doping apologist? wrote:
Just because more people are getting caught in one country doesn't mean more people in that country are doping. Has it ever occurred to you that athletes from 1st world nations might have access to better, more sophisticated doping programs and thus are less likely to get caught?
IMO, two possibilities: It could mean more are doping in countries that have a high offender rate (i.e., the more that dope - the more that will get caught). Or it could imply that better and more OOC testing has occurred in a particular country that has caught the dopers by surprise. Russia, currently banned as a nation, had an extremely high offender rate (numerous doping positives & 60 + ABP suspensions - leaps & bounds over any other nation). This shouldn't be surprising at all given their State-sponsored doping program where virtually everyone was doping. That being said, there were quite of few of their athletes that didn't get caught over their careers.
Kenya, OTOH, has had dozens of doping busts over the last several years (mostly IC?) but things really ramped up his year with four (4) ABP provisional suspensions over a period of a few months (Chepkirui, Chepchirchir, Rutto, Kiptum). Plus there were a couple of doping positives this year and one refusal which is an automatic 4 yr ban (Kendagor).
https://www.athleticsintegrity.org/disciplinary-process/provisional-suspensions-in-forceSo, has the number of dopers increased in Kenya this year or with the opening the PLK lab in Nairobi last year, has testing improved and better enforcement of the ABP?
Curious: What would be some examples of a sophisticated doping program? Are you referring to substances or methods?