Elliott responds to comments on Morgan Hamm

EUGENE, Ore. -- A few quick words in response to comments made about my blog post regarding Morgan Hamm's positive test for a prohibited substance, and my assertion that he should be dropped from the team.

First, let's be clear: the shot he took contained what the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency and FIG (the International Gymnastics Federation) classify as a "prohibited substance." Those are USADA's words, not mine, straight from the agency's news release.

If it is being used for therapeutic purposes, the proper paperwork must be filed. Hamm did not do that. If he didn't know, which seems highly unlikely given that he has been an elite-level athlete for many years, his coach certainly did.

And ignorance is not an excuse for breaking a law in any setting.

As for the suggestion that he was in great pain and just decided to get a shot without worrying about paperwork, that doesn't hold up. No athlete just decides to take a shot to alleviate sudden pain. Every elite athlete knows to be careful about everything that he or she ingests.

I've seen athletes refuse to drink from opened water bottles because they feared the water might have been contaminated and that they could test positive for something later. They know they are responsible for whatever they put into their bodies and they know that rules must be followed.

Part of the punishment he accepted is the erasure of his results at the U.S. championships. His selection to the Beijing team was partly based on those results. If they're wiped out, should he still be on the team? I say no. But I doubt USA Gymnastics will agree.

-- Helene Elliott 

Comments

[Big Daddy]

Who are you to assert anything without being privy to all the facts and or details of the situation? Unless you have spoken to Hamm, his coach, his doctor, FIG reps close to the case... you have no logical or educated grounds to make an assertion. That would be like me asserting you are a fool, simply by the naivety of you making "shoot from the hip" foolish assertions! But that again, would be logically unsound. Did not your parents ever teach you not to JUMP to conclusions? Let me educate with a little life lesson: There are three sides to every story his - theirs - and the truth.

[Bill Baldwin, Jr.]

You are absolutely correct that Hamm should be removed from the team and who's to say he didn't get another shot during the Olympic Trials?

You may say, what's the big deal with a steroid shot of this nature? Fair question. Back in the 1980's, I injured myself in the gym, the result being a baseball pitching injury from 25 years before suddenly flared up. I tried various remedies from massage to Ultra Sound and none worked. Finally, I got a steroid shot very similar to what Morgan Hamm received. One minute my right shoulder blade area hurt.....the next minute it was "what shoulder injury?"

If I were one of the alternates, I would be petitioning the Olympic Committee right now and it is unfortunate that Morgan Hamm might be removed from the squad, but he broke the doping laws and gained an unfair advantage. And let's be frank, isn't Morgan Hamm on the team to placate his brother, who has his own problems with credibility having kept the All Around Gold Medal from Athens knowing clearly he was not the winner.

[Margarie Jones]

I completely agree with your Helene. Morgan's scores at Trials were WAY too high and could only have value in winning Paul's favor. It's politics as usual, as USAG will do ANYTHING to keep Paul happy. Morgan's doping violation isn't even mentioned on USAG's site at this time. How much more proof do you need? They protect him at all costs.

He broke the rules and should be punished.

[TCO]

Both your initial post and followup are very flat. I get the impression you are just trying to stir things up rather than honestly argue a point. I know also that you have previously done things like call gymnasts midgits to stir things up, so I don't trust you to be honest and fair.

[Gymfan]

What you DON"T address in your response is whether EVERYBODY who received a similar warning should be disqualified -- the wrestler, the basketball player and the track & field athlete. Why is only Morgan Hamm the one who should be banned from an Olympic team over a paperwork error?

Yes, ignorance is no excuse. It was a boneheaded oversight, for sure. But I think you're letting your obvious anti-Paul Hamm bias interfere with your objectivity.

Be careful what you wish for -- you might get it. This team is much better served with Morgan on it. USAG does a lot of foolish things, but in this case, they picked the right team, assuming everyone's healthy.

[Gym coach]

To Big Daddy: Elliott isn't jumping to conclusions - the facts have been stated by USADA and USAG, and Hamm and Avery confirmed them: Hamm got a cortisone shot without filing the necessary forms, and he tested positive during competition.

Hamm has been competing internationally FOR YEARS, and Avery has been coaching FOR YEARS; there is absolutely no excuse for them `forgetting' to get the exemption. If Hamm had `forgotten' and gone to Beijing, then competed in the team competition and tested positive, the U.S. could be stripped of any medal it would have earned with his participation. If this had been any other gymnast besides one of the Hamms, I'm confident that said gymnast would be off the Olympic team.

[NJ Man]

David Durante has worked hard, paid his dues, overcome injury and done it right...It's time to reward him. He should have been named after the trials.

[Sam]

From the New York Times, which is actually covering this story like journalists who gather and employ facts:

"The type of steroid found in Hamm’s urine sample was in a class of special substances called specified substances in the World Anti-Doping Agency’s code. The code says those substances, which include things like alcohol and Beta blockers, are “particularly susceptible to unintentional anti-doping rule violations because of their general availability in medicinal products.”

To avoid a doping violation charge, an athlete must prove he did not intend to enhance performance. The penalty for using those substances could be anywhere from a public warning to a two-year suspension. To make his case, Hamm sent his medical records to the United States Anti-Doping Agency and included letters from his doctor and physical therapist.

“There was proof that it was for legitimate medical reasons and he had a doctor’s prescription,” Travis T. Tygart, the chief executive of the United States Anti-Doping Agency, said in a telephone interview. “We were more than comfortable with giving just a public warning.”

This whole thing is stupid, starting with Hamm's failure to fill out the forms and ending with extremist suggestions like throwing him off the team without suggesting that others guilty of the exact same violations should endure the same extreme consequences. He is being punished: he received a warning and was stripped of any titles he won in that particular competition. That's his penalty.

Yes, guys like Durante and Bhavsar deserve to make the team. Unfortunately, there are about 12 of those guys and six spots on the Olympic team. Justice for all is mathematically impossible.

It's mind-blowing to see people suggesting that one guy who deserves a spot should be removed so another guy who deserves a spot can be on the team. To hear suggestions that Hamm should be removed from the team over this tempest in a teapot -- for which he's already been penalized -- is BEYOND mind-blowing. What next? Death penalty for shoplifting?

[Ono No Komachi]

"What you DON"T address in your response is whether EVERYBODY who received a similar warning should be disqualified -- the wrestler, the basketball player and the track & field athlete. Why is only Morgan Hamm the one who should be banned from an Olympic team over a paperwork error?"

TCO, excellent question. I can't see any logical reason why Morgan Hamm should be banned and the others should not.

I can see an illogical one - Morgan Hamm shares a lot of DNA with Paul Hamm.

P.S. I personally would not have selected Morgan for the team, but that is something about which reasonable people could disagree.

[Lorraine]

Helene, the problem is that you're going overboard with your reaction. This is an issue of paperwork. Hamm forgot to file his paperwork, and has been duly punished - his results from day 2 of Nationals were wiped out. This would have benefited Justin Spring, as he would have moved up to the 10th place in the scoring system the USAG had in place. But guess what - Spring made the Olympic team.
Additionally, your belief that him not getting kicked off the team is only because he's a Hamm is ridiculous. At the 1984 Olympic Trials, Kathy Johnson tested positive for ginseng, a banned substance at the time. The USAG swept it under the rug and she wasn't kicked off the 1984 Olympic team, as her bronze medal on balance beam from those Games suggests. In more recent years, Jason Gatson, Brett McClure, and Sean Townsend all tested positive for marijuana, a banned substance as well. All three were simply given warnings.
This is not a precedent. People who share you bias and ignorance will agree with you. That's unsurprising. But I think you should do a little more research before jumping to conclusions and raving about how an athlete should be kicked off the team. Are you raving about Zadick and Brunson too? Do you apply your standards to athletes of all sports or just the ones you happen to personally dislike?

[grantjones]

In review of your July 3 article, I noticed that you just used the term "steroid" which obviously has a very negative connotation. I surmised one of two things: 1) you do not understand the difference between anabolic steroids and corticosteroids, which if you do not, you need to do your research before writing such an article, or 2) you do understand the difference, but you chose not to specify which type of steroid in order to intentionally blast Morgan in the press. Corticosteroids, which Morgan received, do not provide a competitive edge as anabolic steroids do. Corticosteroids are strong anti-inflammatories used to decrease significant inflammation associated with injury when traditional anti-inflammatories such as Advil and Naprosyn are not working. Morgan had significant posterior tibialis tendinitis associated with recurrent severe ankle sprains. He was not taking the medication to improve his strength or endurance as anabolic steroids do. Numerous professional, amateur, and Olympic athletes have used this medication to decrease the pain and swelling associated with significant injury. The use of this medication is permitted if it is medically indicated and the appropriate paperwork is filed. Granted Morgan did not prospectively fill out the necessary paperwork, but he retrospectively provided the appropriate documentation of the medical necessity for the corticosteroids. He was not trying to hide his use of this medication. Why would he when its use is permitted with appropriate medical documentation? Prior to this ankle injury, Morgan amazingly recovered from one of the worst upper extremity injuries for a gymnast, a pectoralis major tendon rupture. He did so with shear determination and without any "illegal" aids. It would have been a shame if the pain from a severe ankle sprain and posterior tibialis tendinitis prohibited him from the opportunity to make the Olympic team.

Before you write articles, do your research on the subject and/or make sure that you provide all of the necessary information about the subject for your readers to let them form their own opinions. This article obviously had malicious intent.

Grant Jones, M.D.
Associate Professor/ Team Physician
The Ohio State University

[Star Mingus]

Since we know Morgan gets these injections without filling out the paperwork, isn't it possible that he did this multiple times? Wouldn't that have some kind of benefit/give him an advantage over the athletes that actually follow the rules?

[Tara]

There is a clear bias in this article, although not as bright and obvious as its predecessor. Luckily, I've read a few articles myself and seen what Morgan himself posted on his own website. So I know that you've skated over a few details.

For example, Morgan claims that he did not know that a banned substance was in the shot. Innocent until proven guilty, right? Well, that's hearsay, so throw it out if you like -- but your readers still deserve to know that. We have to remain objective for our readers, don't we? Insert your opinion, but give them all the facts, not just those convenient for you.

The steroid is non-performance enhancing. I see you managed to get away without saying that as well. You implied it by saying it was used for medicinal purposes, but innocent readers new to the scene already have "Steroid=cheater" emblazoned on their brains and need out-right verification, not implications.

But it cannot be more clear that you are simply looking for an excuse to throw Morgan Hamm off the team. For what reason, from this article I cannot tell; in your last article, though, it was quite clear that you are anti-Paul Hamm, which leads to anti-Hamm twins in general. If this were any other athlete, I doubt we'd be seeing a blog post from you. This was a paperwork mistake. A public warning is more than enough to make sure that Morgan remembers his paperwork again -- and, of course, one must not forget the crucifixion by the press. If Morgan makes the mistake again, let action be taken if the USAG feels it is necessary. However, other athletes, as previously mentioned, have made mistakes as well. Dispute their cases while you dispute Morgan's, or decide where your opinions lie. I, for one, do not think Morgan should be thrown off because some people have rash tempers and vindictive natures, nor because he made a paperwork error.

Please, by all means, continue to stir up controversy and hold your name in lights for a few moments. Be the silently-suffering, courageous, altruistic fan who sees the corruption of the USAG. It won't last long.

[Bill Baldwin, Jr.]

Dr. Grant Jones is putting the best possible face on the situation since he no doubt knows Morgan Hamm, who went to Ohio State. where Jones is a team physician

The facts are these according to an AFP story of two days ago :

USA Gymnast Hamm in Limbo Following Positive Drug Test

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5h0o8wTiCZlsuuU6f7FFADU-7lbJQ
"USA Gymnastics has received notification from the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) regarding Morgan Hamm's positive drug test and resulting public warning," USA gymnastics spokesperson Leslie King said Thursday.

"USA Gymnastics will review this situation to determine how this may impact his qualification to the 2008 U.S. Olympic Team."

The 25-year-old Hamm, who is the twin brother of reigning Olympic all-around gymnastics champ Paul Hamm and had already competed in two Olympics, tested positive for triamcinolone acetonide.

Triamcinolone acetonide is used as an anti-inflammatory medication by athletes and is prohibited under the rules of the International Gymnastics Federation and USADA.
Some athletes are permitted to use the drug if they and their doctor seek an exemption prior to the start of competition.
USADA said Hamm had a prescription from a doctor to use the anti-inflammatory medication but failed to get a pre-competition exemption.
"The doping offence involved the use of a prescribed anti-inflammatory medication under the care of a physician but without first seeking a therapeutic use exemption as required by the applicable rules," USADA said.

MEANING, Dr. Jones that Helene Elliott didn't make up or embellish the story with, as you put it, "malicious intent" RATHER, Dr. Jones, it is you who is applying a malicious interpretation of the rules and regulations of the USADA in trying to change the subject and smear the reporter in the process. Perhaps the meaning of words is different within the sheltered confines of Ohio State University, but out here in Los Angeles the phrase "prohibited under the rules of the International Gymnastics Federation and USADA." is understood to mean, You Can't Use It !

I guess it depends on what your definition of "prohibited" means, huh, Doc?
It is clear that Morgan Hamm, a veteran of many US International teams, did not get permission to be treated as he was, a process that should have been a no brainer for an athlete of his experience. He may or may not have been given permission to be treated with Triamcinolone acetonide prior to the May competition, but since Hamm didn't seek permission, his scores from that weekend are not valid and since that competition and the Olympic Trials were both examined in the selection process, Hamm can't possibly measure up to any of the three alternates. He should be removed from the team.

As to your attempt to cloud the issue here by stating that Ms Elliott was wrong because, as you put it," you do not understand the difference between anabolic steroids and corticosteroids" --- who are you kidding ? Anabolic steroids have NOTHING to do with the subject at hand. Morgan Hamm knowingly took a drug which is banned from use unless pre-competition permission is asked for and granted. That drug is a corticosteroid and it wouldn't matter if it was called Bean Bag, the facts remain as stated by Elliott and others.

[Jake]

I think Dr. Jones and Sam made excellent points, so I won't belabor them. With respect to the team, and the alternates, I would like to see Durante compete and I believe he and Bhavsar will be the ones to go. I feel very sorry for Artemev, but he's just been very inconsistent.

I think the point about how these blogs post have been written, particularly the carelessness the author has shown, simply shows how low the standards of the LA Times have fallen. This isn't merely a pity but is shameful for anyone who is a graduate of a journalism school. Irrespective of the fact that these are "blog" posts, its a blog attached to a major newspaper and certain standards should merely be maintained, they should be expected.

[Former US National Team Coach]

I know both of the Hamms personally and do not believe that they would do anything underhanded to gain an advantage in competition. This being said, Morgan did use a proscrbed substance without prior approval. This resulted in his scores from the second day of Nationals to be voided. The Mens Olympic selection team used a number crunching, statistical probability program to help choose a team that has the potential to put up the best possible team score. Data sets from all four days of competition were utilized in this process. Since Morgan's Day 2 Nationals scores were null and void, he wouldn't have made the team based on the matrix used for selection. I believe that this has to taken into consideration of the fairness that is the embodiment of the olympic games.

[Shawna]

In response to a reader's comments about needing "permission"... get the facts straight. He simply needed to file an exemption petition before the competition. The USAG doesn't treat gymnasts, nor their doctors, like children. According to Morgan, he did specifically ask if the shot had anything banned in it and was told no. There is a very good likelihood that he did not know he needed an exemption for it (as Morgan stated), since the drug was not put on the banned list until 2005, a year after he stopped competing. The fact that a reader makes the blanketed comment that Morgan "can't possibly measure up to any of the three alternates" shows a lack of research. While losing day 2's scores do lower his overall score, that does not mean he cannot measure up to high standards. He still received some of the highest scores of the two meets, has the second best resume on the national team, and has the most international competition experience except for his brother. The fact that he was coming back from two injuries would also give the committee reason to be a little lenient towards his lower scores, since more than likely those scores would improve as he healed.

[Interested Party]

While everyone is entitled to their opinion there is one thing I think needs to be addressed. People are saying that the anti inflammatory nature of the shot was not performance enhancing...well if it hurts and making it not hurt is NOT enhancing your performance I do not know what you call it. Pain makes performance more difficult. There must be a reason why the FIG and the USADA require pre approval before allowing an athlete to receive these treatments. The other consideration that no one has mentioned is that if the FIG or the IOC says that a "warning" is not sufficient and Morgan is not eligible to compete due to his positive test then guess what.... it does not matter what the USADA or USAG says...so...hold your breaths...it is in the hands of the international governing bodies now....

[GemGym]

Interested Party says:

"People are saying that the anti inflammatory nature of the shot was not performance enhancing...well if it hurts and making it not hurt is NOT enhancing your performance I do not know what you call it. Pain makes performance more difficult."

Then, by that standard, ice, tape, Advil, Naprosyn, and massage (among other things) are also performance enhancing. Are you suggesting that they be prohibited too?

When people refer to "performance enhancing drugs" within the context of sports, they generally mean that you reach a level of performance you cannot attain without the drug, irrespective of injury.

"There must be a reason why the FIG and the USADA require pre approval before allowing an athlete to receive these treatments."

The drug doesn't require pre-approval except by a physician. In Morgan's case, the sports governing body requires a "therapeutic use exemption" form to be submitted -- in other words, disclosure that the drug has been administered prior to competition, and yes, there is a reason for that (the reason is very easy to look up if you care to). As indicated in the New York Times article that referenced above, the USADA's code acknowledges that the class of drugs in question is especially susceptible to unintentional anti-doping violations.

[A Gymnast]

The Hamm's were an embarrassment to the Olympic Team 4 years ago. Morgan did not perform well then and hasn't done much since. He doesn't deserve a place on this team because of this doping scandal, and the fact that he's not nearly as good as the alternates. And Paul Hamm refusal to return the gold medal that was given to him in error showed poor sportsmanship - he should never have been considered to represent our country at the Olympics again.

[Interested Party]

There are standards to the prevention, care and treatment of athletic injuries. To equate tape to a prescription anti inflammatory just does not make sense. There are standards that must be followed. If Morgan asked and was told there were no banned substances in the shot then the Doctor is at fault. An athlete can not be held responsible to know the contents of every medication on the proscribed list. He needs to trust his medical staff. In light of that the medical staff does need to know what is contained in each and every medication that is used; prescribed or over the counter. The athletic world has its own standards as to what is permitted and what is not..if you want to participate then know the rules and protect yourself from the possibility of ingesting a banned substance. Even the most informmed and prepared athlete can make a mistake in either ingesting something accidentally or following the advice of an uniformed medical practitioner.

[Jim C]

Yea! Glad to see that there are others that agree with me that the Hamm brothers have displayed actions that are not a positive image on our Olympic Team... One for keeping a medal that he only won on a technicality and not his performance. One for thinking he did not need to follow the rules and taking medication that was prohabited without doing paperwork. Both deserve to be off the team. Now I will watch the Olympics on the TV.

[Peachy]

I am glad they are both not competing in 2008. You never know what would happen next... Besides, they're not that cute anyways.