The unintended consequences of the anti-steroids crusade

bbonds8.jpgAs noted in this earlier post, I have long had reservations regarding the anti-steroids campaign that is promoted by various regulatory bodies and the media. As Peter Henning noted over the holiday season in this extensive post, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued an important decision in the Balco case in which the appellate court overturned three lower court orders that had declared government searches unconstitutional and directed the government to return the drug tests to the businesses that were searched. In United States v. Comprehensive Drug Testing, Inc., a divided Ninth Circuit panel reversed the lower court rulings and upheld the search warrants, including seizure of computer records, and ordered the lower courts to segregate records that fall outside the scope of the warrants so that they can be reviewed by a federal magistrate. The appellate decision also reversed the district judge’s order quashing the subpoena issued after the search, and went on to declare that the government may issue a subpoena for documents held by a third party even after a search for the same records.
In this lucid ReasonOnline op-ed, Jacob Sullum sums up why all of this is quite troubling:

The 9th Circuit’s loose treatment of “intermingled” data allows investigators to peruse the confidential electronic records of people who are not suspects, hoping to pull up something incriminating. It replaces a particularized warrant based on probable cause with a fishing license.

The mob believes that the athletes who use steroids are cheating criminals who should be punished. Let’s just hope that the laws that protect us from government’s overwhelming prosecutorial power aren’t trampled in the process of upholding the myth of fair play in professional sports.

The most valuable college football programs

ohio_stadium2.jpgThis post from awhile back addressed the widespread insolvency in big-time college football. However, as this Forbes article on the 15 most valuable college football programs points out, a few big-time programs do quite well, thank you. Notre Dame’s program tops the list at a value of $97 million, while the University of Texas’ program slides in at second at $88 million and Texas A&M’s program checks in at no. 15 with a value of $53 million. By the way, Notre Dame remains the most valuable program despite being consistently the most overrated program on the big-time college scene these days. With last night’s loss to LSU in the Sugar Bowl, the Irish have now lost nine straight bowl games since beating Texas A&M 24-21 in the 1994 Cotton Bowl.
A couple of surprises: Ohio State is only sixth on the list at $71 million, while the USC on the list is not the University of Southern California. Rather, it’s the University of South Carolina at no. 14 with a value of $57 million. As you might expect, only teams from the Southeastern Conference, Big Ten Conference and Big 12 Conference made the Forbes list because those conferences have the most lucrative television deals with CBS, ESPN and ABC.
Finally, despite the value of these big-time programs, it is still decidedly minor league — most NFL franchises are worth at least 10 times more than the most valuable college program.

The epidemic of diagnosis

vaccines.jpgFollowing on the strong NY Times medical-related stories of Lawrence K. Altman (here, here and here) over the holiday season, Drs. H. Gilbert Welch, Lisa Schwartz and Steven Woloshin contribute this op-ed to the Times in which they make the salient point that the American health care system is a hypochondriac’s dream:

For most Americans, the biggest health threat is not avian flu, West Nile or mad cow disease. Itís our health-care system.
. . . The larger threat posed by American medicine is that more and more of us are being drawn into the system not because of an epidemic of disease, but because of an epidemic of diagnoses.
Americans live longer than ever, yet more of us are told we are sick.
How can this be? One reason is that we devote more resources to medical care than any other country. Some of this investment is productive, curing disease and alleviating suffering. But it also leads to more diagnoses, a trend that has become an epidemic.[ . . .]
. . . the real problem with the epidemic of diagnoses is that it leads to an epidemic of treatments. Not all treatments have important benefits, but almost all can have harms. Sometimes the harms are known, but often the harms of new therapies take years to emerge ó after many have been exposed. For the severely ill, these harms generally pale relative to the potential benefits. But for those experiencing mild symptoms, the harms become much more relevant. And for the many labeled as having predisease or as being ìat riskî but destined to remain healthy, treatment can only cause harm.

Read the entire article. Then take a chill pill! ;^)