Editor's note: ESPN.com conducted the following Q&A with senior writer Jayson Stark while he was on his way to Shea Stadium to report on the reaction to the Ken Caminiti steroids story.:

Q: Jose Canseco says 85 percent of players have used steroids. Chad Curtis says 40 to 50 percent. Apparently, even the players in the game have no idea what the percentage is, but is steroid use that pervasive?

A: It's not that simple of a question. I had a prominent player tell me within the last two weeks that 50 percent of hitters are on something. Of course, there's a difference between steroids, which are illegal, and creatine, which is legal and easily available. You can go into a 7-11 or hotel gift shop and buy an energy drink and it may have creatine in it. Andro is another step beyond that, but also legal and easily available at the health-food store at the mall.

It's when players start talking about illegal substances that it begins to taint the game. This doesn't mean players who are putting up big numbers or setting records are on anything. If you can't hit, it's not going to help. The irony is a guy like Mark McGwire couldn't get himself on the field enough until he started taking andro -- it's legal and it enabled him to stay on the field and play more games. So, you can understand the motivation to take it.

Q: Is there any chance the union would ever agree to any form of steroid testing?

A: I think there is. First, we have to remember that there was a drug-testing policy that was in effect at one point (late 1980s), although it was before issues like this. However, it was management that unilaterally severed the previous agreement. Under certain conditions, the union could agree to a new policy; it's not good for them to have this thing hovering over the union, something that could taint the sport. And if players are using drugs that ultimately could cause health problems -- and perhaps serious illness -- then the union has to address it.

Another thing to keep in mind is that players who don't using anything are starting to come forward, and approaching people like me and Tom Verducci and Buster Olney to write about it. So, other players are starting to get concerned. It's a difficult and tricky issue, but until all the labor and economic issues get settled, this takes the backseat. You never know what might make a deal in a new collective bargaining agreement, but this is more likely to be a separate issue.

Q: Do you think baseball is scared about what it might find if it tested?

A: Given the numbers that are being thrown around, I would be worried. But if you are the commissioner of a major sport, the numbers are irrelevant. If there's an issue that arises that creates a significant taint on the sport, it's your job to deal with the issues, irregardless of what you may find. Even if they tested everybody next week, I bet the percentage would be far less than 50 percent, since so many of the steroids can be easily masked today. And so many players use them in the offseason to bulk up and then stop using during the season, thus making it difficult to detect. I don't see the owners wanting to test during the winter, when it becomes difficult and expensive to do. And the union would be concerned about confidentiality issues. In the past, first-time offenders were notified and warned, but names were kept private. Only after repeated offenses would it turn ugly.

Q: Do you think the average fan cares if players take steroids?

A: I think so, although I think they didn't for a long time. What's happened is when you have players the stature of Canseco and Caminiti saying what they said at that high of a percentage -- accurate or not -- it has to make fans wonder what's up. Even if you don't totally trust Canseco or if you think Caminiti is a troubled guy, there are enough other indications that the percentage of hitters -- and some pitchers -- that are taking something is high enough that it begins to taint some of the offensive numbers and records of late. I don't in any way see how that's a good thing.

Q: Now that Caminiti has said he took steroids during his MVP season, do you view his accomplishments that season any differently?

A: Everybody alleges that Gaylord Perry was cheating. It was widely suspected and even humorously talked about. Yet he won 300 games and is in the Hall of Fame. People were willing to accept what he achieved; his success is what it was. Is this a different issue? In a way. But Ken Caminiti was the MVP that year. That team doesn't do what they did (win the NL West) without him. He was their leader and he was a great player.

But what he did and what he took has caused a lot of problems for him and in the end, may have shortened his career. Part of his rehab (for other drug problems) probably has him stepping up and telling the world what he did. He may be helping his sport by even coming clean as he did. Do you admire him for what he said, or does talking like he did take the luster away from his feats? That's something everyone has to judge for themselves.