----- Original Message -----
From: "Jb Jones" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 1999 10:46 PM
Subject: Re: Jama Study on Half Shields and Full Shields
 
 
> steroids are also a totally different ballgame than face shields, banning
> steroids doesn't really have anything to do with the health risks
associated,
> or at least not much, it has to do with unfair performance enhancement.
 
Huh?  It has everything to do with the health risks.  If it were just
performance enhancement that everyone were worried about, why hasn't there
been a movement to ban weightlifting?  Why do they test for non-performance
enhancement drugs like marijuana and cocaine?  Steroids' ability to enhance
performance is why people take them, but it doesn't follow that that is why
they are banned.
 
This is also irrelevant to the point.  Taking steroids would be the choice
of the athlete and he or she is the one that would face the consequences of
their debilitating effects.  So, by the logic presented, why should the NCAA
be banning them?  Are players any less adults on the subject of drugs than
face shields?
 
J. Michael Neal
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.