Chapter[ X. Review of the Major League Baseball Joint Drug Prevention and
Treatment Program ]
Section[ B. 2. Transparency and Accountability ]
2. Transparency and Accountability
Transparency is essential to demonstrate the integrity of any drug testing program.
In this context, transparency means disclosure of sufficient information about the operation of
the program to ensure that it is operated fairly and in accordance with the expectations of
interested parties, including fans. The need for transparency must be balanced against a player’s
right to privacy.
A hallmark of a transparent drug testing program is the issuance of periodic
reports of its operations. These reports do not identify individual test results but, in general,
disclose the number of tests taken during the year, the number of those tests that were
determined by the testing laboratory to be positive, the disposition of each test, the substance
found in each positive test, and information regarding other violations of the joint program.
The ability to audit a drug testing program also is essential to show that positive
tests are handled appropriately and are not suppressed.524 In any drug testing program, there are
a number of stages at which violations can be ignored or suppressed; this is generally referred to
as “results management.” For example, if a test is ordered but not taken, an audit should resolve
whether the failure to take the test arose from the player’s refusal to be tested, which may be a
violation of the program and treated as a positive test, or for another, more benign reason. In
addition, audits are necessary to demonstrate adherence to the testing protocols necessary to
ensure the integrity of the testing process.
Major League Baseball does not provide reports on the joint program’s aggregate
results and it appears that it never has been audited. The joint program requires that, once CDT
524 Report of the Independent Int’l Review Commission on Doping Control – U.S.A.
Track & Field, at 5-14 (July 11, 2001).
265
receives a negative result for a sample, it must immediately destroy all documents relating to that
sample. This requirement could impede or prevent an audit.525
In August 2006, I requested summaries of aggregate, de-identified data relating to
the administration of Major League Baseball’s joint program. For the years 2003 through 2005,
the majority of the records necessary to compile this data already had been destroyed. Even for
the then-ongoing 2006 season, we were advised that the records necessary to respond to certain
requests had not been retained.526
The mandatory destruction of information relating to negative tests impairs the
joint program’s transparency and limits the ability to detect the use of steroids. Best practices in
steroid testing are now focused on proving steroid use by reference to variations between the
results of a number of tests taken over a period of time (referred to as “panel” or “longitudinal”
data). This method of proof requires that test result data from prior negative tests be available.527
The destruction of negative test data also may prejudice players charged with banned substance
violations who might turn to longitudinal data to support their defenses to such charges.
525 Major League Baseball’s Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program, Addendum B
(2006).
526 See Letter from Robert D. Manfred Jr. to Sen. George J. Mitchell, dated Mar. 28,
2007.
527 When a test results suggest the possible use of anabolic steroids but nevertheless does
not qualify as a positive test result, WADA procedures require the sample to be reported as
“atypical,” requiring further investigation and comparison with prior test results or the
establishment of a longitudinal profile. Because an individual’s ratio of testosterone to
epitestosterone will remain relatively consistent from test to test, changes in an individual’s T/E
ratio might be evidence of anabolic steroid use even if the ratio does not itself establish use.
Analysis of longitudinal data also can provide a method to detect steroid use for so-called
“designer” steroids; this may provide a method to combat the use of new and otherwise
potentially undetectable steroids such as the designer steroid “the clear” that was at the center of
the BALCO investigation.
266
Contents
Prev
Next
Last
