Let's get some things straight. First, Sen. Mitchell did a fine job with his report. He identified the problem, meticulously worked through the investigation, assigned blame, named players, and proposed some solutions. And he did all of this with no subpoena power.

For all of you conspiracy theorists, forget about his ties to the Red Sox. He implicated former Red Sox players such as Eric Gagne and Mo Vaughn, and he indirectly added former Red Sox utility player Manny Alexander's name into the mix.

For all of you Bud Selig haters, and that includes me, let's get off the MLB Commissioner's back for a bit. It's not like he hasn't been pushing hard for stricter drug testing for the past few years. Does he share some blame in this whole mess? Yes, but Sen. Mitchell was refreshingly blunt in his criticism about who is to blame for the current steroid mess.

According to the MLB Player's Association's (MLBPA), the owners and management are partly to blame as they looked the other way for a while.

True, but the MLBPA's assertion that more stringent testing did not occur earlier because the owners didn't initially push for it is ludicrous. Look at the roadblocks that the MLBPA has put up for current testing. Does anyone think the MLBPA would have acted differently 15 years ago if the owners had wanted tougher testing?

For those who argue that Sen. Mitchell's report is incomplete, I agree but for different reasons. I watched Sen. Mitchell's press conference and parts of it were very good, but certain parts of it made no sense, because they seemed to have one goal: hide the Real Drug Issues.

Since this will be a bit lengthy, I'll break the issues into groups:

Real Drug Issue #1 = severe underestimate of MLB players who used illegal drugs.

Sen. Mitchell said that the percentage of MLB players who had tried or used steroids or HGH was about 5-7%, and that the vast majority of MLB players were clean. He then discussed how HGH couldn't be detected by urine samples.

Does anyone else see the big problem here? If you can't detect it, then how can you even guess how many players are clean or dirty?

I would bet a lot of money that if the American public were polled, at least 95% of rational Americans believe that the number of MLB players who have tried an anabolic steroid, HGH, or some other illegal drug is probably closer to 70% or higher.

If you're a struggling minor league player, aren't you going to do everything in your power to get that extra edge? This is why the idea of MLB players policing themselves is a joke.

Real Drug Issue #2 = the "Marion Jones Effect"

As many of you know, Marion Jones was a U.S. Olympian in track and field. For years she vehemently denied using performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs). It was easy to believe her because she's gorgeous, well-spoken, and she passed all of her drug tests. Trust me, the drug tests that track and field athletes take makes the MLB test look like a starter kit.

Also, elite track and field athletes can be tested anytime and anywhere, as opposed to MLB players who are always given some type of advanced notice of a test. You think I'm joking about how strict track & field is about testing? Here is an excerpt from the USATF, the governing body for U.S. Track & Field, regarding out-of-competition drug testing:

"...it is important for athletes to know that out-of-competition drug testing can occur any time and any place--at work, home, the track, the gym, in class, etc."

The point is that if Marion Jones can consistently beat such a tough detection system, then so can MLB players. That is the "Marion Jones Effect".

Therefore, the fact that Roger Clemens never had a positive urine test does not prove his innocence. In short, a positive urine test means that someone is definitely doing steroids (assuming a very very low false-positive ratio). A negative urine test only means that the sample wasn't definitively positive. Think "Marion Jones".

Real Drug Issue #3 = wimping out on addressing banned substances

The Mitchell Report talks about the use of testing that "maximizes detection". But what it really is saying is that measures should be used to maximize the detection of currently banned substances. Although this is a step in the right direction, it misses the major point that the current list of substances banned by MLB is woefully inadequate.

Let's look closely at what the list of banned substances really is. MLB has divided the list into two categories: a) Drugs of Abuse, and b) Steroids.

"Drugs of Abuse" are:

Cocaine, LSD, Marijuana, Opiates (e.g., heroin, codeine, morphine), MDMA ("Ecstasy"), GHB, Phencyclidine ("PCP"), Ephedra

 

"Steroids" are:

Androstanediol, Androstanedione, Androstenediol, Androstenedione, Bolasterone, Boldenone, Calusterone, Clostebol, Dehydrochloromethyltestosterone, Desoxy-methyltestosterone, ?1-dihydrotestosterone, 4-dihydrotestosterone, Drostanolone, Ethylestrenol, Fluoxymesterone, Formebolone, Furazabol, 13a-ethyl-17a-hydroxygon-4-en-3-one, 4-hydroxytestosterone, 4-hydroxy-19-nortestosterone, Mestanolone, Mesterolone, Methandienone, Methandriol, Methenolone, Methyltestosterone, Mibolerone, 17a-methyl-?1-dihydrotestosterone, Nandrolone, Norandrostenediol, Norandrostenedione, Norbolethone, Norclostebol, Norethandrolone, Oxandrolone, Oxymesterone, Oxymetholone, Stanozolol, Stenbolone, Testolactone, Testosterone, Tetrahydrogestrinone, Trenbolone

Any salt, ester or ether of a drug or substance listed above

Human Growth Hormone

That list looks long, but it's actually quite small.

Now let's look at the list of banned substances established by WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency), the governing body for illegal drug testing,

S1. Anabolic Agents

 Anabolic agents are prohibited.

1. Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS)

a. Exogenous * AAS, including:

18 -homo-17 -hydroxyestr-4-en-3-one; bolasterone; boldenone; boldione; calusterone; clostebol; danazol; dehydrochloromethyl- testosterone; delta1-androstene-3,17-dione; delta1-androstenediol; delta1-dihydro-testosterone; drostanolone; ethylestrenol; fluoxymesterone; formebolone; furazabol; gestrinone; 4-hydroxytestosterone; 4-hydroxy-19-nortestosterone; mestanolone; mesterolone; metenolone; methandienone; methandriol; methyldienolone; methyltrienolone; methyltestosterone; mibolerone; nandrolone; 19-norandrostenediol; 19-norandrostenedione; norbolethone; norclostebol; norethandrolone; oxabolone; oxandrolone; oxymesterone; oxymetholone; quinbolone; stanozolol; stenbolone; tetrahydrogestrinone; trenbolone and other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological effect(s).

 

b. Endogenous ** AAS:

androstenediol (androst-5-ene-3 ,17 -diol); androstenedione (androst-4- ene-3,17-dione); dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA); dihydrotestosterone; testosterone.

 

and the following metabolites and isomers:

5 -androstane-3 ,17 -diol; 5 -androstane-3 ,17 -diol; 5 -androstane- 3 ,17 -diol;, 5 -androstane-3 ,17 -diol; androst-4-ene-3 ,17 -diol; androst-4-ene-3 ,17 -diol; androst-4-ene-3 ,17 -diol; androst-5-ene- 3 ,17 -diol; androst-5-ene-3 ,17 -diol; androst-5-ene-3 ,17 -diol; 4-androstenediol (androst-4-ene-3 ,17 -diol); 5-androstenedione (androst-5-ene-3,17-dione); epi-dihydrotestosterone; 3 -hydroxy-5 - androstan-17-one; 3 -hydroxy-5 -androstan-17-one; 19-norandrosterone; 19-noretiocholanolone.

2. Other Anabolic Agents, including but not limited to:

    Clenbuterol, zeranol, zilpaterol.

S2. Hormones And Related Substances

1. Erythropoietin (EPO);
2. Growth Hormone (hGH), Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF-1), Mechano Growth Factors (MGFs);
3. Gonadotrophins (LH, hCG);
4. Insulin;
5. Corticotrophins.

S3. Beta-2 Agonists

All beta-2 agonists including their D- and L-isomers are prohibited. Their use requires a Therapeutic Use Exemption.

S4. Agents With Anti-Estrogenic Activity  

1. Aromatase inhibitors including, but not limited to, anastrozole, letrozole, aminogluthetimide, exemestane, formestane, testolactone.
2. Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators (SERMs) including, but not limited to, raloxifene, tamoxifen, toremifene.
3. Other anti-estrogenic substances including, but not limited to, clomiphene, cyclofenil, fulvestrant.

S5. Diuretics And Other Masking Agents

Diuretics and other masking agents are prohibited.

 

Masking agents include but are not limited to:

Diuretics * , epitestosterone, probenecid, alpha-reductase inhibitors (e.g. finasteride, dutasteride), plasma expanders (e.g. albumin, dextran, hydroxyethyl starch).

 

Diuretics include:

acetazolamide, amiloride, bumetanide, canrenone, chlortalidone, etacrynic acid, furosemide, indapamide, metolazone, spironolactone, thiazides (e.g. bendroflumethiazide, chlorothiazide, hydrochlorothiazide), triamterene, and other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological effect(s).  

 

Prohibited Methods

 

M1. Enhancement Of Oxygen Transfer

 

The following are prohibited:  

a. Blood doping, including the use of autologous, homologous or heterologous blood or red blood cell products of any origin, other than for medical treatment. 

 

b. Artificially enhancing the uptake, transport or delivery of oxygen, including but not limited to perfluorochemicals, efaproxiral (RSR13) and modified haemoglobin products (e.g. haemoglobin-based blood substitutes, microencapsulated haemoglobin products).

Prohibited Substances

S6. Stimulants  

The following stimulants are prohibited, including both their optical (D- and L-) isomers where relevant:

Adrafinil, amfepramone, amiphenazole, amphetamine, amphetaminil, benzphetamine, bromantan, carphedon, cathine * , clobenzorex, cocaine, dimethylamphetamine, ephedrine ** , etilamphetamine, etilefrine, famprofazone, fencamfamin, fencamine, fenetylline, fenfluramine, fenproporex, furfenorex, mefenorex, mephentermine, mesocarb, methamphetamine, methylamphetamine, methylenedioxyamphetamine, methylenedioxymethamphetamine, methylephedrine ** , methylphenidate, modafinil, nikethamide, norfenfluramine, parahydroxyamphetamine, pemoline, phendimetrazine, phenmetrazine, phentermine, prolintane, selegiline, strychnine, and other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological effect(s) *** .

S7. Narcotics  

buprenorphine, dextromoramide, diamorphine (heroin), fentanyl and its derivatives, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, pentazocine, pethidine. 

 

S8. Cannabinoids

Cannabinoids (e.g. hashish, marijuana) are prohibited.

S9. Glucocortocosteriods  

All glucocorticosteroids are prohibited when administered orally, rectally, intravenously or intramuscularly. Their use requires a Therapeutic Use Exemption approval.

 

Specified Substances* 

 

Ephedrine, L-methylamphetamine, methylephedrine;
Cannabinoids;
All inhaled Beta-2 Agonists, except clenbuterol;
Probenecid;
All Glucocorticosteroids;
All Beta Blockers;
Alcohol.

 

See a difference?

Some of you may think that WADA seems like a foreign organization, so you may be a little suspicious of it. Okay, let's bring it closer to home. Here is a list of substances banned by the NCAA:

 (a) Stimulants:
amiphenazole, amphetamine, bemigride, benzphetamine, bromantan caffeine1 (guarana), chlorphentermine, cocaine , cropropamide, crothetamide, diethylpropion, dimethylamphetamine, doxapram, ephedrine (ephedra, ma huang), ethamivan, ethylamphetamine, fencamfamine, meclofenoxate, methamphetamine, methylene-dioxymethamphetamine
[MDMA (ecstasy)], methylphenidate, nikethamide, pemoline, pentetrazol, phendimetrazine, phenmetrazine, phentermine, phenylephrine, phenylpropanolamine (ppa), picrotoxine, pipradol, prolintane, strychnine, synephrine (citrus aurantium, zhi shi, bitter orange) and related compounds  

(b) Anabolic Agents:
anabolic steroids, androstenediol, androstenedione, boldenone, clostebol, dehydrochlormethyl-testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), dihydrotestosterone (DHT), dromostanolone, fluoxymesterone, gestrinone, mesterolone, methandienone, methenolone, methyltestosterone, nandrolone, norandrostenediol, norandrostenedione, norethandrolone, oxandrolone, oxymesterone, oxymetholone, stanozolol, testosterone2, tetrahydrogestrinone (THG), trenbolone, and related compounds
other anabolic agents
clenbuterol

(c) Diuretics:
acetazolamide, bendroflumethiazide, benzthiazide, bumetanide, chlorothiazide, chlorthalidone, ethacrynic acid, flumethiazide, furosemide, hydrochlorothiazide, hydroflumethiazide, methyclothiazide, metolazone, polythiazide, quinethazone, spironolactone, triamterene, trichlormethiazide, and related compounds

(d) Street Drugs:
heroin THC, marijuana3 (tetrahydrocannabinol)3

(e) Peptide Hormones and Analogues
chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG human chorionic gonadotrophin), corticotrophin (ACTH), growth hormone (HGH, somatotrophin)

(f) others: erythropoietin (EPO), sermorelin

When you compare the list of banned substances by MLB, WADA and the NCAA, there are a few things which are notable 

1.  the MLB list lags far behind the WADA and NCAA list. If the real goal of MLB is to clean up its house, then how can it have such dramatically lower standards than WADA and the NCAA? For the NCAA to have such stricter drug policies than MLB is reminiscent of the fact that for years minor league baseball had a much stiffer drug policy than MLB.

2.  the MLB list only bans known steroids or agents which are almost completely identical to known banned steroids. It does not make a general statement that bans ALL anabolic steroids. Therefore, MLB players can use "designer steroids" which can be manufactured to avoid being classified with one of the known steroids.

This is exactly what happened with BALCO and its Tetrahydrogenstrinone (aka THG or The Clear). THG was not detectable previously because it was a designer drug created to avoid detection. Although THG is related to the banned anabolic steroids trenbolone and gestrinone, it had enough differences that made it undetectable to standard tests for these two illegal drugs.

Unless MLB includes a blanket statement that "all anabolic steroids are forbidden", it's only a matter of time before we have our next BALCO-type scandal

3.  the MLB list demonstrates ignorance. Growth Hormone is a peptide. It's not a steroid.

4.  the MLB list demonstrates how it's leaving the door open for continued abuse. To ban Growth Hormone but not IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor-1), its analogues or Growth Hormone Releasing Factor is ridiculous.

This requires a bit of explanation.

Growth Hormone itself can cause changes, but in the liver it causes the production and secretion of another important anabolic growth factor called IGF-1. IGF-1 is banned by WADA because various labs have clearly demonstrated that both unaltered IGF-1 and slightly modified IGF-1 can result in significant muscle mass gains.

The goal of using injectable (exogenous) Growth Hormone is to increase the amount of Growth Hormone in a person's bloodstream. To get the same result of increased Growth Hormone in your blood without actually adding/injecting it into your body, one could use Growth Hormone Releasing Factors (GHRFs). These drugs stimulate cells in a person's anterior pituitary to make and release more Growth Hormone. The end result of using these GHRFs is the same as using injected HGH.

5.  the MLB list does not account for steroid masking agents. These drugs are used by steroid users to evade detection during urine tests.

Real Drug Issue #4: the Mitchell Report does not discuss blood testing.

One of the real problems with the MLB drug testing policy is that it does not allow for blood testing. In a normal individual without a lot of resources, banned substances can be readily detected in the urine. However, in a person with money (e.g. an MLB player), there are all sorts of ways to make the urine look "clean" of steroids.

The simplest way is to carry a packet of "clean" urine into the bathroom during a drug test and dump it into the urine collection jar.

More complex ways involve the use of masking agents such as Propecia.

If MLB really wants to show that they're serious about cleaning up the sport, then blood tests should also be done. MLB players and the MLBPA may argue that it's dangerous, but if track and field athletes can do it, then so can MLB players.

Real Drug Issue #5: the Mitchell Report does not address the MLB's ridiculous difference in policy between "Drugs of Abuse" and "Steroids".

This is an issue that I have yet to see discussed anywhere.

Under the current drug/steroid testing policy which expires in 2008, "Drugs of Abuse" and "Steroids" are considered completely different entities for drug testing. A player can be randomly tested for steroids at any time (both in-season and out-of-season). However, a player cannot be randomly tested for "drugs of abuse"

Huh? Don't believe me?

According to "Major League Baseball's Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program" rules, "Except as set forth in Section 3.C, Players shall not be subject to testing for the use of any Drug of Abuse."

In case you're wondering, Section 3.C states that a player cannot be tested for a "drug of abuse" unless there is reasonable cause (non-random) presented to the oversight committee and that committee votes by a majority to test the player.

If you wonder why more MLB players aren't caught using illegal drugs like cocaine, PCP and ecstasy, it's because the vast majority of them never get tested for it during their careers.

All of this brings me to a final ominous conclusion: NO ONE REALLY WANTS TO CATCH ANYONE.

What could possibly be an impetus for cleaning up the game? Attendance is at an all-time high. TV contracts are through the roof. And the Yankees are still spending money like it grows on trees and contributing mightily to the luxury tax.

So, let's look at the participants in this charade of "getting tough on drugs":

1) MLB and the Commissioner's Office

If they were serious, they would use the same testing procedures as the USATF. If they are worried about the MLBPA, then at least they should release to the public a list of what they are pushing for in a strong new drug testing policy. If the MLBPA doesn't like it, then they will have to face the public and explain the reasons for their opposition.

The fact that this hasn't been done yet is either because it's all talk and no action, or the owners and Commissioner Selig are afraid of angering the MLBPA and inciting a strike.

2) MLBPA

Their perceived job is to protect ALL of their players. The last thing they really want is a tougher drug policy. Why? A tougher drug policy means that the MLBPA would be put in the negative situation of having to spend more of its time and resources defending cheaters.

3) MLB Players

This is the part that is the toughest to acknowledge. To date, only a couple of currently active players have publicly spoken out against steroids and HGH. If Sen. Mitchell's estimates of 5-7% of ballplayers using illegal substances is correct, and if the number one thing that really angers clean players is that the cheaters are gaining an unfair advantage, then it makes complete sense that a lot of players should be coming out and publicly blasting the cheaters.

This hasn't happened.

Why?

There are three possible answers:  

1)      no "clean" player wants to look like a goody-two-shoes

2)      player apathy

3)      the number of dirty players is much much higher than Sen. Mitchell's estimate

 

If Sen. Mitchell is correct that "clean" players are really angry about the cheaters, we can put #1 and #2 aside.

So, where is the yelling? The silence is a bit overwhelming.

Why might the number of dirty players be incredibly high?

Baseball is not like basketball or football. For most pro baseball players, it takes years of playing in the minors to get a chance in the majors. An early injury, perceived lack of strength/power, and whispers about a person not having enough "pop" in their bat can destroy a once-promising career.

The money waiting for baseball players in the majors has gotten ridiculous. It's probably the most ridiculous salaries of any major pro sport. For example, Yankees Alex Rodriguez, a guy who has done nothing in the postseason and never won a World Series Championship, will be paid $30 million a year to play baseball, while Tom Brady of the New England Patriots who has won 3 Super Bowl Championships and is on his way to a fourth will be paid $6 million a year to play football.

Many people (not athletes) have said that they would use illegal PEDs in a heartbeat if offered that kind of money to play baseball. It's understandable and also a telling statement.

If we as individuals without the necessary talent set to even get to the minor leagues would be willing to break the law and use such drugs, then how much greater must the temptation be for players who have the talent, but just need a small boost to get into the majors?

Then once a player gets to the majors and tastes the lifestyle, the thought of being sent back down to the minors or having to leave the game due to injury can be devastating.

In such a context, it's easy to understand why a lot of players probably used or at least tried anabolic steroids and HGH.

And it's also easy to understand why there has not been a bigger outcry about the steroids scandal from current MLB players: there are very very few players who have never tried steroids or HGH.

My guess is that as Sen. Mitchell and his team dug deeper, they realized that illegal drug use was far more rampant than anyone could have ever guessed. But he decided to do what was "in the best interest of baseball" and provide only the names of players that he was sure had cheated. Had we been provided a list of players under investigation...

Also, for those who think that Radomski and McNamee lied about which players they had assisted in using steroids and HGH, guess again. If you read the Mitchell Report carefully, you'll see that their immunity is valid only if their testimony is truthful. As much pressure as they were under to give up names, they were also under greater pressure not to lie.

Some say that the Mitchell Report is a good start to solving the problem. I disagree. Without proposing things like following the WADA guidelines for illegal substances, allowing random blood and urine tests, and figuring out a way to convince the MLBPA that it's in their best interest to push for much stricter test parameters, the currently proposed changes - if instituted - will catch a few more players, but nothing substantial is going to change.

People will try to deflect everyone's focus by concentrating on things like stiffer sentences handed out to players caught because of the system that's currently in place. But this is a smokescreen.

If the ultimate goal is to clean up the game, then stricter sentences for an inadequate system that only catches less than 1% of the total number of cheaters is just a drop in the bucket. The focus now should not be on punishment but rather on detection.

Until we have a better and more comprehensive detection system in place for MLB, we're just avoiding the Real Drug Issues.