Juiced

Despite testing, baseball hasn't kicked drug habit

OK, it's hardly front-page news that more than a few major league ballplayers use drugs.

Cocaine was a big problem in the 1980s, and steroid and human growth hormone usage -- spotlighted last summer by former National League MVP Ken Caminiti's allegations in Sports Illustrated -- hasn't been seriously slowed by baseball's toothless drug-testing program.

Still, it was interesting to see Tony Gwynn's comments the other day in The New York Times. The former San Diego Padres star, one of baseball's straight arrows, says amphetamines -- also known as "greenies" or "beans" -- are baseball's favorite drug. The eight-time NL batting champ estimates 50 percent of position players routinely use them.

“I would say he is pretty accurate in that statement," Atlanta Braves outfielder Chipper Jones said the other day. "There is probably a little bit more of a problem as far as that goes than with the steroids."

There's certainly nothing revolutionary about amphetamines, which have been around baseball longer than the DH. Pete Rose has admitted using them, and Jim Bouton even wrote about them in Ball Four, way back in 1969. Guys pop them before games for an energy boost, to sharpen their focus.

“This is a tough, tough lifestyle," said Jones. “You are traveling from time zone to time zone. You’re playing at different times of the day. You’re not eating right at certain times. That is tough on guys. Guys are paid a lot of money to show up at the right time and do their job and sometimes they need a little help."

And it isn’t in a teammate’s job description to police pre-game habits around the clubhouse.

“I’m not gonna tell another grown man how to go about his business as long as he comes to play when the bell rings," Jones said. “But you can tell what’s going on. I mean you can look at a lot of lockers."

Around baseball, most players toe the union line, but this is the rare issue where membership doesn’t speak in a single voice. Some openly fret that "juicers" -- those popping pills or taking injections -- enjoy an unfair advantage.

Major League Baseball's first testing program is nothing more than a survey. Every member of the 40-man rosters -- about 1,200 players -- is tested once, then about 240 are tested randomly a second time. There’s no individual penalty. If 5 percent of the players --60 -- test positive, then a disciplinary component will be activated next year (treatment for a first offense, a 15- to 25-day suspension for a second).

No one is speculating on the number of positive tests to date. That will come in an official announcement after the season. But even though the players' union has finally given in to testing -- something already agreed to in the NBA and NFL -- the watered-down plan is viewed as a joke in many circles.

“They’re pussy footing around right now," says Dr. Domenic Sica, a consultant to the NBA Players Association and professor of medicine and pharmacology at Virginia Commonwealth University. “Why should there be differences between the league [drug policies]? It all has to do with unions. Does it have to do with the health of the player? No, not at all."

Understandably, union officials bristle at such suggestions. They say they routinely issue advisories and educate members to the dangers of drugs. But the union also sees drug testing as an invasion of privacy, arguing that an employer isn’t entitled to a urine sample by virtue of providing a job, unless the job is tied to national health and safety.

But if there is rampant use of steroids in baseball, as some suggest, the union is willing to relax its position. That’s where the survey comes in.

“The perception is there’s a [steroid] problem, for sure," said Gene Orza, the union's associate general counsel. “If indeed you have an epidemic, it should be determined on the basis of something more scientific that what Jose Canseco said in a newspaper article about a book he was going to write. The way you determine that is you take a creditable survey. And if it’s then found you have an epidemic, you have forced testing, unannounced testing of all individuals."

The number that matters here is 60. If baseball has indeed turned into a pharmacological trade show, surely at least 60 players will test positive during the survey phase. But predicting an outcome is dicey because baseball isn’t testing for androstenedione or human growth hormone. Aother criticism of the program is that players reportedly knew what month they were being tested.

“I don’t think it’s rampant," said Atlanta Braves reliever Ray King. “Are [performance-enhancing drugs] in the game? Yeah. There is a lot of stuff in the game and it needs to be cleaned up, because baseball has enough negative spots. Guys need to look at life after the game instead of trying to make more millions of dollars than what they are making."

Just the threat of testing may be a start. Talk around the clubhouses is that more players reported to camp this spring smaller, trimmer, not quite as bulky.

“It is not just a coincidence that you’re seeing an abundance of guys coming in having lost weight," said Jones. “Guys looking good but having lost weight. I think that is a direct result of the fact they know they’re gonna get tested.

“I would say there were probably two or three instances in our clubhouse. That being said, I am not saying somebody is juicing. But I think you probably see two or three guys in every clubhouse that way."

Union officials say it’s only natural for suspicion to filter through clubhouses. Their hope is that testing will calm some of the rumors. And if it also prompted players to come to work smaller this season, fine.

“If people are responding to the program," said Orza, "the program has worked."

Mike Fish is a senior writer for SI.com.

Comments? To e-mail Fish, click here.

 

Related information

Stories

Previous Mike Fish Columns

Multimedia

Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video