Published in 2011, but I haven't seen any discussion about it. This study followed 7200 samples from 2300 IAAF athletes since 2001. Hematological parameters were tracked and measured for evidence of blood doping. (Specific parameters can be found int he full text).
This is the country-by-country break down. Most prevalent country found [bold]48%[/bold] of samples were doped. Incredible!
http://www.clinchem.org/content/57/5/762/T2.expansion.htmlna Prevalence M1, %b Prevalence M2, %
Males 4028 12 (10–15) 12 (10–15)
Country A 205 48 (35–63) 78 (54–99)
Country B 352 3 (1–11) 1 (0–2)
Country C 257 23 (15–30) 28 (17–36)
Country D 208 6 (3–19) 5 (0–17)
Country E 160 18 (11–30) 18 (7–28)
Country F 148 6 (1–25) 2 (0–22)
Country H 160 39 (20–54) 51 (21–87)
Females 3261 18 (15–21) 18 (15–21)
Country A 445 46 (35–58) 50 (35–68)
Country B 130 8 (4–34) 2 (0–11)
Country C 147 12 (4–20) 14 (1–28)
Country D 103 1 (0–11) 0 (0–3)
Country E 106 11 (7–20) 8 (1–14)
Country F 110 6 (3–19) 0 (0–13)
Country H 65 36 (13–62) 36 (5–66)
All 7289 14 (12–16) 14 (12–16)
All nonendurance 1329 3 (0–8) 1 (0–3)
All endurance 4999 18 (15–22) 19 (16–22)
In light of the new marathon performances, how can we believe that the current culture is any different from the 2000's doping culture? What has been done to change things from 2011 to now, that the huge amounts of doping found just 3 years ago disappears?