or as 

justification for their social, political, and economic systems. ‘‘Bread and circuses’’ 

(panem et circenses) were used in this fashion by the emperors of Rome.17 Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, East Germany, and Communist China all used sport for 

political advantage.19 Consequently, such governments, arguably, would be less 

than enthusiastic participants in the fight against doping or, for that matter, even 

publicly acknowledging the existence of widespread doping. On the contrary, there 

is a reasonable amount of evidence that the governments of the Soviet Union, East 

Germany, and Communist China all played significant roles in the systematic 

doping of their athletes. 

With many societal problems, identifying potential solutions is easy, but agreeing 

on a proper course of action and successfully completing it are difficult. The following are our alternatives for dealing with the use of performance-enhancing drugs 

as well as supplements: legalization, interdiction, education, and alteration of societal values and attitudes related to physical appearance and winning in sport. 

LEGALIZATION: AN END TO HYPOCRISY?

The legalization of illicit drugs has for some time been the subject of heated debate: comments range from ‘‘morally reprehensible’’ to ‘‘accepting reality.’’ Legalization would reduce the law enforcement costs associated with illicit performance-enhancing drug use as well as the substantial cost of drug testing. Even some opponents of legalization must concede that such an action would lessen the level of hypocrisy currently enveloping sport. It can be argued that society and sport federaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
47

tions have turned a blind eye or have subtly encouraged drug use in sport as long 

as the athletes have not been caught or spoken publicly about their use of performance-enhancing drugs.19-25

In the U.S., legalization of performance-enhancing drug use in sport would involve 

two levels of authority. At one level, federal and state laws related to the possession, 

distribution, and prescription of performance-enhancing drugs would have to be 

changed. For example, if in the future anabolic steroids become an accepted means 

of contraception or as treatment for ‘‘andropause’’ (so-called male menopause), it is 

difficult to understand how anabolic steroids could remain a Schedule III controlled 

substance in the U.S. At the second level, bans on anabolic steroids now in place 

in virtually every sport would have to be rescinded. Legalization would bring cries 

that the traditional ideals of sport and competition are being further eroded. On the 

other hand, given the continued litany of drug and other sport scandals that have 

taken place in full public view over the past five decades, it is hard to imagine in 

this jaundiced age that many people believe the so-called ‘‘traditional ideals’’ in elite 

sports even exist. It has long been asserted that the legalization of performance-enhancing drugs would force athletes to further expose themselves to the potential for 

physical harm or else to compete at a disadvantage. Some have even questioned this 

basic premise that banning drugs in sport benefits the health of athletes and have 

argued: 

. . . the ban has in fact increased health risks by denying users access to medical 

advice and caused users to turn to high risk black market sources.26

Further, legalization would allow athletes to use pharmaceutical grade drugs 

while being monitored by a physician. It can also be argued that the ‘‘dangers’’ of 

performance-enhancing drug and supplement use are not, in itself, a realistic deterrent given the existing levels of tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, and other illicit drug 

use. 

In 2003 it seems that legalization of performance-enhancing drug use in sport is 

still not acceptable. However, if the apparent impotence of drug testing, now in full 

view, persists for much longer, it is easy to imagine the IOC or other sport federations throwing up their hands in frustration and publicly allowing the athlete with 

the best chemist to prevail. 

INTERDICTION: A QUESTION OF COST- EFFECTIVENESS

The U.S. federal government and all state governments currently have laws regarding the distribution, possession, or prescription of various performance-enhancing drugs such as anabolic steroids, growth hormone, and amphetamines.27 For example, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) was amended as part 

of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 such that distribution of anabolic steroids or 

possession of steroids with intent to distribute without a valid prescription became 

a felony. This legislation not only increased the penalties for the illicit distribution 

of steroids but it also facilitated prosecution under the FFDCA. In 1990 the Anabolic 

Steroids Control Act was signed into law by President Bush and added anabolic 

steroids to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. This law institutes a regulatory and criminal enforcement system whereby the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) controls the manufacture, importation, exportation, distribution, 

and dispensing of anabolic steroids. However, the act did not provide extra resources 

to the DEA to shoulder the added responsibility. 

Furthermore, as the use of anabolic steroids is increasingly criminalized, drug use 

will likely be driven further underground and the source of the drugs will increasingly be clandestine and foreign laboratories, the products of which are of questionable quality. It also appears that in some areas criminalization has already altered 

the distribution network for anabolic steroids; athletes used to sell to other athletes, 

but sellers of street drugs are now becoming a major source.28

Even though the legal apparatus to control steroid trafficking exists, enforcement 

agents already are struggling to handle the problems of importation, distribution, 

sales, and use of other illicit drugs such as cocaine and heroin.29 Thus, the availability of performance-enhancing drugs in this country suggests there is reason to 

believe the U.S. may simply not have the law enforcement manpower to deal with 

apprehending and punishing sellers of performance-enhancing drugs. Based on what 

we know about the physical, psychological, and social effects of performance-enhancing drugs, it is neither realistic nor prudent that enforcement efforts for performance-enhancing drugs should take precedent over those for more harmful drugs. On 

the other hand, this line of reasoning should not be used as a rationale for a lack 

of effective action against performance-enhancing drugs. Nevertheless, the outlook 

that limited resources can be stretched to cover yet other drugs is not optimistic,28

especially given the increase in recreational drug use among adolescents 29 and in 

48

light of the demands placed on all levels of law enforcement regarding homeland 

security. 

Nonetheless, after passage of the Anabolic Steroids Control Act, numerous anabolic steroid investigations were initiated by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and many arrests were made and convictions obtained.30 However, because 

of the way criminal penalties were developed for steroid infractions, an individual 

brought to court on charges of distribution or selling must be a national level dealer 

to receive more than a ‘‘slap on the wrist’’ and/or a short visit to a ‘‘country club’’ 

prison. For this reason, U.S. law enforcement agents often do not bother pursuing 

small cases because the costs of prosecution vastly outweigh any penalties that will 

be assessed. 

The range of supplements available to athletes has increased dramatically over 

the past few years with the loosening of regulations regarding their sale. The 1994 

Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) substantially reduced the 

control of the U.S. FDA over supplements and permitted the introduction of new 

supplements as long as they occurred naturally in food. In other words, if a substance occurs naturally—and as long as manufacturers do not claim it has medical 

benefits—the FDA cannot monitor it. As a result, the DSHEA allows the sale of 

some steroid hormones such as androstenedione (Andro) and 

dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) as over-the-counter dietary supplements. Consequently, for the consumer (athlete), the distinction between what is a drug and 

what is a supplement is further blurred. 

Drug testing by sport federations is yet another form of interdiction. Such testing 

has been partially successful when directed at performance-enhancing drugs that, 

to be effective, must be in the body at the time of competition, such as stimulants 

and narcotics. Drug testing has been even less effective against performance-enhancing drugs that are used during training or used to enhance an athlete’s capacity to train. For example, testing can be circumvented in several ways. Generally, 

to avoid a positive test, athletes can determine when to discontinue use prior to a 

scheduled test or, in the case of an unannounced test, they titrate their dose so as 

to remain below the maximum allowable level, as is the case with testosterone. Further confounding the issue is that while EPO testing is finally being instituted (athletes can still resort to autologous blood doping without fear of detection), there are 

currently no reliable tests for recombinant human growth hormone and other performance boosters such as insulin and insulin-like growth factor-1. 

Moreover, as the booming biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries discover 

new ways to fight disease, athletes and their scientific advisors are also discovering 

ingenious new ways to subvert those substances and methods to enhance performance and appearance. There are some unscrupulous scientists who attend academic 

meetings and perch like vultures waiting to figure out how substances can be 

tweaked for athletic use. Then, a few months later, we hear rumors about athletes 

who are experimenting with them or these new substances are being sold as nutritional supplements. 

It is important to note that testing for performance-enhancing drugs such as anabolic steroids is expensive (over $100/test), and although organizations like the IOC, 

NFL, or NCAA may be able to institute such procedures, the cost is prohibitive for 

the vast majority of secondary schools. Consequently, only a handful of U.S. secondary school systems test for performance-enhancing drugs such as anabolic 

steroids. 

In spite of this, we note that the recent establishment of the World Anti-Doping 

Agency (WADA) and its counterpart in the United States, the U.S. Anti-Doping 

Agency (USADA), offers for the first time a better-coordinated and consistent effort 

to combat doping in sport. To date, however, WADA and USADA have been, at best, 

only marginally effective in overcoming the technical innovations of users and in reducing the prevalence of doping in sport. 

In summary, although interdiction through law enforcement and drug testing has 

intuitive appeal, its impact on the use of performance-enhancing drugs is open to 

debate. Since the flurry of legislative activity at the state and national levels regarding the control of the manufacture, distribution, prescription, and possession of 

steroids in the late 1980s and the early 1990s, use among U.S. adolescents has increased significantly. As to the future of testing, it is difficult to be optimistic: over 

the past 30 years, drug users have consistently outplayed the drug testers. In addition, one can only speculate as to the future challenges posed by impending advances in genetic engineering. Will we be able to genetically enhance muscle mass, 

aerobic capacity, vision, and neurological response? 31 In fact, selected genetic engineering has already been achieved in animals. Researchers have shown in mice that 

a gene injected directly into a target muscle can increase muscle performance by 

27%. More recently, researchers have identified a protein transcription factor, 

49

peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma coactivator-1, that, when expressed at physiologic levels in mice, converts fast-twitch, strength muscles into 

high-endurance, slow-twitch muscles. Some have speculated that drugs that influence these factors may be used to increase muscle activity, although much work still 

remains to elucidate the mechanism. 

EDUCATION: IS ANYBODY LISTENING?

Since the 1980s, the U.S. Public Health Service, the U.S. Department of Education, as well as many state education departments, state and local medical societies, private foundations, and sports federations have been involved in prevention 

efforts related to performance-enhancing drugs, especially steroid abuse. For the 

most part, these efforts have centered on the development and distribution of educational materials and prevention programs such as posters, videos, pamphlets, 

workshops, and web sites. For example, the Iowa High School Athletic Association 

developed an educational booklet that provides information on the effects of steroid 

use, but also includes strength-enhancing alternatives to steroids and prevention 

ideas.32 The U.S. Department of Education and other sources developed a variety 

of informational posters targeted at high school students to provide facts about 

steroids, their adverse effects, alternatives to their use, and their illegal status.33

Video distributors now have a wide range of videotape programs available on steroid 

use prevention as well as body building techniques.34 Educational consulting firms 

provide anti-steroid training, program, and curriculum development to junior and 

senior high schools across the United States.35,36 The Office of National Drug Control Policy provides a web site (http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/prevent/sports/

index.html) and information resources such as newsletters on drugs and sports for 

coaches, athletes, and parents. Similarly, the Energy/Australia Live Clean Play 

Clean Drug Education Program aims to educate Australia’s young aspiring athletes 

on the moral, ethical, social, and physical reasons for not taking performance-enhancing drugs. In addition to a web site (http://www.olympics.com.au/default.asp?pg=livecleanplayclean&spg=home), the program offers a video of Australia’s leading athletes publicly declaring their opposition to illegal sports drugs 

and the athletes who use them. 

U.S. health educators have made some inroads in changing several high-risk behaviors, such as high-fat diets, sedentary lifestyles, drunk driving, and smoking. 

However, educators are well armed with vast quantities of scientific data regarding 

the deleterious nature of these activities. Furthermore, these are behaviors upon 

which society has increasingly frowned. In sports, on the other hand, athletes who 

use performance-enhancing drugs and especially supplements have enjoyed significant improvements in physical performance and appearance. Society is much less 

likely to shun these people. The adulation of fans, the media, and peers is a strong 

secondary reinforcement, as are financial, material, and sexual rewards. 

Another fly in the education ointment is the possibility that performance-enhancing drugs including anabolic steroids taken intermittently in low to moderate doses 

may have only a negligible impact on health, at least in the short term. In 1989, 

several experts at the National Steroid Consensus Meeting concluded that according 

to the existing evidence, these drugs represent more of an ethical dilemma than a 

public health problem.37 Although there is still little available evidence regarding 

the long-term health effects of performance-enhancing drugs such as anabolic 

steroids, many current or potential performance-enhancing drug and supplement 

users unfortunately mistake absence of evidence for evidence of absence. Even more 

frustrating is the fact that in two national studies, a significant minority of the anabolic steroid users surveyed expressed no intention to stop using anabolic steroids 

if deleterious health effects were unequivocally established.38,38 Also, according to 

national results on adolescent drug use from the 2001 Monitoring the Future 

Study,40 following a peak in perceived risk of steroids in 1993, a six percentagepoint drop occurred between 1998 and 1999 and another four percentage-point drop 

in 2000. This sharp a change is quite unusual and highly significant, suggesting 

some particular event (or events) in 1998 changed beliefs about the dangers of 

steroids. Coincidentally, a sharp upturn in use of steroids also occurred that year. 

Clearly, the paucity of scientific information has impeded the formulation of effective health education strategies. Far more than that, the unsubstantiated claims of 

dire health effects made by some in sports medicine and sensationalized by the 

news media have further eroded communication between athletes and doctors. However, even if long-term deleterious effects were well documented for performance-enhancing drugs and supplements, our experience with teenagers and smoking suggests that substantial abuse would probably persist.41,42

50

All of these problems and limitations in developing and disseminating effective 

prevention and intervention strategies could, in great part, explain the significant 

increase in performance-enhancing drug and supplement use among adolescents. 

Changing a behavior that has resulted in major benefits to the user, such as improved appearance and athletic performance, presents a monumental challenge. 

Traditional cognitive and affective education approaches to tobacco, alcohol, and 

other drug abuse prevention have not been effective.43 In fact, there is evidence that 

providing a prevention program that uses ‘‘scare tactics’’ to dissuade adolescents 

from becoming involved with performance-enhancing drugs such as anabolic steroids 

may actually lead to increased usage, possibly because additional information stimulated curiosity.44 This observation helped lead to prevention programs (Athletes 

Training and Learning to Avoid Steroids—ATLAS and Athletes Targeting Healthy 

Exercise and Nutrition Alternatives—ATHENA) focused, in part, on positive educational initiatives related to nutrition and strength training. The programs also focused on increasing adolescents’ awareness of the types of social pressures they are 

likely to encounter to use anabolic steroids and attempts to ‘‘inoculate’’ them against 

these pressures. Adolescents are taught specific skills for effectively resisting both 

peer and media pressures to use anabolic steroids. Periodic monitoring and reporting of actual anabolic steroid use among adolescents was conducted in an effort to 

dispel misinformation concerning the widespread use of anabolic steroids among 

peers. Using peers as program leaders is an additional component. These programs 

have been successful in significantly affecting attitudes and behaviors related to 

steroid use and remained effective over several years.45

There are two important and, as yet, unanswered questions regarding the ATLAS 

and ATHENA programs. First, are school boards, in an age of constrained resources, 

willing to commit time and money to these relatively demanding programs? Efficacy 

aside, it would be far easier and cheaper to continue to only give ‘‘lip service’’ to 

this problem and restrict efforts to an occasional talk by the coach and the use of 

readily available educational videos and posters. 

The second question is even more threatening to school officials. In an era when 

some believe that the ‘‘win at all costs’’ philosophy is gaining the upper hand, will 

some schools hesitate to unilaterally ‘‘disarm’’? That is, will some schools hesitate 

to institute a program that could significantly reduce performance-enhancing drug 

use at the cost of conferring an advantage to an opponent who chooses to maintain 

a ‘‘see no evil’’ stance on the use of performance-enhancing drugs? This question is 

given some legitimacy by pervasive anecdotal accounts of high school coaches encouraging the use of, and in some instances selling, so-called supplements such as 

creatine, DHEA, and Andro to their athletes. 

In summary, although educating athletes about the health risks and ethical 

issues associated with performance-enhancing drug and supplement use continues 

to hold some promise, this strategy certainly cannot be viewed as a panacea. 

OUR VALUES MUST CHANGE

Compared with legalization, interdiction, and education, our social environment 

appears to receive far less attention. Yet in many ways the social environment exerts a more fundamental influence on drug and supplement use in sport than do 

the more superficial strategies described earlier. 

A number of performance-enhancing drugs, including anabolic steroids, are not 

euphorigenic or mood altering immediately following administration. Instead, the 

appetite for these drugs is created predominantly by our societal fixation on winning 

and physical appearance. An infant does not innately believe that a muscular physique is desirable—our society teaches this. Likewise, children play games for fun, 

but society preaches the importance of winning—seemingly, at an increasingly 

younger age. 

Ours is a culture that thrives on competition—both in business and in sport. However, we long ago realized that competition of all types must exist within some 

boundaries. A primary goal of competition is to win or be the very best in any endeavor. Philosophically, many in our society appear to have taken a ‘‘bottom-line’’ 

attitude and consider winning the only truly worthwhile goal of competition. If we 

accept this philosophy, then it becomes easy to justify, or be led to the belief, that 

one should win at any cost. At that point doping becomes a very rational behavior, 

with the end (winning) justifying the means (use of performance-enhancing drugs 

and supplements). 

This ‘‘win at any cost/winner take all’’ philosophy is not new. The winners in the 

ancient Greek Olympics were handsomely rewarded, and episodes of athletes cheating to obtain these financial rewards are well documented.46-48 Smith 49 argued persuasively that the level of cheating in college athletics at the turn of the last cenVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
51

tury exceeded what we see today. Even the legendary college football coach Knute 

Rockne was quoted as saying, ‘‘Show me a good and gracious loser and I’ll show you 

a failure.’’ Pro football coach Vince Lombardi went a step further with his philosophy that, ‘‘winning isn’t everything—it’s the only thing.’’ Indeed episodes of cheating, including drug use, have been commonplace at the collegiate, professional, and 

Olympic levels over the past 50 years.14,20,24,50-54. Moreover, because of reports in 

the news media as well as written and verbal testimonials by athletes, adolescents 

are aware of the part that performance-enhancing drugs and supplements play in 

the success of many so-called role-model athletes.19,51,55

Our fixation on appearance, especially the muscularity of males, is also long lived. 

An entire generation of young men in the 1930s and 40s aspired to the physique 

of Charles Atlas, followed by yet another generation who marveled at the muscles 

of Mr. Universe, Steve Reeves, who played Hercules in several movies in the 1950s. 

Today’s children look with envy at the physiques of Vin Diesel , Jean Claude Van 

Damme, Wesley Snipes, Linda Hamilton, Demi Moore, and other actors and actresses whose movie roles call for a muscular athletic build. In addition, a number 

of professional wrestlers such as Hulk Hogan, ‘‘Stone Cold’’ Steve Austin, ‘‘The 

Rock’’, and Goldberg are admired in part for their bigger than life muscularity, 

while some elite athletes like professional baseball player Barry Bonds and Sammy 

Sosa are envied because of the spectacular athletic feats of which they are capable. 

Anabolic steroid use among professional wrestlers, including Hulk Hogan, was given 

national attention during a steroid trafficking trial in 1991.56 President George H. 

Bush’s appointment of Arnold Schwarzenegger, an individual who attained his 

prominence as a bodybuilder and movie star at least in part as a result of steroid 

use, as chair of the President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports from 1990-

1992 was yet another inappropriate message we sent our children. Interestingly, 

Schwarzenegger was then replaced by Florence Griffin Joyner (‘‘Flo Jo’’) who cochaired the Council from 1993-1998, and competed, retired, and died under suspicion of performance-enhancing drug use. Lee Haney, bodybuilder and eight time 

Mr. Olympia winner, followed Joyner and chaired the Council from 1999 through 

2002. Such messages of material reward and fame as a result of drug-assisted muscularity and winning grossly overshadow posters on gym walls and videos that implore ‘‘Just Say No to Drugs.′′

Some might argue that our attitudes and values related to sports and appearance 

are too deeply entrenched to change. That may be so, in particular when it comes 

to elite sport—there is simply too much money involved. However, if we cannot control our competitive and narcissistic natures, we then must resign ourselves to anabolic steroid use, even among our children. 

Society’s current strategy for dealing with the use of performance-enhancing 

drugs in sport is multifaceted and primarily involves interdiction and education. 

However, years after our society was made aware that our children were using 

steroids, our efforts to deal with this problem have not been very successful. Since 

1989 a number of national conferences on anabolic steroid use have been held, sponsored by either the U.S. federal government or sports and educational organizations. 

The purpose of these meetings was to gather and/or disseminate information or to 

achieve a consensus for action. At this point all these activities appear to have been 

a sincere effort to deal with the problem, but this strategy of attacking the symptoms while ignoring the social influence of drug and supplement use in sport is obviously ineffective. If we maintain our current course in the face of increased high levels of performance-enhancing drugs and supplements, then we as sports medicine 

professionals, parents, teachers, and coaches are guilty of duplicity—acting for the 

sake of acting. We plan and attend workshops, distribute educational materials, 

lobby for the passage of laws, and seek the assistance of law enforcement. All these 

activities merely soothe our consciences in the face of our inability—or unwillingness—to deal with our addiction to sport and our fixations on winning and appearance. 

REFERENCES 

1. Associated Press. 2001. ‘‘Outgoing IOC chairman Samaranch says war against doping is 

‘never won.’ ’’ Vancouver Sun, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, July 2, on line version. 

2. The Age. 2003. ‘‘Swimmer banned after drug test.’’ August 26, on line version. 

3. Yahoo News. 2002. ‘‘Colombian soccer player Higuita tests positive for cocaine.’’ October 10, 

on line version. 

4. Yahoo News. 2003. ‘‘U.S. Javelin thrower suspended after failing drug test.’’ January 15, 

on line version. 

5. Yahoo News. 2003. ‘‘Three soccer players reportedly test positive for banned substances.’’ 

January 23, on line version. 

6. Yahoo News. 2003. ‘‘South Korea confirms speed skater tested positive for illegal drug.’’ 

February 6, on line version. 

52

7. News24,com. 2003. ‘‘Two athletes suspended.’’ February 20, on line version. 

8. The New York Times. 2003. ‘‘U.S. sprinter loses golds after failing doping test.’’ August 13, 

on line version. 

9. Leaderman D. 1990. ‘‘57 of 106 universities in NCAA’s top unit punished in 1980s.’’ Chronicle of Higher Education, January 3, A31. 

10. Lassar S. 1998. ‘‘Four former Northwestern football players indicted on perjury charges 

related to sports gambling investigation (press release).’’ U.S. Justice Department, U.S. Attorney, Northern District of Illinois, December 3. 

11. Saum B. 1998. ‘‘Written testimony of Bill Saum, Director of Agent and Gambling Activities, National Collegiate Athletic Association, before the National Gambling Impact Study Commission.’’ Las Vegas, Nevada, November 10. 

12. USA Today. 1999. ‘‘Study: Gambling in NCAA rampant.’’ January 12, 3C. 

13. Simson V, Jennings A. 1992.The Lords of the Rings: Power, Money, and Drugs in the Modern Olympics. London: Simon and Schuster. 

14. Swift E. 1999. ‘‘Breaking point.’’ Sports Illustrated, February 1, 34-5. 

15. Economist. 1998. ‘‘A survey of sport: Not just a game.’’ 347, 2-23. 

16. Hiestand M. 1999. ‘‘The B word—billion—no longer out of bounds.’’ USA Today, January 

12, 1-2A. 

17. Benario H. 1983. ‘‘Sport at Rome.’’ The Ancient World, 97:39. 

18. Hoberman J. 1984. Sport and Political Ideology. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 

19. Bamberger M, Yaeger D. 1997. ‘‘Over the edge.’’ Sports Illustrated, April 14, 60-70. 

20. Dubin C. 1990. ‘‘Commission of inquiry into the use of drugs and banned practices intended to increase athletic performance’’ (Catalogue No. CP32-56/1990E, ISBN 0-660-13610-4). 

Ottawa, ON: Canadian Government Publishing Center. 

21. Lemonick M. 1998. ‘‘Le Tour des Drugs.’’ Time, August 10, 76. 

22. USA Today. 1998. ‘‘Drugs and cycling.’’ September 29, 1C. 

23. USA Today. 1999. ‘‘Longtime drug use.’’ January 28, 3C. 

24. Voy R. 1990. Drugs, Sport, and Politics. Champaign, IL: Leisure Press. 

25. Yesalis C, Friedl K. 1988. ‘‘Anabolic steroid use in amateur sports: An epidemiologic perspective.’’ In Proceedings of the US Olympic Academy XII, edited by R. Kretchmer, et al., pp. 

83-89, Colorado Springs, CO: U.S. Olympic Committee. 

26. Black T. 1996. ‘‘Does the ban on drugs in sport improve societal welfare?’’ Int Rev Sociol 

Sport, 31:367-80. 

27. Interagency Task Force on Anabolic Steroids. 1991. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, January. 

28. U.S. Department of Justice. 1994. ‘‘Report of the International Conference on the Abuse 

and Trafficking of Anabolic Steroids.’’ Washington, DC: Author. 

29. Office of Applied Studies. 1999. National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Main Findings 

1997. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health 

and Human Services, SMA # 99-3295. 

30. Yesalis C, Cowart V. 1998. The Steroids Game. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. 

31. BartonDavis ER, Shoturma DI, Musaro A, Rosenthal N, Sweeney HL. 1998. ‘‘Viral mediated expression of insulinlike growth factor I blocks the agingrelated loss of skeletal muscle 

function.’’ Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 95:156037. 

32. Beste A. 1991. ‘‘Steroids: You Make the Choice.’’ Iowa High School Athletic Association 

Printing Department. 

33. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and the U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services. STEROIDS DON’T WORKOUT! (a poster). Washington, DC: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. 

34. Wm C. Brown Communications. 1992. 1992-1993 Weight Training Fitness & Conditioning 

Catalog, Dubuque, IA: Brown and Benchmark Publishers. 

35. Griffin T, Svendsen R. 1990. Steroids and Our Students: A Program Development Guide. 

St. Paul, MN: Health Promotion Resources and WBA Ruster Foundation. 

36. Harding, Ringhofer & Associates Inc. and Media One, Inc. 1993. Students and Steroids: 

The Facts . . . Straight Up. A steroid use prevention program for adolescents. Minnetonka, MN. 

37. Yesalis C, Wright J, Lombardo J. 1989. ‘‘Anabolic androgenic steroids: A synthesis of existing data and recommendations for future research.’’ Keynote research address, National Steroid 

Consensus Meeting, Los Angeles, July 30-31. 

38. Yesalis CE, Herrick RT, Buckley WE, Friedl KE, Brannon D, Wright JE. 1988. ‘‘Self-reported use of anabolic-androgenic steroids by elite power lifters.’’ Physician Sportsmed, 16: 91-

100. 

39. Yesalis C, Streit A, Vicary J, Friedl K, Brannon D, Buckley W. 1989. ‘‘Anabolic steroid 

use: Indications of habituation among adolescents.’’ J Drug Educ, 19:103-116. 

40. National Institute on Drug Abuse. 2001. Monitoring the Future: National Results on Adolescent Drug Use. Overview of Key Findings 2001. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, NIH. 

41. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1994. Preventing Tobacco Use Among Young 

People: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: CDC. 

42. Health United States: 1989. DHHS Publication (PHS) 89-1232, U.S. Hyattsville, MD: Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, March. 

43. Schaps E, Bartolo R, Moskowitz J, Palley C, Churgin S. 1981. ‘‘Review of 127 drug abuse 

prevention program evaluations.’’ J Drug Issues, 2:17-43. 

44. Goldberg L, Bents R, Bosworth E, Trevisan L, Elliot D. 1991. ‘‘Anabolic steroid education 

and adolescents: do scare tactics work?’’ Pediatrics, 87: 283-6. 

45. Goldberg L, Elliot D, Clarke G, et. al. 1996. ‘‘The adolescents training and learning to 

avoid steroids (ATLAS) prevention program.’’ Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, 150:713-21. 

46. Thompson J. 1986. ‘‘Historical errors about the ancient Olympic games.’’ Gamut, 

17(Winter): 20-3. 

53

47. Thompson J. 1986. ‘‘The intrusion of corruption into athletics: An age-old problem.’’ J Gen 

Ed, 23:144-53. 

48. Young D. 1985. The Olympic Myth of Greek Amateur Athletics. Chicago: Ares. 

49. Smith R. 1988. Sports and Freedom: The Rise of Big-Time College Athletics. New York: 

Oxford University Press. 

50. Dealy F. 1990. Win at Any Cost: The Sell Out of College Athletics. New York: Birch Lane 

Press Books. 

51. Dickey C, Helmstaedt K, Nordland R, Hayden T. 1999. ‘‘The real scandal.’’ Newsweek, 

February 15, 48-54. 

52. Francis C 1990. Speed Trap. New York: St. Martin’s Press. 

53. Sperber M. 1990. College Sports Inc. New York: Holt. 

54. Telander R. 1989. The Hundred Yard Lie. New York: Simon & Schuster. 

55. Alzado, L. 1991. ‘‘I’m sick and I’m scared.’’ Sports Illustrated, July 8, 20-27. 

56. Demak R. 1991. ‘‘The slam is a sham.’’ Sports Illustrated, July, 8.

Mr. STEARNS. I thank you. And I will start the questioning. 

Mr. Hooton, I—little words that I can say about the loss of your 

son, and I think all of us feel deeply about it. And having 3 boys 

myself, I particularly identify, knowing raising children today is 

not for the faint at heart. And I admire you for starting this, the 

Taylor Hooton Foundation, and anything we can do to help advertise what you are doing, we will do. 

My question for you is, were there signs that other parents could 

see of steroid abuse, that either the coaches could identify, or you 

and your wife could identify, to recognize the signs, so that other 

parents, who perhaps are ignorant of this, might start to think 

twice? 

Mr. HOOTON. Great question. All of the signs, in hindsight, were 

there, both physically and emotionally. Physically, he put on about 

30 pounds of weight in his upper body. 

Mr. STEARNS. So, he went from 175 to 205. 

Mr. HOOTON. 205. 

Mr. STEARNS. Yes. 

Mr. HOOTON. At his death. Developed a severe case of acne on 

his back, oily skin, puffy face, puffy neck, bad breath, and he used 

to go through bottles of mouthwash, couldn’t figure out why. If we 

had been trained, if we knew what we knew now, all of the physical signs were there, but what was more apparent were the emotional signs, the mood swings, known in the vernacular as roid 

rages, where you are dealing with a kid, and we have raised two 

other children, you are going to go through explosive episodes with 

your kids. But not as explosive as it is when you have got a kid 

on steroids, that would—got to picture that on two occasions, drove 

a fist through a sheetrock wall for no reason, just exploded. Yelling 

and cursing at his mom and I, only——

Mr. STEARNS. Huge aggression. 

Mr. HOOTON. Huge aggression. So, the combination of those, in 

hindsight, it was obvious that he was doing steroids. 

Mr. STEARNS. You know, Dr. Yesalis has indicated that he is not 

sure random testing, I think you said is going to, would stamp it 

out. Is that a fair assessment of what you are saying? 

Mr. YESALIS. Yes, sir. 

Mr. STEARNS. Because you could drive an M1 tank through it, 

you say. But——

Mr. YESALIS. At night, I could drive it through. 

Mr. STEARNS. Now, when a young man goes in the Marine Corps, 

he is tested for all the drugs, and sometimes, the threat of random 

testing will work to the benefit. So, I am a little concerned that you 

sort of feel so adamant that random testing would not—either in 

54

high school or college, be a deterrent. But on the other hand, I 

went onto the Internet, and I saw there is analog anabolic steroids, 

which mean they are a derivative, and these were touted as you 

cannot detect them. So, there is now a whole new classification of 

these steroids, that one, are almost considered like multivitamins 

but are steroids, and can’t be detected. So, that is sort of a contribution problem, too. 

Mr. YESALIS. I think drug testing would have significant deterrent value with kids. I made my comment related to lead athletes. 

If you wish to use testosterone creams and gels judiciously, and 

most of these elite athletes in big money sports have scientific advisors, unethical people, who are making sure they don’t test positive, if you use growth hormone, insulin, insulin-like growth factor, 

designer drugs, new drugs that come on the market, even before 

they are even on the market, athletes can get a hold of them before 

physicians can. Those are the loopholes which I addressed. And 

they are sustained loopholes. They have existed in different types 

and shapes and sizes, since drug testing started in 1968, in the 

Olympics. Clearly, if drug testing did its job since 1968, we 

wouldn’t be sitting here today talking about this. 

Mr. STEARNS. Yes. Dr. Goldberg, since a lot of testing, so little 

testing is done in high school, some of your statistics, how accurate 

do you think they are? 

Mr. GOLDBERG. Well, I think that the steroid statistics are, probably what we are dealing with is the bottom. 

Mr. STEARNS. At the bottom. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. At the bottom. 

Mr. STEARNS. What would you project the top is, I mean, just 

based upon your feel? Because Mr. Hooton had mentioned as 11 

percent, I think, he mentioned. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. There were 11 percent in Arkansas. There was 

12 percent in Michigan, in State studies. So, there has been studies 

that have looked at this. I think it would probably be more in the 

realm of 8 to 12 percent. Now, we did the first study on drug testing. NIDA funded our study, called the Saturn study. The results 

of the final, randomized control trial, it is the only one that has 

ever been done, a randomized control trial, looking at drug testing, 

to reduce drug use among student athletes. We did that study. We 

will have the results. The pilot study showed that it did work. The 

pilot study, that was just two schools, showed that it was—there 

was one fourth the illicit drug and one fourth the performance-enhancing drug use, in the school that did the drug testing, than the 

school that did not do the drug testing. That is not what we are 

finding with the randomized control trial, but it is a deterrent. 

When you mention about the reason to say no, we found only 20 

percent of the kids, was it a reason to say no. For 80 percent, drug 

testing was not a reason to say no. One of the reasons is that the 

drug testing that is done in the high schools, they can’t afford the 

Olympic style testing. They can’t afford the $100 a urinalysis for 

steroids. So, they can’t afford that, and the way they do it is very 

different. I have been a USADA, United States Anti-Doping Agency 

drug control officer. I have to look at the person void. We can’t do 

that to kids. It is very different. We used a screen. We use a screen 

to have up so you can’t see the person voiding. And there are so 

55

many ways to beat the system. There are penises you can buy on 

the Internet that are the color of your skin, and there are pocket 

warmers that you can use to warm the urine, and a person can 

give you a sample that is clear as can be. 

There are all different types of ways——

Mr. STEARNS. Because they kill all the sample, within the urine 

specimen, through the heat, then. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. No, it is—you can buy clean urine. 

Mr. STEARNS. Oh, I understand. Oh. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. And you put the bag there, and you have an artificial penis, and——

Mr. STEARNS. Oh, okay. Oh, I see. I see. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. [continuing] somebody is—no one is looking. 

Mr. STEARNS. Oh, I see. I understand. Okay. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. So, if you go in a room, you can—you just—you 

strap it to yourself and use it. 

Mr. STEARNS. I see. My time has expired. The gentlelady, the 

ranking member, Ms. Schakowsky. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. You know, sometimes we deal with problems 

that deal with such deep cultural issues that they are really hard 

to get a grip on, but often, when you look at those issues, money 

is involved, that somewhere, money is involved here, the selling of 

these drugs, and of course, the value of sports, not only professional sports, but even college sports. 

My colleague from Colorado, Diana DeGette, was talking about 

hearings that we had about the University of Colorado, and the use 

of alcohol and sex, et cetera. I find it ironic that the coach, Gary 

Barnett, is still there, and the President of the University, tell me 

her name again, Elizabeth Hoffman, is gone. And one of the reasons she cited for having to leave the University, it was that scandal and some others, was that she wasn’t able to raise the money 

any more that is needed for a university like that. So, the coach, 

in his million dollar plus job, who was engaged in these—and also 

said that one of the women on the team, who had been raped, well, 

‘‘she was just a girl,’’ were his comments. He is still there, so we 

have to look at money, as well, and who is profiting from this. 

I wondered, Mr. Hooton, you have been hearing a lot about testing, and how many people think it is ineffective. I feel like you 

would like to say something, because that was a centerpiece of your 

testimony. 

Mr. HOOTON. Yes, thank you. 

The first point I would like to make, if you think of yourself as 

a 15 or 16 year old kid in high school, there are no deterrents, 

right now, in most schools. There is no education program, the 

coaches claim not to know what to look for, or deny that it is going 

on. The parents don’t know what to look for. The family physician 

doesn’t know how to recognize steroid use. All of our system of 

checks and balances with these kids are nonexistent. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. What happened to the guy, or whoever it was, 

at the YMCA, where your son got——

Mr. HOOTON. We knew exactly who it was, and the police weren’t 

successful in making a case against him, and he has—I have talked 

to his dad, he is still out on the street. As far as——

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. He is another young person? 

56

Mr. HOOTON. Well, he is 19 now. He was 18 at the time. So testing, for me, random testing is at least one step that we can take 

that will give the kid, at least there is a risk he will get caught, 

even if it is only 20 percent, that we drop the usage, that is 20 percent more deterrent than we have now. If there is one message I 

can leave you with, there are no deterrents for a 15 or 16-year-old 

kid, except the positive messages, look at the millions you can 

make if you take this stuff and you are successful. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Yes. Mr. Kanaby, in your—there is a 

slideshow, is that yours, attached to——

Mr. KANABY. That is correct. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. [continuing] your testimony? ‘‘Where do you 

usually get your anabolic steroids? Friend and family, 20 percent. 

Other physician.’’ I wanted to ask about these 3, 3 of them. ‘‘Friend 

and family, 20 percent, other/physician, 16 percent, website/mail 

order,’’ and you also have if you Google buy steroids, it’ll tell you 

where to go. 

Mr. KANABY. That is absolutely correct. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. But I wondered if you could comment on 

those——

Mr. KANABY. Well, my only comment would be—excuse me—my 

only comment would be that they are absolutely easily accessible, 

that the monitoring, as Mr. Hooton indicated, getting into this 

country is relatively easy from the standpoint of steroids, and you 

can go online and order what you want, without checking in terms 

of ages or anything else. Far too easily accessible. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Did either of the doctors want to comment 

about that? Dr. Goldberg? 

Mr. GOLDBERG. Yes. What we found is most kids get it either 

from the gyms, where they are working, where they see older athletes, and older athletes tell them what to do, or the Internet. I 

don’t know any doctors that do do that, but I think that is the area. 

As far as testing is concerned, though, we could train 200 athletes 

and their coach in the coaching staff, for the cost of 14 steroid 

tests, and that would last them for years, and those tests would 

only last them during the time that they were in sport. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. You know, I just have a second to ask, what 

is the appropriate role of coaches here? I mean, it seems like there 

is at least as much complicity as there is prevention going on. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. We asked all the coaches in Oregon, how many 

kids on your team are using steroids, and how many kids on other 

teams are using steroids. To a coach, they said there was no use 

of steroids on their team, but about 6 percent use on other teams. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Thank you. 

Mr. KANABY. May I respond to the comment about coaches? One 

of the things that the committee should understand is what has 

happened with coaches and coaching over the last 15 years or so. 

Traditionally, as I listened to Congressman Ryun talk about the relationship that he had with his coach, he would see that coach on 

a day in, day out basis, maybe in the cafeteria, in the halls, et 

cetera, perhaps even had them in the classroom. That is not what 

coaching is at the secondary level any more, due to the fact that 

people won’t coach any more as teachers, in that regard. We estimate up to 50 percent of the coaches in this country, that are workVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
57

ing with young people, are no longer in those schools. And I could—

I can speak regularly to athletic administrators who say 75 percent 

of their coaching staff are not in a school building, so that these 

individuals are coming from our community, to—they go through 

various alternative routes, which are legitimate and available, approved by the State legislatures, and Departments of Education, in 

those respective states. 

And I am not saying these are not good people. But they are no 

longer the individuals that you see, the way we used to see, the we 

thought of, and that we remembered of, in terms of the relationship 

that was described by Mr. Ryun, et cetera. 

Coaching is a 24-hour job, and you more easily fulfill that responsibility when you have the opportunity to bump into a youngster who might just have had a fight with his girlfriend, or might 

just have had a problem with another teacher in that classroom, 

or teachers seek out coaches because they are available in the 

skills, to talk to them about incidences and signs, et cetera, that 

might heighten their awareness. 

So our coaching in the United States has changed dramatically 

in that regard. We have a coaches education program that is subscribed to by 36 of our member states, that they make it mandatory to take our coaching education program for any individual who 

comes into the system this way. And part of our coaching education 

program does deal with steroid information. 

Mr. STEARNS. The gentlelady’s time expired. The chairman of the 

full committee, the gentleman from Texas. 

Chairman BARTON. Well, thank you, Chairman Stearns. 

Mr. Hooton, I really appreciate you coming forward. Not often do 

you see the members just really listen to testimony, but they listened to you. They weren’t reading their papers, and they weren’t 

having a conversation about a pending amendment. They—everybody who was here at the time you were speaking was listening to 

you, and myself included. So we appreciate you coming forward. 

My question to you, the coach that told your son that he needed 

to get bigger, did he directly encourage him to take steroids? Did 

he implicate that he should take steroids? Did he—was he using 

code language to encourage him to take steroids? 

Mr. HOOTON. Great question, Mr. Barton, and it will give me the 

opportunity to say categorically, we are not accusing the coach in 

any way of encouraging Taylor to use steroids. He made his own 

decision, based on information he got from his friends. A great 

number of the kids on the team, a high percentage, were using 

steroids. So there was enough pressure without the coach. My challenge to our coaches, the world has changed, the world of coaching 

has changed in the last 10 years. Telling a kid to get bigger, in my 

mind, is irresponsible, and borders on negligence. 

Chairman BARTON. Well, my question is, is that code language 

in the coaching community, in the high school athletic community, 

that the coaches don’t want to be accused of knowing, but they are 

street smart, too, and is that just a way to encourage something 

that they know is illegal, without them being culpable? That is my 

question. 

Mr. HOOTON. It could be. I would very much like not to make any 

accusation of that, because I have no specific knowledge of that. My 

58

problem, you know, that is possible, and it is probably going on 

some places. Not my role to challenge that yet. We may get there, 

but my problem with the coaches are they tell a kid to get better, 

whether it is code language or not, and they are not qualified to 

show the kid how to get bigger. 

Chairman BARTON. Right. 

Mr. HOOTON. They haven’t been trained to show him what exercise program or what diet he needs to get on. He leaves it to a 16-

year-old to make his own judgments about how to get bigger. And 

to your question, there is probably a lot of what is inferred in your 

question going on. 

Chairman BARTON. Well, again, I want to thank you for coming 

forward with the personal tragedy, and——

Mr. HOOTON. Thank you. 

Chairman BARTON. [continuing] the courage you have encountered. I want to ask Mr. Kanaby, are there things that we could 

do that would send a direct signal at the high school level that 

teams, communities, coaches, that wink and nod at steroid use are 

not going to be tolerated? For example, if we set up some sort of—

in Texas high school athletics, it used to be rampant that back in 

the old days, somebody finds out there is a young man, then, now 

young men and women, I guess, that was a great athlete, they 

would offer the dad a job, and they would move him. And lo and 

behold, Texas, they got to be so big time that they passed a law 

that you had to live in the district so many months or years before 

you could transfer athletically, and if somebody still tried to do it, 

opposing coaches could lodge a protest that so-and-so moved over 

here because we offered his dad a job, and that athlete could be 

disqualified. 

Could you set up some sort of a protest in high school athletics, 

that if coaches suspected somebody wasn’t playing by the rules on 

steroids, that after due process, they could take away the district 

championship, the State championship, prevent them from competing for, you know, either collectively as a team, or on an individual basis? Could something like that be done? 

Mr. KANABY. I think what you are asking is can we restore to 

this country the culture of sport that existed many, many years 

ago, and that is not to say that even many, many years ago, that 

these same kinds of charges about giving someone’s father a job to 

get them to go to a specific college, or to get them to go to a specific 

high school, probably college, years ago. Even high school——

Chairman BARTON. In Texas, it was high school. 

Mr. KANABY. Yes. I am sure, is going to be eradicated, or in a 

new culture. Our member State associations, virtually all of them, 

all 51 of them, have what amounts to transfer for athletic advantage rules, and they consistently will have—when evidence is produced, and it has to be evidence, because you are going to end up 

ruling someone ineligible——

Chairman BARTON. I am not saying we are transferring athletes, 

because of their ability to use steroids. I am using that as an analogy. If I feel like the school district next door has a coaching staff 

or a community or a culture of use, that condones the use of 

steroids, and I think I can prove it, could I ask for a hearing, and 

if it was proved, that athlete, that district, that school be prohibVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
59

ited from competing, have its victories forfeited, have its championship forfeited, so you know, Ronald Reagan loved the Russians, but 

he said trust, but verify. 

I am trying to come up with a verification system that is selfpolicing, and if—to use an example in my district. I live in Inez, 

Texas, and also, Arlington, Texas. But Inez, Texas, has won the 

stateSdistrict AAAA championship 3 of the last 5 years in football. 

Waxahachie, Texas won the State district championship in the 

early 1990’s. Inez got tired of getting beat by Waxahachie. So, Inez 

went out and hired a coach, and upgraded their athletic facilities. 

Now, let us assume Waxahachie thinks Inez is cheating on 

steroids. Let the Waxahachie Independent School District file a 

complaint with the UIL in Austin, that Inez, Texas Lion football, 

who has won 3 State championships in the last 5 years, are cheating on steroids. And if it is proven, they forfeit those championships, they forfeit the 10 district championships in a row. They forfeit all those things. Would that work, if we made it a penalty to 

go against those communities where there is a culture of steroid 

winking and looking the other way? That is my question. 

Mr. KANABY. And it is a good question, and my answer, basically, 

would be this. I am confident that should that be brought to the 

attention of a—by a specific school on another specific school, that 

the representatives, the competent representatives in the UIL, 

would probably—let me answer it the way I would, if I were back 

in New Jersey. We would bring the representatives from both 

schools together, in terms of that, and provide them with the opportunity to prove their burden, to meet their burden of proof. 

Chairman BARTON. Well, as there is no penalty——

Mr. KANABY. Well——

Chairman BARTON. [continuing] for abuse, somebody out there is 

going to take advantage of that. Now, I want to ask the athletic 

director for—trainer at University of Maryland, could we do the 

same thing at the college level, and say before you get—before the 

Maryland Terrapins offer you a basketball or a football or a baseball or a soccer or a hockey or a girl’s volleyball, or whatever the 

scholarship is, you have got to pass a steroid test, and you don’t 

get offered that scholarship if you don’t pass that test, and sign an 

affidavit, I make everybody that goes to my academy interview, for 

a military academy, I have not knowingly or willfully used any sort 

of illegal substance, period. And they sign their name. And if it 

that turns out they lied, we kick them out. We don’t even consider 

them in the process. So, if the NCAA adopted something, you don’t 

get an athletic scholarship to college unless you sign this, and 

prove that, in some way, that you have been not using steroids, 

would that help at your level? 

Ms. WORTH. Well, that certainly is something that would come 

from a level above where we are. I mean, at the administrative 

level for intercollegiate athletics. If that is what the rules are, and 

everybody knows what the rules are——

Chairman BARTON. Well, I am asking your opinion—would something—I am not saying you are the one to implement. 

Ms. WORTH. Right. 

Chairman BARTON. If it were to be, would that help? What we 

are trying to get at here——

60

Ms. WORTH. Yes. 

Chairman BARTON. I don’t want the U.S. Congress to have to 

pass a bunch of Federal bureaucratic standards on steroid use. If 

that is what it comes to, and we can do it, legally and Constitutionally, if the athletic—at every level, from the elementary to the 

pro level, if you all won’t do it, I am going to try to get this committee to do it. But I would rather you do it yourself. You know, 

I am tired of people sticking their heads in the sand, and saying 

I don’t know how come that kid gained 50 pounds and improved 

his 40-yard dash two tenths of a second. I just know he can do it. 

Go get them, tiger. It doesn’t happen naturally. I lifted weights 

until I was blue in the face in high school, and gained 5 pounds. 

You know. I just wasn’t built to be a high school football player. 

Well, you know, until everybody collectively decides that this is a 

problem, and tries to think of ways to fix the problem, we are going 

to be here in Washington besieged by parents and sports fan, who 

say what are you going to do about steroid abuse? 

Now, there are a lot of things that could be done by the NCAA 

and by UIL, and by the professional sports to clean up their own 

act, but if the prevailing opinion is, as long as I am not responsible, 

all I want to know is can he throw that fastball 95 miles an hour, 

can he run the 100-yard dash, or the 100-meter dash in 9 seconds 

flat, whatever it is, can he bench press 350 pounds, don’t ask me 

how he can do it, or why he can do it, or she can do it. I just want 

him to do it. You all have got to change it, and what I am telling 

you, if you don’t change it, and start doing it soon, this committee 

is going to use every legal authority and jurisdictional authority 

that we can get to try to do it for you. 

That is what I am saying. I am tired of hearing that somebody’s 

son or daughter got hooked on steroids and committed suicide, or 

died at the young age, and when I go and talk to my young people 

in my district, they look to me as a role model, and I have got the 

ability, through chairing this committee, to do something about it, 

and I am fed up. I don’t want bureaucratic answers. I don’t want 

gobbledygook. I don’t want it is the next person’s problem. It is 

your problem, and the professional representatives that are coming 

the next panel, it is their problem. And if you don’t clean it up, we 

are going to try to clean it up for you. 

That is what I am telling you. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. Can I respond to that? 

Chairman BARTON. You can try. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. Okay. I think one way Congress can help are 

fund programs that are scientifically proven to work. Give us—we 

have two programs we developed. 

Chairman BARTON. We just passed a law last year that is a start. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. But it is not—they are not funded. It is not appropriated. 

Chairman BARTON. Well, we will help appropriate it. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. And that is one start. You have mentioned some 

very nice potential policies that could work. But those policies need 

to be studied. That is why we asked NIDA, and received grants to 

study drug testing, because people do drug testing, and we wanted 

to know does it work or not? Are we wasting money if we are doing 

drug testing? 

61

Chairman BARTON. Well, you come in and see my staff, and I bet 

every member of this committee’s staff, and we will, on a bipartisan basis, come up with some funding mechanisms, and go to the 

appropriators, as long as the money can be shown to be well-spent, 

and not wasted, and given to bureaucrats who sit on their butts in 

various agencies, and never hit the streets, we will help you. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. Well, Congressman Barton, I was in Texas last 

week, and I lectured at Texas, and showed our programs, and the 

people there wanted to use those programs, and they distributed 

100 of those to schools. So I am hopeful that there will be more of 

that, because I think that it is important to use scientific methods 

that actually work, and bring this research to service, which can 

be done. 

Chairman BARTON. Well, we will work with you. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman, for letting me go way over. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the chairman, and I just commend him for 

his comment, and as he pointed out, even last year, President Bush 

in his State of the Union told the Nation that we must do something to clean up this terrible obsession we have with trying to get 

the edge all the time. So, I think that is what the chairman is talking about. 

And the gentleman from Michigan is recognized. 

Mr. UPTON. Well, thank you, and I would want to follow up 

Chairman Barton’s comments. I am bitterly disappointed that the 

leaders of these other institutions, whether it be the NCAA or the 

MLB, Bud Selig, refused to come and talk to us today. I think what 

the chairman said a little while ago, about limiting or saying no 

to aid packages, student aid packages, to go to university, I think 

that ought to be on the table, and I would like to hear specifically 

from the NCAA in terms of why that shouldn’t be. 

Mr. Hooton, we were all deeply moved with your testimony, and 

I am going to take this home myself. My son Stephen Taylor 

McCarthy Upton is going to see that he is a teenager. He is going 

to read this tonight. Make sure that not only him, but his friends, 

see that same message. So we appreciate your ability to come 

today. 

Ms. Worth, I have a question. As a trainer, so many different 

athletes. Maryland has a great program. I hope they do well in the 

tournament this weekend, and I am sure——

Ms. WORTH. So do I. 

Mr. UPTON. Can—are you able to suspect athletes as you see all 

these folks that are in and out? Are you able to have some degree 

of suspicion that certain athletes may be using? 

Ms. WORTH. The football, the wrestling, the field, track athletes, 

those that require a bit more strength than say, perhaps, tennis or 

wrestling, something like that. You will notice strength gains in 

the general population, student population, you do notice strength 

gains, just as they are in the weight room, working out. Those that 

make precipitous gains in short periods of times, do raise everyone’s eyebrows. And you have to wonder. In place at the University 

of Maryland, if there is suspicion, and it has to be validated. I 

mean, it can’t just be because I don’t like the way you look, or you 

know, your green hair is making me crazy. It can’t be anything like 

62

that, but there has to be behavioral, there has to be somatic kinds 

of things. 

Mr. UPTON. But you can—but what you are saying is, you can 

almost target folks that ought——

Ms. WORTH. Yes. 

Mr. UPTON. [continuing] to be tested, based on what you——

Ms. WORTH. Yes. That is correct. 

Mr. UPTON. Dr. Goldberg, how long do traces of steroids stay in 

a system? 

Mr. GOLDBERG. That is a good——

Mr. UPTON. A couple months? 

Mr. GOLDBERG. Yes, that is a good question. 

Mr. UPTON. A couple weeks? 

Mr. GOLDBERG. Some of them, just a couple of days. You can tape 

a buckle type of steroids, which you put in between your cheek and 

gum, it can be gone in 6 or 8 hours. Some would be oil-based. They 

will last a month or longer. And the problem is, a lot of these drugs 

are cycled, so there is times that you are on the steroids, and then 

you are off the steroids. So that is why when baseball said oh, we 

have from 5 to 7 percent of use, well, that was not true. That 

means that is more like 10 to 14 percent, and that doesn’t include 

all the steroids that are hidden, all those designer steroids. 

Mr. UPTON. Okay. When you talk a little bit about the problems 

in testing with the urine that you indicated a little bit earlier. Are 

there other ways to test? Can you take your hair? Isn’t that a much 

better—I just know that other drug testing that firms have, it is, 

obviously, not as invasive. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. You have hair. You have saliva. 

Mr. UPTON. And that keeps it—doesn’t the hair, even if you use 

a steroid that is good for only a few hours, doesn’t it stay for a long, 

long time, indicating use? 

Mr. GOLDBERG. Well, it has not been well studied for hair, but 

how are you going to test Barry Bonds? He is bald. 

Mr. UPTON. Well——

Mr. GOLDBERG. Could I add, excuse me, Congressman. 

Mr. UPTON. I can’t go there. 

Mr. GOLDBERG. I just wanted to speak to the—how long these 

drugs stay in your system. If you use regular testosterone via 

creams and gels, and you use it judiciously, we have a level, a 

chemical level in testing, and if you stay under that level, which 

will still give you a performance enhancement, you can test me 

every day of the year, and you will—I will not test positive. 

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Kanaby, different states, as you were talking 

about, with legislation, one of them being Michigan. I am going to 

follow up with my State legislators, to see where that is. I know, 

you know in Indiana and New Jersey probably best of all, when 

you have a student that is identified as being tested positive, and 

they are automatically drummed out, are there provisions within 

those states if that student cannot transfer to another——

Mr. KANABY. Yes. 

Mr. UPTON. [continuing] school association. Just because I know 

some kids that have broken the rules for drinking, other things, 

and they have——

Mr. KANABY. Yes. 

63

Mr. UPTON. [continuing] simply transferred to another school district. 

Mr. KANABY. No, that is covered by each of our member State associations, who would have a bylaw that would prohibit that kind 

of a transfer in order to avoid a penalty at a previous school, that 

might be imposed. 

Mr. UPTON. And Dr. Yesalis, last question, because my time is 

expiring. I know that you come from Penn State, a great university, in one of the best conferences that there is, and I just think 

about your coach, Joe Paterno, a friend, a wonderful man, and I 

have got to believe that his policy with his players is a no tolerance 

policy. Is that correct, do you know? 

Mr. YESALIS. We are very aggressive in testing, but again, we are 

limited to what is technologically available. So, you know——

Mr. UPTON. But does he let his—doesn’t he let his players know, 

like Coach Carr and some other great coaches in the Big 10, if you 

use this—these pills, et cetera, you are off the team, period? 

Mr. YESALIS. All right. But—Coach Paterno has been very aggressive about that, as have some other coaches. I don’t think 

enough of them. But again, you can tell these kids, you can tell 

them what the consequences are, but you know, there are some collegiate athletes that actually, because they have potential pro careers, they already have some scientific helpers out there making 

sure they are not going to flunk drug tests. Because they know that 

kid might sign a multimillion dollar contract. 

Mr. UPTON. That is why I like Chairman Barton’s idea about the 

scholarships. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired. I yield back. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Shimkus is recognized. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And it has been a 

long morning. I really appreciate your testimony. I was a coach in 

high school for 4 years, at a small Lutheran high school, in which 

I was in that environment where you taught, and then you stayed. 

It made for long days, but those who love it can do it. But I am 

in a different era. I was able to coach my son’s sixth grade basketball team November, December, January. It is pretty unique, based 

upon our schedule, but it just happened that I could do that, and 

I am the parent, outside, going into the school, to do that. So, there 

is a shift change in our culture, with respect that maybe it is—

somehow, we need to get back. 

This—I am going to take this in a little bit different direction. 

There is legislation on the book, Mr. Chairman, but this issue on 

steroids, for some reason, culturally, has not been accepted as illegal, illicit drugs, like we would marijuana or cocaine, crack cocaine, 

and the like. Under the legislation No Child Left Behind, there is 

a provision in the bill on Safe and Drug-Free Schools Act, which 

requires high schools to record, for the Department of Education, 

incidences. That is the importance of these hearings. So that we 

can then follow up under that provision, and say well, why isn’t 

steroid use a reportable item in this report? 

Then there are grant moneys available for schools to access, to 

train and educate, $400 million last year. Still, and even in the 

President’s budget, there is—it has been cut, in his proposed budget, but there is $100 million available under that provision. So, 

there is access to funds. Why I know all this, this is not the EduVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
64

cation and Workforce Committee. We are not real involved in that, 

but I have—there is—another tie is, I have a bill, and I would like 

my colleagues to look at it, that amends that bill on the issue of 

bullying, another major issue. And I am wondering, Mr. Hooton, if 

your foundation has, or if it would consider, in your work, because 

of the aggressive behavior that is indicated, maybe there is a connection to bullying in schools, just because of the nature of the 

change. 

Is that anything you all have looked at? 

Mr. HOOTON. That is a great—no, we haven’t. It is a great question. I think steroids is related to a lot of the bad behavior that we 

see, whether it is the increase in domestic violence amongst many 

of our pro athletes, whether it be a lot of the violence that we see 

on the streets amongst and between our policemen and the, you 

know, but great question, and I would love to follow up with you 

on that. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. Yes, and I would like for, you know, to the best 

of the individual’s ability, because when I have talked about bullying at editorial boards, and I mean, we have actually got a large 

number of Members co-sponsoring the legislation, this kind of bullying is kind of a taboo subject. It is kind of like steroid use. It is 

like other type abuses that we know is out there, we are afraid to 

address it. 

Mr. HOOTON. Hard to deal with. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. Hard to deal with. We would rather not know. Let 

us just get along and be merry, but it is a significant problem in 

our schools, so much that there is a large coalition of different, diverse groups, from the National Education Association to the Sheriffs Association, that really would like us, as part of this reporting 

procedure that is already in current law. So I think on—twofold, 

how it can address this issue, and especially for, you know, the 

tragedy that we see with the young kids is making sure that as the 

Safe and Drug-Free Schools, you have the safety aspect, you have 

got the drug-free, steroid use aspect, and then, if we are successful 

in adding bullying to this equation, maybe there will be other identifiers that we can use to help educate members, and that may be 

another way to help free up money, as Chairman Barton said, in 

the education and training of coaches, peer counselors, all these 

things that we have talked about. 

Any—does anyone want to add to that, because my time is up, 

but you—I have got a few minutes for anybody to respond. 

Mr. KANABY. My only response would be that that would be a 

very appropriate topic to also include in that bullying or hazing or 

whatever else our traditional rites of passage, so to speak, more 

often than not, unfortunately, do occur in athletic programs. And 

it is something that we need to address and should address. So we 

would support that. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. And I thank you for your testimony. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank you. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

The gentlelady from Tennessee, Ms. Blackburn. 

Ms. BLACKBURN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 

each of you. I have questions for each of you, but what I am going 

to do, in the interests of time, because we do have another hearing 

65

that is going to start in a few minutes, and a panel yet to hear 

from, and I am going to submit these. I do want to make just a 

couple of comments, though. 

I agree with what our chairman was expressing to you all, and 

the concerns there, and you know, it is an amazing, amazing thing. 

If the private sector and the not for profit sector does not fill a need 

that exists in society, then people are going to turn to government 

to fill that need. So, if the policing agencies and the groups that 

exist, if the coaches, if the educational institutions do not tend to 

the situation, people are going to expect us to do it, and you know, 

Ms. Worth, I found it really almost incredible that as a trainer, 

someone involved in the National Athletic Trainers Association, involved with education, that you made the comment, I find it interesting you state that you think Congress and the media need to get 

the message out about the dangers of steroid use. 

And being a parent, having children that competed in high 

school, and one who competed, competitively, ran in college, you 

know, there are folks that they are listening to. There are trainers, 

and there are coaches, and there is also the responsibility of the 

parent, but there are those that they answer to every single day, 

just as Congressman Ryun was saying, and I do think that there 

is a responsibility there. Because this is something that needs to 

be addressed. 

And I will submit my questions to each of you. They range from 

dealing with the secretive nature of what we see, your—what your 

opinions are going to be on the Steroid Control Act that we put into 

place last year. Looking at educational programs, outreach questions, motivation of why kids other than athletes are using 

steroids. So these will come to you. 

Thank you for your time. Thank you for your participation and 

your desire to work with us. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the gentlelady. We want to thank you for 

your forbearance, and we will now call up the third panel. 

Dr. Ralph Hale, Chairman of the United States Anti-Doping 

Agency. Mr. Adolpho Birch, Counsel for Labor Relations, the National Football League. Mr. Frank Coonelly, Senior Vice President, 

the Major League Baseball. And Ms. Mary E. Wilfert, Chief Liaison, the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports, the National Collegiate Athletic Association. 

So, I want to welcome all of you with your opening statements. 

And before you start, I want to clarify and to make one statement 

again. To say that this committee, this subcommittee did invite the 

commissioners of Major League Baseball, the NFL, the NBA, and 

the President of the NCAA. All declined to appear personally. Now, 

it is our feeling on this subcommittee that these officials should not 

duck their responsibility by failing to appear, and must at some 

point be called to account, to this committee and the American people, for their failure to address this issue before today. They need 

to provide answers for their league, and be leaders in establishing 

the highest standard to combat this plague that is hurting our kids 

and, obviously, the sports we love so much. 

So with that, Dr. Hale, I welcome you for your opening statement. 

66

STATEMENTS OF RALPH W. HALE, CHAIRMAN, UNITED STATES 

ANTI-DOPING AGENCY; ADOLPHO BIRCH, COUNSEL FOR 

LABOR RELATIONS, NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE; 

FRANCIS X. COONELLY, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, MAJOR 

LEAGUE BASEBALL; AND MARY E. WILFERT, CHIEF LIAISON, 

COMMITTEE ON COMPETITIVE SAFEGUARDS AND MEDICAL 

ASPECTS OF SPORTS, THE NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 

Mr. HALE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to come and talk about this very important health issue. I 

will try to keep my comments relatively short, since you do have 

my testimony. 

I am here as the Chairman of the Board of the U.S. Anti-Doping 

Agency, which is very fortunately funded extensively by Congress, 

and for that, we certainly do appreciate it, and I want to extend 

our thanks to you. 

I am also a physician who has been practicing for over 40 years. 

I have been involved with sport teams at the youth, the high 

school, the university, and the Olympic level. I am also the father 

of 3 elite athletes, one of whom, incidentally, is a high school coach 

now, and I have seen the incidence of steroid use, and the problems 

facing our young athletes, up close and personal. You very well 

have described the perils of the medical issues related to the use 

of anabolic steroids, and others have already testified to the increasing incidence, so I am not going to say that. It is in my testimony. 

But why, then, do teens and adults themselves use steroids? I 

think there are multiple reasons. Steroids, they do increase muscle 

mass. They do increase size and strength, and we live in a sport 

culture here where winning at all costs is the standard, and resultant success can result in money, fame, and much more money, as 

you see by the bonuses some of these people receive, which are astronomical, more than most people will ever earn in their entire 

lifetime. 

They also see their sports heroes, and that, I think, is one of the 

things that we do face, the sport heroes that our youth look up to, 

they believe their answer is to be the same, and they can achieve 

that goal by the use of steroids. They also realize that they can 

heal their injuries much faster by the use of steroids. Whether this 

is a real healing or a false sense of security is not even thought 

of by these athletes. 

And also, what we are now starting to see is the concept of looking better. I still remember, in fact, I am old enough to remember 

when the Charles Atlas advertisements in the back of comic books 

were the things that all young men looked for. It was based upon 

basically muscular development and use of weight training, but 

now, many of these young athletes, they look at that, and they say 

all I have to do is take steroids, because they have seen this among 

themselves, and we have worked with Mr. Hooton and his foundation, and we are very concerned about seeing these particular problems. 

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency is concerned. Obviously, at the 

Olympic and para-Olympic level athlete, maintaining a clean playing field. This is the basis of our drug testing program, which is 

67

designed to deter the use, and it is important that deterrent is 

there. But in addition, we believe that education programs are extremely important, and we have a strong educational component 

that we work with. As a matter of fact, we even are starting at 

middle school, working with Scholastic Magazine, trying to get out 

the information to help the young athletes that will come. Because 

you have to be a young athlete before you can be an Olympic athlete. You just don’t walk onto the floor. 

We also conduct an active research program. And recently, our 

experience with THG and the Balco lab has been very much in the 

news, and we are very interested in trying to identify all sorts of 

other designer steroids and others that may out there. However, all 

of our efforts at the USADA will not totally succeed, until all sports 

organizations agree to fully participate in programs to deter the 

use of performance-enhancing, dangerous steroid drugs. Programs 

that fail to test, or that test sporadically and infrequently, are not 

a deterrent. As a matter of fact, programs with minimal sanctions 

will only result in minimal success. 

Unfortunately, for many athletes, it is simply a matter for the 

cost/benefit analysis. Because these athletes are focused on current 

success, they discount or ignore the long-term consequences of steroid use that may suffer later in life, or the short-term punishment, 

excuse me, that may be dealt out to them. 

Again, I want to emphasize again the potential side effects of 

steroids as they affect men and women. They are—can be disastrous. They can result in extreme debilitation as well as death. 

However, this is not what people look at. They are looking at what 

will be the result of their success taking this. And so education will 

ultimately be the critical and most important area we have to deal 

with. And until we get there, though, an effective program of testing to deter the use, and of sanctions when caught, is essential if 

we are to defeat this battle. 

I would like to thank the committee very much for the opportunity to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Ralph W. Hale follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RALPH W. HALE, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, UNITED

STATES ANTI-DOPING AGENCY

Mr. Chairmen, Members of the Subcommittees, good morning, my name is Dr. 

Ralph Hale. Thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding this important 

health issue. Today, I am here as the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the 

United States Anti-Doping Agency. I am also a physician who has been practicing 

medicine for more than 40 years. USADA has been recognized by Congress as the 

independent, national anti-doping agency for Olympic and Paralympic sport in the 

United States. Our mission is to protect and preserve the health of athletes, the integrity of competition, and the well being of sport through the elimination of doping. 

Recently USADA has received increased media attention for its role in the investigation into the existence and use by elite athletes of the designer steroid, THG. 

Designer steroids are an important concern for USADA. However, USADA is equally 

concerned about all anabolic steroids that are readily available in the United States. 

The availability of these anabolic steroids is a significant public health issue that 

transcends sport and places American consumers at risk. 

The perils of anabolic steroid use are well known. In Olympic sport, the most notable, systematic state-supported program of doping with anabolic steroids was conducted by the East Germans from 1974 until the Berlin Wall fell. The documented 

side effects of steroids and steroid precursors among these East German athletes, 

particularly women athletes, are tragic. These side effects included damage to the 

liver and reproductive system, susceptibility to cancers, and permanent 

68

1Sheltra, Patrick. ‘‘Stomping Steroids: Districts Can’t Afford to Test Their Athletes.’’ Inland 

Valley Daily Bulletin 13 Feb 2005 2De’Noon, Daniel. ‘‘Steroid Use: Hitting Closer to Home; Olympic scandals spot light performance-enhancing drugs as number of kids use them.’’ 4 August 2004 http://www.WebMd.Com 3 Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Survey Projects 1.1 million Teens have used Potentially Dangerous Supplements and Drugs. 31 October 2003

masculinization of women. It is also well known that men who abuse steroids and 

steroid precursors risk serious health consequences including gynecomastia, 

baldness, shrunken testicles, infertility and susceptibility to aggressive behavior or 

rage. For adolescents who use steroids the side effects can include all of the above, 

as well as a strong likelihood that natural growth will be arrested or otherwise detrimentally affected. 

Let me address youth first. In a 2003 study of 48,500 students in the 8th, 10th, 

12th grade by a group at the University of Michigan in conjunction with the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, 2.5% of 8th graders, 3% of 10th graders and 3.5% of 12th graders had used 

steroids.1

A recent Newsweek report stated that 300,000 American Teenagers abuse steroids 

each year. In a 1998 Massachusetts based survey published in the Journal Pediatrics, 3% of middle school students had used steroids. This problem is increasing on 

an annual base. In June 2004, the CDC published figures on self-reported drug use 

called the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance from 2001 to 2003 use of steroids went 

up 20% for men and 300% for girls. Of more concern among 12th graders 3.3% of 

girls and 6.4% of boys had used steroids once however 7.3% of ninth grade girls and 

6.9% of ninth grade boys had already been using steroids.2

A recent Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association survey estimated that approximately 1.1 million youth between the ages of 12 and 17 have taken potentially dangerous performance enhancing drugs.3 These are just a few of the ever increasing 

number of reports on the use of these dangerous compounds. And yet in the Blue 

Cross and Blue Shield Association study 76% of the teens could not identify any 

negative side effects from long-term use. These surveys are also increasingly being 

confirmed by admissions of high school athletes who have used steroids. For example, nine football players from Heritage High School in Texas recently admitted to 

using steroids. Of significance is the fact that lack of testing for steroid use by high 

school athletes’ results in lack of detection, so the true incidence is unknown. 

Why then do teens and adults use steroids? Steroids increase muscle mass and 

thus size and strength. In a sport culture where ‘‘Winning at all costs’’ is the standard and the resultant success can result in money, fame, and more money, the use 

of steroids is viewed as an easy way to attain this goal. They also see their sport 

heroes using steroids and believe this is their answer well. Steroids are also viewed 

as a way to increase healing of injuries. This is especially true with muscular skeletal injuries. A recent finding is the use of these compounds to make individuals 

‘‘look better.’’ Even non-athletes appreciate the muscular body of the athlete. I still 

remember the Charles Atlas advertisement in comic books when I was growing up. 

Many thousands of young men sent in for the Charles Atlas system. Now they believe they just have to use steroids. 

USADA is concerned, with the Olympic level athlete and maintaining a clean and 

equal playing field. This is the basis of our drug-testing program, which is designed 

to deter use of performance enhancing drugs. In addition we believe education programs for the athletes, from youth to Olympic level, must also be a key component 

of addressing the problem in the U.S. USADA also supports an active research program related to the use of performance enhancing drugs. 

However, all of our efforts will not totally succeed until all sports organizations 

agree to fully participate in programs to deter use of performance enhancing dangerous steroid drugs. Programs that fail to test or that test sporadically and infrequently are not a deterrent. Programs with minimal sanctions only result in minimal success. Unfortunately for many athletes, it is simply a matter of cost-benefit 

analysis and because these athletes are focused on current success, they discount 

or ignore the long-term consequences of steroid use that may not surface until much 

later in life. Is the cost of being caught and disciplined greater than the rewards 

gained from using the compounds? You will note that the side effects, although serious and life threatening, are not included in the formula. The reason is that in the 

end, if they were considered, the cost side of the equation would be enormous and 

does add a significant burden to the health care system. 

Let me again emphasize the potential side effects of steroids as they affect adults. 

In men steroid use has been associated with reduced sperm count, infertility, impotence, gynecomastia (increased breast size), enlarged prostate, urinary and bowel 

69

problems, sleep problems, baldness, left ventricular hypertrophy of the heart, liver 

damage, stroke, sudden mood swings, rage and aggression. Withdrawal can result 

in depression and suicide. These psychological effects can be even more severe in 

adolescents who are going through the upheavals associated with teenage adjustment. In women, many of these same problems can occur as those in men but also 

include as breast reduction, increased facial and body hair, deepening of the voice, 

menstrual problems, clitoral enlargement, acne and heart disease. 

I am including reference on Anabolic steroids for the committees’ information that 

outline the health hazards. In addition, I ran a Medline of the Adverse Effects of 

Anabolic Steroids following the notice of the hearing. There were more than 50 references in this initial review. 

I would like to thank this Committee for its time and its interest in this important public health issue and for inviting me to share my thoughts on the dangers 

posed to American athletes and non-athletes by the use of steroids.

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Birch. 

STATEMENT OF ADOLPHO BIRCH 

Mr. BIRCH. Thank you. My name is Adolpho Birch, and since 

1997, I have acted as labor relations counsel for the NFL. My responsibilities include the negotiation and administration of our 

player discipline policies, which would certainly include our policy 

on anabolic steroids and related substances. 

I would like to thank you for the opportunity to share our 

thoughts and concerns on, perhaps, what is the most important 

issue in the sports business today. I would like to start by really 

developing the NFL’s policy, and how we got to where we are. 

Primarily, the National Football League, and the NFL Players 

Association have been committed to ensuring that our sport is not 

tarnished by steroids. We are guided by three pillars and three 

principles that we think are most important in this area. 

First, we think that steroids threaten the fairness and integrity 

of the athletic competition on our field. They can distort results of 

games. They can distort League standings. Moreover, the use of 

certain substances by players without negative consequences leads 

other players to believe that they have to take them as well in 

order to remain competitive, on their team or in the League. This 

arises not only with respect to steroids, but with ephedrine and 

other stimulant substances, which should be considered performance-enhancing for reasons beyond strength or beyond endurance. 

Second, we have serious concerns about the health effects of 

steroids and other performance-enhancing substances. We have 

talked at length, I think, some of the panelists, about those effects, 

but we do consider them to be important, and we do protect the 

health and safety of our players as a primary thought. 

Third, we take our role in educating and providing guidance to 

high school athletes and young athletes in particular. When these 

young athletes see professional players who they admire or even 

idolize using performance-enhancing substances, their desire to use 

them increases dramatically. When you combine that desire with 

a still-developing judgment and decisionmaking skills, these athletes face even higher risks than a professional athlete would. As 

role models, our players must be concerned with those consequences. 

Using those, that pillar, and those foundations, we—in 1989, we 

became the first U.S. professional league to implement a program 

of testing, discipline, and education. The components of our policy, 

70

and what we feel are the bases of an effective policy, are that we 

have unannounced, random, and annual testing of all players, both 

in and out of season. We have a banned list of over 70 prohibited 

substances, which includes steroids, precursors, growth hormones, 

stimulants, and all of which is frequently revised and updated 

based on scientific developments, and based on things that occur 

within and outside of the NFL. 

We have the use of WADA-certified testing laboratories and 

internationally respected and known scientific and medical advisors. We have a commitment to scientific research, through which 

we have funded a number of studies that have been effective in 

providing new techniques and new testing. We have a mandatory 

4 game suspension upon first violation, based upon a strict liability 

standard, meaning the player is responsible for what goes into his 

body. There are no excuses, and there are no second chances. 

The adherence to those provisions has resulted in our policy generally being considered to be the most effective in professional 

sports. Notwithstanding, we feel one of the key things that we need 

to do is educate our players and educate the public about the 

health risks associated with steroid use. Indeed, the most rigorous 

testing and discipline cannot be effective in the absence of substantive education on the risks and dangers. In that regard, we 

have undertaken a number of initiatives. 

We have established a dedicated toll-free hotline, where information from scientific professionals and medical professionals can be 

obtained regarding issues of dietary supplements and/or steroids. 

They certainly would include information concerning the hazards 

and risks of those types of substances. We have funded a number 

of studies that have helped us and other organizations to identify 

better techniques. 

We work with our Youth Football department and with USA 

Football to develop youth-oriented materials that could help us, 

and help kids, in determining and deterring their use at that level. 

We started a label certification program, which is an effort to provide additional review and testing of dietary supplements to ensure 

that they are free of banned substances, and to ensure that they 

contain what they say they contain. 

We also, and most recently, have announced a partnership with 

the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency and the Center for Human Technology, to establish the Sports Medicine Research and Testing Laboratory, which we expect to devote a significant portion of its activities to scientific research. 

Overall, we would like to reiterate that we have a commitment, 

along with our Players Association, to maintaining the strongest 

and most comprehensive policy possible. We owe it to our players. 

We owe it to our fans who support our game, and most importantly, we owe it to the young athletes who take guidance from the 

dedication and accomplishments of the players who suit up and 

play every Sunday. 

Again, we would like to thank you for the invitation, and we will 

be happy to answer any questions that you would have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Adolpho Birch follows:]

71

PREPARED STATEMENT ADOLPHO BIRCH, LABOR RELATIONS COUNSEL, NATIONAL

FOOTBALL LEAGUE

My name is Adolpho Birch and since 1997 I have acted as Labor Relations Counsel for the National Football League. On behalf of the NFL, I would like to thank 

the Committee for inviting us to participate in this hearing. We sincerely appreciate 

the opportunity to share our thoughts and concerns on perhaps the most important 

issue facing the sports community today. 

DEVELOPMENT OF THE NFL’S STEROID POLICY

The National Football League and NFL Players Association have long been committed to ensuring that our sport is not tarnished by the influence of steroids and 

other performance-enhancing substances. We are guided in this respect by three 

principles:

• First, these substances threaten the fairness and integrity of the athletic competition on the playing field and could potentially distort the results of game and 

League standings. Moreover, the use of certain substances by some players 

without negative consequence might lead other players to believe that they 

must use them as well in order to remain competitive. This concern arises not 

only with respect to steroids, but also with respect to ephedrine and other stimulants, which some players believe will provide a boost or ‘‘edge’’ in competition. 

• Second, the League has serious concerns about the adverse health effects of these 

substances on our players. There is a growing body of medical literature linking 

their use to a number of physiological, psychological, orthopedic, reproductive 

and other serious health problems. 

• Third, the NFL takes very seriously its role in educating and providing guidance 

to high school athletes and youth generally. When young athletes see the professional players whom they admire and even idolize using performance-enhancing substances, their desire to use such products increases dramatically. When 

that desire is combined with adolescent judgment and decision-making skills, 

young athletes face even higher risks than professional athletes. As role models, 

NFL players must be concerned with such unintended consequences. 

KEY PROVISIONS OF THE POLICY

Following these principles, in 1989 the NFL became the first U.S. professional 

league to implement a comprehensive program of steroid testing, discipline and education. The key components of the policy are:

• Unannounced annual and random testing of all players both in and out of season; 

• A list of more than 70 prohibited substances--including anabolic steroids, steroid 

precursors, growth hormones and stimulants--which is frequently revised and 

updated based on scientific developments both within and outside of the NFL; 

• The use of WADA-certified testing laboratories and expert scientific and medical 

advisors; 

• A commitment to scientific research by the NFL and NFL Players Association, including the establishment of a new research and testing laboratory; 

• Mandatory 4-game suspension (25% of the regular season) without pay upon first 

violation; and 

• Strict liability for players who test positive—a violation will not be excused because a player was unaware that a product contained a banned substance. 

The consistent adherence to these provisions and to our guiding principles has resulted in the NFL’s policy being considered the most effective in professional sports. 

EDUCATIONAL EFFORTS/HEALTH AND SAFETY

As discussed, one of the primary tenets of our policy is the protection of the health 

and safety of our players. In our view, that is best accomplished through education. 

Indeed, the most rigorous testing and discipline cannot be effective in the absence 

of substantive education on the risks and dangers of steroids. In that regard, we 

have undertaken a number of initiatives:

• We have established a dedicated toll-free hotline that players and Clubs can call 

to receive confidential, objective information on dietary supplements and 

steroids, including the physiological and psychological risks and hazards associated with their use; 

• Since 1989, we have funded a number of research studies looking at a variety of 

issues related to steroids and other performance-enhancing substances. Those 

studies have assisted in educating the League and other organizations on potenVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
72

tial areas of concern, and in identifying better techniques for testing and detection; 

• We continue to work with our Youth Football department and USA Football to 

develop youth-oriented materials and programs stressing the dangers of steroids 

and the importance of healthy nutrition rather than the use of supplements; 

• At the start of the 2004 season, we launched a Dietary Supplement Label Certification program, which provides a mechanism for additional review and testing 

of dietary supplements to ensure that they are free of banned substances and 

that they contain exactly what is listed on the label; and 

• In 2004, we announced a partnership with the United States Anti-Doping Agency 

and the University of Utah’s Center for Human Toxicology to establish the 

Sports Medicine Research and Testing Laboratory, which will devote a significant portion of its activities to scientific research in the field. 

Concluding, the NFL would like to reiterate our commitment, along with that of 

the NFL Players Association, to maintaining the strongest and most comprehensive 

policy possible. We feel that we owe it to our players, the fans who support our 

game and, most important, the young athletes who take inspiration and guidance 

from the dedication and accomplishments of those who suit up and compete every 

Sunday on a fair and level NFL playing field.

73


99915.001
74


99915.002
75


99915.003
76


99915.004
77


99915.005
78


99915.006
79


99915.007
80


99915.008
81


99915.009
82


99915.010
83


99915.011
84


99915.012
85


99915.013
86


99915.014
87


99915.015
88


99915.016
89


99915.017
90


99915.018
91


99915.019
92


99915.020
93


99915.021
94


99915.022
95


99915.023
96


99915.024
97

Mr. STEARNS. And I thank you. Mr. Coonelly. 

STATEMENT OF FRANCIS X. COONELLY 

Mr. COONELLY. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittees. I 

am pleased to appear before you today on behalf of Major League 

Baseball. Like you, Major League Baseball is deeply concerned 

about the use of performance-enhancing substances by athletes, 

particularly young athletes. 

As many of the committee members indicated today in their 

opening remarks, the research tells us that the potential long-term 

effects associated with steroid use are particularly dangerous with 

the young athlete. We agree with you that the message must go out 

here today, loud and clear, that steroid use is not a shortcut to getting to Major League Baseball, or any other professional sport. In 

fact, that steroid use by young athletes will hurt, not help your 

chances of becoming a major league player. We understand that 

our players are role models for children. I am pleased to report to 

you that we are addressing this very important and critical issue 

in professional sports in 3 distinct ways. 

First, Major League Baseball has made tremendous progress in 

its testing programs, both at the major league level, and at the 

minor league level. The goal of each of these programs is zero tolerance, a word that has been used by both committee members and 

panelists here today. Second, appreciating their position as role 

models. Our players have been out in the forefront on this. Unfortunately, certain misguided former players have gotten most of the 

press, but our current players today have come out forcefully 

against drug use, and particularly steroid use by young athletes. 

Third, our office is working closely with our friends at the Partnership for a Drug-Free America to educate American youth on the 

dangers of steroid use. I will describe each of these efforts for you 

today. 

The most important and most influential thing that baseball can 

do, Major League Baseball can do for the youth of America, is to 

tell them that baseball does not tolerate steroid use, at the minor 

league level, and at the major league level. And therefore, using 

steroids as a young person is not an effective, and will not be an 

effective stepping stone to the major leagues. 

We have just completed an unprecedented agreement with the 

Players Association that we believe will do just that. Indeed, the 

steroid policies that have been negotiated with the Players Association, and unilaterally implemented at the minor league levels, are 

well on their way to eradicating steroid use completely from Major 

League Baseball. 

In 2001, Commissioner Selig promulgated the first ever comprehensive drug policy for minor league players. In the first year 

of that testing, 11 percent of minor league players tested positive. 

This was alarming to us, as it should have been. In each subsequent year, however, as a result of educational programs that have 

been instituted at the minor league level, and as a result of the deterrent of drug testing on a random, unannounced basis, that rate 

has declined. It was 4.8 percent in 2002, 4 percent in 2003, and 

less than 2 percent this last year. 

98

As we embark on 2005, baseball has committed even more resources to this effort. In fact, as we sit here today, we have an educational program going on at the minor league level, in the spring 

training camps today, as a result of expert testimony and expert 

witnesses that have put together a really rather remarkable videotape that is being shown and being in every camp today. 

Similar progress has been made at the major league level. In 

2002, Major League Baseball reached a new agreement with the 

Players Association, which for the first time, provided for the random testing of major league players for steroids. Under that agreement, anonymous prevalence testing was conducted in 2003. The 

positive rate for performance-enhancing substances in 2003 was in 

the 5 to 7 percent range. That was alarming to us as well, and it 

triggered a more rigorous testing program under our collective bargaining agreement. This more effective, rigorous program resulted 

in the decline of positive test results in the major leagues to just 

in the range of 1 to 2 percent in 2004. In other words, the program 

that has been criticized in many circles has actually resulted in the 

reduction of steroid use in Major League Baseball. 

It wasn’t enough, however. As a result, we went to the Players 

Association at the Commissioner Selig’s insistence, and negotiated 

an unprecedented midterm modification to our collective bargaining 

agreement to strengthen the drug testing program at the major 

league level. 

This new policy addresses all of the major areas that were 

brought to us by Congress in hearings last year. Let me describe 

it for you. First, the new policy broadens the list of banned substances in Major League Baseball. The banned list now includes 

not only all steroids, but the steroid precursors, ephedra, human 

growth hormone, diuretics, and other masking agents. Congress’ 

passage of the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004 has helped in 

this area. As a result of the passage of that legislation, all of the 

precursors have become illegal in Major League Baseball, and are 

now tested for. 

Second, the new policy greatly increases the frequency of testing 

at the major league level. Under the prior policy, players were tested once a year. When—once they were tested, they knew they 

couldn’t be tested again. Now, players are tested multiple times. 

Each is also tested once a year, but then is subject to random, unannounced testing throughout the season and in the off-season. 

Under the new policy, no matter how many times a player has 

been tested, that player will remain subject to additional testing. 

As I indicated, the policy now is broadened to include off-season 

testing. This off-season testing will ensure that misguided players 

can’t use the off-season to build their bodies through illegal steroid 

use. 

Baseball’s new policy also provides for greater penalties. There 

are no free passes under this policy. First time offenders will be 

suspended, without pay, for 10 days, and will be publicly identified 

as violators of the steroid policy. In other words, they will be publicly identified as cheaters. It was mentioned earlier in today, by 

one of the members, that Sammy Sosa is viewed by some as a 

cheater because he used a corked bat. Those who are identified 

publicly as steroid users will be viewed the same way. The penVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
99

alties for subsequent offenses increase to 30 days, 60 days, and 

then 1 year. 

Major League Baseball has recognized that our players are role 

models to the youth of America. Players have come out, as I said 

at my opening, and have been forceful that young individuals cannot and should not use steroids to get to the major leagues. I will 

give you just a few examples. 

Mr. STEARNS. We will probably just need you to sum up. 

Mr. COONELLY. Okay. 

Mr. STEARNS. You are 2 minutes over. 

Mr. COONELLY. Yes, sir. To sum up, Major League Baseball has 

taken aggressive steps to eradicate the use of this illegal substance 

in the sport. The programs are working. As I sit here today, and 

as the members also said, I listened to Mr. Hooton. I was also 

deeply touched by his remarks. As a father of 4, myself, 3 of whom 

are in high school today, one is on his way, I was deeply touched 

by that tragedy. And I am personally dedicated, and Major League 

Baseball, to make sure that baseball is the leader in this area. 

Thank you very much for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Francis X. Coonelly follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FRANCIS X. COONELLY, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND

GENERAL COUNSEL—LABOR, MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL

Messrs. Chairmen, Ranking Members and Members of the Subcommittees, I am 

pleased to appear before your Subcommittees today on behalf of Major League Baseball as you address the important issue of anabolic steroid use among our nation’s 

young athletes. Like you, Major League Baseball is deeply concerned about the use 

of performance enhancing substances by athletes in general, and young athletes in 

particular. As you are well aware, the potential long-term health risks associated 

with steroid use are greatest for young users. We agree with you that the message 

must go out loud and clear to young people that anabolic steroids are extremely 

harmful to your health and will hurt, not help, your chances of becoming a Major 

League Baseball player. Major League Baseball understands that our players are 

role models for young athletes and what we do and say does matter. I am pleased 

to report to you that we are addressing this issue in three distinct ways. 

First, Major League Baseball has made tremendous progress in dealing with the 

use of performance enhancing substances by its players by instituting a zero tolerance policy in the minor leagues and by negotiating a new and much stronger steroid policy at the Major League level with the Major League Baseball Players Association (‘‘MLBPA’’). The goal of each of these programs is zero tolerance for steroid 

use. Second, appreciating their position as role models, many of our biggest stars 

have spoken out about the dangers of steroid use, particularly for young people. 

Third, our office is currently working closely with the Partnership for a Drug-Free 

America to educate America’s youth on the dangers of steroid use. This morning, 

I will describe for you our efforts in each of these areas. 

The most influential step that Major League Baseball can take to dissuade young 

people from using steroids is to demonstrate to them that steroid use is not tolerated in professional baseball and thus cannot be used as an effective stepping stone 

to the Major Leagues. We just completed an agreement with the MLBPA that 

should do just that. Indeed, the steroid policies that we have negotiated or instituted unilaterally now have no tolerance for steroid users and are effectively eliminating steroids from professional baseball. 

In 2001, Commissioner Selig promulgated the first-ever comprehensive drug policy for minor league baseball. In the first year of testing under that policy, the positive rate in the minor leagues was approximately eleven percent. In each subsequent year, that positive rate has decreased dramatically. The rate was 4.8 percent 

in 2002, 4 percent in 2003 and just 1.7 percent in 2004. As we embark on the 2005 

season, Baseball has committed even more resources to the eradication of steroid 

use in the minor leagues. 

Similar progress has been made at the Major League level. In 2002, Major League 

Baseball reached a new agreement with the MLBPA which, for the first time, provided for the testing of Major League players for steroids. Under the agreement, an 

100

anonymous prevalence study was conducted in 2003. The positive rate for performance enhancing substances in the 2003 testing was in the range of 5-7 percent. This 

disturbing rate triggered a more rigorous disciplinary testing program in 2004. This 

more effective program resulted in a decline of the positive rate to just 1-2 percent 

during the 2004 season. In other words, the 2002 agreement that had been roundly 

criticized in some circles actually resulted in a significant reduction in steroid use. 

Despite this improvement, Major League Baseball has continued to move ahead 

on this challenging issue. Last December, at the urging of Commissioner Selig, the 

MLBPA took the unprecedented step of reopening an existing collective bargaining 

agreement to allow for the negotiation of an even stronger, new policy on performance enhancing substances. This new policy addresses all of the major areas of concern raised in Congressional hearings conducted in 2004. 

First, the new policy broadens the list of banned substances in Baseball. The 

banned list now includes not only all steroids, but also steroid precursors, ephedra, 

human growth hormone and diuretics and other masking agents. Congress’ passage 

of the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004 was a key development in allowing Baseball to move closer to accepted international standards in this area. 

Second, the new policy greatly increases the frequency of testing of Major League 

players. Under our prior policy, each player was subject to just one steroid test per 

season on an unannounced, randomly-selected date. This type of testing will continue in 2005. Under the old testing program, however, once the player had completed his one test for the year, the threat of discipline for the use of steroids was 

gone until the next season. To address this shortcoming, Major League Baseball 

added an on-going program of random testing for 2005 and beyond, under which 

players can be tested multiple times in a given year. Under the new policy, no matter how many times a player is tested in a given year, he will remain subject to 

additional, random tests. 

Third, the new policy, for the first time, introduces off-season or ‘‘out-of-competition’’ testing. In the traditional employment context, unions have resisted employer 

efforts to intrude into off-duty hours and vacation time. This traditional union resistance has carried over into the context of professional sports. To its credit, however, the MLBPA has agreed to compromise the privacy concerns of its members 

and allow off-season testing. This off-season testing, which will literally be carried 

out around the globe, will insure that misguided players cannot use the winter 

months to enhance their performance through illegal substances. 

Baseball’s new policy also provides for increased penalties. There are no free 

passes under the new policy. First-time offenders will be suspended, without pay, 

for ten days and will be publicly identified as having violated the drug policy. A tenday suspension will cost the average Major League player approximately $140,000 

in lost salary. More important in terms of deterrence, however, is the fact that no 

player wants to be identified to his peers and the public as a cheater. Penalties for 

subsequent offenses increase to 30 days, 60 days and one year. 

Major League Baseball has always recognized the influence that our great players 

can and do have on the youth of America. Our players recognize this as well. As 

such, both owners and players have been deeply concerned that recent revelations 

and allegations of steroid use have sent a terrible message to young people. With 

our encouragement, some of our great players have begun to speak out forcefully 

on this topic, often times aiming their strong anti-drug message directly to young 

players aspiring to become Major Leaguers. For instance, Reds’ first-baseman Sean 

Casey recently applauded the new Major League policy and noted that ‘‘it sends a 

strong message that you don’t need to take steroids to be a Major League player.’’ 

Likewise, Mets’ catcher Mike Piazza was recently quoted as saying that the stronger 

policy was important to him because it ‘‘put this issue to the forefront and [made] 

a statement to all kids who look up to baseball that this is something we don’t endorse.’’ Finally, Red Sox’ centerfielder Johnny Damon said that the tough new steroid program was ‘‘great for baseball,’’ because performance enhancing substances 

‘‘need[] to be out of this game’’ and ‘‘kept away from kids.’’ 

On a more formal basis, our office has been working with our friends at the Partnership for a Drug-Free America over the past year to determine the appropriate 

timing and content of public service announcements that will discourage young people from using steroids. In the coming months, you will see the product of these efforts on television and through other educational material and we can only hope 

that these announcements will contribute to better decision-making by young athletes. 

We believe that, with the steps that I have outlined here today, Major League 

Baseball is sending a very strong message to young people that performance enhancing substances have no place in professional or amateur athletics and will not 

101

be tolerated in Major League Baseball, by those playing the game today or by those 

who aspire to play it one day. 

I want to thank the Subcommittees for the opportunity to appear before you 

today.

Mr. STEARNS. And Ms. Wilfert. 

Ms. WILFERT. Thank you, Chairman Stearns. 

Mr. STEARNS. Just turn your mike on, if you would. 

STATEMENT OF MARY E. WILFERT 

Ms. WILFERT. Thank you, Chairman Stearns, Ranking Member 

Schakowsky, and other distinguished members of the subcommittees. On behalf of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, I 

am Mary Wilfert, and I appreciate the opportunity to appear today, 

and to provide you a full accounting of the Association’s drug education and drug testing programs. 

For the last 5 years, I have been responsible for managing the 

NCAA’s efforts in the areas of drug education and drug testing, 

and am also the NCAA liaison to the Committee on Competitive 

Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports, and the Drug-Education 

and Drug-Testing Subcommittee. 

The NCAA is an association of 1,200 member institutions, representing over 360,000 student athletes. The NCAA’s Constitution, 

under the Principle of Student-Athlete Welfare, states that intercollegiate athletics programs ‘‘shall be conducted in a manner designed to protect and enhance the physical and educational welfare 

of student-athletes.’’ And in addition, NCAA legislation requires a 

shared responsibility between the NCAA national office and NCAA 

member institutions, again, those over 1,200 member institutions 

that are part of the Association. 

The Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects 

of Sports is comprised of experts in sports medicine practice and 

research, sports law, and athletic administration, many of whom 

have been published in their respective fields. These dedicated professionals assist the NCAA in the development of drug education 

and testing policies, and provide medical and policy review and adjudication for any student athlete who wishes to appeal a positive 

drug test. 

In order to promote student athlete well-being and deter drug 

use, the NCAA has developed a two-pronged approach, education 

and detection. The NCAA provides over $500,000 in funding assistance to its member institutions for educational programs, and approximately $4 million annually for its national drug testing program. In addition to NCAA resources, our member institutions provide substantial resources on campus to complement these efforts. 

Our membership continues to play a vital role in shaping our policies, and enhances our efforts through their own education and 

testing programs. 

In my written testimony, I set out several resources that we provide to assist our member institutions in education. One resource 

I would like to highlight is the Dietary Supplement Resource Exchange Center, which provides student athletes and athletic staff 

a 24 hour toll-free number and website to get reliable information 

about NCAA banned substances, medications, and supplements, 

and all inquiries are treated in a confidential manner. 

102

The NCAA sponsors two drug testing programs, national drug 

testing programs. During NCAA championships, that program was 

established in 1986, and randomly throughout the academic year, 

that program was established in 1990. The NCAA publishes a list 

of banned drug classes that is even more comprehensive that what 

is required by law. All NCAA student athletes in all sports are subject to testing, and may be tested during NCAA championships or 

during the academic year. NCAA testing is conducted under a 

strict, published protocol, using one of the best labs in the U.S. for 

sports drug testing. The UCLA Olympic Analytical Lab identified 

the latest designer steroid to hit the market, THG, and developed 

a testing protocol that now benefits the NCAA and others in providing keener detection of hard to identify anabolic steroids. 

Sanctions from a positive drug test are automatic, and are defined for the student athlete in the annual signing of the drug testing consent form. Athletes who test positive are withheld from competition in all sports for at least 1 year, and lose one of their 4 

years of collegiate eligibility. Athletes who test positive a second 

time for steroids lose all remaining collegiate eligibility, and are 

permanently banned from intercollegiate competition. 

The NCAA was supportive of legislative efforts to remove steroid 

precursors from the dietary supplement market through the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004, and joins the authors and partners in celebrating this victory. The next important steps involve 

expanding resources for research in the area of detecting new performance-enhancing substances as they emerge, and developing effective prevention strategies. Again, the two-pronged approach, 

drug testing and drug education. 

On behalf of the NCAA, I would like to thank the subcommittees 

for the opportunity to speak before you today, and express the 

NCAA’s willingness to assist in moving forward in this monumental and critical task to eliminate drugs from sports. 

[The prepared statement of Mary E. Wilfert follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARY E. WILFERT, CHIEF LIAISON, NCAA COMMITTEE ON

COMPETITIVE SAFEGUARDS AND MEDICAL ASPECTS OF SPORTS

Chairman Stearns, Chairman Deal, Ranking Member Schakowsky, Ranking Member Brown and other distinguished Members of the Subcommittees, on behalf of the 

National Collegiate Athletic Association, I am Mary Wilfert and I appreciate the opportunity to appear today and inform you of the Association’s drug education and 

drug-testing programs with Association member institutions. For the last five years, 

I have been responsible for managing the NCAA’s efforts in the area of drug education and our drug testing program and am also the NCAA liaison to the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports (CSMAS) and the 

Drug-Education and Drug-Testing Subcommittee of CSMAS. This NCAA Committee 

provides expertise and guidance to the NCAA on health and safety issues, reviews 

the NCAA drug-testing and education programs, and adjudicates positive drug-test 

appeals. I have an extensive professional background in the health services field, 

focusing on programs that enhance wellness and lifelong learning. 

The NCAA is a private association of approximately 1,200 four-year institutions 

of higher education and athletics conferences. There are more than 360,000 studentathletes competing at these NCAA member schools. According to the NCAA Constitution, under the Principle of Student-Athlete Welfare, intercollegiate athletics 

programs ‘‘shall be conducted in a manner designed to protect and enhance the 

physical and educational welfare of student-athletes.’’ The NCAA manual states 

that it is the responsibility of each member institution to protect the health and 

safety of and provide a safe environment for each of its participating student-athletes.In order to promote student-athlete well-being and deter drug use, the NCAA 

has developed a two-prong approach—education and detection. Both are critical to 

103

the overall effort to address concerns with the use of drugs in intercollegiate athletics. The NCAA established its national drug-education and testing programs in 

the 1980’s and 1990’s. The NCAA drug-testing program has earned a reputation as 

a model of quality and professionalism. The NCAA spends close to $4 million annually for our national drug testing programs. The national NCAA drug-education and 

testing programs are enhanced and complemented by the additional efforts of NCAA 

member institutions. The majority of members have developed institutional policies 

to conduct drug-education and drug testing programs of their athletes, as measured 

through the biennial Drug-Education and Testing survey of the membership. This 

partnership provides a strong anti-doping message throughout intercollegiate athletics programs. 

COMPETITIVE SAFEGUARDS AND MEDICAL ASPECTS OF SPORTS

The NCAA Association-Wide Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical 

Aspects of Sports, CSMAS, provides expertise and guidance to the NCAA on issues 

pertaining to student-athlete health and safety. CSMAS is comprised of experts in 

sports medicine practice and research, sports law, and athletic administration. 

Members of this committee have been published in their respective fields, and are 

looked to as important resources for sports science information. These dedicated professionals contribute their time and expertise to assist the NCAA in the development of drug-education and testing policies, and provide medical and policy review 

and adjudication for any student-athlete who wishes to appeal a positive drug test. 

This committee annually reviews the NCAA drug-testing program protocol and list 

of banned drugs. 

DRUG EDUCATION

Since 1985, the NCAA has conducted a national study of the drug use habits of 

college athletes. The study is replicated every four years and five replications have 

been conducted since the original study. The study is designed to obtain data on the 

substances and use patterns of college athletes through the use of anonymous selfreport questionnaires. This data assists us in developing policy and practice to deter 

drug use by collegiate athletes. More than 21,000 student-athletes completed the 

survey in the 2001 study. The results of the 2005 study will be available later this 

summer. Copies of the last two published studies are available at www.ncaa.org. 

To support and promote drug education of student-athletes, NCAA Bylaw requires 

that each institution’s Director of Athletics or the director’s designee educate student-athletes about NCAA banned substances and the products that may contain 

them. Student-athletes are required to sign a student-athlete statement and a drugtesting consent form that alerts them to the NCAA drug-testing policies and the list 

of banned substances, and requires their agreement to abide by these regulations 

and be tested when selected either during the academic year or during any championship play. The NCAA publishes guidelines for institutional drug-education programs, and annually provides more than a half million dollars in resources to its 

member institutions to help them conduct campus drug-education and prevention efforts. Some of the other resources provided to assist our member institutions to enhance student-athlete health and safety and deter drug use are:

• Health and safety specialists. The NCAA national office employs staff members 

who oversee the NCAA’s health and safety initiatives. 

• The NCAA Sports Medicine Handbook. A set of sports medicine guidelines compiled by leaders in the field of sports science that includes the NCAA’s recommendations on educating athletes about drugs and supplements. 

• Educational seminars on developing student-athlete drug and supplement prevention programs within the university. 

• Educational information via bookmarks, posters, and Web-based resources. 

• Educational conferences for coaches and administrators on deterring supplement 

use by athletes. 

• A national speakers bureau of experts on drug use in sport. • The Dietary Supplement Resource Exchange Center (REC). All NCAA athletes 

and staff may use this service funded by the NCAA and housed at Drug Free 

Sport. The REC provides a toll-free number and Web site for athletes to get reliable information about NCAA banned substances, medications and supplements. Inquiries are treated in a confidential manner. 

• Articles and alerts through its biweekly publication, The NCAA News, which has 

featured a number of articles on drug use in sports. 

• A special advisory memorandum sent annually to the senior athletics administrators at every NCAA institution to alert them to the potential risks of banned 

drugs in dietary supplements. 

104

DRUG TESTING

The NCAA sponsors two national drug-testing programs for college athletes—during NCAA championships and randomly throughout the academic year. The NCAA 

believes that drug testing is an integral part of drug-abuse prevention. NCAA drug 

testing was established to protect student-athlete health and safety and to ensure 

that athletes are not using performance-enhancing drugs to gain a competitive advantage. 

The NCAA first introduced drug testing at its championships and postseason football bowl games in 1986. Since 1986, any NCAA athlete competing in these events 

is subject to NCAA drug testing, and approximately 1,500 athletes are tested each 

year through championship drug testing. NCAA testing is conducted under a strict, 

published protocol utilizing one of the best laboratories in the U.S. for sports drug 

testing, the UCLA Olympic Analytical Lab, certified by the International Olympic 

Committee. Not only tops in analysis, the UCLA lab is also the research lab that 

identified the latest designer steroid to hit the market, THG, and developed a testing protocol that now benefits the NCAA in providing keener detection of hard-toidentify anabolic steroids. 

As part of its drug-prevention efforts, the NCAA publishes a list of banned drug 

classes. 

This list goes further than those substances banned under federal law, and includes anabolic steroid precursor DHEA and the stimulant synephrine. 

To deter the use of training drugs such as anabolic steroids, the NCAA implemented a second drug-testing program in August 1990. Today as part of this program, more than 10,000 athletes, including incoming freshman and transfers, are 

tested by the NCAA on their campuses August through June. Athletes in all sports 

are subject to this testing, and may be tested at any time during the academic year. 

Sanctions for positive drug tests are automatic and defined for the student-athlete 

in the annual signing of the NCAA drug-testing consent form. 

PENALTIES

The NCAA and its member institutions have taken a strong stand to deter doping 

in sports and have established serious penalties for those who violate these policies. 

Athletes who test positive are withheld from competition in all sports for at least 

one year, and lose one of their four years of collegiate eligibility. Athletes who test 

positive a second time for steroids lose all remaining eligibility and are permanently 

banned from intercollegiate athletics competition. 

RESULTS

The NCAA has been active in the fight to deter steroid use for over 30 years. 

Through collaborative educational efforts with sports medicine and athletics organizations, the NCAA has been a champion in deterring the use of these substances 

by young athletes. The establishment of drug testing, NCAA support for drug-testing research, the strengthening of NCAA and campus policies to deter drug use, and 

the combined educational efforts from the NCAA national office and campus athletics staff have had a positive impact on steroid use. Data from the NCAA substance use surveys note a marked decrease in the reported use of steroids following 

the institution of drug testing for that substance during the academic year. In the 

1989 Study of the Substance Use Habits of College Student Athletes, 9.7% of NCAA 

Division I football student-athletes reported using anabolic steroids. In 1990, the 

NCAA began testing for anabolic steroids during the academic year in all Division 

I football programs. In the 1993 study, 5.0% of Division I football student-athletes 

reported using anabolic steroids, and subsequently, 2.2% reported steroid use in the 

1997 study and 3.0% in the 2001 study. 

NEXT STEPS

The NCAA was vocal and supportive of legislative efforts to remove steroid precursors from the dietary supplement market through the Anabolic Steroid Control 

Act of 2004 and joins the authors and partners in celebrating this victory. But we 

understand there is much more to be done. We continue to review and enhance our 

drug testing protocol, and work to strengthen our relationships with drug prevention experts. We support our friends and colleagues in their efforts to address drug 

use at the high school and professional leagues, and offer our cooperation to those 

who share in our commitment to ensure safe, drug free sport. As we have for almost 

two decades, we will continue to meet on common ground with the professional 

leagues and our colleagues at the high school level, and to enlist the expertise of 

sports scientists to provide us guidance in our prevention and testing programs. The 

105

important next steps involve expanding resources for research in the area of detecting new performance enhancing substances as they emerge, and to identify and implement effective prevention strategies. As noted in the THG case, the importance 

of research to detect and test for new performance enhancing drugs cannot be overstated, and on behalf of all of us who administer athletics programs, we urge funding support for drug-testing research and implementation of programs that have 

been able to demonstrate a positive impact on youth decisions to enhance performance through healthy and fair strategies, by hard work, dedication and practicing 

healthy behaviors. 

On behalf of the NCAA, I would like to thank the subcommittees for the opportunity to speak before you today and express the NCAA’s willingness to assist in 

moving forward in this monumental and critical task to eradicate drugs from sports.

Mr. STEARNS. Thank you. Mr. Coonelly, I am going to start with 

you, with the opening questions. Are there athletes, in your opinion, today, that are taking steroids in the Major League Baseball? 

Just yes or no. Just yes or no. Are there athletes today in Major 

League Baseball—not the minor, I am talking the Major League 

Baseball, are taking steroids, yes or no? 

Mr. COONELLY. The testing to date, sir, indicates that yes, a very 

small proportion. 

Mr. STEARNS. Yes, they are taking them. Okay. Now, under the 

law, those caught with illegal possession of steroids without a prescription faced arrest and prosecution. That is the law. Dealers face 

a Federal felony charge and up to 5 years in prison. Once you detect an athlete that has this, 10 days is nothing. The athlete is 

against the Controlled Substance Act. Do you understand that? 

And so, shouldn’t you find out how he got it, and shouldn’t you go 

after the dealer, which is a felony, and shouldn’t you have more 

than just 10 days suspension, because this fellow, he is getting 

something without a prescription, and that is against the law. 

Mr. COONELLY. Mr. Chairman, I disagree with you that 10 days 

is nothing for a major league player. Ten days is 10 days of his career that he will never get——

Mr. STEARNS. Let us ask him—why don’t you find out from him 

who is the distributor, how he got it, and go after them? 

Mr. COONELLY. Mr. Chairman, I would respectfully say to you 

that that is the prosecutor’s job, and we do not prosecute felonies 

at Major League Baseball. 

Mr. STEARNS. So you are not interested in who—how he got the 

drugs? That is no concern of Major League Baseball. 

Mr. COONELLY. Mr. Chairman, we are interested in removing 

drugs from our sport entirely. 

Mr. STEARNS. Are you concerned with how he got it at all? Is 

Major League Baseball—if you find a person has tested positive, 

are you concerned at all how he got the drug? 

Mr. COONELLY. We are concerned, because we are concerned that 

that person may also be distributing to other major league and 

minor league players. 

Mr. STEARNS. And what do you do to find the distributor? 

Mr. COONELLY. We will turn over all of the information that we 

have, or we can get, to the Federal prosecutor, the State prosecutors, who can prosecute those crimes. 

Mr. STEARNS. And let me ask you, you give 10 days. What do you 

do in the minor leagues if that same, if some person is caught with 

possession without a prescription of steroids. What do you do in the 

minor leagues? 

106

Mr. COONELLY. The penalty for a first offense is 15 days in the 

minor leagues. 

Mr. STEARNS. And what is the penalty the second? 

Mr. COONELLY. Same as the major league program, 30 days, 60 

days, 1 year. 

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. And why is there a difference between the 

minor league and the major league, in terms of the penalty? 

Mr. COONELLY. The 5 day difference, Mr. Chairman, is the result 

of collective bargaining with the Major League Baseball Players Association. The minor league players are not unionized, and as a result, we unilaterally implemented that policy. 

Mr. STEARNS. So because of the unions, you have a lesser penalty. 

Mr. COONELLY. It was a result of the negotiation with the Players Association, yes, sir. 

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. Mr. Birch, the same question for you. In the 

NFL, are there athletes today in the NFL that are using steroids? 

Just yes or no. 

Mr. BIRCH. Yes. 

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. And the penalty for someone who you find 

with steroids is what, again? What is the penalty? 

Mr. BIRCH. The penalty is a mandatory 4 game suspension without pay. 

Mr. STEARNS. Which could be a month. 

Mr. BIRCH. Correct. 

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. And so you have almost a 30 day penalty, 

and the Major League Baseball has a 10 day. Does that include, 

Mr. Coonelly, does that include weekends, so if a person was found 

on a Friday, that would include Saturday and Sunday, plus the 

next Saturday and Sunday, so he would only be out possibly 5 

working days? 

Mr. COONELLY. It does, Mr. Chairman, but we work 7 days a 

week. 

Mr. STEARNS. Well, I know. Okay. 

Mr. COONELLY. We play every day. 

Mr. STEARNS. That is a good point. That is a good point. NCAA. 

Are there drugs, athletes using steroids in the NCAA? 

Ms. WILFERT. Yes. 

Mr. STEARNS. Yes or no. Yes. 

Ms. WILFERT. Yes. 

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. So we have come, across the board, that all 

of these sports activities are using steroids. And we have been told 

in the second panel that you can’t even get them by testing. So the 

question is for people like legislators, how do we even know that 

your testing is getting—is an accurate test, and we are extirpating, 

rooting out this problem? I mean, you talked quite a bit in your 

opening statement about these testing, but the feeling I have from 

the second panel is that the testing, you can drive a tank through 

the testing. And you heard that testimony, too. What do you think? 

Ms. WILFERT. I did, Mr. Chairman. I believe that our testing 

does identify steroid users. I know that we don’t identify every steroid user, and as one of the panelists in the second panel identified, 

we would probably need to test every day, everybody, all the time 

to do that. But we do believe that the deterrent aspect of testing 

107

at the collegiate level, along with education, is effective in reducing 

steroid use. 

Mr. STEARNS. Now, as I understand it, the Olympics, Ms. Wilfert, 

is much stricter than the NCAA. Isn’t that correct? 

Ms. WILFERT. The first penalty for steroid use is a 2 year penalty. 

Mr. STEARNS. Two years. 

Ms. WILFERT. Correct. Dr. Hale. 

Mr. STEARNS. Dr. Hale, is that correct? 

Mr. HALE. That is correct. 

Mr. STEARNS. Well, it seems to me if it is for Olympic athletes, 

it is 2 years, and it is only 10 days for baseball, it is a month, four 

games, for the NFL, and for NCAA, it is——

Ms. WILFERT. One year of 4 years of eligibility. 

Mr. STEARNS. So——

Ms. WILFERT. So, it is 25 percent of their career. 

Mr. STEARNS. The more money you make, there seems to be 

something tied here. The more money you make, the less the penalty. Dr. Hale, does that sound right? 

Mr. HALE. I—we believe very strongly that a 2 year banment 

from the sport is a very strong deterrent, because for most Olympic 

level athletes, that basically ends their career. 

Mr. STEARNS. Well, in the NFL, Mr. Coonelly, if you take a 

month off, that is a huge part of the season. And it seems to me 

we have the Olympics, we have the NCAA, we have the NFL, and 

you folks have the lightest touch on the athletes. And I just think 

that there seems to need to be a more stronger enforcement by you. 

Do you test drugs in the off-season? 

Mr. COONELLY. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. STEARNS. And let us say, a Barry Bonds, do you go to his 

home, or how do you test him? 

Mr. COONELLY. We would go to a player’s home, and test him at 

that point. 

Mr. STEARNS. And how often, in the off-season, do you test a 

player like Barry Bonds? 

Mr. COONELLY. Well, any individual player might be tested or 

might not be tested. We have—the off-season testing was first instituted in this new program, so we will do it——

Mr. STEARNS. And that started when? 

Mr. COONELLY. [continuing] for the first time next year. 

Mr. STEARNS. And when did that start? 

Mr. COONELLY. That will start next off-season, which is the first 

year——

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. So right now, you are not doing a rigorous 

testing in the off-season of any of these athletes. 

Mr. COONELLY. Well, we did not this past off-season, because 

that was part of the new program——

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. Okay. 

Mr. COONELLY. [continuing] that we just instituted. 

Mr. STEARNS. But don’t you—wouldn’t you—wouldn’t the American people understand that if the person takes the steroids all 

during the off-season, and then tailors off during the season, you 

really can’t detect them, and the testing, we have shown, is not rigVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
108

orous enough anyway. So really, your program is extremely weak, 

and——

Mr. COONELLY. That is——

Mr. STEARNS. [continuing] it is now just starting to get some 

teeth in it, and the only reason you have got teeth on it is because 

of prodding, either from Congress, from the public, or from these 

exposes from children dying. I mean, it seems like you are very 

low, slow in showing full accountability here. 

Mr. COONELLY. Mr. Chairman, I would disagree with the last 

point, but I do agree that as a result of those things, we instituted 

a much stronger penalty, and we also instituted off-season drug 

testing so that those types of things could not happen. 

Mr. STEARNS. Okay. I submit that you are slow in solving the 

problem, and your enforcement is weak, and now, your testing is 

also weak, because you are just starting in the off-season. So with 

that, my time has expired, and Ranking Member Schakowsky. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I would like 

to say that you know, you quoted from the State of the Union Address, where the President referred to having to root out the use 

of steroids, and Mr. Shimkus referred to a program twice, referred 

to a program that it is in schools, Safe and Drug-Free Schools State 

grants. I just wanted to note that in the President’s proposed budget, where last year, that program was funded to the extent of $437 

million, it is slated to be completely eliminated and zero funded for 

2006. So, those of us who are concerned about youth in particular, 

I think, ought to take a very close look at that particular program, 

or at the very least, at programs that address the use of steroids 

in our schools and our country. 

Mr. Coonelly, you know, Pete Rose was banned from baseball for 

gambling, and I understand that is a serious offense, but here we 

are. I want to get back to this 10 game issue, because I—you said 

you were moved by Mr. Hooton’s testimony, and in his testimony, 

he points out that that does represent about 6 percent of the 

games, and I understand to most Americans, $140,000 in lost salary is a lot of money, but unfortunately, or fortunately, to professional athletes, it is a drop in the bucket in many cases. 

And so, if we want to leave here, as you said, with a really strong 

signal that steroid use, there is no tolerance, again, justify it for 

me how what, for many athletes, amounts to a slap on the wrist 

sends that strong message. 

Mr. COONELLY. I would only disagree that it is a slap on the 

wrist because, as I indicated in my opening statement, the real deterrent here is that these individuals will be publicly outed as 

cheaters in the game. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. You know, I want to say this about that. What 

does ‘‘publicly outed’’ mean? You know, you get your multimillion 

dollar salary, and your—and in many circles, having kind of 

thumbed your nose at the system, unfortunately, in our culture, 

very often is—that is pretty cool, and so, what does publicly outed, 

what is the consequence of that? 

Mr. COONELLY. The consequence, particularly in Major League 

Baseball, is we are known by our history. These players are known 

by where they stand in history, and as, I believe it was Congressman Upton indicated in his statement, as I indicated in mine, in 

109

many circles, Sammy Sosa, who otherwise has a Hall of Fame career, is now known as a cheater because he used a corked bat on, 

he says, one occasion. Others think that he wasn’t telling the truth 

when he said other occasions. 

Those in Major League Baseball who are publicly identified as 

being a cheater, they will be treated and viewed differently by not 

only their peers, but also, by historians of the game, and by their 

fans. And it means a lot more than a slap on the wrist to a major 

league player to be identified not as a great home run hitter, future 

Hall of Famer, but as a cheater. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. You know, I think that is such an incredibly 

subjective kind of punishment, and if we are going to be relying on 

reputations and history writers, et cetera, rather than concrete 

sanctions, as a way, we are in deep trouble here, I think. What one 

may think is a horrible rebuke, and something that will change behavior, to another person is just, you know, nothing. 

Anyway, the difference between, you said that the difference between major league and minor league is just a few days. If you 

think it is so important, and you have complete control over those 

minor league players, why is it that even there, that they penalties 

are as light as they are? I mean, if you mean zero tolerance, if you 

really mean zero tolerance, in a setting where you control, and 

which is often the entry point for young athletes, why don’t you do 

more there? 

Mr. COONELLY. Because again, because we think that the greatest deterrent for a minor league player as well, is to be publicly 

identified as somebody who is cheating on steroids. But the minor 

league——

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Wait. I want to underline that. You are going 

on record now as saying that the greatest deterrent to steroid use 

is for the public to know that someone is using steroids. That is 

the greatest deterrent. 

Mr. COONELLY. Yes, Ms. Congresswoman. I am, and I think that 

as some others in the panel have indicated, the financial sanctions 

don’t work in this area. They are meaningful, and they are meaningful to a minor league player, but that is not what is going to 

drive the professionals——

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. What about legal sanctions, as my chairman 

has indicated. What about those? People who have broken the law. 

Mr. COONELLY. I agree that those people should be prosecuted, 

and I am quite surprised that they are not. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I have to tell you, I think it is absolutely stunning that the official position of the representative of baseball coming before this body is to say that the worst thing that could happen is just for someone to be identified as a steroid user. Clearly, 

in our culture right now, making the majors and being professional 

athletes, and making a ton of money, is worth all these risks of 

being identified as somebody who has used risky and perhaps even 

illegal, as well as unethical behavior. And I am very disappointed. 

Mr. COONELLY. I think your analogy of Pete Rose tells the story. 

It is not the 1 year ban that Pete Rose has complained of and has 

gone on his own crusade. It is the fact that he is not allowed in 

the Hall of Fame. It is the historical perspective that is important 

to these individuals. 

110

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Incredible. 

Mr. STEARNS. The gentlelady’s time has expired. The gentleman 

from Michigan, Mr. Upton. 

Mr. UPTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have got a couple questions, and then, I am going to go to my hearing, which has started 

on the third floor. 

Mr. Birch, how—it is my understanding, the NFL, every player 

gets tested. 

Mr. BIRCH. Correct. 

Mr. UPTON. Multiple times. The first violation, they miss 25 percent of the season. The second violation, it increasingly gets more, 

and as you say, it is most effective. Is that right? 

Mr. BIRCH. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. UPTON. And how long have you had that plan in place? 

Mr. BIRCH. Since 1987, we initiated——

Mr. UPTON. Terrific. Terrific. That is all I need to hear. Ms. 

Wilfert, I liked what the NCAA has as well. First violation, you 

miss how much? 

Ms. WILFERT. One year of——

Mr. UPTON. One year. 

Ms. WILFERT. [continuing] your 4 years of eligibility. 

Mr. UPTON. And the second violation, you’re done. 

Ms. WILFERT. Out for life. 

Mr. UPTON. So you lose, obviously, you lose your scholarship, too. 

In essence, the death penalty for the NCAA. You are done playing. 

Ms. WILFERT. For an individual. 

Mr. UPTON. For an individual. I think everyone here, Republican 

or Democrat, would—supports that. And we were very disappointed, again, as we watched this, us baseball fans, very disappointed the way that baseball ended up, particularly knowing 

that you all were on notice. It is my feeling that the players unions 

were much to fight about it. Is that right, Mr. Coonelly? I mean, 

they—did they object? Were they dragged along kicking and 

screaming with what you ended up? 

Mr. COONELLY. Well——

Mr. UPTON. Could you have gone for more? 

Mr. COONELLY. I wouldn’t constitute as come along kicking and 

screaming, and in fact, as I indicated, it was unprecedented that 

this was a midterm change in a collective bargaining agreement. 

The Players Association——

Mr. UPTON. Though you have had it——

Mr. COONELLY. [continuing] negotiates hard. 

Mr. UPTON. [continuing] since 1987 in the NFL, almost 20 years. 

Why couldn’t we get this same deal for baseball? 

Mr. COONELLY. Congressman Upton, we did propose this in previous collective bargaining negotiations, and——

Mr. UPTON. But did the players union say no? 

Mr. COONELLY. [continuing] and the Players Association objected 

to the——

Mr. UPTON. Okay. 

Mr. COONELLY. Yes, at that time, yes. 

Mr. UPTON. You know, I wish, and as Chairman Stearns said, we 

are going to have additional hearings on this, and if we have to 

pursue legislation, I certainly intend to be part of that struggle. 

111

But I will tell you the other thing that disturbs me, is that, you 

know, when—MLB says you want to do it right. You are proud of 

what you have now accomplished, and yet, the Commissioner, Mr. 

Selig, refuses to come and testify to the committee, when he was 

asked. 

If you wanted to do it right, I think that it should have fallen 

on his shoulders to have him brag about what they have done, particularly in light of what the NFL, as well as the NCAA has done. 

And the other thing that I want to say, too. You know, I am one 

of those guys that reads the sports section first, and when I got 

this Washington Post this morning, before 6, my curb, MLB Union 

Fight House Order. ‘‘Lawyers for MLB vowed Wednesday to fight 

efforts by a House committee to compel seven current and former 

members to testify.’’ I want the players union to come testify. I 

want them to tell us why they didn’t want to go further. And with 

MLB not sending the top guy here, and not allowing for the players 

themselves to come testify, and to join their side, when in fact, in 

your own testimony, you cite Sean Casey, Johnny Damon, and others, Mike Piazza. You use their comments, so that you can use 

their testimony in your testimony, but we can’t ask other players 

what the deal is, to ask them how many players might cheat. 

Mr. COONELLY. Congressman Upton, I would note that Donald 

Fehr, the executive director of the Players Association, has agreed 

to testify at the hearings next week. 

Mr. UPTON. But why do you guys side with them? And my staff 

was—some counsel from the MLB was on the radio this morning, 

and he was, I think the words of my staff was, he was really deliberate in making—vociferous in that they shouldn’t come testify. 

Mr. COONELLY. Well, I heard Mr. Brand on Baseball——

Mr. UPTON. I didn’t hear it. I just heard——

Mr. COONELLY. I heard him on the radio as well, and there are 

important privacy issues relating to the drug testing program that 

has been instituted——

Mr. UPTON. But if you want to do it right, why shouldn’t they 

be exposed, if—to send a signal so that we don’t have another 

young boy, somewhere in America, die, as we heard in the testimony earlier this morning? 

Mr. COONELLY. Congressman Upton, I would respectfully suggest 

that the strongest signal that can be sent here today is that we 

have agreed on a new, tough, rigorous testing program. That testing program is going to do away with steroids——

Mr. UPTON. You know what. We don’t believe it. 10 games is not 

enough. A corked bat, with steroid use, is not enough. It ought to 

be what the NCAA has done. It ought to be what the NFL has 

done. They have sent the signal to their players that they are not 

going to allow this to continue to happen. 

Mr. COONELLY. I have heard that view expressed here today, Mr. 

Congressman, and this is, and will be part of future collective bargaining negotiations, and I take your point. 

Mr. UPTON. My time has expired. I yield back. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the gentleman. The full chairman. 

Chairman BARTON. Has Mr. Engel gone yet? 

Mr. STEARNS. I think, as a policy, Mr. Engel is not a member of 

the subcommittee——

112

Chairman BARTON. Oh. 

Mr. STEARNS. [continuing] on Commerce and Consumer Protection and Trade, nor on the—Health, so what I was going to do was 

take all the members who are, and then come to him. 

Mr. UPTON. Would the chairman yield just 1 second? 

Mr. STEARNS. I would be glad to yield. 

Mr. UPTON. Is Mr. Engel waiting for my hearing? We have actually moved it to upstairs, if you want to go with me. 

Chairman BARTON. I am going to go to the hearing as soon as 

this hearing is done. Yes. But I have two other questions. I have 

two questions that I want to ask. 

Mr. STEARNS. I have two hearings. We have an Energy and Air 

Quality hearing, and Telco hearing, so——

Chairman BARTON. Yes. 

Mr. STEARNS. But with that——

Chairman BARTON. This is a great committee. 

Mr. STEARNS. I didn’t want to go out of order with Mr. Engel, but 

if he is not a member of the subcommittee. 

Chairman BARTON. I will wait. It is fine. 

Mr. STEARNS. Take my time. 

Chairman BARTON. Thank you. Well, first of all, I want to thank 

you all for testifying voluntarily. We can subpoena, too. It is—this 

committee has used the subpoena authority, and if we need to, we 

will, but we try to do things in a cooperative fashion, so I appreciate you all being here. 

My first question is to the gentleman who is the head of the 

Anti-Doping Agency. How long can you detect the traces of steroids 

in an athlete’s system after they stop taking them? 

Mr. HALE. The—it depends on the root, as was explained to you 

earlier, whether it is an oral compound, or whether it is an 

injectable compound. In most instances, you are probably looking 

at 72 to 96 hours. However, it is a constant use of a steroid, it 

changes what we call the testosterone, epitestosterone level. We 

can evaluate that up to several months following that, and there 

is recently some research being done on something called the carbon isotope ratio. Most—without going into the chemistry involved, 

most of the steroid compounds are based on a vegetable background, and therefore, they have a different isotopic formula than 

those that are on—used from humans. And that is what we usually 

use to see if there has been a long-term use of steroids. 

Chairman BARTON. Well, you know, obviously, the initial reaction 

to any kind of a problem like this is to have a testing program, and 

make sure that it is accurate, and you have very few false 

positives, and things like this. But it doesn’t do too much good to 

claim you have a testing program if it is fairly easy to get around 

the test, because you take the test once a month, or once a year, 

or—so, I guess my question to my two friends from the major 

leagues, from the football, NFL, and Major League Baseball, are 

you all serious about a testing program that could actually catch 

people? 

Mr. COONELLY. Well, let me——

Chairman BARTON. Not just on paper, that—but that you would 

actually set the program up, so that if they are using something 

they are not supposed to be, you will catch them. 

113

Mr. COONELLY. Let me start, and indicate, as I indicated in my 

opening, that our testing program now uses gold standard WADA 

laboratories to do the testing. We use the most sophisticated testing that——

Chairman BARTON. I am not talking about the type of test. I am 

talking about the frequency of testing. 

Mr. COONELLY. And on that point, we also address that point as 

well, by putting in a program that now, a player doesn’t know at 

all during the season or during the off-season, that he can’t be tested. A player can be tested on multiple occasions, unannounced, 

random testing. There is never a point in time when the player can 

say I have been tested 3 times this year, so I know I won’t be tested this week. That player can be tested throughout the year, regardless of how many times he has been tested. 

Chairman BARTON. Mr. Birch. 

Mr. BIRCH. Yes. I would agree with that, to the extent that our 

testing program has a host of safeguards and checks to prevent 

predictability, and to ensure that that deterrent value is there, and 

that if, in fact, when that person tests, they have used a substance, 

that we will find it. 

Chairman BARTON. All right. Let us just, hypothetically, on average, in Major League Baseball, if you have a random testing program, which it sounds to me like, it is what you—how often would 

a major leaguer expect it, not knowing when, but in the course of 

a season, how often might he be tested, on average, with your random program? 

Mr. COONELLY. On average, that player would be tested 2 to 3 

times. 

Chairman BARTON. 2 to 3 times. And——

Mr. COONELLY. But the—but he could be tested as many as 4 to 

5 times. 

Chairman BARTON. We understand that. But somebody is going 

to be tested almost every day, we just don’t know who it is. 

Mr. COONELLY. It wouldn’t be almost every day, because our season is 183 days, but it is throughout the season, and during spring 

training, the time that we are in right now. 

Chairman BARTON. But over the course of the season, a Major 

League Baseball player could expect to be tested 2 or 3 times from 

spring training through the World Series. 

Mr. COONELLY. Correct. 

Chairman BARTON. Not knowing when. What about the NFL? 

Mr. BIRCH. Well, our testing is by a random draw. It would be 

at least, I would say, a minimum of 4 or 5, a maximum, it could 

be anywhere, probably 15, 16. I mean, we have—it really—there is 

no maximum limit to it. It just—it is how many times it comes up 

during—on that computer draw. 

Chairman BARTON. Okay. 

Mr. BIRCH. But it certainly is a very wide range. 

Chairman BARTON. Okay. And what about if there is reason to 

believe, are there rules in the collective bargaining agreement if 

somebody feels there is reason to believe that there is a specific individual, can they be tested for cause, and if so, what do you have 

to establish as that cause before they are tested? 

114

Mr. COONELLY. Under our program, there is reasonable cause 

testing, and what you have to establish to a medical committee is 

that there is some reason to believe that this person is using 

steroids. 

Chairman BARTON. How long does it take to go through that before they are actually tested? Does it take so long that by the time 

they get around to the test, it is out of their system? 

Mr. COONELLY. No. If the committee decides that there is reason 

to believe this person is using steroids, he would be tested within 

1 to 2 days. 

Chairman BARTON. Okay. And what about——

Mr. BIRCH. We have a reasonable cause program. We can also, 

the clubs can request a player be tested before employment, meaning if they are choosing to sign a player, they can get him tested 

prior to signing. We also have a medical, behavioral, and legal component that allows for testing if, in fact, there are behavioral indications or medical indications, or there have been some documented prior involvement with steroids, that we learn of, we 

can——

Chairman BARTON. Well, my time has expired. I just want to end 

up on this note. This is a systemic, endemic program. And it is 

starting in grade school, and it is going through the pros. And obviously, when you get to the professional level, the short-term pressure to win is so great that it is easy to overlook some of these 

issues, and say, well, we just want to win the Super Bowl, or the 

World Series this year. But if we can’t get the major leagues to 

really be role models in a positive way, it is going to be darn tough 

to get the junior highs and the high schools and the colleges to do 

the things that they need to do. 

So it has to be a comprehensive effort, and this committee is one 

of the few committees that has enough jurisdiction to do it across 

the spectrum, and as we said earlier, we don’t normally operate by 

subpoena. We operate by cooperation. But as we pursue this, I 

want you to take the word back to Mr. Tagliabue and Mr. Selig, 

that at some point in time, if we want them to appear, I expect 

them to appear. Now, we will do it the easy way or the hard way, 

and we want to come up with a program that starts in grade 

school, and goes through the professional, and we all work from the 

same sheet of music, and try to do something that in the near 

term, changes the culture of sport in our society. 

I don’t want to do that coercively. I want to do it cooperatively. 

And I know many owners of Major League Baseball teams and 

NFL football teams, and I can interact with them on a personal 

basis. But we are probably going to need, at some point in time, 

to have the Commissioner of the NFL and of Major League Baseball to appear before this committee, and we hope that we can 

work that out in a cooperative fashion. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the Chairman. There is just under 10 minutes left, and I thought what we would do is let the gentlelady 

from Tennessee use her 5 minutes, and then I, if—I am not sure 

if the gentleman from New York will have enough time, because I 

think after this, we will adjourn the subcommittees. 

115

Ms. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, if not, can he submit his questions? 

Mr. STEARNS. The gentleman is—by unanimous consent, can submit his questions to——

Mr. ENGEL. I just need 1 minute, if we can hurry it up, I would 

be happy to, just——

Ms. BLACKBURN. Well, I will be happy to. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. STEARNS. Just use your time. 

Ms. BLACKBURN. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. I want 

to thank all of you for being here, and for taking the time. This 

is a topic that I think all of us who are concerned about our children, or concerned about role models, are quite interested in. And 

I will tell you, Mr. Coonelly, when I picked up this paper today, the 

Examiner, and the quote on the front page, where when the baseball stars were called to testify, the quote from your main office 

that was given is that it is an absolutely excessive and unprecedented misuse of Congressional power. 

Now, with all due respect, sir, to you and baseball, which is my 

husband’s very favorite sport, as I said to the earlier panel, if the 

private sector and the not for profit sector does not tend to an 

issue, then that is when you are going to see government become 

involved. And I feel like there are two reasons we are here today. 

One is Balco, and the other is baseball. And I pulled the transcript 

of the 60 Minutes interview with Victor Conte, and read back 

through that. And I pulled some of the newspaper articles that 

have been—it is amazing the amount of coverage that the steroids 

issue has given, and the misuse, and the abuse has received out 

there. 

And then, you know, there is Jose Canseco’s book, and there is 

all the discussion of if there is going to be an asterisk placed by 

his name, and if we are going to see his title given to Jeff 

Greenwell, who, you know, the 1988 MVP title, if that is going to 

be given to somebody else or recognized, if there is an asterisk by 

his name. And all of that just dilutes the excitement of what should 

be our Nation’s favorite pastime. 

And reading in the paper today, and by the way, you may want 

to read that. I think there are 4 or 5 different articles in there on 

this issue, it leads me to ask you this question. You talk about the 

minor leagues having a zero tolerance policy, and then in your testimony, you talk about the majors are getting better. 

So my question to you, sir, very quickly, is this. Are you all just 

going to be getting better, or are you going to sit there and wait 

until Congress decides that a zero tolerance policy has to be enacted, and what is your course of action? 

Mr. COONELLY. Congresswoman Blackburn, first, I am glad to 

hear that your husband is a fan of Major League Baseball. Second, 

our policy at the major league level is a zero tolerance policy. As 

a result of negotiations with the Players Association, the penalties 

are less strict than they are at the minor league level, but the goal, 

the policy, is zero tolerance, and that is where we are, that is 

where the policy is today. As I indicated, it is a matter subject to 

collective bargaining, and the bargaining agreement will be negoVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
116

tiated again, and I have taken the points made by the members of 

this committee. 

Ms. BLACKBURN. With all due respect, sir, a slap on the wrist, 

and sitting in the timeout corner for a few moments is probably not 

viewed by the public as zero tolerance. 

Thank you very much for being with us today. 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank you. And if the gentleman wants to take 

a minute, we will be glad to give him a minute. 

Mr. ENGEL. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, I want to agree with everything that has been said 

here. I am a big baseball fan myself. Mr. Coonelly, if Pete Rose is 

banned from the Hall of Fame for gambling, why should not someone be banned from the Hall of Fame for steroid use? 

Mr. COONELLY. Well, that is an interesting question, Congressman. I think drug use and drug abuse has always been treated differently by all professional sports, and even by amateur athletes. 

As I indicated, the difference between amateur athletics, whether 

it be the Olympics or the NCAA, is that they don’t have employees 

who they have to negotiate with unions. And that is why, as this 

continuum that was noted by the chairman, in that the amateur 

athletes, the penalties are stronger, and when you get to football 

and baseball, the penalties are less strong. It is because we negotiate with professional unions that negotiate on behalf of rights of 

their individual members. 

Mr. ENGEL. But you see, if someone has a drug dependency, I 

can almost say, you know, they are really sick, and perhaps, we 

should be more lenient, because we have got to get them away from 

their dependency. This isn’t a dependency, this is a conscientious 

effort—a conscious effort, excuse me, to do this to enhance. And 

you know, Dr. Hale, you said in your testimony, is the cost of being 

caught and disciplined greater than the rewards gained from using 

the compounds? And I think that the feeling is that it probably is 

not, and I just don’t understand. I realize there are negotiations, 

but I don’t—I think 10 days, a second time they are caught, 30 

days, a third time, they are caught, 60 days, a fourth time, they 

are caught, 1 year. I mean, that is ridiculous. I mean, if you are 

caught so many times, why shouldn’t you be banned? 

Mr. STEARNS. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. STEARNS. We are going to close up shop. I just conclude by 

saying I think the major—the baseball league has not been aggressive enough, and in fact, has been deliberately slow, it would appear, and I think as a quote, they are at the bottom of the lineup, 

and the amateurs appear to be at the top. 

And with that, the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 1:48 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Additional material submitted for the record follows:]

117

April 26, 2005

The Honorable CLIFF STEARNS

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection 

2125 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable NATHAN DEAL

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Health 

2125 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515

Re: ‘‘Steroids in Sports: Cheating the System and Gambling Your Health’’

DEAR CHAIRMEN STEARNS AND DEAL: On behalf of the National Football League, 

I would like to again thank the Subcommittees for inviting me to participate in last 

month’s hearing. This will respond to the additional questions put forth in your letter dated April 11, 2005: 

Question 1. What is your testing policy for college players who attend the NFL 

scouting combine? Can you test them as a pre-condition for attending the combine? 

Response: Although college players who are invited to attend the combine are not 

employees of the NFL, all invitees are tested for performance-enhancing substances, 

as well as for substances of abuse. Players who test positive for performance-enhancing substances are reported to the Clubs and are placed on reasonable cause 

testing. 

In addition, college players who are not invited to the combine may be given a 

pre-employment test at the request of a Club and will be given an annual test upon 

joining the team, if they are signed to a contract after the annual testing for that 

Club has concluded. 

In all cases, players will also go into the random steroid testing pool upon joining 

the Club. 

Question 2. Please describe the testing procedures the NFL employs regarding the 

randomness of testing in season. Specifically, please provide data regarding the percentage of tests conducted for each day of the week during the 2004 season (from 

training camp through the Super Bowl) and the percentage of tests conducted for 

each team on each day. 

Response: Beginning the week of the first preseason game (usually the first week 

in August) and continuing through the playoffs and Super Bowl for the participating 

teams, random tests are conducted on 7 players per Club per week. Players are selected via a randomization program which ensures that every player is subject to 

be chosen regardless of how often he was chosen previously. There is no limit to 

the number of times a player may be selected and tested during the course of the 

season. 

To detect and deter the use of stimulants during games, a portion of the selected 

players per week is always tested on the day immediately following the game (usually Monday or Tuesday). The remaining tests occur at the discretion of the Advisor 

and are conducted between Monday and Friday. 

We do not maintain data showing the specific percentages of tests conducted on 

each day of the week. Moreover, to the extent that such data could be assembled, 

its dissemination could potentiality undermine the effectiveness of the policy by allowing a player to attempt to calculate his odds of being tested on a particular day. 

Question 3. Who conducts the testing program for the NFL (i.e., is the program 

conducted by a contracted entity, what lab is used, etc.)? 

Response: The NFL’s program is a comprehensive but tightly structured one that 

encompasses player selection, notice, collection, analysis and results management. 

The administration of the policy including player selection and testing is conducted 

under the direction of Dr. John Lombardo, who has been jointly approved by the 

League and NFL Players Association and who has more than 25 years of experience 

in the field. The collection of specimens is conducted by a group of Drug Programs 

Agents we have retained in every Club city. These DPAs have law enforcement 

backgrounds (usually DEA or FBI) and receive continuing training in proper specimen collection techniques. Neither the NFL, NFL Players Association, nor any team 

has a role in the selection of players to be tested or the collection of their specimens. 

Once collected, the specimens are analyzed at the UCLA Olympic Laboratory—

currently the only WADA-certified lab in the country—under the direction of Dr. 

Don Catlin. The analytical processes and techniques are further reviewed and certified by Dr. Bryan Finkle, Chief Toxicologist to the NFL’s steroids and substance 

118

abuse programs, who has more than 40 years’ experience in forensic toxicology and 

doping control. 

Additionally, we maintain a standing Advisory Committee comprised of leading 

experts in the field. The Advisory Committee meets periodically to evaluate and consider developments in testing technology and trends in use. Based on its recommendations, the program is updated and modified on an ongoing basis. 

Thank you again for your interest in the NFL’s steroid program and if you would 

like further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Sincerely, 

ADOLPHO A. BIRCH III 

Labor Relations Counsel 

cc: Joe Browne 

Dennis Curran 

The Honorable CLIFF STEARNS

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection 

2125 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable NATHAN DEAL

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Health 

2125 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515

DEAR CHAIRMAN STEARNS AND CHAIRMAN DEAL: As you have requested, I respectfully submit for the record the following responses to the questions submitted by 

Chairman Stearns and Member Blackburn following the Subcommittees’ March 10, 

2005 hearing ‘‘Steroids In Sports: Cheating The System And Gambling Your 

Health.’’ 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY CHAIRMAN STEARNS

Question: MLB unilaterally instituted a drug-testing program for the minor 

leagues in 2001 because minor league players are not unionized. Why did the league 

wait until 2001 to implement a drug testing policy for the minors? 

Answer: In 1991, the Commissioner added steroids to the list of substances that 

were prohibited under his unilaterally-implemented Commissioner’s Drug Policy. 

This Drug Policy was applicable to minor league players. Although the Commissioner’s Drug Policy permitted the Office of the Commissioner to subject minor 

league players to unannounced testing for illegal drugs, including steroids, this Office did not implement comprehensive drug testing at the minor league level until 

2001. At least part of the reason for this was the fact that many individual Major 

League Clubs had instituted drug testing programs covering their minor league 

players and these programs tested for steroids as well as other illegal drugs. In addition, the implementation and administration of a comprehensive, wall-to-wall drug 

testing program in the minor leagues was an enormous undertaking. There are over 

160 affiliated minor league teams and more than 6,000 players signatory to a minor 

league contract. In the late 1990s, however, the Commissioner became concerned 

that the testing conducted at the individual Club level was not sufficient to address 

what appeared to be more than an isolated issue. As a result, the Commissioner 

consulted with outside experts and gathered information about the prevalence and 

patterns of steroid use by players. This process led to, among other steps, the promulgation and implementation in 2001 of the comprehensive Minor League Drug 

Prevention And Treatment Program. To put this undertaking into some perspective, 

we expect to conduct approximately 8,400 drug tests of minor league players in 

2005. 

Question: Please provide aggregate data regarding the number of minor league 

players suspended for a violation of the league’s drug policy since 2001. Please identify the number of minor league players suspended for a positive steroid test for 

each year since 2001. 

Answer: Since 2001, 186 players have been suspended for violating the Minor 

League Drug Prevention And Treatment Program. Of these 186 players, 165 players 

were suspended for a positive steroid test. In both responses, we have counted every 

suspension as an event so that if a player has been suspended on two different occasions, that player would be counted twice. 

119

Question: Please identify how many players, if any, tested positive for each year 

under the minor league testing program that were on the 40 man roster of a major 

league team at the time of their positive test. 

Answer: A Player who is on a 40-man Major League roster but whose contract 

has been optionally assigned to a minor league affiliate is considered, for purposes 

of the Clubs’ bargaining relationship with the Major League Baseball Players Association (‘‘MLBPA’’), to be a Major League Player covered by the collective bargaining 

agreement between the 30 Major League Clubs and the MLBPA. Therefore, no player on a 40-man roster of a Major League Club is tested under the Minor League 

Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. Instead, these players are tested exclusively under the Major League Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBER BLACKBURN

Question: If it is proven through the BALCO investigation or by other means that 

some current or future baseball record holders or former MVP’s were using steroids 

while reaching their record marks, is baseball prepared to write anyone out of the 

record books? How would baseball handle that situation? 

Answer: With all due respect, this is a decision that only the Commissioner can 

make. To date, the Commissioner has indicated that he is not prepared make a decision on the record books based on the information that is currently available. 

Follow-up Question: Will baseball address the Jose Canseco 1998 MVP award 

with an asterisk or some other designator as a result of his admitted steroid use 

during that season? 

Answer: Again, this is a question that only the Commissioner can answer. To 

date, the Commissioner has not been prepared to place an asterisk or some other 

designator next to the MVP award that Mr. Canseco received in 1988. It is important to note that Baseball does not determine postseason awards. They are voted 

on and given by the Baseball Writers’ Association of America (‘‘BWAA’’). 

Question: I commend you for the recent steps in toughening your steroid policies. 

It definitely is a step in the right direction and sends a good message to our nation’s 

youth. Although, in that policy you reference a penalty for a first positive being a 

10 day suspension. As you know, the NFL has a 4 game suspension, equivalent to 

a month and ′ of the season, which is significantly longer than baseball. How did 

you come to the 10 day number? 

Answer: When we negotiated with the MLBPA over the first Joint Drug Prevention And Treatment Program in 2002, the Commissioner sought a more significant 

penalty for first-time offenders (and subsequent offenders). Similarly, when we 

opened mid-term negotiations over the Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program in 2004, the Commissioner again sought a longer suspension for first-time offenders (and subsequent offenders). The MLBPA was unwilling to agree to any discipline for a first-time offender in 2002. By 2004, the MLBPA was prepared to agree 

to discipline for a first offense but was unwilling to agree to a penalty of more than 

a ten-day suspension for a first violation. The 10-day suspension for a first-time offender was, in short, the best compromise that we could make with the limited bargaining leverage that we possessed during this last round of mid-term bargaining. 

In assessing the significance of the ten-day suspension, it is important in our view 

to remember that the MLBPA was under no legal or contractual obligation to negotiate any changes to the Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program during the 

term of our collective bargaining agreement, which will not expire until after the 

2006 season. Under these circumstances, agreeing to move from a regime of no discipline for a first offense to one with a ten-day suspension without pay was significant. The Commissioner remains committed to increasing the penalties for offenders. 

Very truly yours, 

FRANCIS X. COONELLY

Senior Vice President and General Counsel—Labor 

RESPONSES FOR THE RECORD BY DR. RALPH HALE, CHAIRMAN, UNITED STATES ANTIDOPING AGENCY

1. The percentage of tests conducted In-competition and Out-of-competition during 2004

2004 ........................................ In-Competition 42%.

OOC 58% ............................. 52% No-Notice .................... 6% Short Notice 

120

2. The Number of tests conducted and the number of athletes tested for calendar years 2003 & 

2004

Total number of tests Athletes tested 

2003 ............................................................................................................................. 6890 3982

2004 ............................................................................................................................. 7630 4234

3. The Number and percentage of tests conducted for each of the five most tested Olympic 

Sports during 2004

Sport Total number of tests % of all tests Athletes tested 

Track & Field ............................................................................ 1618 21% 823

Swimming ................................................................................. 706 9% 377

Cycling ...................................................................................... 526 7% 267

Weightlifting .............................................................................. 388 5% 166

Rowing ...................................................................................... 335 4% 165

Total of 5 .................................................................................. 3573 47% 1798

Total tests conducted by USADA .............................................. 7630 100% 4234

April 14, 2005

The Honorable CLIFF STEARNS

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection 

Energy and Commerce Committee

The Honorable NATHAN DEAL

Chairman, 

Subcommittee on Health 

Energy and Commerce Committee

Subject: Answers to questions submitted by Rep. Blackburn

Question 1

You mentioned that 1⁄3 of high school steroid users do not participate in interscholastic sports. 

What is the primary motivation for use by this group? 

The answer here is pretty straight forward. Teenagers just want to be bigger. The 

motivation for this group is not necessarily to excel in a sport. The motivation is 

often simply to be bigger, stronger, and ‘‘better built’’ and to impress members of 

the opposite sex. Teenagers not only see athletes they want to emulate, but entertainers, body builders and others. With the growth in the workout business in recent years, teenagers have more exposure to the culture of muscle building. As I 

mentioned in my testimony, most high school student have little sense of mortality, 

they don’t believe or understand the harms and they simply just want to be bigger. 

In your report you mentioned that the National Institute on Drug Abuse survey 

reported an increase in use and a decrease in the perceived harm by 10th graders. 

Your examples cited multiple potential reasons for increase in use but very little in 

regards to why individuals would perceive it to be less harmful 

Why do you think the perception has grown? Could use by professional athletes 

by the cause? 

After a career of more than 40 years working with high schools and high school 

students, I would never underestimate the impact of popular culture on young people. Use of performance enhancing drugs by professional athletes and the milestones 

they achieve is a big part of the reason that the perception of harm is low. If pop 

culture icons who are older, more experienced and presumably smarter do it, it must 

be OK. 

You mentioned that the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004 was a step in the 

right direction. One portion of that bill was intended to award grants to enable public and nonprofit entities to carry out science-based education programs in elementary and secondary schools to highlight the harmful effects of anabolic steroids. 

Describe the effectiveness of both the criminal provisions as well as the grant programs. 

First regarding the criminal provision. We believe that such laws can be effective 

deterrents to steroid abuse. We fully approve of the section that amends the ConVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:04 May 02, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6621 F:\DOCS\99915.TXT HCOM1 PsN: JOEP
121

trolled Substances Act to expand the list of substances to include products such as 

THG and Andro. With respect to the grant programs this is absolutely the course 

of action. We need to enable organizations like ours to improve and enact comprehensive education programs to communicate the harmful effects of anabolic 

steroids. We strongly support full funding of this provision of the Anabolic Steroid 

Control Act of 2004 and look forward to participating in this program.

ROBERT KANABY

Executive Director

National Federation of State High School Associations 

April 25, 2005

The Honorable CLIFF STEARNS

Chair, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection 

The Honorable NATHAN DEAL

Chair, Subcommittee on Health 

U. S. House of Representatives 

2125 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515-6115

DEAR CHAIRMEN: As requested, enclosed are my responses to your questions regarding the NCAA drug-testing programs. The NCAA supports all efforts to address 

the problem of doping in sport, and will be available to provide additional information as requested. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any clarification of my responses. 

I can be reached at 317-917-6319 or m. 

Sincerely, 

MARY E. WILFERT

Chief Liaison

Committee on Competition Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports 

Enclosure 

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS FROM CONGRESSMAN STEARNS RE: THE NCAA DRUG TESTING

PROGRAM

Percentage of tests conducted for each sport in the most recent academic 

year. 

In the 2003-04 academic year, the most recent academic year for which drug-testing numbers are available, the NCAA conducted 10,574 drug tests of student-athletes in the year-round testing program and in the championships testing program. 

In 2003-04, all Divisions I and II football and Division I men’s and women’s track 

and field teams were tested in the year round program. 

In 2003-04, 39,569 student-athletes participated in Divisions I and II football; 19% 

of these athletes were drug tested through the NCAA year-round and championship 

testing programs. 38,736 student-athletes participated in Division I men’s and women’s track and field; 6% of these athletes were drug tested through the NCAA yearround and championship testing program. 

In 2003-04, approximately 31,000 student-athletes participated in championship 

events other than football and track and field. Approximately 2.6% of these studentathletes were drug tested through the NCAA Championship testing program. Beginning in 2004-05, all Divisions I and II sports teams are being tested in the yearround program, which will increase the number of total tests conducted in each 

sport. 

Is a student-athlete whose eligibility has expired, but is still enrolled, tested? 

If a student-athlete has no more eligibility remaining, or will no longer be able 

to participate in intercollegiate athletics due to injury, there is no longer an issue 

of competitive equity or risk of loss of eligibility. Therefore, according to NCAA 

Drug-Testing Protocol 4.4.1.1, student-athletes listed on the squad list who have exhausted their eligibility or who have career-ending injuries will not be selected [for 

drug testing]. 

122

According to Ms. Wilfert’s testimony ‘‘The NCAA manual states that it is the 

responsibility of each member institution to protect the health and 

safety of and provide a safe environment for each of its participating 

student-athletes.’’ Has the NCAA sanctioned any member institution for 

failing to provide a safe environment for its student-athletes on the 

basis of positive steroid tests by its student-athletes? 

It is the institution’s responsibility to educate student-athletes about NCAA drugtesting policies. It is the student-athlete’s responsibility to follow that policy. A 

member institution’s athletics department staff members or others employed by the 

intercollegiate athletics program who have knowledge of a student-athlete’s use at 

any time of a substance on the list of banned drugs shall follow institutional procedures dealing with drug abuse or shall be subject to disciplinary or corrective action, 

ranging from public reprimand to loss of membership in the Association. (Bylaw 

19.5.2.2)Institutions have been required to review and/or revise their drug-testing 

and educational policies to ensure compliance and sufficient education. In addition, 

institutions have been required to issue a letter of admonishment to the individual(s) responsible for the violation. 

The NCAA takes a strong position on the use of nutritional supplements, warning 

student-athletes of the following: 

‘‘Many nutritional/dietary supplements contain NCAA banned substances. In 

addition, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not strictly regulate the supplement industry; therefore purity and safety of nutritional/dietary 

supplements cannot be guaranteed. Impure supplements may lead to a positive 

NCAA drug test. The use of supplements is at the student-athlete’s own risk. 

Student-athletes should contact their institution’s team physician or athletic 

trainer for further information.’’

In addition, the NCAA places restrictions on its member institutions in providing 

nutritional/dietary supplements to student-athletes, under Bylaw 16.5.2. 

There have been cases where an institutional staff member provided an impermissible substance to student-athletes, or allowed student-athletes to purchase impermissible substances at a reduced rate (e.g., protein shakes, creatine). In response 

to those cases, the involved staff members have been suspended from their coaching 

duties for one or two contests, and/or received letters of reprimand. In addition, the 

institutions have been required to conduct rules review sessions with the athletics 

training staff and strength coaches concerning the use of supplements and, if necessary, develop policies and procedures regarding the use of nutritional supplements 

by student-athletes. 

What sanctions can the NCAA take against member institutions whose athletes have tested positive for steroids? 

Under NCAA Bylaws 14.1.1.1 and 18.4.1.5, the institution must declare ineligible 

a student-athlete who tests positive by the NCAA for banned substances. Once the 

institution is notified of the results of a positive drug test, the institution must withhold the student-athlete from competition for a minimum of 365 days. If the institution continues to play a student-athlete after notification of the positive drug test, 

the institution will be sanctioned under the provisions of Bylaw 14.11.3, which identifies failure to withhold such a student-athlete from competition as a violation of 

the conditions and obligations of membership. If a coach willfully plays an ineligible 

player, the penalties may range from the suspension of the coach to the loss of 

scholarships permitted to be awarded by the institution. 

Does the NCAA plan to introduce penalties on member schools if their 

teams’ athletes have competed unfairly by using steroids? 

The NCAA has regulations in place to penalize member schools who violate the 

NCAA drug-testing policy (see above.) The NCAA member institutions have adopted 

the NCAA drug-testing legislation, and may, through the legislative process, amend 

NCAA drug-testing legislation. 

Can the NCAA require steroid testing of all prospective student-athletes, 

prior to the athletes’ enrollment in the NCAA member school, as a precondition of entering the NCAA’s initial eligibility clearinghouse? 

NCAA drug-testing policy requires that a student-athlete annually sign a drugtesting consent form prior to practice or competition or by the Monday of the fourth 

week of classes, in which the student-athlete consents to be tested for the use of 

drugs prohibited by NCAA legislation. NCAA protocol does not allow for drug-testing of individuals who have not matriculated to a member institution, as the member institution is the vehicle through which the consent form and, in the event of 

a positive drug test, the declaration of ineligibility and withdrawal from competition 

123

is accomplished. The NCAA member institutions have adopted the NCAA drug-testing legislation, and may, through the legislative process, amend NCAA drug-testing 

legislation. 

RESPONSE FOR THE RECORD BY SANDRA WORTH, ON BEHALF OF THE ATIONAL

ATHLETIC TRAINERS ASSOCIATION

REPRESENTATIVE BLACKBURN

Question: In your testimony you mentioned that legal, ethical and sportsmanship 

boundaries are being obliterated. In a recent interview with 60 Minutes, Kelli 

White, a track and field star that was stripped of her medals was asked if she had 

a moral problem with steroids. She responded, ‘‘No because I felt that there are so 

many people doing it that I would be just like one of the others.’’

As a college administrator that sees the direct affect that professional athletes 

have in influencing college athletes, what do you believe professional sports leagues 

and track and field need to do to address this issue? Have they done enough? 

Response: Given that steroid use continues to occur among high school, college 

and professional athletes, it would be difficult to say that we have ‘‘done enough.’’ 

Clearly, we must do more. 

The financial resources needed to adopt a consistent and effective drug testing 

program at the high school level especially, but also among many colleges programs, 

is a major barrier but I see no reason why the professional sports—all of them—

cannot adopt similar or like testing parameters 

Every organization has different banned substances lists, different testing panels, 

different collection processes and different sanctions for positive tests. Even at the 

Olympics, which arguably have the most stringent drug testing requirements and 

most severe penalties, drugs are still an issue. As Ms. White’s response to the 60 

Minutes question implies, there are great rewards for success at this level in terms 

of money and prestige. The temptation is too strong for all to refuse, no matter how 

stringent or diligent the testing process. Control of illegal performance enhancing 

drug use in a collegiate setting is far more manageable than the professional counterpart where money and technology combine. The successful professional athlete 

has the means and the access to these designer drugs. Realistically, you will never 

eradicate drug use in sports—particularly professional sports—totally. 

We must continue to make education a priority. We must work to strengthen drug 

testing programs and we must encourage all organizations to establish and abide 

by one standard of testing. We must continue to make use of our educational resources—from PSAs to school curriculum to internet web sites, videos, educational 

booklets, Powerpoint presentations, etc. Unfortunately, the rule breakers, the ‘‘cheaters,’’ are generally one step ahead of the rule makers. Be assured that right now, 

there are labs preparing masking agents that help athletes ‘‘pass’’ their drug tests. 

I believe all organizations should look to make their positive test penalties as stringent as possible. The penalty should be a deterrent in and of itself. A baseball player who plays a 160+ game schedule is not impacted by a 10 day suspension the 

same way a professional football player who plays 16 games is affected by a 4 game 

suspension. 

Steroids remain a problem because they are obtainable, easily in fact. When I can 

order steroids (plus literature on cycling, stacking, how to inject, what medications 

to use to help prevent or minimize side-effects, etc . . .) over the internet, that is a 

problem! I have listed several websites below where this information can be obtained. I would ask that these sites not appear in the record of this hearing as I do 

not wish to provide these sites with free advertising but I do want the Committee 

to be aware of the fact that they are out there. The federal government can again 

be front and center on this issue by aggressively working to eliminate access to 

these drugs and I would hope that the professional and Olympic sports organizations would support this not only in spirit but in practice. 

http://www.steroids.com/, www.anabolicsteroids.com; http://www.elitefitness.com/; 

http://www.legalsteroids.com/; http://www.steroid-encyclopaedia.com/; http://

www.steroids101.com/; http://www.veterinarysteroids.com/

We continue to believe that while the adoption of more uniform drug testing 

standards and more stringent penalties will help significantly, the best way to address this problem over the long-term is through education. 

124

April 19, 2005

The Honorable MARSHA BLACKBURN

Committee on Energy & Commerce 

U.S. House of Representatives 

2125 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 

Dear CONGRESSWOMAN BLACKBURN: This letter is in response to your written 

question regarding my testimony before the joint hearing of the Subcommittee on 

Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection and the Subcommittee on Health on 

March 10, 2005. 

Let me begin by stating—I believe that competition is good. It is responsible in 

large part for making our country the great nation that it is. Our competitive spirit 

has facilitated significant advances in engineering, medicine, and science. However, 

competition without moral and ethical boundaries can lead to excesses, as we have 

observed with the behavior of some journalists, CEOs, scientists, and politicians, 

among others. In our increasingly secular society, these moral boundaries, unfortunately, have become clouded. Situational ethics and moral relativism appear to hold 

a more dominant role in our society, and led the late Senator Moynihan to conclude 

that we have ‘‘down-defined deviance.’’ Thus, morally unbridled competition has resulted in a ‘‘win at all cost’’ attitude where it is only cheating if you get caught, 

and it can’t be cheating if everyone is doing it! In such an atmosphere not only is 

drug use very rational behavior, it can be exceedingly profitable for both owners and 

players in that it can enhance the entertainment value of sport by creating bigger 

than life athletes capable of super human feats. In addition, given the banner financial years that MLB and the NFL have had—in the presence of major drug scandals—it appears that the fans/customers share some good amount of culpability regarding the pervasiveness of drug use in sport. 

If I am correct in my assertions, further emphasizing that drug use is cheating 

to elite athletes will have no effect and, short of substantial coercion, there is little 

incentive on the part of owners and players to give anything but lip service to this 

problem. Rather, sport sanctioning bodies will likely attempt to ‘‘wait out’’ Congress 

and the news media until the focus shifts to other issues of the day. 

If either you or your staff wishes to speak further about this issue, please contact 

me. 

Sincerely, 

CHARLES E. YESALIS MPH, ScD

Professor of Health and Human Development

Penn State University

Æ