Doping in the United States

Doping, or the use of restricted performance-enhancing drugs in the United States occurs in different sports, most notably in the sports of baseball and football.

Part of a series on
Doping in sport

History

History

Restrictions regarding drug use like synthetic hormones by athletes for enhanced performance in competition did not come around until the 20th century. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) established its initial list of prohibited substances in 1967 and introduced the first drug tests at the France and Mexico Olympic games in 1968.[1] Thirty years later, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) was founded. WADA was founded at a time when individual governments, sport federations, and the IOC all had differing definitions, policies, and sanctions for doping. WADA bridged these differences by setting unified anti-doping standards and coordinating the efforts of sports organizations and public authorities worldwide.[1]

The United States, a WADA Foundation Board Member, followed suit by establishing the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) in 2000. USADA is recognized by the United States Congress as the official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan American and Paralympic sport in the United States. The agency has adjudication powers and abides by WADA’s World Anti-Doping Code (“Code”), which provides the global framework for anti-doping policies, rules, and regulations. Doping in sports is generally defined as using a prohibited / banned substance; however, WADA expanded the definition to include breaking one or more of eight anti-doping rules within the Code, which range from presence of a prohibited substance in an athlete’s test sample to administering or attempting to administer a prohibited substance or method to an athlete. As of December 19, 2008, the Code banned 192 performance-enhancing drugs, substances, and methods.[2]

Similar to the definitional disputes the international community faced in the 1990s, national professional sports leagues in the U.S. approach anti-doping policy differently and independently of U.S. government regulation, WADA guidelines, and one another. They do not have the same list of banned substances or tests they require players to abide by, may not provide tests or sanctions for use of some prohibited substances, and negotiate their anti-doping policies with their respective players associations through collective bargaining.[3]

In 2005, the United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform took an active interest on anti-drug policies in professional sports by opening an investigation into the matter following heightened media activity on steroid use in Major League Baseball (MLB). The use, possession, distribution, dispensing, or selling of steroids is a punishable federal offense under the Controlled Substances Act which, in addition to steroids, lists other performance-enhancing drugs and substances as Schedule III drugs. A series of Schedule III drugs were held, most notably with MLB, the National Football League (NFL), and the National Basketball Association (NBA). Each league’s anti-drug policy was compared to that of the IOC, and each fell short of the IOC requirements.[3] Response to the congressional investigation by sports league representatives resulted largely with push back and a “we can police our own” mentality, but the Committee felt differently and introduced the Clean Sports Act, one of six bills introduced that year in both chambers[4] —addressing the need to adopt uniform national anti-drug policy standards among professional sports leagues that are consistent with, and as stringent as, those enforced by the USADA. While most of the bills were voted out of committee, none were enacted. As of 2013, professional sports leagues continue to negotiate their anti-doping policies privately through collective bargaining.

Olympics

United States has had eight Olympic medals stripped for doping violations. In all cases, the US government or the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) had nothing to do with it, and sanctioned athletes acted on their own. In the case of swimmer Rick DeMont, the USOC has recognized his gold medal performance in the 1972 Summer Olympics in 2001,[5] but only the IOC has the power to restore his medal, and it has as of 2017 refused to do so.[5] DeMont originally won the gold medal in 4:00.26. Following the race, the IOC stripped him of his gold medal[6] after his post-race urinalysis tested positive for traces of the banned substance ephedrine contained in his prescription asthma medication, Marax. The positive test following the 400 meter freestyle final also deprived him of a chance at multiple medals, as he was not permitted to swim in any other events at the 1972 Olympics, including the 1,500-meter freestyle for which he was the then-current world record-holder. Before the Olympics, DeMont had properly declared his asthma medications on his medical disclosure forms, but the USOC had not cleared them with the IOC's medical committee.[7][5][5]

Doping by sport
Substance Athlete population Percentage of athletes using substance[8]
Any substance banned by WADA Elite athletes across sports (positive drug tests) 2% over past year
Anabolic steroids Professional football players (self report) 9% used at some point in career
Opiates Professional football players (self report) 52% used at some point in career (71% of those misused at some point in career)
Smokeless tobacco Professional basketball players (self report) 35%-40% over past year
Professional football players (self report) 20%-30% over past year

National Collegiate Athletic Association

Major League Baseball

Drugs of abuse:

The Mitchell Report
Main article: Mitchell Report

In December 2007 US Senator George Mitchell released Report to the Commissioner of Baseball of an Independent Investigation into the Illegal Use of Steroids and Other Performance Enhancing Substances by Players in Major League Baseball. Major League Baseball asked Mitchell to conduct an independent investigation to see how bad steroid use was in baseball. In the report Mitchell covers many topics and he interviewed over 700 witnesses. He covers the effects of steroids on the human body. He also touches on human growth hormone effects. He reports on baseball's drug testing policies before 2002 and the newer policies after 2002. Mitchell also named 86 players in the report that had some kind of connection to steroids. Among those named were: Andy Pettitte, Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, and Eric Gagne. To finish his report, Mitchell made suggestions to the Commissioner of Baseball about drug testing and violations of the drug testing policies. Mitchell also reported that he would provide evidence to support the allegations made against such players and would give them the opportunity to meet with him and give them a fair chance to defend themselves against the allegations. The report also includes a paper trail of evidence that states, "Former Mets club house attendant, Kirk Randomski sent performing enhancement drugs to the players mentioned in the report." Quinn, T.J. and Thompson, Teri Daily News Sports Writers [New York, N.Y.] CT. (2007):66[9][10]

See also
Most commonly abused substances in the MLB[11]

Drug tests

Doping is easily spotted in blood when someone is being drug tested. Drug tester can immediately look at the antigen pattern of the red blood cells. When these blood cells present different genetic markers, the doping can be spotted very easily. There are two types of doping tests; in-competition tests and out-of-competition tests, meaning that athletes can be tested any time and anywhere whether they are in season or not. [12]

Test and frequency of tests

According to MLB rules all players are subject to random urine testing during the season as well as once during spring training; there is no limit to the amount of random drug testing during the season. However, in off-seasons players are only subject to random urine testing for DHEA (formally known as dehydroepiandrosterone, is a performance-enhancing drug. It is a predecessor to testosterone, meaning it results in increased testosterone levels in the body, and therefore increased muscle mass)[13] and performance-enhancing drugs.

Players are also subject to announced blood tests for the use of human growth hormone (HGH) during the season, off-seasons, and spring training.

In addition players are subject to testing for performance-enhancing drugs and DHEA if there is reasonable cause to believe the player is doping. If there is any information provided that a player has bought, sold, used, or possessed these drugs they are subject to testing.

There is however, exemption from these rules if banned substances are being used for therapeutic purposes. Players with documented and valid medical prescriptions for these banned substances will be granted a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE), and are thus exempt from punishment. In other words, players with a TUE for prohibited substances do not violate the program by possessing or using that substance.

Procedural details

Players who test positive for a performance-enhancing drug will be subject to the following penalties.

  1. First violation: 80- game suspension
  2. Second violation: 162-game suspension/ 183 days of pay suspension
  3. Third violation: Permanent suspension from Major League/Minor League Baseball

Players who test positive for a stimulant will be subject to the following penalties

  1. First violation: Follow-up testing
  2. Second violation: 25-game suspension
  3. Third violation: Determined by the Arbitration Board

Players who test positive for DHEA will be subject to the following penalties

  1. First violation: Follow-up testing
  2. Second violation: 25-game suspension
  3. Third violation:80-game suspension
  4. Fourth and subsequent violations: Determined by the Arbitration Board

Players who are disciplined for breaking these rules will be subject to six unannounced urine collections and three unannounced blood tests in every subsequent year for using performance-enhancing drugs.

If team management, coaching staff, or team owner encourages such PED usage, the club will be given the maximum fine given by the MLB, loss of all draft picks for the next 3 years, and possible suspensions or other sanctions including a forced sale of a club (if owner is complicit).

Agencies that perform tests

Testing is ordered by the Medical Testing Officer and is performed by the Director of the Montreal Laboratory

Professional cycling

In 2012, Lance Armstrong, cyclist and seven times Tour de France winner, was charged by USADA with using performance-enhancing drugs, although he had denied it throughout his career and had never failed a drugs test.[14] The charge is based on blood samples from 2009 and 2010 and testimonies from cyclists and other members of staff on Armstrong's former teams. On August 23, 2012, Armstrong announced that he would not be fighting the USADA's charges.[15] On August 24, 2012, the USADA banned Armstrong for life and removed all his results from August 1998 and thereafter.

National Football League

In 2009, nearly one in ten retired National Football League (NFL) players polled in a confidential survey said they had used now-banned anabolic steroids while still playing. 16.3 percent of offensive linemen admitted using steroids, as did 14.8 percent of defensive linemen.[16]

The NFL banned substances policy has been acclaimed by some[17] and criticized by others,[18] but the policy is the longest running in American professional sports, beginning in 1987.[17] The current policy of the NFL suspends players without pay who test positive for banned substances as it has since 1989: four games for the first offense (a quarter of the regular season), eight games for a second offense (half of the regular season), and 12 months for a third offense.[19] The suspended games may be either regular season games or playoff games.[19]

While recently MLB and the NHL decided to permanently ban athletes for a third offense, they have long been resistant to such measures, and random testing is in its infancy.[20][21]

Since the NFL started random, year-round tests and suspending players for banned substances, many more players have been found to be in violation of the policy. By April 2005, 111 NFL players had tested positive for banned substances, and of those 111, the NFL suspended 54.[18]

A new rule is in the works due to Shawne Merriman. Starting the 2007 season, the new rule would prohibit any player testing positive for banned substances from being able to play in the Pro Bowl that year.[22]

Performance-enhancing drugs in the National Football League
NFL performance-enhancing drug policy

Since steroid testing began in 1987, the NFL has made strides to discourage steroid use through their testing policies and procedures. According to nflcommunications.com, The NFL collects more than 14,000 tests each year which is more than any other professional sport league.[23] But there are also 53 players in each team, so this does not necessarily mean, there are more tests per player, compared to other leagues. Furthermore, players are contacted with little time before their testing date, and any player who fails to test is referred to disciplinary review. The NFL has committed to testing for a wide array of Performance Enhancing drugs, Starting in 2011 the NFL implemented random blood test for the use of the human growth hormone (HGH).[24] NFL sanctions include a minimum four game suspension for first-time offenders, six game suspension for second-time offenders and a year around suspension for third-time offenders.[25] All NFL suspensions are without pay in order to further discourage performance-enhancing drug use.

Drug tests
Test and frequency of tests[26]

According to NFL rules all players are subject to pre-employment, annual, seasonal, post-seasonal, and off-season urine testing. Each week of the regular season and post-season ten players on each club are randomly selected for testing. During the off-season players under contract may be testing up to six times.[27]

Procedural details

Reasonable cause testing may be required when the IPA receives documentation that a Player may have violated the Policy. Oftentimes the Player is subject to the Reasonable Cause Testing Program. Once found guilty a player, he may appeal.

  1. First violation: Suspended without pay for X number of games depending on the offense.
  2. For diuretic or masking agent—two regular and/or postseason games.
  3. For stimulants or anabolic agent—four regular and/or postseason games.

For a prohibited substance plus a diuretic or masking agent/attempt to substitute, dilute or adulterate a specimen/attempt to manipulate a test result/violation of section 5:

  1. First violation: Suspension for up to six regular and/or postseason games.
  2. Second violation: Suspension for 10 games whether it be regular or post season without pay.
  3. Third violation: Suspension for 2 seasons from NFL without pay.

If the team management and coaching staff, or the team owner encourages, facilitates, or conspires such mass PED usage, the club will be given the maximum fine given by the NFL, loss of all draft picks for the next 2 years, and possible suspensions or other sanctions such as a forced sale of a club (if owner is complicit).

Agencies that perform tests

All specimens are collected by an authorized specimen collector under the authority of the Collection Vendor and analyzed at the appropriate laboratory. All testing and enforcement is done through the Independent Administrator (IPA).[28]

Historical performance-enhancing drug studies in the NFL

In 2009 researchers conducted a survey of 2552 retired football players. The survey reported that anabolic steroids were introduced to the National Football League as early as 1963.[29] Steroids use became so prevalent that players suspected that 90% of the NFL had used steroids.[29] In addition to these rough statistics, Offensive-Lineman Pat Donovan suggested that up to 70% of the Dallas Cowboys offensive line had been using steroids.[29] In 1990, a survey to 120 current NFL athletes reported that 67% of Offensive Lineman used steroids.[29] At the conclusion of the survey, researchers found that out of 2552 ex-NFL players, 9.1% self reported using anabolic steroids during their career. Furthermore, 16.3% of Offensive lineman and 14.8% of defensive lineman surveyed reported using steroids during their careers.[29]

Recent developments in performance-enhancing drug use in the NFL

The widespread use of performance -enhancing drugs in the NFL has been an ongoing problem. Within the last eight years, three defensive rookies of the year have been charged with using illegal performance-enhancing drugs.[30] After reading such facts, there seems to be a strong correlation between success in the National Football league and the use of illegal performance-enhancing drugs. Furthermore, as these rookies were identified as cheaters, they were disciplined mildly with a suspension of four games.

Sportswriter Mike Freeman recalls a Hall of Fame Coach telling him that "For every one or two PED (performance-enhancing drug) cheats the NFL catches, 10 go free. Maybe 20".[30] Widespread steroid use is extremely common in the NFL, oftentimes going unnoticed by the authorities. In a study of steroid cases surrounding the 2004 Super Bowl, statistics show that multiple players were discovered as steroid users. Furthermore, the study shows that those specific cases were never formally documented.[31] "The NFL says it tests players randomly, without warning, throughout the year. And yet there's no record of these players ever testing positive".[31] The NFL's failure to document steroid use is extremely rare and problematic. While steroid use is concealed in the NFL, it is oftentimes the source of controversy in other professional sports leagues.

HGH testing

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform revisited the NFL's anti-drug policy on December 12, 2012, specifically as it relates to testing for human growth hormone (HGH). The collective bargaining agreement that ended the NFL lockout in August 2011 included a provision for HGH testing as soon as the 2012-2013 season — but only once the NFL Players Association approved the process. However, as of February 2013 testing had not yet begun because both parties continue to disagree on a number of issues relating to the accuracy of the testing and whether the test is valid for NFL players. Adolpho Birch, the NFL:s senior vice president for law and labor policy, stated the following when interviewed by The New York Times in February 2013: “It has been a stall. I don’t know if it’s a tactic. There is absolutely no reason for this to have taken this long and us not have testing implemented. We should have been more than a year into this by now.”[32] Congress is hopeful that HGH testing will be included in the NFL's anti-drug policy come the 2013-2014 season.

National Basketball Association

The National Basketball Association (NBA) first developed its anti-drug policy with the NBA Players Association in 1983. Only eight players have been caught and suspended for the use of performance-enhancing drugs, most serving 5-, 10-, and 20-game suspensions:[33]

Several other players have been banned for testing positive for illegal drugs four times, mostly for cocaine use. Under the 1983 policy, such players are eligible to reapply for reinstatement after two years.[35]

Drug tests
Test and frequency of tests

All players are subject to four random tests per season. An accused player has five days to request a retest. There is also reasonable cause testing (If there is reason to believe a player is violating drug rules the NBA will hold a hearing to determine if there is reasonable cause to do a drug test). [36]

Procedural details

If a player tests positive for a Drug of Abuse he will be dismissed or disqualified from the NBA. A player will also be dismissed if they plead guilty or no contest to a crime involving the use or possession of a Drug of Abuse.

Players who test positive for SPEDs will be subject to the following penalties.

  1. First violation: Player will be suspended for 10 games and will be subject to entry into the SPEDs Program.
  2. Second violation: Player will be suspended for 25 games and re-entry into SPEDs program
  3. Third violation: Player will be suspended for one year and re-entry into SPEDs program
  4. Fourth violation: Player will be dismissed or disqualified from the NBA

A player will also be dismissed or disqualified from the NBA if he is convicted of, or pleads guilty to a crime involving the use or possession of a SPED Players who test positive for Marijuana will be subject to the following penalties.

  1. First violation: Player will be required to enter the Marijuana Program
  2. Second violation: Player will be subject to a $25,000 fine and re-entry into the Marijuana Program
  3. Third violation: Player will be suspended for five games and re-entry into the Marijuana Program.
  4. Fourth or subsequent violations: Player will be suspended for five games longer than the player’s immediately preceding suspension.

Players who test positive for Diuretics will be subject to the following penalties:

  1. If a player tests positive during random testing he will be subject to the same penalties that are implemented for a positive test result for SPEDs.
  2. If a player tests positive during Reasonable Cause Testing, he will be subject to the penalties for a positive test for the prohibited substance for which the authorization for reasonable cause testing was issued.

If team management, coaching staff, or team owner encourages such PED usage, the team will be given the maximum fine given by the NBA, loss of all draft picks for the next 2 years, and possible suspensions or other sanctions such as a forced sale of a team (if owner is complicit).

Agencies that perform tests

All drug tests are analyzed by certified laboratories selected by the NBA and approved by the Medical Director.

See also
  • 2010 NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement Highlights[37]

National Hockey League

List of banned compounds

Drugs that are banned in the National Hockey League (NHL) are determined by the World Anti-Doping Agency's (WADA) list of prohibited performance-enhancing substances. From here there are recommendations made to the NHL and the National Hockey League Players' Association (NHLPA) as to which performance-enhancing substances are relevant to the sport of hockey.[38]

This list includes drugs of abuse and most recently there was debate regarding the presence of cocaine in NHL, which led to its addition to the prohibited substance list.

Drug tests
Test and frequency of tests

According to NHL rules, drug testing procedures are similar during training camp, regular season and playoffs. Each club is subject to team-wide, no-notice testing once during training camp. Teams will be selected at random for testing during the regular season and individual players will be randomly selected throughout the season. Tests are conducted at work on the day of practice but not on game days. Throughout the off-season, a maximum of 60 drug tests randomly, without notice.[38]

Procedural details

A player's refusal to test, tampering with tests, or failed test will result in a positive test result. Such results are subject to appeal to the impartial arbitrator within 48 hours of being notified by the Program Doctor. Disciplinary penalties for a positive test work as follows: All of which include mandatory referral to the SABH Program and possible treatment, if necessary.

  1. First violation: a suspension of twenty (20) NHL Games without pay.
  2. Second violation: a suspension of sixty (60) NHL Games without pay.
  3. Third violation: a "permanent" suspension. A suspended player may reapply via the Program Committee for discretionary reinstatement after a minimum period of two years.[38]

If team coaches, general manager, and/or owner conspires or encourages players to use performance enhancing drugs, then the team will be given the maximum fine given by the NHL, loss of all draft picks for the next 3 years, and possible suspensions or other sanctions such as a forced sale of a team (if owner is complicit).

Agencies that perform tests

The Program Committee is responsible for establishing educational programs for players on the dangers of drug abuse. The Program Committee's responsibilities also include deciding what drugs should be deemed "prohibited," select laboratories and collecting authorities, monitor and oversee the Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) process and creating policy for the destruction of samples and other related documents and records.

United States Anti-Doping Agency
Main article: United States Anti-Doping Agency

The United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) is a non-profit, non-governmental organization and national anti-doping organization (NADO) for the United States. The organization has control of anti-doping programs for U.S. Olympic, Paralympic, Pan-American and ParaPan American sport. Its work includes in-competition and out-of-competition testing, the results management and adjudication process, the provision of drug reference resources, the therapeutic-use exemption process, various scientific research initiatives, and athlete and outreach education. USADA is headquartered in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

USADA is a signatory to, and responsible for implementation in the United States of, the World Anti-Doping Code, widely considered the basis for the strongest and strictest anti-doping programs in sports. In 2001 the agency was recognized by the U.S. Congress as "the official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan American and Paralympic sport in the United States."[4] USADA is not a government entity; however, the agency is partly funded by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), with its remaining budget generated from contracts for anti-doping services with sport organizations, most notably the United States Olympic Committee. The United States has also ratified the UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport, the first global international treaty against doping in sport.

Anti-doping policies instituted by individual sporting governing bodies may conflict with local laws. A notable case includes the National Football League (NFL) inability to suspend players found with banned susbstances; after it was ruled by a federal court, that local labor laws superseded the NFL's anti-doping regime. The challenge was supported by the National Football League Players Association.[39][40]

In the U.S., anabolic steroids are currently listed as Schedule III controlled substances under the Controlled Substances Act, which makes the first offense simple possession of such substances without a prescription a federal crime punishable by up to one year in prison, and the unlawful distribution or possession with intent to distribute anabolic steroids punishable as a first offense by up to ten years in prison.[41] EPO is a drug that may only be obtained through a medical practitioner's prescription. Professional cyclists that test positive for the drug are banned from professional road races for a minimum of two years on the first offense and banned for life on the second offense.[41]

Scandals
gollark: Anyway, it compiles your entry to a shared library then invokes it via ctypes. I thought that this would be more elegant and efficient a
gollark: And yet it has GLOBALS in it?
gollark: ```pythondef c_wrapper(file): print("Compiling", file) temp = tempfile.mktemp(prefix="lib-compile-") print(temp) if subprocess.run(["gcc", file, "-o", temp, "-shared"]).returncode != 0: raise ValueError("compilation failed") library = ctypes.CDLL(temp) entry = library.entry entry.restype = ctypes.POINTER(ctypes.c_int)```Here's a bit of the *excellent* code.
gollark: Your entry is a function, it doesn't start up a process on every iteration or it would go slower.
gollark: How is not arbitrarily zeroing things "unusual"?

See also

Doping in Sport Doping in Baseball World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)f

References
  1. "WADA: A Brief History of Anti-Doping". June 2010.
  2. "192 Banned Performance Enhancing Substances and Methods". 17 March 2010.
  3. Halchin, Elaine (17 October 2007). "Anti-Doping Policies: The Olympics and Selected Professional Sports" (PDF). CRS Report. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 October 2013.
  4. Brooks, Nathan (8 July 2005). "Drug Testing in Sports: Proposed Legislation" (PDF). CRS Report.
  5. Associated Press (January 30, 2001). "Better late than never". sportsillustrated.cnn.com. Archived from the original on May 7, 2001.
  6. Neil Amdur, "Of Gold and Drugs," The New York Times (September 4, 1972). Retrieved March 16, 2015.
  7. Rick DeMont. Sports-Reference.com
  8. Reardon, Claudia. "Drug Abuse in Athletes". www.dovepress.com. Retrieved 2016-04-10.
  9. Files.mlb.com
  10. Sports.espn.go.com
  11. "List Of Every 2015 MLB And Minor League Drug Suspension (It's A Long One)". Forbes. Retrieved 2016-04-10.
  12. Haff, G. Gregory. "The science of doping and how cheating athletes pass drug tests". The Conversation. Retrieved 2020-03-10.
  13. "ESPN". Sports Nutrition. ESPN. Retrieved 2016-03-10.
  14. "Lance Armstrong". Retrieved 2012-06-30.
  15. "Lance Armstrong Banned For Life, Career Vacated". NPR. AP. Retrieved August 24, 2012.
  16. Health.usnews.com
  17. Maske, Mark; Shapiro, Leonard (April 28, 2005). "NFL's Steroid Policy Gets Kudos on Capitol Hill". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 3, 2010.
  18. Joel Roberts (April 27, 2005). "NFL Steroid Policy 'Not Perfect', House Committee Praises Tougher Testing Policy, But Still May Act – CBS News". Cbsnews.com. Retrieved May 3, 2010.
  19. "NFLPA.org" (PDF). NFLPA.org. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 6, 2008. Retrieved May 3, 2010.
  20. Kiely, Kathy (November 17, 2005). "– MLB, players agree to update drug policy". USA Today. Retrieved May 3, 2010.
  21. "NHL unveils new drug testing policy". CTV.ca. September 28, 2005. Retrieved May 3, 2010.
  22. TV Station 7/39 KNSD (NBC in San Diego, CA) Broadcast 5:00 am News on February 8, 2007. (Retrieved from the Global Broadcast Database on September 17, 2008)
  23. "The Facts on NFL Steroid Testing". Archived from the original on November 13, 2011. Retrieved March 27, 2012.
  24. Klemko, Robert (October 14, 2011). "NFL says HGH tests coming soon; Players say no". USA Today. Retrieved March 27, 2012.
  25. Tagliabue, Paul (February 29, 2004). "What the N.F.L. Is Doing to Stamp Out Steroid Abuse". New York Times. Retrieved March 27, 2012.
  26. "NFL Players Association - Drug Policies". www.nflpa.com. Retrieved 2016-03-17.
  27. "Behind the Shield: NFL drug testing policy not as good as sold". The San Diego Union-Tribune. Retrieved 2016-03-17.
  28. "National Football League Policy Program on Substances of Abuse" (PDF). National Football League Players Association. National Football League Players Association. 2015. Retrieved 2016-03-10.
  29. Horn, Scott; Patricia Gregory; Kevin M. Guskiewicz (2009). "Self-Reported Anabolic-Androgenic Steroids Use and Musculoskeletal Injuries: Findings from the Center for the Study of Retired Athletes Health Survey of Retired NFL Players". American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. 88 (3): 192–200. doi:10.1097/phm.0b013e318198b622.
  30. Freeman, Mike. "Where's the Outrage Over Steroids in Football?". CBS News. Retrieved February 15, 2012.
  31. Leung, Rebecca. "Steroids Prescribed To NFL Players". CBS News. Retrieved February 15, 2012.
  32. Battista, Judy (21 February 2013). "Official Says Union Is Stalling on H.G.H." New York Times.
  33. Abbott, Henry (9 November 2012). "The Gaps in NBA Drug Testing". ESPN.
  34. Associated Press (13 February 2013). "Magic's Turkoglu Suspended for Use of Steroids". New York Times.
  35. "NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement". NBA.
  36. "NBA, NBPA to Add HGH Testing into Anti-drug Program." NBA.com. Accessed April 03, 2016. http://www.nba.com/2015/news/04/16/nba-and-nbpa-to-introduce-hgh-blood-testing/.
  37. "Highlights of the Collective Bargaining Agreement Between the National Basketball Association (NBA) and the National Basketball Players Association (NBPA)" (PDF). August 2010. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-06-12.
  38. "Collective Bargaining Agreement Between National Hockey League and National Hockey League Players' Association" (PDF). National Hockey League: 188–194. September 16, 2012.
  39. Sports.espn.go.com
  40. Belson, Ken (2009-11-04). "N.F.L. Seeks Congressional Help on Drug Policy". The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-05-27.
  41. "Title 21 United States Code (USC) Controlled Substances Act". US Department of Justice. Retrieved 2009-09-07.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.