NFL: WADA Pulls No Punches in Addressing NFLPA and its Failure to Implement HGH Testing

In two November articles (Rep. Waxman Calls Into Question NFL Union “Delay” Tactics Regarding HGH Testing and MLB Beats NFL in Holding Athletes Accountable for HGH Use) I discuss the NFLPA’s failure to actually implement the needed HGH testing they had agreed to in the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) they signed this fall.

It is in those two pieces where I disclose the NFLPA reasoning behind their delay; that they [NFLPA] question the validity of the test. That seems to be their main concern, along with making sure the appeals process is fair and independent.

However, it appears that WADA is fed up with their gamesmanship as they take issue with the NFLPA and its “thought process.”

Two separate articles, one in USA Today (WADA blasts NFLPA for dragging feet on HGH) and the other on (WADA chief to NFLPA: ‘If you’ve got nothing to hide, open up’), disclose  WADA director general David Howman’s viewpoint regarding the holdup.

USA Today
“The players are making a very good go of trying to say it is a problem by not agreeing to be tested. I would have thought if there wasn’t a problem, they would say, ‘Hey, test us.'”

“If you’ve got nothing to hide, open up.” (about NFLPA objections)
“not about science” [they have] “no substance.”

Again, the inference in both pieces is that the NFLPA is questioning the validity of the test. With this, most experts seem to agree with Howman, and with what Northwestern Professor of Medicine Dr. Gerhard Baumann (whose work encompasses HGH) had to say on the NFLPA argument.

“This [HGH test] has been studied for decades. These arguments are not scientifically valid.”    

At this point, I have yet to come across arguments from the NFLPA other than the ones depicted above. It is for that reason I must side with what former NY Jets quarterback Boomer Esiason was quoted saying in that ESPN piece which I highlighted in a previous article:

“the union is backing off because they have players guilty of using this substance.”

Any other take on the topic? Please feel free to comment.

Leave a comment