• Grand Tour Winner
  • *
  • Country: gb
  • Posts: 9100
  • Liked: 3360
    • Velorooms
  • Awards: Race Preview of 2014Best Post 2012
WADA - 2013 Anti Doping Reports
« on: August 25, 2014, 16:40 »
Im a bit behind on this, they actually came out about a month ago but some numbers and pretty pictures.

The story is pretty much the same as 2012 (Last Years Analysis) testing is up, but actually analysis is still very low in relation to the number of samples collected, and there are still areas of concern.

The full set of reports are Here (zipped PDF's)

Some summaries:

Total Samples Analysed & Reported by ADAMS (Not Including Bio Passport)

IC UrineOC UrineIC BloodOC Blood

Percentage of Urine Samples Collected – tested for EPO – 2012/2013
Once again, this one is a concern. Like 2012, plenty of samples are collected, but the number actually analysed for EPO remains very low.

YearTotal IC SamplesIC AnalysedIC % AnalysedTotal OC SamplesOC AnalysedOC % AnalysedTotal % Analysed

One of my big arguments last year was that they analysed a much bigger percentage of OOC samples for EPO, despite the much lower rate of success (success being positive tests), as considering halflife/glowtime youve got to be pretty retarded to test positive for EPO out of competition. It is noticable that the percentage of samples analysed OOC has dropped, and the percentage of IC samples analysed has increased (whilst the overall number of samples analysed has remained pretty static).

So thats a good thing, but I still think much greater emphasis on testing needs to be IN competition especially when you consider the positive rate IC is considerably higher.

Talking of the rate of positive...

Percentage of Urine Samples testing positive for EPO (Based on number of AAF v Analysed Samples)

IC CollectedIC AnalysedIC AAF'sIC AAF%OC CollectedOC AnalysedOC AAFOC AAF%Total AAF

As with 2012, the rate of positive from In Competition samples is considerably higher than the rate of positive in Out of Competition samples. The %'s change a little this year, but that is possibly explained by the higher number of IC samples being analysed, and the lower number of OC samples being tested. But i remain convinced that the focus and resources of analysing samples for EPO needs to be the IC samples collected.

GC/C/IRMS Tests (Gas Chromatograph/Carbon/Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometer))

In CompetitionAAFOut of CompetitionAAFTotal AAF %

hGH Blood Tests Conducted

In CompetitionAAFOut of CompetitionAAFTotal AAF %

HBT Blood Tests Conducted

In CompetitionAAFOut of CompetitionAAFTotal AAF %

HBOCS Blood tests Conducted

In CompetitionAAFOut of CompetitionAAFTotal AAF %

Biological Passport Samples Collected

In CompetitionOut of CompetitionTotal

  • ReplyReply
  • « Last Edit: August 25, 2014, 17:00 by Dim »


    • Grand Tour Winner
    • *
    • Country: gb
    • Posts: 9100
    • Liked: 3360
      • Velorooms
    • Awards: Race Preview of 2014Best Post 2012
    Re: WADA - 2013 Anti Doping Reports
    « Reply #1 on: August 25, 2014, 16:58 »
    Testing numbers by Governing Body/NADA's

    My other huge bug bear from 2012. The fact that the vast majority of testing within the sport is conducted by the UCI and NOT the National Anti Doping Agencies. Everyone agrees this is a problem, and that the Anti Doping within the sport is not truly independant. Its notable that two other sports have this issue, Tennis, where the vast percentage of the Anti Doping is done by the ITF, and Football. Both sports that arguably have their head in the sand regarding doping. ]

    There really isnt a huge change this year. In 2012, 43.35% of testing was conducted by the UCI, in 2013 that drops slightly to 42.10%. Will be very interesting to see if in 2014 that figure drops. We know that historically there have been battles between AFLD and UCI (Tour de France), USADA and UCI (American Races) over who does the testing. If the UCI is serious about independant Anti Doping, we should see this figure drop in 2014 as more of the anti doping responsibility is placed in the hands of the national anti doping agencies.


    IC UrineOOC UrineIC BloodOOC BloodTotals
    French Cycling Fed875633711986
    Russian NADO3602934518716
    Italian Olympic Comittee4566214942709
    NADO Flanders41429269775
    Chinese Anti Doping17138049600
    Spanish Cycling Federation272149391515
    German NADA6289295
    Colombian NADO3313018379
    Portugese Anti Doping12994223
    Italian MOH2982300
    Bund Deutscher Radhahrer295295
    Australian ADA130131624291
    UK Anti Doping106163104283
    Korea Cycling Racing273273
    French Comm of Belgium NADO22940269
    Netherlands ADA14795242
    Indian NADA1227538235
    Canadian Centre for Ethics71112435231
    Swiss Antidoping43122461230
    South African IDFS17149220
    Polish NADA142538203
    Japanese ADA16326189
    Austrian ADA529610158
    Denmark Anti Doping9458152
    Irish Sports Council525522129


    IC UrineOOC UrineIC BloodOOC BloodTotals
    French Cycling Federation8948091411106
    Chinese Anti Doping318497815838
    Russian NADO5711754815809
    NADO Flanders437316753
    Italian Olympic Comittee4811261491712
    Colombian NADO3203030380
    Portugese Anti Doping13412696356
    South African IDFS26575340
    Australian ADA1411819331
    German NADA2526145331
    Italian MOH31511326
    Netherlands ADA1521481301
    UK Anti Doping127148221298

    Percentage of Samples Analysed & Reported by ADAMS conducted by UCI

    IC UrineOC UrineIC BloodOC BloodTotals
    Totals 201313947708154366722238
    UCI %43.7141.9054.8810.3442.40
    Totals 201212521679764366320624
    UCI %44.0447.4618.5112.2243.35

    The Big Eight – 2012 v 2013 Testing

    Finally, testing by the big nations (Yes, there are other nations, but i just selected these 8 particularly). A few questions can be asked, why is testing by the Dutch Anti Doping Agency so incredibly low, and what the hell happened to Spain in 2013. Spanish testing has pretty much dropped off the planet. Bear in mind these figures include multiple agencies where relevant, and also that for some races the testing may not be under the jurisdiction of the NADA, the Vuelta for instance where i Believe testing was done by the UCI, not SPanish Anti Doping.

    The big movers, post Armstrong case are USADA who continue to up the amount of testing they are doing. A big increase of this is In Competition testing when the UCI finally allowed them to actually test at races.

    IC 2012OOC 20122012IC 2013OOC 20132013
    Australia  136155291141190331
    UK  116167283127169296

  • ReplyReply


    Back to top