i won't wrote:
That's not how it works. Lagat's A sample was improperly handled, having unrefrigerated for an extended period of time in an unusually warm summer in Europe. Investigators concluded that this was the cause of the A sample result, and not the presence of any rhEPO.
If forensic examiners can exhume bodies after years of decomposition (in some cases, hundreds of years) and test them for minute traces of chemicals, I wouldn't worry about a urine sample spending an extra 30 days on ice.
The fact that athletes (or those close to them) have admitted to taking EPO after the fact (Pettigrew, Marion Jones), and never been tested positive; while the likes of Ramzi was only caught after almost certainly remaining undetected for several seasons, makes the arguments concerning Lagat's A and B samples a pretty moot point. The test (either A or B) wasn't accurate or reliable, full stop. It didn't catch Jones, or Pettigrew, and only got Ramzi once new procedures for keeping samples long term, were put in place in 2008. If top American athletes, who would have been subjected to rigorous testing throughout their careers, weren't caught by the test, it's not a giant leap of reality to presume there were many others guilty, who weren't tested anywhere near as often by their "poor national federations". Even to this day, some countries don't test their athletes out of season.
The reason why more Americans get tested positive is because they are monitored regularly and thoroughly by their own National governing body as well as by the IAAF. Most African nations do not test their athletes out of season, due to financial constraints. Thus if you're taking EPO, you'll be far more likely caught if you're American (though even then you'd have to be somewhat stupid) than if you're running for an African nation.
It's got nothing to do with the morality of different nationalities and back grounds. It's simply down to the law of averages. Those tested more often are more likely to get caught.