Masters Swimming and Illegal Supplements

Originally posted by gull80 But that does not guarantee a negative drug test. The content of supplements varies and is unregulated. That's why it's best to stick with supplements that are manufactured according to pharmaceutical standards. Of course, the content of foods is also unregulated, and there's really nothing you can do about that! What should happen when an athlete fails a drug test and did not expect to is: 1) The athlete should supply the unused portion of the suspected item to the drug testing organization and have them test it to see whether it contains the banned substance. 2) If it does (and the substance was not listed on the label), the test results should be used to prosecute the manufacturer. Manufacturers are required by law to list all ingredients on the label. If it is possible that the athlete could have tampered with the product himself, an opened container may also need to be tested to prove that the manufacturer was at fault. 3) If it appears that the athlete did not knowingly take a banned substance, there should be no penalty beyond invalidation of his/her times in the meet where the drug test that detected the substance was done. Bob

Originally posted by gull80 I believe this will answer your question: www.wada-ama.org/.../newsarticle.ch2 Well, yes it does! But it raises another important issue: They are monitoring use in order to determine whether they need to ban any of the substances. But what this means is that if USMS committed itself to testing according to WADA standards, it would be committing not only to test for what is on the banned list today, but also for what may be on the banned list tomorrow. Bob

Originally posted by Karen Duggan Why just test National Records and World Records? Why not randomly test everybody? I guarantee you that it is just as frustrating for the person getting 11th place who was beat by the cheater who got 10th. Just my .02 (two tenths ;) ) ha ha I also noticed that FIDE does drug testing for international chess tournaments (though I'd never before realized that beta blockers are a performance enhancer for chess players). But why should they restrict the testing to international tournaments? Don't you think it's just as frustrating for a somebody to lose a chess game even when they're not playing at a tournament? Why not look for people playing chess in the park or in their living room and test them, too? And if they fail the test and don't have a Therapeutic Use Exemption (or refuse to be tested), bar them from playing chess again for a year or two. That'll fix 'em! Bob

This: Originally posted by Bob McAdams ... 2) If it does (and the substance was not listed on the label), the test results should be used to prosecute the manufacturer. Manufacturers are required by law to list all ingredients on the label. If it is possible that the athlete could have tampered with the product himself, an opened container may also need to be tested to prove that the manufacturer was at fault. 3) If it appears that the athlete did not knowingly take a banned substance, there should be no penalty beyond invalidation of his/her times in the meet where the drug test that detected the substance was done. Bob is ideal. What happened to sprinter Kicker Vencill (U.S.) in U.S. Swimming two and a half years ago, is that he was booted from U.S. Swimming for two years and his times for a perdiod prior to the test were erased. He proved recently that the manufacturer of a supplement was misleading on the label. This only proved that himself, Kicker Vencill, was not cheating. The suspension stood. This year, Kicker Vencill came back in U.S. Swimming meets much slower than before, he trained all along for the two year ban but the lack of competitions shows in a stark way. Kicker Vencill is suing the manufacturer, right now.

Originally posted by nkfrench I bet that many Masters swimmers are taking substances that are on the USADA list. It's suprising what is listed. Over the counter cold meds, dietary supplements, diet aids, diuretics and headache remedies often contain banned substances. Some blood pressure meds and some drugs for menopause symptoms are banned. I bet some Masters swimmers drink a lot of coffee before meets - warmup in a cup. So what about these caffeine induced ginseng laced pep drinks? Or for that matter an espresso? These products are flooded in the teen/rapper music market -or via your local coffee shop Thanks Starbucks! These energy drinks would personally shoot me into outerspace. If it's available to the general market then it's OK to use? Do we show our receipts from GNC to the officials along with our heat sheets? It seems like we are expecting a personal responsibility from everyone to be playing on the same level. A.K.A. good sportsmanship? The code of swimmers? Basic athletic standards? Got me. If one looks at a morning cup of coffee as performance enhancing Vs. necessary to function then how are we to address this or do we?

Hmmm sounds like dealing with getting insurance to pay for things.

Originally posted by Bob McAdams Vitamins are a type of supplement, as is ginseng. Did you not know this? Yes, I was aware. My point was that this thread is really not about vitamins but about the other supplements that are so prevalent these days. We all know many of these substances are hocus pocus stuff and you should recognize this when buying them. A consumer has an expectation, which is substantially different than a right. I, personally, have an expectation that anyone who puts unregulated stuff in their body probably doesn't give a flip about their personal well being, or, is willing to take a risk. For instance, when I enjoy a hot dog, I know there's a whole lot more parts of the cow in there than just the beef label leads me to believe on the front - like maybe some tail, snout, ears, etc.

Originally posted by Ion Beza This: is ideal. What happened to sprinter Kicker Vencill (U.S.) in U.S. Swimming two and a half years ago, is that he was booted from U.S. Swimming for two years and his times for a perdiod prior to the test were erased. He proved recently that the manufacturer of a supplement was misleading on the label. This only proved that himself, Kicker Vencill, was not cheating. The suspension stood. I'm familiar with Kicker's ordeal. That's why I said I was laying out what should happen. And this is one of the things that disturbs me about the concept of drug testing USMS swimmers. If this behavior is going to be typical of the review boards that are given the task of deciding whether to issue Therapeutic Use Exemptions (i.e., second-guessing the athlete and his doctors), I don't find this prospect inviting. This year, Kicker Vencill came back in U.S. Swimming meets much slower than before, he trained all along for the two year ban but the lack of competitions shows in a stark way. Kicker Vencill is suing the manufacturer, right now. That's interesting! Conventional wisdom has been that it is training - not meets - that makes a competitive swimmer fast. This would appear to prove that false. It also raises the question of whether masters swimmers are at a disadvantage due to the relative infrequency of masters meets (compared with, say, the frequency of meets that a typical kids' swim team has). Bob

Originally posted by gull80 Again I would refer you to the list on the WADA website. In the first place, the majority of the drugs listed are clearly performance enhancing (anabolic steroids, growth hormone, etc.), and very few, if any, Masters swimmers are using these to treat a legitimate medical condition. But, as noted previously, they are also monitoring things like caffeine, phenylpropanolamine, and pseudoephedrine in order to decide whether to include them on the list in the future. If USMS were to implement the WADA standard, it would be agreeing to conform not just to the current list, but also to anything WADA decides to add to the list in the future. Second, if an athlete requires, say, a diuretic for hypertension, it can be used with a Therapeutic Use Exemption. Theoretically. But that's the problem. Historically, the board that issues the TUEs has been accustomed to dealing with fairly simple things like insulin use by Type 1 diabetics, drug use to treat sports injuries, etc. And that happened because they were dealing almost exclusively with young athletes who, because of their participation in their sport, were on the average healthier than their peers. The health problems faced by some masters swimmers are far more complex. And research is proceeding at such a rapid rate that it's difficult, if not impossible, for a doctor to keep abreast of everything that's been discovered. That's why people go to specialists, and get second opinions. Now, lets say that you've got a health problem - maybe even several health problems. You've been to a number of doctors, you've tried numerous treatments, you've suffered from drug sensitivities, bad side effects, and drug interactions, but you've finally found a doctor with the expertise to put you on a regimen that works. But there's one problem: The regimen includes a substance that's on the WADA banned list. And the result is that you have to place your fate as a comptetive swimmer (or as a patient - take your pick) in the hands of a board of doctors who have had no experience treating you and who have no particular expertise with the medical problems you have. Does that sound fair? Another thing to consider is whether you want to advertise your medical problems to the entire world by applying for a TUE. Of course, USMS might promise you that the information would be kept confidential. But that also means that USMS would be open to lawsuits if that confidentiality were ever breached (even by accident). Bob

Originally posted by aquageek I agree with you that if these were One-A-Days there might be an issue. However, I was under the impression we were discussing some type of supplement, not a vitamin with some ginseng tossed in. Vitamins are a type of supplement, as is ginseng. Did you not know this? Nutritional supplements are subject to the same kind of regulation that foods are. This means that they are required by law to list their ingredients on the label. (One of the reasons for this requirement, btw, is so that people with food allergies can make sure they don't buy a product to which they're allergic.) Food products and nutritional supplements are not monitored to the degree that pharmaceutical drugs are, but a consumer of such products has a right to expect that all ingredients will be listed on the label, and this rightful expectation is even stronger when the product is a supplement that lists exact quantities of each of the nutrients it supposedly contains. Bob