NCAA Testing for New Target

There’s not much notice given--and that’s the point. College athletic directors are told 24 to 48 hours in advance that the NCAA will be on campus administering drug screenings. Teams must assemble with a formal roster in hand, used to randomly pick the men and women to be tested.

The procedure has been in place since 1990, started at a time when the NCAA and member schools primarily were trying to ferret out use of illegal street drugs--marijuana, cocaine--or steroids. Combating those drugs remains a concern, but today the war has shifted to another front: nutritional supplements that contain banned substances such as ephedrine, a stimulant with potentially dangerous side effects.

“Our biggest problem is supplements,” said Dr. Gary Green of UCLA, chairman of the NCAA drug testing and drug education subcommittee. “If I could make a wish today, I would make them all go away because they make our job extremely hard.”

The NCAA conducts between 10,000 and 12,000 drug tests a year on athletes, Green said, making it the largest testing program of its kind in the United States.

Supplements containing ephedrine allegedly were used by two college football players who died recently--Rashidi Wheeler of Northwestern and Devaughn Darling of Florida State.

Northwestern declined to comment on its in-house procedures for drug-testing athletes. School spokesman Chuck Loebbaka says the university will “not be talking in detail about anything” during the investigation into the death of Wheeler, 22, of Ontario. Wheeler, who suffered from asthma, died Aug. 3 after collapsing while running a rigorous conditioning drill at Northwestern.

But his death has raised questions about the effectiveness of drug testing conducted by the NCAA and individual schools.

Green said “about two-thirds” of positive drug tests conducted by the NCAA in the last few years are a direct result of supplement use. A positive test carries an automatic one-year suspension, subject to appeal. After a year, an athlete can apply to have his or her eligibility reinstated.

Of 4,599 athletes tested by the NCAA from July to December in 1999, 46 (1%) tested positive for a banned substance, according to the latest published figures provided by the National Center for Drug Free Sport in Kansas City, Mo., an independent company contracted to collect urine samples for the NCAA.

Of those who tested positive, 35 (76.1%) were detected to have consumed a substance that could have come from a nutritional supplement, said Frank Uryasz, president of the NCDFS.

Supplements containing ephedrine have been a particular problem since the drug was added to the NCAA’s list of banned substances in 1997.

“A lot of [athletes] are not [competing] this year because of ephedrine use,” Green said. “We’ve probably had a dozen ephedrine positives in the last year.”

Green said supplement use increased among college athletes after Mark McGwire revealed in 1998--the year he hit a major league-record 70 home runs--that he boosted his power by taking creatine, a legal supplement, and androstenedione, a “steroid precursor” on the NCAA’s list of banned substances.

NCAA Division I schools addressed this issue last summer by prohibiting the distribution of many supplements.

Officials said they wanted to send a message that because supplements are not regulated and have not been subjected to comprehensive laboratory testing, they should not be distributed to student-athletes.

The NCAA has issued warnings about the use of nutritional supplements that may contain banned substances such as ephedrine and nandrolone. Student-athletes are advised to check with a team physician or athletic trainer before taking any supplement.

Random testing in any sport can occur at an NCAA championship/playoff or football bowl game. Tournament directors and drug-testing site coordinators are notified of the testing plan no earlier than seven days before testing, which is usually conducted after the event.

The year-round, on-campus testing program is limited to Division I and II football and Division I men’s and women’s track and field. Athletic directors are notified no earlier than two days before testing.

In those sports, where drug use is suspected to be more prevalent, testing occurs at every school at least once a year, sometimes more. Athletes in any sport who have tested positive for a banned substance also are subject to year-round testing.

After urine samples are collected, they are sent to the UCLA Olympic Analytical Laboratory in Westwood, where they are screened for these banned drug classes: stimulants, anabolic agents, diuretics, street drugs, peptide hormones and urine manipulators.

The NCAA does not require individual schools to have drug-testing programs, but Green said nearly all Division I schools have some form of institutional testing. About half of the Division II schools test their athletes, Green said, and there is no institutional drug testing at the Division III level.

“Each [school] has its own needs and problems,” Green said. “The only thing we require is, if a school does have [drug testing], it has to follow its own policy. If you violate your policy, then that is an NCAA violation, if it gets reported.”

But that’s a big if, considering schools do not have to report positive tests to the NCAA. Green said schools can test for whatever substances they choose.

“We don’t police them,” he said.

Mary Wilfert, NCAA program coordinator for health and safety, said the NCAA will provide guidance for schools establishing a drug-testing program.

At USC, athletes are subject to random testing even if their sport is not in season. University officials declined to say when or how often they test, except to say it is random. That means they cannot test during preseason physicals.

“You can’t include it,” said Daryl Gross, USC associate athletic director. “There are legal ramifications of getting outside of random testing.”

The university’s random drug tests rely on urine screening to check for anything on the NCAA’s banned substance list.

“To do it, you’ve got to spend some money,” Gross said.

USC can afford the costly testing in part because the school of pharmacy collects and handles the samples. Samples are sent to the UCLA Olympic Analytical Laboratory.

Uryasz of the NCDFS said it costs between $200 and $250 per athlete to test urine samples. That includes collection, administrative costs and laboratory costs.

USC responds to positive results on a case-by-case basis.

“We talk with the coach and the team physician and the drug-testing coordinator to come up with an appropriate response,” Gross said. “Counseling is a must. It’s an educational approach, but you still have the threat of being suspended.”

In general, first-time offenders are given counseling. With the second offense, the athlete is often sent to counseling and suspended. With the third offense, “It’s almost three strikes and you’re out,” Gross said.

In-house results are not reported to the NCAA.

Drug testing at UCLA can be triggered three ways.

A computer program randomly selects 10% of the approximately 650 student-athletes for testing once a month from August to May. The medical staff can request that an athlete be tested if drug use is suspected, and an athlete who has tested positive is subject to testing at any time.

A fourth positive test in an athlete’s career will result in permanent dismissal from the team and the athlete’s financial aid will not be renewed. Associate Athletic Director Betsy Stephenson said no UCLA athlete has tested positive four times.

Previously, an athlete was dismissed after three positive tests in a single year.

“We made it more of a deterrent,” she said.

An athlete must undergo counseling after the first and second positive tests and the head coach is notified. A third positive test results in immediate suspension from the athlete’s next game and three more counseling sessions.

Stephenson, citing confidentiality issues, would not disclose how many Bruin athletes have tested positive or whether there are greater problems in certain sports.

An athlete who voluntarily discloses a drug problem to a team physician is not considered to have tested positive and coaches are not notified.

“Our team physicians were probably teaching faculty and feel strongly about the program being education-based,” Stephenson said.

Reports of local college athletes testing positive for drugs have been scarce.

Jelani McCoy quit UCLA’s basketball team only weeks before the NCAA tournament in 1998 because, according to sources, he had failed school-imposed drug tests multiple times and was on the verge of removal from the team.

In 1994, Frankie Hejduk of UCLA’s soccer team drew a one-year suspension after he tested positive for marijuana during a random NCAA drug test, sources said.

In 1986, USC’s football team lost a starter before a bowl game for the second consecutive year when offensive guard Jeff Bregel failed an NCAA drug test. He admitted he had used a steroid while undergoing rehabilitation after knee surgery. The previous year, Trojan receiver Hank Norman failed a drug test before a bowl game.

Some athletes have found ways to get around testing.

A rumor has circulated for years that a football player in the Pac-10 Conference, faced with a follow-up test after a positive screening for marijuana, smuggled his girlfriend’s urine into the test. Only one problem: she was pregnant.

In 1990, USC quarterback Todd Marinovich was the subject of drug rumors and was tested often by the school. However, he avoided sanctions by admittedly sneaking in someone else’s urine when he was tested.

Marinovich, 32, is currently in a drug treatment program under Proposition 36 for his conviction on felony heroin possession.

Staff writers Steve Henson, David Wharton and Alan Abrahamson contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Report Cites Wrong Figures

Because of an error in the NCAA News, the percentage of student-athletes reported using nutritional supplements was incorrect in Tuesday’s editions of The Times.

Forty-two percent of student-athletes responding to an NCAA survey said they had used a supplement other than a multivitamin in the previous year.

Although that level of use remains a concern to the NCAA, it does not indicate a majority behavior, as the original report in the NCAA News indicated.