orted by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place tobe searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Cornell.edu). Many feelthat the act of testing a person for illegal drugs is an invasion of ones privacy. What an athlete wishes to do with his/her own body, whether being good or bad,is that athletes prerogative and cannot be infringed. No matter how strenuousthe circumstances may be, every one deserves that right of privacy and noindividual should be permitted to partake in the invasion of it.Another opposition to drug testing is that the results from drug tests arenot always 100 percent accurate due to non-certified laboratories, not carefullywatched specimens, and no follow up tests being administered. Opposers feel,a false-positive is the finding by a drug test of a drug that is not, in fact, presentin the tested sample (Levine, 1998, p. 102). This can occur when specimensget mixed up. Also tests can pick up substances that are contained in simpleover-the-counter products or food that can make the test come back positive(Levine, 1998). All some test show is a person came into contact with sometype of drug at one time. Tests may not give sufficient information to indicate theway the drug got into a persons body (Levine, 1998, p.103). Due to theseuncertainties and suspicions, athletes can be wrongfully accused of being a drugabuser and therefore might possibly be wrongfully punished.In addition to not being 100 percent accurate the act of tampering withsamples can lead to falsified specimens. There have also been accusations ofcheating, when urine samples are collected. Some athletes say that it is easy toswitch bottles or to bribe an official to swap the athletes dirty sample of urinefor a clean one before it is tested (Goldma & Klatz, 1992, p. 41). Therefore,drug testing can be highly ineffective and unproductive in ceasing drug usagedue to these dubieties.Another opposition to drug testing is that ...
