Drug Screen Harassment?
Our local paper is doing a magnificent job of covering the Track and Field Olympic trials. Each day they have added a full section in the paper, including interviews, results, photos and opinions.
Today, I read with dismay the article on the rigors drug screening for top finishers. What they have to endure seems a little over the top to me.
For the urine sample: [Quote from the paper]
“The athlete is required to expose him or herself from the mid torso to mid thigh. Providing a clear view to the observer." Tim Christie The Register Guard
Speaking from personal experience, I had to provide a urine sample as part of employment regulations... After proof of identification I was handed gloves and a cup, then instructed to leave the door open so they could hear me…
I find the whole process of drug testing degrading. It’s ashamed we must all be treated this way just because a few have felt it was OK to be involved with drugs.
BTW
A special kudos to the paper’s photographers for the top notch photos taken!!!
Image Ben Johnson 1988 Olympics (wiki)
3 comments:
I think the issue is that with products like the Whizzinator commercially available, drug testers feel like the only way to ensure validity is to actually confirm the act of urination.
As long as you have athletes actively cheating and doing their best to evade detection, you will have an environment where it will be difficult for athletes to fight testing methods on privacy grounds.
Traditionally, I'm a big privacy advocate. However, as an athlete opting into competition, I'm comfortable with providing urine samples under observation if asked- and I wish USAT would test down into the amateur (age-group) ranks at major races, as we are at times racing for qualifying spots to world championship races.
Well said Alan.
We have to look at the bigger picture.
Sad but true.
It's crazy. There's got to be a better way. Now just because you're good or Dana Torres, everyone thinks it must be the drugs.
Post a Comment