British skier Alain Baxter won a bronze medal at the Olympics. A few days after his win, he was informed that he tested positive for methamphetamine.
Yesterday, Baxter lost his bronze medal and was informed that he will be banned for life from Olympic competition. A story here. (tomorrow, this story will move to an archive that you must register for, but it is free.)
Baxter’s explanation is that he used an over-the-counter Vicks Vapor Inhaler. He uses them in Britain, where the inhalers are not prohibited items. Unfortunately for Baxter, he bought a new inhaler in the US. In the US, these inhalers contain methamphetamine and are banned for use by Olympic athletes.
He lost his bronze for testing positive, and faces a lifetime Olympic ban for this doping offence. We will also lose sponsorship money and face shorter term bans.
I understand that Olympic athletes operate under a different and stringent set of rules. Therefore, I think that taking his Olympic medal from him can be justified. I think that a ban from Olympic competition for an inadvertant offence seems extreme.
Also, I find int a great deal shocking that it is possible to buy methamphetamines over the counter in the US.
So, should all of these consequences flow from one event? Baxter could have, and should have, checked the list of banned products. Or, should there be some mitigation of the more extreme sanctions due to inadvertence?
So, it looks to me like he’s “busted”. I’m sorry for him, but hey… The OC doesn’t have any way of knowing whether the amphetamine in his system came from the Vicks nose-squirter, or from major pill-taking.
I really feel for the guy, actually. There was an article in today’s UK Times about him; he comes across as someone who is truly bewildered by the whole thing.
Problem is, the IOC’s stance on drugs over the years hasn’t been stellar. They’ve got to be 100% watertight and be seen to be 100% watertight.
The athletes are good at what they do; they’re not (and are not supposed to be) chemists or pharmacists. I think the lesson to be learned here is that, when you’re competing at that sort of level, you have to have every single substance and food that you put into your body, by whatever orifice, checked out.
DDG, simplification, yes, but When I have the cites at hand, I can show you some of the amphetimines that were available OTC in the US until very recently. so its not that much of a simplification
That’s exactly right. Baxter says that the amphetamines got into his system from the inhaler, but he can’t prove that unless he has video tapes of himself 24/7 for the past few months. Of course, he is probably telling the truth, but the enormacy of the drug threat to sports justifies strict liability.
Whoops, I need to remember to keep my vast oversimplifications in the Pit. :eek:
I’ve read in other stories, some weeks ago that the US inhaler is on a list of prohibited products.
It seems reasonable to me that banned substance equals lose award. I don’t see any reason to try to determine whether the substance did influence the result. But, it also seems to me that Baxter has believably stated that he didn’t mean to use a banned substance, and that this should mitigate some of the longer-term penalites. Very few of us could compete in an Olympics, and now a product that is legal to buy is going to make Baxter one of the fewer people who can compete at the Olympics, but is banned from doing so.
As far as the result goes, I have no question that his bronze medal should be taken away, even if it can be proven that he took the amphetamines “inadvertantly.” After all, he had an unfair advantage over the other competitors, whether or not he intended to have one. I don’t think this is even really an issue of “Drugs are bad, m’kay?” If he’d cheated by other means, he’d be disqualified as well, and few people would have questioned it.
Okay, okay, he can’t prove he got the drug in his system by inhaling, and loss of the medal was probably correct. But, when, in all probability, the use in this case was inadvertant, I think banning him from future competition is unfair. He didn’t check the list. I get that. He’ll probably check it hereafter. Give the guy a break.
By the way, I hope he knows that if he likes baked goods with poppy seeds his blood will show use of opiates. People have been kicked out of the military for that. Don’t ask me for a cite, please; my information as to that fact is anecdotal. But I know from asking a doctor that a few poppy seeds in your dinner rolls will test out in your blood as if you had used opium. You should be careful what you put in your mouth, to paraphrase Monica Lewinskey.
There has been so much publicity over the Olympic rules on drugs in the past few years, I’m hard pressed to understand how an Olympic athelete can attempt at all to say ‘gee, I didn’t know’.
I admit I don’t always read the fine print on boxes of OTC’s. But then,[list=1]
[li]I’m not an Olympic athelete[/li][li]I’m not a prisoner/probationer/parolee subject to drug testing[/li][li]I’m not some one with high degree of drug allergies[/li][li]I’m not currently taking any prescription meds w/which I have to be careful of drug interactions[/li][li]I don’t routinely operate heavy equipment, trains, buses, planes or other commercial methods of transportation[/li][/list=1]
In other words, persons in the above categories have it drummed into their heads **don’t take anything unless you know absolutely that it won’t be a problem. check it out thoughouly with pharmacists and physicians if you have any question at all.
I’m British, like the skier. (So I’ll start on his side).
I don’t think we’ve ever won a skiing medal before. (So it would be jolly nice to win one.)
The Olympic anti-drug laws are widely publicised. (As indeed are examples of medal stripping).
OK, there’s an introduction.
Now for the clincher.
Did it say on the side of the drug (oooh - DRUG :eek: ) what the ingredients were?
If not, why did he take it?
If so, did he read them?
Either way I’m delighted he’s lost his medal. We don’t want stupid people representing our country, thank you.
No, it does NOT say on the side of the nose-squirter, “Caution: contains methamphetamine”.
It says, “Contains Levmetamfetamine (nasal decongestant)”. He may perhaps be forgiven (and one of those Wallies retracted) for not knowing, as I didn’t, that “levmetamfetamine” equals “meth”, more or less, especially to a drug test.
OTC drug laws are way different in the U.S. and the UK–you can’t buy codeine OTC here, but you can in the UK. So he might also perhaps be forgiven (and another of those Wallies retracted) for not realizing that a simple nose-squirter, in the otherwise totally drug-paranoid United States, could contain something like meth.
Duck Duck Goose: OK, say I’m about to enter Olympic competition (presuming, of course, they come up with an event for out-of-shape cricketers…Armchair Cricket?). I know that I may and probably will be subjected to a drug test, so I’ve got to be careful about what I ingest. A couple of weeks before the competition, I get the flu and buy an inhaler. On the side of the bottle it sez:
“Contains Levmethamfetamine”
Now, I know next to nothing about drugs…but shouldn’t I be just the teeniest bit concerned? I mean, I know the spelling’s wonky, but that pretty much says “Amphetamine” as clear as can be. If I’ve been so careful about what I’ve been taking, I should know darn well that amphetamines are right out. At the very least, I should have checked it out with the team physician.
Until your post, I would have been willing to give Baxter the benefit of the doubt. But if the inhaler actually listed “levmethamfetamine” as an active ingredient…I mean, that’s pretty hard to miss.
Would you like me to tell you who Eddie ‘the Eagle’ was?
May I call you Duck Duck? (blushes).
Obviously you are a highly intelligent person who knows how to find stuff out (especially with your friend, Google ). You would be most welcome to represent Britain.
But surely even Baxter ‘the Poop’, (a human with little brain*) might have been able to register the slightest suspicion about sticking foreign drug concoctions into his system before competing. If only Britain could have afforded a team doctor… :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Even though the word “Levmetamfetamine” may sound like “amphetamine”, he may perhaps be forgiven for ignoring that fact, as the label also clearly states that it’s safe for children to use, and forgiven for assuming that it therefore contains nothing that would affect his drug tests. “Would the United States government allow children to use amphetamines? Of course not. Therefore it’s only a coincidence that the word sounds like it might have something to do with amphetamines.” Sniff away.
Yes, I agree, he should have been more cautious, but I also think he was sandbagged just a wee bit by the Truth In Labeling laws. No way is Vicks gonna put “Hey, folks, this contains AMPHETAMINES” on their kid-friendly nose-squirters, and in any case, they can call it by its right name–“Levmetamfetamine”–and get away with it, resting secure in the knowledge that the non-label-reading American public, if it does notice it, will think nothing of it. “It’s not amphetamines, it’s Levmetamfetamine, says here it’s a nasal decongestant”.
I’d just like to point out that he bought what he thought was the exact same thing here as he had already been told was ok in the UK. It’s a nasal inhaler, made by Vicks, probably with the exact same name. It’s just that it happens to contain amphetamines. So it’s not a question of “oh, stupid skier bought a nasal inhaler,” it’s “oh, stupid skier bought the same kind of inhaler he’s been using since god knows when but they use different ingredients across the pond, whodathunk?”
DDG I humbly submit that you’re using the DDG tm personal responsability assesment tool.
In Other Words, you’re looking at it as “how would some one like me, perceive this? What level of caution would I take” and I suggest that’s an incorrect analysis.
The athelete in question has spent months and years in pursuit of the Olympic goal. He’s been to many, many competitions, where the drug testing gods have been there, no doubt has observed others being paranoid about partaking of stuff. Hell, there’s news stories all the time about atheletes and drug tests.
He absolutely knew that he would be tested. He therefore had a duty to be absolutely certain that everything he put in his mouth was A-OK. And the fact that it’s an OTC doesn’t absolve him of this, since there are things (as you pointed out) in such medications that do cause problems.
). You would be most welcome to represent Britain.