Steroid testing not an option in Georgia, By: Todd Holcomb

Legality, cost cited as determining factors

06/12/07 

Bills that would make steroid testing mandatory for high school athletes in Texas and Florida are waiting this week for their governors' signatures to make them law.

But don't expect Georgia to follow the trend and begin steroid testing soon, said Ralph Swearngin, executive director of the Georgia High School Association.

"It looks good to politicians and the general public when they read that Texas and other states have stepped up," Swearngin said. "It gives you a warm feeling, but I'm not sure everybody's thought through the ramifications. I'm not sure testing is the best solution."

Swearngin is concerned about issues of privacy, potential litigation, the cost and management of a statewide program and the fairness of singling out athletes and not other members of the student body.

Although high school associations in Texas and Florida will run the testing programs, elected officials in those states championed the bills.

In Georgia, Rep. Chuck Martin (R-Alpharetta) says steroid abuse in high schools warrants debate, but he stops short of supporting legislation.

Martin is a community football coach at Milton High School and chairman of the high school athletics

overview committee that meets periodically with Swearngin to discuss issues in high school sports.

"Money expended to keep Georgia students safe is a good use of state resources, but I don't know what the return would be," Martin said. "If we want to be proactive and stop it, it's probably going to be a combination of study and education, and perhaps after a thorough discussion, maybe there will be a place for some sort of testing."

The most controversial issues would be who pays and how much, and whether steroid use is prevalent enough among high school students to justify taxpayer money.

Texas legislators are setting aside $3 million, with the goal of screening at least 22,000 of the state's 733,000 athletes in the coming academic year.

Florida is testing athletes in football, wrestling and baseball in a one-year pilot program, so only $100,000 has been earmarked to reach perhaps 600 student-athletes.

In New Jersey, which implemented the nation's first statewide testing program in 2006, the rationale for testing was bolstered by a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that indicated the number of high school students who had tried steroids had almost doubled from 1991 to 2003 — to 6.1 percent from 3.1 percent.

But in New Jersey's first year of testing, none of more than 500 athletes tested positive. Only players on playoff teams were randomly screened.

In Georgia, no school system tests for steroids, but a few, including Hall County, test for recreational drugs such as marijuana, cocaine and methamphetamines.

Of the 168 chosen randomly for testing in the fall of 2004, eight tested positive. They were suspended for at least one game and made to seek counseling, according to Gordon Higgins, Hall County's director of athletics and community relations.

In March, nearly three years later, Hall County conducted its ninth round of testing. All came back negative. Higgins said the results showed the program is working.

"We feel it's been a deterrent," Higgins said. "We're trying to help student-athletes make better choices. From what we've heard from focus groups [with students], it has been effective. Maybe students are realizing they'll lose the right to play in some games."

One test costs $25 per student, or about $2,500 per school, Higgins said. Testing for steroids would be eight times that much, he said.

"Steroids ... it's just too expensive," Higgins said. "When you're talking 300 athletes per school times $200 [per steroid test], that would take up the entire budget for athletics."

Several metro area football coaches interviewed by the Journal-Constitution said they do not believe steroid use is prevalent. But many would support testing, if it's practical.

"I'm all for it," Marist football coach Alan Chadwick said. "The expense of it is probably the reason we haven't gone that route, but it's a way to level the playing field and to avoid any potential catastrophes."

But Brookwood football coach Mark Crews doesn't think testing is necessary if coaches are conscientious.

"You can see anomalies when all of a sudden [the athlete] benches 50 more pounds than three months ago," Crews said. "It's easy to pick out those who look suspicious and address those issues individually."

East Hall football coach Tim Marchman has supported testing in his county, but it's an investment that must be weighed against the benefits.

"I think parents really want to have players tested, but not at their expense, and coaches say they want it, but not at their expense," he said. "So to me, that's the only problem with it. But those kids using any kind of drugs ought to be caught and punished."