Jump to content

Steroid tests to begin in Texas high schools


bronco1

Recommended Posts

Jan. 10, 2008, 11:28PM

Steroid tests to begin in Texas high schools

Official says she anticipates a February start

By GARY SCHARRER

Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau

AUSTIN — The long-awaited steroid testing of Texas high school athletes could start next month, state officials said Thursday after adopting rules for the program that will collect random urine samples from about 23,000 students each year.

A contract with the company selected to conduct the massive testing program should be finalized "in just a very few days," said Patti Ohlendorf, vice president for legal affairs at the University of Texas.

She would not identify the company, which will have to hire testing personnel and a crew chief and get them trained and certified.

"I doubt that it would start in January. I would anticipate probably February," she said after the University Interscholastic League Legislative Council adopted rules and procedures for the program.

State lawmakers mandated the random testing program for anabolic steroid use start during the current school year. It will cost about $3 million a year and is considered the largest steroid testing program of its kind in the world.

Some legislators have grumbled about the slow start of the program, which they expected to launch during the high school football season last fall.

But it was imperative to make sure the program was legal, fair and afforded students and their families proper treatment, said Mark Cousins, athletic coordinator for the University Interscholastic League, or UIL.

"If it took a little bit longer to make sure that that happened, then that's just the way it had to be," Cousins said.

Students who test positive would be suspended from competition in their chosen sport. For example, football players randomly selected for testing this spring would have to serve their suspension next fall if they test positive for steroids.

A public comment period ending last month did not result in any major changes in the rules and procedure for the testing program. A number of Texans suggested that the program would be more meaningful if the state tested for all illegal drugs instead of confining it to steroids, said Kim Rogers, UIL spokeswoman.

Steroid abuse can result in shrinking of the testicles, impotence, baldness and enlarged breasts for males and decreased breast size, deepening of the voice and excessive body hair for females, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

For both sexes, steroid abuse can cause liver cancer, blood clotting, acne, depression, heart attacks and strokes.

Student athletes who test positive the first time will be suspended for 30 days from competition. A second positive test result would lead to a one-year ban from competition.

Any student athlete returning from a suspension must pass a follow-up steroid test before returning to competition. The state would pay for the exit test after the first suspension, but the student would have to pay for any additional test, estimated to cost between $100 and $200.

Schools will get between 24 and 48 hours notice before crews arrive to begin the random testing process.

Medical exemptions will be granted to students who can substantiate a medical need for a steroid prescription from a physician.

Diet supplements, including protein powders, amino acids, creatine and vitamins are neither tested nor regulated by the Food and Drug Administration and could be contaminated with steroidlike chemicals, officials warn. Such a positive test is not grounds for an appeal.

Student athletes should avoid taking dietary supplements, Texas Education Agency Associate Commissioner Jeff Kloester said.

The steroid testing company will be required to help educate students and families about the risks of taking dietary supplements, Kloester said.

UT's Ohlendorf said the ambitious testing program "is a very crucial challenge for the state and for everybody who's implementing it."

"And I don't think it's just going to be without difficulties," she said.

But she told the council that it could modify the testing program along the way.

[email protected]

Article Link:  http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5445656.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Statistics

    46,201
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    JBarry68
    Newest Member
    JBarry68
    Joined


  • Posts

    • naw, maaaaybe 7, definitely not 8 deep.  today im avoiding sitting by #10s parents, had to move away yesterday.   "put my son back in jub, put my son back in"  and then crying on every little touch of someone.    lets ball out today ktz!    
    • Very close game until the 2nd half (mostly the 4th) when Orangefield came unraveled. Worse defensive effort I have seen out of the Bobcats in three years. This team has to get back on D and quit getting beat over the top when pressing. Offensively, non ball handlers continually turn it over and their shot selection is poor. Basic basketball, such as: defensive hustle, boxing out, and taking care of the basketball are the areas the Bobcats need to work on most. Whitmire will get them on point, but he shouldn't have to coach effort at the Varsity Level.  We'll be at McnNeese this Friday night at 6pm.
    • I don’t benefit from it, that’s not my area.  But the average cost to imprison someone is around $15k per year (on average in the US) and capital cases cost somewhere between $1.5-$3M with over half being overturned or reduced to life in prison anyway.  These numbers may be inflated since the last report I read but I’m sure it would be on both sides and higher on the DP side if anything. So what’s the point?  We feel better because we got to return the favor on someone (hopefully) who committed a heinous crime?  And I don’t know I can say we have “complicated” it. Which appeal should we cut out?  Our justice system has a pecking order and we have higher courts for a reason. When we are about to impose the ultimate judgment, should we cut steps that other cases have to save a buck?  Or do we not pay for an indigent person’s experts at the trial court level because it’s too expensive? Or do we just lock them up and throw away the key (unless we later find out they weren’t actually guilty, in which case we have a key and a life we haven’t unjustly ended) and save a ton of money?  Seems to me to be an easy and obvious solution but I’m more of a pragmatist.
    • 1 thing for certain. Coach Earned 3 more years to figure it out lol
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...