It's all in the urine...

Our volleyball team recently finished our season after a proud finish at the Provincial Championships. As we made our way to the tournament on our washroomless bus, much of our discussion about the tournament centred around the issue of drug testing, and much of it had a relatively worrisome tone.

To my knowledge no one on our team uses steroids or Human Growth Hormone or any other performance-enhancing drug, and if they are, it certainly doesn't show. You would think that for this reason our team would have nothing to fear if we were approached by a doping official during one of their random drug tests. But this is not the case.

The league that we play under has an extensive list of prohibited substances, one of them being marijuana. This drug, which contrary to the implications made by the movie How High, is in no way performance-enhancing and is actually quite detrimental to one's performance, especially in a sport like volleyball.

Regardless, pot could very well act as our team's kryptonite. There is a good chance that if a member of our team were to be tested, they could test positive for pot. I understand how using performance-enhancing drugs should be monitored by an athletic league that wishes to ensure equality on the playing field, but should their jurisdiction be extended to a substance that is rivalled if not exceeded in potency by alcohol?

I realize that marijuana has harmful effects and poses several risks to the user, which include health risks, risk to schooling, jobs and one's career. But the people I know that use dope are aware of these risks and have more to lose than being kicked off a sports team.

Using marijuana is not necessarily the right thing, but it's also not necessarily the wrong thing. It may be illegal under Canadian law, but so is underage drinking, and both are enforced by the police. But the league doesn't check for underage alcohol use.

Should an athletic league really have the authority to extend its rules to something like marijuana?