We know this because of stories that have now emerged — and legal cases which have been brought — about the drugs that athletes have had to take in the past. In May of this year, a court in Berlin heard how East German athletes were given performance-enhancing drugs during the 1970’s and 80’s which produced a range of side effects including excessive body hair, deep voices, menstrual problems as well as liver and kidney complaints.

It would appear that performance-enhancing drugs first came to be used by sports people in the nineteen- fifties. The traditional drugs, and the ones that made spectators very suspicious of female athletes, are concoctions which when taken manipulate the biochemical pathway that separates the sexes. They have the effect of simulating the action of the male hormone testosterone, and thereby boost the strength of muscles. A number of today’s abusers still use those old fashioned potions — called anabolic steroids. ‘Anabolic’ means ‘muscle building’; ‘steroid’ refers to a group of chemicals of which testosterone is a member. These drugs allow competitors to train longer and harder, and, if an athlete is injured, anabolic steroids help them recover quickly. These products are used during periods of training and are best detected by a sequence of tests that includes the taking of urine samples when the athlete is in a rest phase. This checking process is called ‘out of competition’ testing. Science can catch these cheats, so long as it is given a chance. But for America and the vast majority of countries, there is no ‘out-of-competition’ testing. This leaves certain windows of opportunity for steroid abuse.

In the Berlin court 66 year old Dr. Manfred Hoeppner, was the defendant along with Manfred Ewald, now 74, who was the man in charge of the East German Sports Federation from 1961 to 1988. Hoeppner claimed that these women had been informed of the risks involved, and had actively chosen to take the drugs, about which since they wanted to become champions.

A swimmer by the name of Ines Geipel made the resonant statement that Hoeppner is endowed with "no ability publicly to acknowledge his wrongs." Ms Geipel was part of 4 by 100 meters relay team whose world record has stood unbeaten for decades. Another swimmer, Cathrin Menschner, was one of many people, athletes included, who condemned Hoeppner’s statement.

Ewald and Hoppner received suspended sentences but will appeal. Their doping efforts were summed up as having been an important part of a promotional campaign on behalf of the East German state and communist bloc in general.

Ironically, if Hoeppner and Ewald do not win the next round of legal battles, they intend to take their trial to the European Court of Human Rights. It emerged during the trial that injections and (little blue) pills were administered by coaches who had orders to say they were vitamins, and that the drugs regime had begun with athletes as young as 11. The court also learned that at one stage Hoeppner suggested to Ewald in 1977 that female athletes should not do television or radio interviews if their voices had become especially deep.

Even today, for drugs to escape undetected, all that is required is a "steroid guru" - a scientist, a doctor or a coach - who can ensure that all trace of the drugs has cleared from the body before competitions. The same gurus will recommend "stacking", where steroids are taken in cycles to minimise side-effects. These include aggression, high blood pressure, sterility, masculinisation in the case of women, and painful erections in the case of men. It is part of the steroid guru’s service to make sure that the athlete concerned will pass any urine test.

British authorities claim that their tests are exceptionally strict; the sprinter Linford Christie is in some disgrace. He has repeatedly denied drug-taking but the latest accusation against him — brought against him for taking the anabolic steroid nandrolone long after he won his gold medal in 1992 — appears to be sticking.

Many charges don’t stick, though, which is where it seems unfair. If an athlete tests positive for nandrolone, that could threaten or destroy a career. At the very time that this article is being composed, the Romanian Olympic team is swirling in a mire of controversy, embarrassment and disgrace. Two of their weightlifters were expelled for failing drug tests administered pre-event and out-of-competition. The entire team was set to be kicked out of the games, but a 50,000 dollar fine was paid so that those who had not tested positive could stay. A 25 year old hammer thrower called Mihaela Melinte of Romania was escorted off the track, and suspended, too. Actually she wasn’t just any old hammer thrower, she’s the world record holder, and was world champion in 1999. At the Olympics she tested positive for steroids. In June she tested positive for metabolites [structures of molecules which interfere with the metabolism] of nandrolone.

As if that wasn’t enough, the Romanian gymnast Andreea Raducan, who had already won a gold medal, lost it because she tested positive for pseudoephedrine. She is the first gymnast ever to lose a medal in this way. Authorities accepted that in her case the imbibing of performance enhancers might have been accidental; but there argument was an interesting one; whether of nor she had intended this to be the case, her efforts were improved artificially. No-one seems to be all that clear as to whether drugs are especially helpful to gymnasts.

There are always going to be silly stories at an event such as the Olympics. This year the commercialism has not bananas of course; as if it wasn’t enough to have the airwaves carved up by certain electronics giants, there was the fact that , and this year, with commercialism rife, the tales of the TV and internet em, but some of them this time have taken, if not the cake, then toothpaste, spaghetti bolognaise and wild boar offal.

The German 5,000 runner, Dieter Baumann who won gold in 1992, was in the nandrolone dock during events late last year, and claimed - convincingly as far as millions of Germans could tell - that some rival had spiked his toothpaste. A bobsled competitor called Lenny Paul blamed a positive result on a plate of spaghetti bolognese. Those excuses aren’t bad, but it seams as if pleading pig ignorant may be better. Large porcine creatures are in themselves an extremely good source of nandrolone. It’s in the innards, you know.

Not everyone likes the Olympics. Two suggestions at Starlab have been:

1. They shouldn’t be stopped, but the whole thing should not last longer than an hour.
2. It would be better if people didn’t know what their events would be until they got there.

There is the feeling that, for all the expertise that has been brought to bear on the things, a small country like Australia can win so many medals, because most of its small population would rather win a gold medal than a Nobel Prize. The Americans also haven’t done badly as far as medals have gone.

Which is all very well, but a stern President Clinton who has become solemnly active in the drugs thing didn’t quite know what he letting himself in for. (He does forget about consequences from time to time). Oozing piety, Clinton went on TV and stating: 'The use of drugs in sports has reached a level that endangers not just the legitimacy of athletic competition but also the lives and health of athletes.' he said.

All very well, but how blameless are the Americans, in fact? Clinton had appointed a man called McCaffrey to wage war against performance enhancers. And there were mutterings all over the place, not least because of McCaffrey’s manner. Finally Richard (Dick) Pound, a high-ranking sports official, spoke out. Dick Pound happens to be Canadian, which adds a little spice to the mix. More importantly though, he is being tipped to run the entire International Olympic Committee, so his opinion counts. And what he said was in itself a pretty forceful warning shot: 'Perhaps America ought to sort its own problems out before it starts lecturing the rest of the world'.

The Americans can prepare for more salvos. A doctor by the name of Wade Exum, who tested athletes for almost a decade during the 1990’s is ready to finger a number of big stars in athletics. These sportspeople are walking around scot free and garlanded, he feels, when others have been incriminated. Watch that space in the stadium: Exum has said 'There are names. There is proof.'

The feeling among experts is that there won’t be a lot that can be done about performance enhancement even by the time the next Olympic Games come around, in 2004. Who knows about 2008.

There has, inevitably been a lot of talk about genes. Quite apart from the usual vaguely racist discussions concerning the seeming aptitude of certain peoples for certain sports, there is the question of actual tampering with genes. Beware, that’s all the scientists say. The information put out by genes is not easy to nail down so that the qualities they express and thereby create are not particularly specific. It’s not just that you could become a better athlete with a certain gene, it could also make you bald, or affect your sightor your bowels. You could be a better at sports, but become brain damaged. If you’re tempted to make jokes about Australians at this point, please don’t as this actually is no laughing matter.

The whole thing, about the enhancing of sports performances seems devoid of amusement, so there is no joy in playing on words so that the sullied Olympic ideals are altered to read: ‘It’s not winning, it’s the taking of whatever’. Or altering the order of the words in the Olympic motto: ‘Farther. Faster. Higher.’ The whole thing stinks, frankly; stinks farther, faster every day. Stinks to high heaven.