TESTING ATHLETES FOR DRUGS SHOWS CONSTRUCTIVE RESULTS

It shouldn't take a formal study to show that high school student
athletes required to take random drug tests would be less likely to
use illicit drugs than their counterparts who do not take tests.

But government is sometimes known to pay for studies to confirm the
obvious, and so has the National Institute of Drug Abuse in a study
focusing on two groups of student athletes in Oregon.

The NIDA could have done its work right here. In Grand Blanc, high
school athletes have been tested since 1998, and although school
officials are pleased by the program, former student Micah White has a
lawsuit pending over his being eliminated from the wrestling team for
refusing to submit.

It has seemed from the beginning that Grand Blanc was well within its
rights. The testing could be a safety measure to prevent drugged
athletes from subjecting themselves to additional dangers, as well as
a possible exercise in character development.

The Oregon study did not look into those factors. It did report that
among athletes surveyed in a school where drug tests were used, only
5.3 percent said they used illicit drugs, whereas among their
nontested counterparts, 19.4 said they used drugs. An American Civil
Liberties Union spokesman said all that means is that tested athletes
lie.

Despite the ACLU's position, Grand Blanc High School's defense is
bolstered. Other area districts have not adopted testing, and Grand
Blanc might have come to feel isolated and backed down. Hanging in has
proven to be the better choice.