Steroids in Baseball... the Human Growth Hormone Problem

As has been widely publicised, there is no testing for human growth hormone, or HGH in baseball because it requires a blood test.  It is highly unlikely the Player's Union would ever agree to such testing in a new collective bargaining agreement.  "Right to privacy" is the battle cry for those who would defend not testing blood, but is it not true that athletes by nature, by the work they do for an institution like baseball on a national and international stage have in some ways at least, given up a bit of that privacy? 

Several employers for jobs that pay a whole lot less to their workers than baseball teams do, have random drug testing as a matter of routine.   It is simply the right of employers to know whether or not its employees are under the influence at their jobs and will not disgrace the company.  Same with baseball teams, but the stakes are higher because the players are public figures that have millions of eyes glued on them.  Privacy?  Sure, but players are public figures, and baseball has a responsibility to protect the game's integrity. 

Why?  Because that's what the paying fans want.  We want to see a legitimate, competitive product on the field.  If we are told we are getting that, but learn we are not, or that the ones in charge are not doing their best to protect that legitimate competition, then we are being lied to and ripped off.  It is like false advertising.  It is not right. 

One of the sad things to learn from the whole Jason Grimsley episode was what he said about guys switching over to human growth hormone when MLB came down harder on steroids.  If that is the case, what's the difference?  How is baseball better than before?  Unless blood testing for HGH is put in place, we will never know which records are legit and which are not.