Sporting purists had always believed that in its truest form, sporting contests were matches of individuals' natural and trained abilities. However, there have been attempts to augment performance capabilities with a variety of esoteric, but quite often useless, forms of training. Of a more insidious nature, was the introduction of chemical enhancement procedures which artificially changed naturally endowed and developed capacities.
For some time chemical enhancement remained with professional athletes, the most conspicuous being cyclists and body-builders. However, as success in amateur sport started to yield fame and fortune, individuals looked to pharmacists for an unethical advantage. As the ease of gaining an advantage through supplementary enhancement came to be realized, more athletes indulged in this "unsporting" behavior. National and international associations realized the unfairness of this practice and legislated sanctions against persons who were found to be using any of a number of "banned" drugs.
One particularly disturbing feature of the sporting drug culture, was national endorsement and control of the practice. From the early 1970s to the late 1980s, a large number of East German athletes competed with this advantage, despite continual public denials from national representatives. With careful medical supervision, East German athletes, and in particular the women, were almost always able to evade positive testing for banned drugs. That story has been clearly explained in the STASI files made public since the amalgamation of the two Germanies.
Since the late 1980s, China has adopted a similar national route seeking sporting success despite "official" denials. The overwhelming majority of international athletes testing positive for banned drugs have been Chinese women. The sport of swimming has taken the limelight as the most "polluted" sport, principally because of the high number of Chinese women swimmers who have tested positive for banned drugs over the past three years. It is now generally conceded that the Chinese provinces, driven by interstate rivalry, run programs employing chemical enhancement on probably unsuspecting athletes.
A strong movement in the swimming world has arisen to work against drug-taking in the sport and has used China as the example of yet another state-run system that is unfairly tipping the balance of competition. The cry to have China banned from competing in the 1996 Olympic Games' swimming events is loud, clear, and justified. Athletes from several nations, but in particular China, are serving two-year suspensions for positive drug testing as mandated by FINA, the international governing body for the sport of swimming.
The loudest voices for control of the "drug problem" in swimming have come from Australia and the USA.
Very recently it was announced that a US national squad member, Jessica Foschi, had tested positive for the banned steroid, mesterolone (PROVIRON) at the US Summer National Championships. A three-person jury recommended that Jessica be placed on probation for two-years, rather than banned as mandated internationally. The outcry from the governing body of US Swimming, world-wide coaching groups, and the swimming world in general, was for the probation to be changed to two years of banishment.
Jessica Foschi's supporters have been equally vocal in her support. The claim of innocence, which is heard from most athletes who test positive for a banned substance, was loudly and aggressively expressed. A claim is that the only way that Jessica could have taken the drug was through an act of sabotage, something which is almost impossible to prove. It has been interpreted by supporters that Jessica was too harshly judged in receiving probation and legal action is impending. The US judicial system will decide if Jessica should participate in sport, not her peers nor her sport's governing bodies. This single act has killed the concept of sportsmanship and moved sport into the realm of the general limitations of civil/criminal law. Since nations differ in their national laws it is likely that different treatments of judicial questions would result from legal interventions depending upon the country.
A confidential legal interpretation of the Jessica Foschi situation, proffered by one of the USA's most respected judicial authorities, has opined that "it is quite possible a court will set aside the probation sanction in the absence of proof of willfulness." If Jessica's supporters take legal action against US Swimming, it is highly likely that she will win and US Swimming will have to let her compete. That sets an alarmingly dangerous precedent. To ban an athlete for the unsporting act of demonstrating chemical performance enhancement, a national governing body will have to prove that an athlete willingly and knowingly used the drug that was detected. This is a burden that will prove to be too much to bear for largely volunteer, underfunded, diversely responsible national associations. The application of sanctions for positive testing drug takers in US sports will be well nigh impossible. The defense that "someone spiked my food" will be the blue print to continue competing despite one or more repeated offenses.
Currently-banned athletes, and future positive-testing athletes will rush to the US courts with this defense and will gain the court's backing to force their participation on the sport governing bodies. In time, US sport governing bodies will tire of the legality and will cease testing and sanctioning. That will give US athletes an advantage over most other nations. In turn, they are likely to stop testing and judging their own athletes because they will be unfairly penalized given the US standard.
Eventually, all international sport governing bodies will stop testing for banned substances because it is a useless practice in the USA. This will be the legacy of Jessica Foschi's supporters' action.
One can speculate on this scenario in many directions. The previously banned Chinese women will re-enter the competitive arena. Athletes, coaches, and organizations will experiment with higher dosages, newer drugs, and different training programs, probably to the detriment of the health and lives of athletes, and in particular, women.
It is realized that today, 15 November, 1995, that the signal for sport to turn the wrong way has occurred. The US judicial system is not structured for sporting arenas or interests but to protect Jessica Foschi's "rights," it has to be involved. Sadly, that will also signal a new form of insidious behavior in sports, lying about the reason for testing positive for banned substances, and "pushing the envelope" for gaining new effects and enhancement. There undoubtedly will be tragedies that will occur as innocent youngsters are unknowingly used for experimental purposes.
This is a sad day for sport. It would have been nice though, if Jessica Foschi and her supporters had considered participation in swimming as a privilege. On the other hand, some can rest easier in knowing that Jessica Foschi's rights have been protected.
November 15, 1995
PostScript. As evidence for this hypothesized trend, on this day the following was reported in the early-morning edition of the San Diego Union-Tribune (15, November, p.D-3):
"One of Canada's top wheelchair athletes has been caught using steroids and banned from competition for four years. An out-of-competition doping sample from Allan Chartrand, a quadriplegic from Edmonton, Alberta, was found to contain stanozolol and metabolites, both banned substances . . ."
Return to Opinion Page Contents.