Out of competition testing of African teams

2,465 IAAF tests last year. In comp 975 out of comp 1440.

Of the 1440 out of comp tets WADA only tested 50 Athletes!

350 EPO tests included in that 2,465.

EPO

Pre comp 90

Out of comp 150

In comp 110

42 of 2,465 tested were positve!

I believe that is 1 in every 59 athletes is doping.

And if you take into consideration much of the testing is done in "wealthier countries who can afford lab work" then one should conclude the sport is even dirtier with a much closer ratio. Those who often cheat are those who have the least to lose and least amount of "official" eyes watching.

Take a look for yourself.

www.iaaf.org/news/Kind=512/newsld=27969.html

Also IAAF doesn't specifically say if the 2,465 tests and EPO tests are from different individual athletes. They might be repeat tests. Example: Test athlete A for steroids(or EPO) out of comp then 2 months later test athlete A in comp for EPO when you know he's probably still clean.

I find it hard to believe that every participant at Ngong was tested

I\'m sorry, that was a little misleading, what I was trying to get at was that every athlete was eligible for testing, in the same way that every athlete in the US championships was eligible, and that the testing decisions (by placing, random or target) were not made by Athletics Kenya, any more than USATF has a say in who gets tested.

Can you provide first hand accounts substantiating your claim that testing took place at the trials?

Athletics Kenya is a Member of the IAAF. To become a Member Athletics Kenya is obliged to put provisions into it\'s Articles of Incorporation that give the IAAF authority to conduct anti-doping controls at it\'s National Championships and any other event sanctioned by Athletics Kenya.

The Athletics Kenya Articles of Incorporation also authorize IAAF to conduct unannounced, random out-of-competition testing on the Registered Testing Pool at the IAAF\'s discretion although IAAF may delegate the testing to WADA, a national governmental agency or to the national body.

In the case of the USATF, Athletics Australia, and several others, IAAF does delegate to the national drug testing body (because that nation had the funds to set up a quango to administer the testing, USADA in the States and ASDA down under). In the case of AK (who can\'t even afford it\'s WADA contributions), IAAF and/or WADA do the testing.

Prize money at international competitions, like last weekends WXC Championships, is only paid if the athlete has two clean OOC tests in the 12 months before the competition in question in addition to whatever IC testing was done. Random is the wrong word for the OOC testing procedure unexpected is probably better, if you are in the Registered Testing Pool, you can guarantee that you will be tested at least twice in a 12 month period, and provisions exist (which you agree to when you register with IAAF) to test a athlete at IAAF\'s discretion, which could be daily, if IAAF chose to.

The athlete (or his agent) who has stumped up $11,700 for a 12 week course of Darbepoetin Alfa (in a country where the average annual income is ~$400) wouldn\'t get paid unless the 2 test results from WADA or the IAAF were clean. No excuses, and the tests would have to be conducted under the WADA protocols, certified to by the tester (in the AK case, WADA). A missed test could also disqualify you from prize money and three missed tests are interpreted as an admission of guilt. Prize money from the WXC races: Individual - US$30,000 for 1st, US$15,000 for 2nd, US$10,000 for 3rd, graduating down to US$3000 for a sixth place finish. Team - US$20,000 for 1st, US$16,000 for 2nd, US$12,000 for 3rd, graduating down to US$4000 for a sixth place finish.

Do I have firsthand proof that the IC and OOC testing was done? Yes, IAAF says they did. It\'s in their Competition Rules. Have you heard of an athlete\'s prize money not being paid from the 2004 WXC or the Athens Olympics? There\'s your proof.

Testing procedures are the same the world over, the only difference is that in the USA the testing is done by USADA who releases the results to IAAF an USATF, who choose to make the results public (one reason, and a good one, why USATF petitioned to be allowed to conduct testing through USADA), and in Kenya the testing is done by WADA/IAAF who only release the clean test results to AK, who choose not to publish their results.

Should WADA and/or the IAAF publish their clean testing results along with the dirty ones? That\'s a whole other subject.

What is also a whole other subject is the testing pools for American international athletes. Check out the USATF website for details of that. Not so hard to get away with it in the USA as you might think.

Hallelujah! A cogent, factual, and informative response. Doesn't answer all my questions, but it comes as close as anything short of a letter from WADA will. What you've said is that, if the IAAF and WADA are following protocol as written, these tests should have happened. Still doesn't confirm that they did, but you clearly let us know that they should have. Thanks for taking the time to make clear that the rules require that the tests take place - now can anyone confirm that they did?

I am still, despite all the evidence that things shouldn't be this way, rather convinced that athletes competed at the World XC's without having had the supposedly required tests. Payment of prize monies should indicate that these tests were done - but does it really? Or does it indicate that the IAAF is unable to actually test all these athletes and is reticent to withhold monies when they are the ones failing to do the testing?

Did any testers visit any of the training camps for athletes from any country in the weeks leading up to these champs, or were all the athletes declared "clean" based on their having been tested months prior? Were there OOC tests specifically administered to test athletes in specific preparations for these championships? Is there enough of a pattern of (and I like your word here) "unexpected" testing at these training locations to act as a deterrent, or is the likelihood of being tested there so slim as to serve no real purpose?

Sounds like, if the rules are followed, things aren't as bad as I'd feared, but I'm still a little skeptical. Thanks again for actually answering my question.

Just arrived from St. Etienne, I read your post. I don't want to be polemic, but want to reply informing you about the facts.

On Thursday,10th of March, in Iten, the WADA agency came to test (taking also blood) my Qatari athletes Shaheen, Hassan, Kwalia and Amer Obaid. The previous day, they went to test Lydia Cheromei and other Kenyan runners.

The day before the beginning of WCCCh (18th of March), in our hotel in St. Etienne, the official of antidoping of the IAAF came to test again (taking blood) Shaheen, Hassan, Kwalia and Sultan. I suppose that the same happened with Ethiopian team. Of sure, happened with Kenyans, as on 19th 4 of the runners of long race (among them my athletes John Korir and Moses Mosop) were tested, taking the blood.

After the short race, Shaheen was tested again, like Hassan after the long race.

So, please, stop to put stupid question regarding the differences between African and European or American antidoping. Also if is very much more difficult to test African runners at home, I know very well that during every winter there are 3-4 periods during which the doctors of WADA go to Africa testing the bigger number of athletes in top 20 in the world that is possible to test.

The managers of the most important athletes, and their Federations, become crazy in updating every day the whereabouts (info regarding the athletes and their sites of training)of top 20 athletes in the world.

What you have to understand is that IAAF is not completely autonomous, they are in fact directly answerable to two bodies, the IOC and WADA (despite the fact that they work hand-in-glove to perform testing) and that in a convoluted way the IOC and WADA are answerable to IAAF. The IOC, WADA and IAAF (and all other international bodies with sports which are sanctioned by the IOC) are signatories to the "World Anti-Doping Code". If WADA finds out that IAAF is paying athletes despite incomplete drug testing protocols (or doing anything else contrary to Code provisions), it can sue for sanctions, up to and including exclusion of athletics (as a whole) from the Olympic Games. IOC can also refuse to recognise the IAAF as the international body responsible for athletics. What the Code basically does is to ensure a "round-robin" where every agency which has a vested interest in covering up errors and omissions (or deliberate acts, such as paying athletes) has another agency looking over it's shoulder. For example, if IAAF found out that WADA was covering up failed tests, it would be in IAAF's best interests to reveal it's findings, and vice versa.

I can't answer for the WXC but it was widely publicized before Athens that IOC was performing OOC tests specifically on Olympic athletes (300 rEPO tests alone).

As for a "pattern" of tests, the Kenyans and Ethiopians get the same as the Americans, no more, no less.

I would say that 2 OOC tests per year are sufficient to catch a significant proportion of drug users. Look at rEPO: A six week low dose "cycle" is comonly used to increase erythrocyte production, which means that, at any time during those 6 weeks, rEPO can be found by urinalysis (a 1 in 4 chance) and a blood sample will find rEPO up to 1 month after administration has ceased (a 10 week period for detection in any 6 months) or a 2.5/1 chance. In addition, whilst the IAAF makes no sanction for oversized erythrocytes, they can be detected up to 120 days post rEPO administration and lead to the athlete being put on a "target" list for more frequent testing (or a 1/1.5 chance).

Athletes are obliged to perform within the 120 day

"window" because rEPO's effects depend on increased hematocrit (no increased hematocrit, no performance enhancement), so if they do well, they will get tested, the oversized erythrocytes noted and they will be put on a "target" list for OOC testing.

As Longfellow said; "Though the mills of God grind slowly, Yet they grind exceeding small; Though with patience he stands waiting, With exactness grinds he all." I don't see Dick Pound as God, but he's pretty close if you're an athlete.

Renato, am I correct that you used to work with MArk Yatich? He is a great man and I used to train with him while I was staying in Kapsabet in 2003. If you still have contact with him I would like to know when he will hopefully be competing over here again. I know he has underperformed since LA, but I hope that he will regain his form.

Renato and Nobby - thanks to both of you for your informative posts. If you will read my orginal post, it is a very simple question - is there OOC testing at the camps in African? Poorly timed though it was, it was a simple question. After 4 pages of name calling and nonsense, you have both combined to provide detailed, accurate and thorough answers - thanks. My intention was never to imply that anyone was doping, but to state that without news of tests, we in the West can lose confindence that the system is being fairly implemented. How can we have confindence in something without any knowledge of it? WADA should create an online and publicly viewable database of tests they conduct - then there I wouldn't have had to resort to this message board for a simple answer to a simple question. I asked if anyone out there could provide firsthand information to confirm that OOC testing is being conducted. After reading Renato's post, it seems that it certainly is. Thanks for the info from all who provided it - may this thread rest in peace.