National Collegiate Athletic Association

Comment

October 26, 1998


Guest editorial -- Dietary supplements imperil eligibility, health

BY GARY GREEN
NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports

The following information is for all NCAA student-athletes who are taking or thinking about taking any of the popular "nutritional supplements" that are currently available.

This article also is must reading for all coaches because the eligibility of your players may depend on the sales clerk at your local nutrition store.

We know from surveys that at least 20 to 30 percent of NCAA student-athletes are taking supplements, and the actual numbers are probably much higher. What you might not know is that a significant number of athletes already have been suspended for one year for taking supplements that violate the NCAA drug-testing policy.

In order to protect you, your teammates and your school from the same penalty, the drug-education and drug-testing subcommittee of the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports offers answers to the following questions:

(1) Do you really know what is in your supplement?

The supplement industry is very poorly regulated. Often, the ingredients are listed in fine print and even then are hard to determine. Recent studies of the supplements St. John's Wort and melatonin found that most products did not contain what was advertised on the label or contained unknown impurities. Nutritional supplements are not subject to the same stringent requirements as prescription drugs, and you are taking a significant gamble with those products.

(2) Does your supplement contain NCAA banned substances?

While Mark McGwire was allowed to take androstenedione in his pursuit of the all-time home-run record, NCAA athletes may not use that supplement or a number of others. There are many substances that can be purchased over the counter or as a supplement (for example, ephedrine, DHEA and androstenedione) that are all banned by the NCAA. The NCAA maintains a list of banned substances, and a copy of it should be available through your athletic trainer, coach or athletics department. Mark McGwire makes the cover of Sports Illustrated for taking

androstenedione, but an NCAA athlete only receives a one-year suspension.

(3) Aren't things like androstenedione "natural"?

The big myth is that "natural" equals "safe." Many of the prescription drugs we use originally came from plants. Nicotine, cocaine and heroin all come from plants. Would you consider them "natural"? Androstenedione is sold as a "natural" form of testosterone. As far as we can determine, androstenedione was invented by the East Germans as a nasal spray to avoid drug testing in the Olympics. Does this sound "natural"?

(4) Aren't things like androstenedione "legal"?

Nutritional supplements like androstenedione can be purchased in nutrition stores, so technically they are "legal" as opposed to "illegal" drugs like heroin, cocaine and marijuana. However, if you look at the NCAA banned-substances list, many of the substances either can be purchased over the counter or legally prescribed by a doctor, but are banned by the NCAA.

(5) Why does the NCAA ban drugs such as androstenedione, DHEA and 19-Norandrostenedione when they are allowed by other sports organizations such as Major League Baseball?

All of those drugs are precursors of anabolic steroids, which means if you take enough of them, they are converted to anabolic steroids. If you believe that it is cheating to take anabolic steroids and/or that anabolic steroids are unhealthy, then you can't advocate the use of those drugs. The NCAA strongly believes that anabolic steroids offer an unfair advantage and are unhealthy. Taken in high enough quantities, androstenedione will cause the same health problems as anabolic steroids. Because of this, the Drug Enforcement Agency is considering re-classifying androstenedione as an anabolic steroid so that it can be controlled under the Anabolic Steroid Control Act. Based on that, perhaps a better question might be, "Why doesn't Major League Baseball ban those drugs?"

(6) Who should I check with before taking a supplement?

To be safe, we recommend checking with your athletic trainer, coach, team physician or the NCAA before taking any supplement. Athletes who have tested positive will frequently say that they checked with the nutrition store, the Internet, their friends, the local gym, their parents and so on. It seems that they have checked with everyone except the people who actually know the NCAA banned-substances list.

Remember, you are responsible for your own eligibility. If you test positive, it is not your friends or the guy at the nutrition store who will be serving the suspension, it will be you!

Also, the salespeople at the nutrition store or the companies that make the supplements are not responsible for knowing NCAA rules. Their job is to sell you something and make a profit.

(7) Given all of these facts, what should an NCAA student-athlete do about supplements?

Get educated! Before taking any supplement, you should first know exactly what it is that you are taking. After that, ask yourself the following questions:

  • Is it allowable under NCAA rules?

  • Is it safe?

  • Have there been any studies to show that it really works?

  • Have I checked with either my athletic trainer, coach, physician or the NCAA?

    If you can answer "yes" to all of those questions, then you can consider taking the supplement. Remember that a healthy, well-balanced diet usually can provide the same benefits of many supplements at a fraction of the cost. If you have any questions about a particular drug, you can check the NCAA Web site at: www.ncaa.org/sports_sciences.

    There is a lot of confusion about supplements, but one thing is very clear: If you test positive under the NCAA drug testing, you will receive a one-year suspension, even if you didn't know they were banned. You need to ask yourself if taking a supplement is really worth one year of eligibility.

    Gary Green, M.D., is the chair of the drug-education and drug-testing subcommittee of the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports. He also is an associate professor in the University of California, Los Angeles, Department of Family Medicine, and team physician for Pepperdine University.


    Comment -- Views vary on Native American mascots

    Every Indian group working on the mascot issue applauds the editorial by Charles Whitcomb that appeared in the September 28 issue of The NCAA News.

    Mr. Whitcomb speaks eloquently on our behalf, and we thank him. For some reason, no one believes us when we tell them this hurts our children and damages their self-esteem.

    I trust others to know when they are offended or harmed by words and actions, but Indians are assured we should not feel these things, only be honored. We are not honored!

    Obviously, Mr. Whitcomb feels our pain, and we thank him. We can only hope that the time will soon come when those in positions of power will understand what they are doing to Indian people and, more importantly, that they will care.

    Thank you again. Voices such as Mr. Whitcomb's will help our small voice be heard.

    Don Merzlak
    Elder, Native American
    Intertribal Association
    Asheville, North Carolina

    Mascots not demeaning

    Over the years, I have kept informed on collegiate athletics by subscribing to The NCAA News. The articles and editorials offer a perspective that is not always considered in the mass media of television and other written publications.

    The guest editorial by Charles Whitcomb hits very close to home. Outside parties have been protesting the use of Chief Illini (at the University of Illinois, Champaign) for years. It is my opinion that institutions should not discard their tradition for the sake of modern-day political correctness.

    Do nicknames like Braves and Warriors not equate themselves to those of Volunteers, Trojans and Mountaineers? Should history be rewritten so as not to offend anyone who may read it?

    Mr. Whitcomb stated "no other race of people in America is used for mascots or nicknames for sports teams." As an American of Irish ancestry, I'm proud of the mascots and nicknames used by the Boston Celtics and Fighting Irish of Notre Dame. Mr. Whitcomb should check his facts before using such defensive rhetoric.

    Not that this matters: The author is listed as a member of the faculty at San Jose State University, the Spartans. Is he concerned about the feelings of the Greek community as well?

    I am concerned that an NCAA committee is so concerned with mascots at member schools. Does the future hold infraction committee hearings for institutions that remain loyal to their history and alumni by nonconformance with the mascot police code of ethics?

    Michael Gibbs
    River Forest, Illinois


    Opinions -- Gambling problem doesn't get the attention it deserves

    Tom Vincent, communications director
    Americans Against Organized Gambling
    USA Today

    Reacting to a USA Today story on college life:

    "As truly important as alcohol-related issues are to the parents of incoming college students, USA Today's cover story on college -- as well as the sidebar stories -- mentioned booze 20 times but not one word about the fastest-growing and most dangerous vice raging across campuses today: the epidemic of illegal gambling.

    "Fact: The NCAA found this year that collegians spend as much money on gambling as they do on alcoholic beverages.

    "Fact: More than 25 percent of college students admit they gamble illegally on or off campus.

    "Fact: The NCAA concedes that illegal sports betting rings -- which work directly or indirectly with organized crime -- prey on students on virtually every major campus community in this country.

    "Fact: A Harvard University study discovered that illicit gambling among teens now results in an addictive rate 300 percent higher than that of the adult population.

    "Too many college students will die or become disabled due to alcohol misuse on their part or others' in the next year, as has been the case annually during this century.

    "But for the first time, and this is indeed alarming to report, all indications are that the 1998-99 school year will see a higher body count -- in other words, a tally of suicides, criminal activities, psychological or emotional dysfunction, and drop-out rate -- among students who succumb to gambling than that of those who abuse alcoholic products."

    Double standards

    Mechelle Voepel, columnist
    Kansas City Star

    "Here's the deal: If you read 20 stories about andro, you'd get 20 suggestions from 'experts' as to its immediate and projected effects on the body. Opinions range from andro being a virtually useless and harmless dietary supplement to it being a definite performance-enhancing drug with potentially dangerous side effects.

    "Then consider that 'experts' tell us that almost everything causes cancer and almost everything prevents it; that being 15 pounds overweight ensures an early death or doesn't really matter; that our mental health is swayed by our physical fitness or completely dependent on our genes.

    "We don't know for sure about anything, andro or otherwise, and therein lies the problem.

    "Gray areas make people uncomfortable, just like puzzles that can't be solved or movies with ambiguous endings.

    "We do not like to anoint heroes and then examine potential flaws.

    "And that is what we've done: not just chronicled his ascent to homer king, but made McGwire a genuine folk hero.

    "Again, maybe that's just what we should have done.

    "Many sports columnists said the andro controversy was a sad commentary on how we always have to find something bad in a good thing.

    "Interestingly, though, many of those same journalists took direct aim at Nykesha Sales and Connecticut's women's basketball team earlier this year. They said the 'plot' to allow the injured Sales to score an uncontested basket to make her the school's all-time scoring leader tarnished the sport.

    "Talk about going out of your way to find bad in good.

    "Ultimately, none of us know how the McGwire story may turn out.

    "But in journalism school, they tell you that if you think you have all the answers, you haven't asked all the questions.

    "Now that the homer race is over, we in sports journalism just might have to think about that a little more."

    College athletics

    Mike Gottfried, college football analyst
    ESPN
    The Sporting News

    "I have long maintained that football, along with basketball and baseball, has outgrown the present NCAA system because it has become too big. It's time to have a commissioner for each sport.

    "A commissioner could handle problems and help build on the positive aspects of college football.

    "When you see the type of money that the SEC generates in the current system and you look at the breakup of the WAC, you wonder what will happen to schools like SMU and TCU. Someone needs to look after the sport and be just as interested in Louisiana Tech and Northeast Louisiana as Alabama and Auburn, so we can continue to have a system where any school that wants to be Division I can be. But I'm afraid we may be headed for a super conference that has just 50 Division I football teams.

    "I think the conference commissioners have done a good job, but they have an agenda and are trying to protect their leagues when they are making legislation.

    "I would like an athletics director from a football league to be the overall commissioner, someone who wants to step out from his league and make decisions that are the best for college football. The bureaucracy is too big and decisions are not made that are the best for everybody; they are based on what is best for the big conferences. It isn't the NCAA, it's the membership. The membership is run by the athletics directors and commissioners from the strongest conferences who don't look out for everyone involved."

    Fans

    Craig Wrisberg, sports psychologist
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville
    Knoxville News-Sentinel

    "That's (one) thing about sport in the '90s. The etiquette and rules of the past -- they're gone. It's not enough to win anymore. Now you've got to rub the opponent's nose in it.

    "Now it's 'We not only scored more points than you, but we beat you and that makes you inferior. And not only you, but your band, your fans and anybody who has anything to do with you.'

    "The fans get caught up in all this emotion and start acting like they're the players, and the next thing you know, you've got two 40-year-old men who couldn't run 50 yards if they had to, but they're getting ready to go at it over their teams."