OCR Text |
Show Sun Advocate opmnoo Tuesday, December 13, 1SB8 Steroid risks It took the shocking disqualification of Ben Johnson, the Canadian track star, at the Summer Olympics in Seoul to jar many Americans into realizing that anabolic steroids are a major component of the drug problem. Predictably, the Olympics scandal has led to calls for more unannounced drug testing in order to steroids combat use of performance-enhancin- g be This Ben Johnson. like athletes among may easier said than done. No one really knows how many Americans use illegal anabolic steroids, a class of synthetic drugs that mimic the effect of the male hormone, testosterone. Estimates run as high as 1 million athletes, and perhaps as many others who are not involved in sports. The Miami Herald recently officers use reported that many steroids to make themselves look imposing. Steroids were first developed during the 1930s to help treat chronically ill individuals with debilitating diseases. Today, their medical use is limited to a handful of treatments because the known side effects are so dangerous: Shrunken testicles, sterility and breast development in men and baldness, deepening of the voice and menstrual irregularities in women. Liver tumors, birth defects and psychotic episodes also are suspected as being caused by steroids. Despite such risks, athletes still reach for steroids because they believe the drugs anabolic, or build-u- p physique or qualities, will give them a to in comexcel muscle added provide strength petition. The drugs are easily obtainable on the black market and sold over the counter in Mexican pharmacies. None of the types of steroids popular with athletes is available without a prescription in the United States. In California, steroids are classified as a controlled substance. Every amateur athletic organization bans their use and professional sports leagues are following suit. This is not only because of the potential health dangers of steroids. Athletes who use such drugs have an unfair competitive advantage over those who dont. In an effort to discourage steroids, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) had instituted random drug tests at championships and major games. The International Amateur Athletic Federation (IAAF) conducts random tests at major d events. In the wake of the amateur Ben Johnson scandal, the IAAF is being urged to expand its testing. Random testing is not without problems, including cost. Each urinalysis costs approximately $100. Even on a random basis, that adds up. Such spot checks also are not always effective. Mr. Johnson, for example, qualified for the Olympics, g program in which despite a Canadian athletes were selected to be tested by lottery. He was not picked. Legal challenges by civil libertarians pose yet another hurdle. Last August, Stanford University convinced a California Superior Court judge to exempt its 600 athletes from signing consent forms in which they agree to participate in the NCAAs drugbody-builde- rs track-and-fiel- drug-testin- testing program. Stanfords athletes arent alone in resisting random use is nations, where sports-steroi- d testing. East-blo-c believed to have originated in the early 1950s, reportedly oppose any move for tougher policies, according to The Athletics Congress, the American arm of the IAAF. That makes it doubtful that the congress will adopt tougher policies at its annual conference this month in Phoenix. Still, proponents of expanded random-testin- g should persevere. We can only expect steroid abuse to decline when users realize that the risks outweigh the benefits. Americans must be educated about the dangers of steroids. And all levels of sports should make it clear that athletes caught using steroids will not be allowed to compete. Welcome to the lion's den crowd lost no time in piling George Bushs selection of New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu as his White House chief of staff. The major knocks on him seem to be that he lacks Washington experience, has a confrontational style (in contrast to the collegiality congressional Democrats have been promising since the election, no doubt) and that his aggressiveness might bruise tender capital egos. We would like simply to point out that in 1982 Mr. Sununu managed to unseat an incumbent Democratic governor by promising no new taxes (read his lips). He also is bequeathing to his successor in January a state with consistently balanced budgets, the lowest taxes and unemployment rate in the nation and continued strong economic growth. A lack of Washington experience hasnt always been seen as a especially when candidates have political handicap been from places like Georgia and California. The budget deficit that the carpers so loudly insist the new administration must raise taxes to deal with was largely created by those with plenty of Washington experience. Maybe its time for them to get out of the way and let somebody with a track record come in and clean up the mess. The on Washington-inside- President-elec- r t (Reprinted from The Detroit News.) NOTICE TO SUN ADVOCATE READERS Contents of special written columns or letters published in this newspaper do not in any way reflect the position, attitude or support of the Sun Advocate. f We could eliminate the deficit by making cartoonists and comedians pay a buck every time they make fun of Dan Quayle! Life other trivialities &. Tipping isn't mandatory By STEVE CHRISTENSEN Managing editor In some ways I think our society has run itself. with away Expecting people to tip every time they turn around is one of those ways. I dont consider myself a big tipper, but I do consider myself a fair tipper. The other day I went to lunch with a friend in Salt Lake City. The service was terrible. The coffee was stale and when we asked for a fresh cup the waitress said she had to use what was in the pot before she could make fresh. When asked how long that pot had sat there, she didnt know before she came on shift two hours ago. We had to practically beg the waitress to do anything for us. Once I even got up and went to the kitchen, where I found her shooting the breeze with the cook while both were smoking cigarettes. She acted disgusted when I asked if we could have our check so we could pay. After all that my friend pulled out two bucks he planned to leave as a tip. You wouldnt dare! I exclaimed. Maybe it was just a bad day. Maybe shes just a lazy person who doesnt deserve to have her job, much less a tip. Yeah, but what will she live on? These places dont pay peanuts. But, if you leave that tip, it will reinforce her attitude and shell think she never has to do anything. He finally consented, but I saw him throw one of the dollar bills on the table as I turned my back. My friend, and many other people, have lost the whole idea about tipping. The very definition, To Insure Prompt Service, implies that tips are meant to be dispersed in an appropriate fashion not just because the waiter shows up at the table. I realize waiters and waitresses make a good portion of their wages through tips. But, it should be just like any other business. A good news reporter works his way up through the ranks and hopefully makes more money as he advances. A bad reporter is soon weeded out of the business and ends up driving a cab for a living. The same situation should apply to waiters and waitresses. The good should be tipped well, the others can go drive a cab. e royko Women face a real There are times when I wonder who makes some of the significant decisions that affect our society. For example, there has apparently been a recent decision that could have a psychological impact on millions of females. Its been decreed that large bosoms are now fashionable. The flat, or skinny look, which has been in for many years, is now out. At least thats what was reported in The Wall Street Journal last week. Frankly, I was surprised to see a story about large bosoms or bosoms of any size, for that on the front page of matter the nations premier financial publication. On the other hand, The Wall Street Journal sometimes advertises itself as the diary of the American dream. And Im sure more American males dream about bosoms than leveraged buyouts or zero coupon bonds. Anyway, the story said that at recent fashion shows, the models are tending toward more bounce in their upper bodies; plunging necklines are becoming increasingly popular; are reporting an increase in demand for bras that push up their contents; and more women are going to surgeons for what is called breast augmentation. I have no objections to any of this, since I have always taken the classic liberal position that what a female docs with her breasts is her own concern. bra-make- rs If some of them wish to buy bras so that their breasts wind up somewhere near their ears, that should be their choice in a free society. I do believe, however, that anyone who gives a surgeon for breast augmen$6,000 tation should give some thought to investing a little more on brain augmentation. But as I said, I wonder who makes these decisions. Do influential fashion designers get together and say: Okay, last year we told them to wear short skirts and that flopped. Theyve wised up to the old frostbitten-thigh- s trick. So what do we do now? How about if we try the trick? No good. Theyve wised up to that, too, and are now wearing gym shoes to work. Theyve pulled the comfortable-fee- t trick on us. Well, is there any chance of the baggy-pantrick working again? I dont think so. A lot of them reject looking like Charlie ' Chaplin. What about bosoms? We havent done bosoms in a long push-u- p issue top-heav- y a cup is better than none? Yes, we can tell them: Be the first in your crowd to point the way. Okay, then we all agree. This season, well catch em in a wringer and see if they yell. I dont know what sociological effects this latest fashion trend will have on our society, other than to make elevators feel more crowded. But I dont understand why women allow a handful of men named Pierre or Luigi or Sam to make such decisions concern their bosoms. that After all these decades of the struggle for female liberation, you would think they would not allow themselves to be stampeded into buying uplifting bras or undergoing bosom augmentation. I really believed that once the historic battle for the constitutional right of a female to not shave her armpits or legs was won, they were free of the tyranny of fashion. It appears not, but I hope Im wrong. If the fashion tyrants get away with this, we could return to the dark age of the 1950s, when countless females used wads of tissue paper for augmentation. How well I remember Slats Grobniks shock when, after love of marrying the his life, he said: She turned out to be 10 percent Kleenex. No, make that 10 percent plus 10 percent. Its 20 percent. I hope females reject this latest fashion folly. Remember, it should be your choice, and yours only, whether your cup runneth over. top-heav- y SaWgt' ts time." Youre right. Weve let bosoms slip, so to speak. So what do we do about them? "How about bigger is better? "Not bad. We can sell a lot of tight sweaters. "But wont we offend the flat trade? We cant just come out and say bigger is better and flat is not where its at. "How about if we just say half TVE BUSH CABINET ( |