By Brent Edmunds
brent@newsroom.byu.edu
The NCAA recently passed down a ban on all muscle-building supplements for college athletes, and leveled the field of play for the future.
'An institution may provide only nonmuscle-building nutritional supplements to a student-athlete at any time for the purpose of providing additional calories and electrolytes, provided the supplements do not contain any NCAA banned substances,' NCAA Bylaws, page 214.
In other words, popular workout supplements Creatine and Androstenedione (Andro) will not be distributed to athletes by any university.
The reasons for the ban are various.
First, the safety of the athlete is in question. There have not been any studies to determine whether or not such supplements are completely safe.
'Because of the lack of long-term studies on possible side effects and lack of FDA regulation, it is not advisable for muscle building supplements to be provided,' NCAA Bylaws, page 215.
Many people laugh at the safety concerns, claiming that Creatine and Andro are merely composed of protein and other natural substances. But Gay Merrill, BYU Athletic Training Program Director, has some concerns.
'We don't know the long term effects,' Merrill said.
'Steroids initially were accepted because they didn't know the long term effects.'
Many people disagree about the safety of the supplements because studies are still being conducted.
But nobody disagrees about the benefits they provide, and that is another concern for the NCAA.
'Although there is continued dispute regarding the safety of muscle-building supplements, the fact remains that such supplements are performance enhancing,' NCAA Bylaws, page 215.
Players at BYU who have taken the supplements agree.
'During my time taking protein supplements I felt bigger and stronger,' said Kam Valgardson.
The fact that these substances are performance enhancing concerns the NCAA because some schools cannot afford to provide their players with expensive supplements.
The disparity of finances between universities creates a competitive advantage for those schools that can afford to buy their athletes the supplements.
'In a pure ethical sense, I think it does effect the integrity of the game,' Merrill said.
However, not everyone agrees.
'I don't think it will help our sport,' Valgardsen said.
'I think as long as it is safe and legal, you should take every advantage,' he said.
One thing everyone seems to agree on is that athletes will continue to take the supplements by themselves -- which is not against the rules. That could create more problems than it will solve.
'The whole supplement market is uncontrolled and stuff gets put in that athletes don't mean to take,' Merrill said.
'Since the University can't distribute it, they can't control it, and that can get risky.'
BYU wide receiver, Jonathan Pittman, agrees that it could be trouble.
'It won't affect me because I don't use it, but I think it's just another way to get people in trouble,' he said.
It will be pretty hard for players to get in trouble however.
Testing for the use of Creatine does not exist, So the NCAA won't even attempt to test athletes for the use of the substances for the time being.
'It's hard to test for because they are natural substances...if you ate a bunch of steak it would show up,' Merrill said.
This is not the first time that these substances have been in the news. Nor is this the first major ban on such supplements.
Andro, in particular, has been banned for use by the National Football League, and the International Olympic Committee for some time now.
Most recently, Major League Baseball banned the use of Andro.
The ban was spurred on by the use of this supplement by Mark McGwire during the famous home run race between him and Sammy Sosa.
Baseball initially disregarded the use of such supplements as performance enhancing, but after further study Andro was put on the list of banned substances.
Creatine however remains to be a commonly used strength training supplement by athletes from the professional, collegiate and high school levels.
The future will certainly provide new performance-enhancing drugs, possibly without any detrimental side effects, but the NCAA has set a major precedent for the future of such drugs in their leagues.