Massive steroid conspiracy

It's a crazy notion to test Masters. What about those of us who take a Sudaphed during a cold or drink a cup or two of coffee before working out? What about some Masters with high blood pressure or other medical issues that require medications that might be considered banned? Masters is about swimming and having fun. Let's keep the drug testing for the athletes that really need to be tested, not us. This could get quite out of control.

Regarding performane enhancing drugs in Masters, if there is no testing there will be some people who will do it. The problem for masters is that testing costs money. For example, assuming full participation in all age groups at LC Nats, if we were to test the top 3 finishers of each age group in each event would involve administering 17(events)*3(places)*12(age group estimate see below)*2(genders) tests which adds up to around 1224. There are 2 national championships a year so that would be around 2470 tests all together. (Add in 24 100 IMS for SCY). If the cost is around $100/pop, (which sounds low to me), the cost would be roughly 250K/year. Where would this money come from? Would most USMS members, (who do not compete), feel good about a good chunk of their fee going after what could amount to only 4-5 users? These are just some numbers to consider, I don't propose drug testing, and don't want to turn this thread into a debate about whether we should test or not. I just want to point out that if USMS were to get serious about cracking down on Performance Enhancing Drugs, it would not be cheap, and the non-racers may have doubts as to whether it is worth it. (There are more than 12 age groups but some age groups have some holes, so I am assuming that any holes will be accomodated by simply assuming that the 19-24-->75-79 age groups were the only ones participating and that they all had 1-3 positions filled up, this might lead to a slight over-estimation but the final tabulation should be within 10% of the tests required).

I don't think we should test at masters either. Something like Clartion for us who have bad sinus problems might be banned. Ashama problems with drugs might be ban.

Just for information -- Sudafed and caffeine were taken off the banned list within the last two weeks. I don't think antihistamines, like Claritin, have ever been included. But I agree that the cost of drug testing would result in prohibitively high entry fees and, frankly, I'd be concerned that it might make some people reluctant to follow their doctor's instructions. To be honest, I can't see enough at stake in a masters event (even Nationals) to justify either result.

Originally posted by Peter Cruise However, I have stated repeatedly, taking substances like creatine (scary for the lack of human testing) is almost as bad. So what if it isn't illegal? If it is truly performance-enhancing (as I was assured it was by several swimmers at Baltimore LC Nats) then it can & should be banned. Am I alone in finding this sort of experimentation disgusting in Masters? I'm wondering what actually does constitute "performance-enhancing" and were the rules regulating performance-enhancing drugs designed to level the playing field or to protect the health of athletes? I ask because if creatine is performance-enhancing why isn't it banned? Or is it banned in some sports and I'm not aware of it (I think maybe I heard it was banned in Baseball - I'm not sure)? And can we actually claim that something is indeed performance-enhancing and at the same time say that it is dangerous because of its lack of human testing? We either have sufficient testing or not.

About the testing--I don't think it belongs in Master's Swimming. If people want to put whatever in their bodies to go faster--be my guest. In our sport, it seems the negatives outweigh the positives in regards to testing. Sure some of us are serious competitors in our sport--but many of us do this for fun and purpose--which doesn't mean we don't like winning or competing. For me personally, if someone on the juice kicks my butt in a race (by the way, a person doens't need to be to beat me!)--I wouldn't freak out about it...I would just feel sorry for them, and keep training hard. Have any of you taken two weeks off to come back feeling out of whack? Jerrycat :rolleyes:

Testing of masters would definitely be unreasonable (unless, maybe, for world records??). The mission statement is to promote a healthy lifestyle, not competition. (Although fast meets are a nice by-product of being healthy. :) ) At least for masters, where (in theory) we are all adults, education is preferable to testing. Maybe set up a web page, with a link to articles of health risks of different supplements/drugs, list of banned substances, etc. ?

Fritz said when I was afraid to say. I could care less what people shove in their bodies. This is Masters swimming where each person swims and/or competes for their personal reasons. We're all adults here and can make our own choices. Having Masters impose some sort of testing routine really is contrary to what Masters is about. I have no interest in being part of an organization that does that. I do have great interest in swimming with friends and competing with and against them from time to time. I can only imagine what this would do to our very reasonable dues and what kind of rift this would cause in Masters swimming. I, for one, like Masters as it is now and don't think any sort of autocratic doping regime should be established. On the other hand, it might make for a neat section in SWIM magazine called "Police blotter, the dope pages."

Amen Peter...I'm around those types at a weight lifiting gym too...now many of these people compete in bodybuilding shows...but for me (I'll repeat it again), for me, it seems so dangerous. Who knows what is actually in those supplements! Many of the people that I know who take considerable amounts of supplements have hair that looks funny/unhealthy, and have strange smells in their breath. Alot of them look much older than they are. The majoirty of them carry a big pill case with them everywhere and are cramming "supplements" all day long. It's soooo weird. And, I'm sorry--if you have to take all of that stuff to look that way, then, obviously it's unnatural. I"m not just talking about a protein shake here...

Let me first say that I in no way condone the use of steroids, creatine, and even supplements recreationally and without full knowledge of the consequences. I am interested in an open and objective discussion about this topic and am glad that the USMS Discussion Forum provides such a venue. However, if the concern here is about the health of the athlete and not just whether they are getting an unfair advantage, then one could just as easily condemn alcohol or smoking or any unhealthy behavior. It's important to point out that many of these performance-enhancing drugs/supplements have their origins in the medical industry as treatment or as aiding in recovery. I personally take a multivitamin/multimineral and a protein shake supplement. At 35 years old and swimming 22,000-24,000 yards a week, plus dry-land exercises 3x a week it is nearly impossible for me to get a sufficient amount of nutrients from food alone (I consume about 3,200 cal. a day - that's a lot of food without supplements). I could argue that it probably would be unhealthy for me to try and maintain that amount of exercise and not provide an adequate amount of nutrients to replace the nutrients expended (i.e. Protein shakes, protein bars, vitamins, minerals, Gatorade, etc.). Glucosamine has allowed my father to continue to exercise when it was beginning to look as though the joint pain was going to be too much for him to continue. If, at 62, my father competes in a Masters event is he cheating? Just playing the devils advocate here since we seemed to jump from the steroid abuse to the use of supplements.