On the Heels of "The Trio" Post

Yup, I’m referencing myself here… Sorry. Anyways, some really interesting NCAA news came out on the heels of our company decision (we clearly pushed the needle), so it seemed relevant to discuss it here.

I’ll spare you the click through, and simply copy and paste here:

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) -- The NCAA's executive committee has approved cost-cutting changes in the drug-testing program. Future repeat tests will focus on sports and athletes at higher risk and eliminate the advance notice given to those schools and individuals facing additional tests. Ephedrine will be eliminated from all test samples, and future steroids testing at NCAA championships will target higher-risk sports. In the past, athletes in sports other than football and baseball have been randomly selected without regard to risk. The National Center for Drug Free Sport and World Anti-Doping Agency will continue to administer the program.

Interesting huh? Makes sense I suppose, depending upon what they deem “higher risk” sports. Squash may not need random testing... But the reason I’m referencing it is the ephedrine lift. That, logically, would suggest that caffeine is next to go. And let’s be honest, it should be. Many strength coaches we’ve spoken to suggest the NCAA can’t even effectively test for caffeine, and even if they could, is caffeine really a performance-enhancing drug? Certainly debatable. 

In preparing for this post, I read the following, which can be found here:

In my daily travels I read through countless blogs, news articles, press releases, and certain articles spark my interested. I ventured over to Swimming World Magazine where I found a press release from the Western Athletic Conference regarding caffeine and its status as an illegal substance in college athletics. The press release focused primarily on one drink (red bull). While I agree that caffeine is a stimulant, I am hard pressed to acknowledge that it has a significant positive (enhancing) effect on athletic performance.

In my opinion, and as a former college athlete, caffeine was how we managed a 5:00am workout followed by two-a-day practices and film study at night along with coordinating a full coarse-load while keeping a respectable grade point average. Second, caffeine has to be one of the most readily accessible drugs for college students; delivered in the form of energy drinks, coffee, soda, chocolate, etc. Further, in a study conducted in 2007 over 51% of college students consume an energy drink more than once per month.

Without going much further, let me point out that I firmly understand that caffeine is a stimulant and I acknowledge that it can/does have performance enhancing qualities with regard to energy levels which could provide certain athletes with an unfair advantage. I also fully understand that caffeine has addictive qualities, and could potentially cause further drug addictions.

Currently, the NCAA limits caffeine blood content to 15 micrograms per mL. It takes 30 to 45 minutes for caffeine’s effects to reach their peak in the average human, and around 3 – 4 hours for half of the caffeine ingested to fully digest. So, if a cup of coffee has 100 milligrams of caffeine (which is typical in an 8 ounce cup of java), you’re blood content level is 18.51 micrograms/mL for the first 2 – 3 hours. This also means that if you have a cup of coffee within that time frame prior to your competition you will most likely positively test for caffeine.

In researching the caffeine contents of various energy drinks and food, here is what I found:

- Coffee = 100 mg (average)
- Red Bull = 80 mg
- 1 ounce of sweet chocolate = 75 – 150 mg
- Monster = 160 mg
- 5 Hour Energy = 136 mg
- 5150 Juice = 500 mg

So, my question to all of you is: Where do we draw the line? In my personal opinion, I think that caffeine should either be removed from the banned substance list as the frequency of its use is almost immeasurable, or the legal limit of caffeine should be increased to acknowledge the current societal intake of the drug. I think that the NCAA can construct precautionary measures, materials, and limits to help deter student-athletes from abusing the drug.

We here at 1R tend to agree with everything in the above (perhaps outside of the performance enhancement part, but even there, we see the point), so why regurgitate/pawn off as one's own argument. Anyways, seemed particularly relevant given the thought we gave to whether or not we should sell Jack3d, NO-Xplode, and SuperPump. Again, would love to hear from anyone with thoughts on the matter… Until until, keep on keeping on. Let’s make some memories!

Written while listening to – Lucinda Williams (aren't I so Country/Blues Rock is an awesome genre... Hooray generic 1R music observations!)

What I read today (not that it matters) - No conception of what signing for that amount of money feels like, but I'll step out on a limb and say, "Good."

What I watched today (not that you care) -