Drug Testing

Drug Testing

Post by RAYMO » Mon, 08 Nov 1993 03:07:06


Quote:
>    This is going out to whoever that UT punk is who posted the message

                                          ^^^^^^^  

Quote:
>implying that the only reason my school (Stanford, of course) has KICKED
>***in NCAAs for quite a while (and will continue to for quite a while
>longer) is because our athletes take steroids.

I really hope you mean Texas, I at Tennessee didn't send this

Quote:
>    Bitter much?  As I recall, our swimmers have been quite successful
>in Worlds and Olympics (where they turn up NEGATIVE for drug use)  Beyond
>that, there are fairly high academic standards for Stanford athletes, and
>on a somewhat different thread, we do a LOT less international recruiting
>than most other top swim schools (not that international recruiting is bad,
>but we don't really seem to need it)
>    But, I don't really mean to make this into a Go Stanford post.  What
>you have done is turned a great sport and a very talented group of
>people into
>a punching bag because your school has come in 2nd or 3rd best.  At some
>point enough is enough, and accusing another schools athletes of unfounded
>steroid abuse clearly crosses the line.  It is a VERY serious subject, and
>I doubt many people even at Texas, Michigan, Cal, Florida, etc. would
>disagree with me on this point.  
>    If you want to talk trash, fine, but know when to stop.  Accusing
>world class athletes of illegal drug use because they happen to be talented
>is simply unacceptable.

I'm from Canada and go to school here in the U.S. Well there were two
people in Canada that tested positive for steroids this summer at their
respective nationals, one was a swimmer who signed with Kentucky (because
of grades he is now at Indian River C.C.) and the other was a track
athlete who is ATTENDING Stanford, sorry, but the truth speaks?!?

Quote:
>    Last point:  the reason Stanford students are taking the drug testing
>policy to court is not so they can get away with using steroids (most of
>them
>have tested negative at various times)  Its a constitutional issue, with

                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Quote:
>REAL legal precedent, at the very least on a national level . . . does an

                                                                   ^^^^^^^^
Quote:
>arbitrary body have the right to invade a persons privacy to obtain a urine

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Quote:
>sample in the random, unfounded hopes of finding legal infracitons.  AND,

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quote:
>I'm not the only one who thinks so.  Any less serious legal consideration
>wouldn't make it to the CA supreme court (they are busy people you know)

If the person has never done anything wrong than they have nothing to
fear. I say that the NCAA and the SEC can take *** samples of me every
day of the year, announced and unannounced, I'm clean and have nothing to
hide. If these people don't want to go through these drug tests then tell
them to get the hell out of athletics!!!!!!!! It comes with the trade and
if you don't like it leave. Constitution or no Constitution the governing
bodies have the right to search for ILLEGAL substances and especially
more so for high profile people like athletes. Look at the MILLIONS that
can be had for the rookies in the NBA. 20 year olds are getting over 80
MILLION dollars for playing sport. If you are just average and don't feel
you can make it and taking steroids will enable you to become successful
than there will always be somebody out there willing to take the risk to
using the ***. If they don't get caught then they are rich as anything.

Bobby Knight once was at an assembly at Indiana and was giving a talk on
athletics and academics. He said (very loosely quote) "I wish that I
could lock the doors right now and drug test every one of the people in
here. I know that about half of the people in here would turn up positive
for some type of banned substance." (Yes alchol counts too) I agree with
him, *** are ILLEGAL, they shouldn't be taken at all by anybody and the
legislating bodies have every right to search for the use of these ***.
Believe me or not, your choice, but this invasion of privacy issue is
just too bogus for me to handle. If you have nothing to hide than just
***in the bottle and don't complain of these Constitutional rights!
                                          Raymond Brown
                                       University of Tennessee

 
 
 

Drug Testing

Post by Garrison W Why » Thu, 11 Nov 1993 03:04:24

1)Stanford swimmers are not drug tested.
2)Stanford swimmers swim fast.

Therefore:

3)Stanford swimmers cheat; using *** to make them swim fast.

Now, I am not Stanford student, much less a stanford swimmer. I swim for a  
DIII school in Minnesota, and have no bias on this subject whatsoever.

The above was an example of, in my opinion, the false logic that is going  
on. It's not a great syllogism (sp) to be sure, but it's not meant for  
perfect logic. It is possible* that a stanford swimmer is taking steroids  
or some other drug. It is also possible* that this is true in every school  
in the nation. We can't know for sure, without drug testing.

Personally, I think Stanford runs a straight program that attracts (and  
produces) some of our country's finest swimmers. To accuse their swim team  
as a whole of drug use on the basis that we don't KNOW that they aren't is  
absurd. I have the highest respect for the program run at Stanford.

        However, I feel that the athletes there should VOLUNTEER for the  
drug testing 'required' by the NCAA. They should, as non-drug users, be  
happy* to aid the NCAA in ridding competition of foul play. This should be  
the case in every school across the nation.

        If I were a swimmer at Stanford, or Texas, or anywhere else (yeah,  
right) that was at that level, I would be happy to do my part in ridding  
the NCAA competition of cheaters. I should think that others would take  
this view, as well.

-Garrison Whyte