Dope scandal scientists stand by their findings
THE two scientists whose analysis of leaked antidoping data from the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) database has thrown athletics into crisis, defended their findings yesterday after their claims were rubbished by the world governing body.
Australian blood experts Michael Ashenden and Robin Parisotto interpreted data from 12,000 blood tests, involving 5,000 athletes, from 2001-12, which came into the possession of British newspaper the Sunday Times and German broadcaster ARD.
The two media outlets claimed that the data pointed to widespread blood doping in athletics and that the IAAF had failed to act on hundreds of suspicious blood samples — many given by Olympic and world championship medal winners.
In a statement on Tuesday, the IAAF said the allegations were based on “guesswork”.
Responding to suggestions that they lacked sufficient knowledge of the IAAF programme, a joint statement pointed out that Parisotto had worked with the Russian Anti-Doping Agency (Rusada) to review blood profiles and Ashenden was a member of the World Anti-Doping Agency ( Wada) passport committee which devised targeting strategies for sporting federations.
“Both advised antidoping organisations on how to undertake target testing of athletes suspected of blood doping,” the statement said.
It also countered the IAAF’s claim that a large number of the blood samples had been collected before the introduction of the Athlete Biological Passports (ABP) in 2009 and therefore could not be used as proof of doping.
“The pre-2009 data is reliable, in fact by their own admission, the IAAF has relied on those data to extend sanctions against athletes,” it said.
“We followed the same procedure as IAAF expert panellists when reviewing ABP profiles, classifying results as ‘likely doping’ when we were able to confidently exclude all other potential causes. We classified results as ‘suspicious’ when there was genuine evidence of blood manipulation, however, further investigation such as target testing would have been required.
“We stand by the evaluations we submitted to Sunday Times and ARD,” the joint statement added.
The IAAF labelled the reports “sensationalist and confusing” on Tuesday, insisting the data used had not been secret and had been used in a report published by Wada four years ago.
In response, the statement from the scientists said: “We note the IAAF’s confirmation that the database is ‘not a secret or hidden document in any way’ and that the IAAF welcomes the opportunity to present to the Independent Commission.
“We therefore call on the IAAF to give a public undertaking that it will immediately share the entire database with (former Wada chief) Dick Pound’s independent review.”
The sport has been bedevilled by spectacular doping cases over the past three decades. Involved among them were some of the biggest stars in the sport, including Canadian 100m sprinter Ben Johnson — who won the 100m at the Seoul Olympics, and American female sprinter Marion Jones.
Both were subsequently stripped of their Olympic gold medals.
The latest storm has broken just weeks before the start of the World Track and Field Championships starting in the Chinese capital, Beijing.
The issue is also likely to become a burning one in the buildup to the election of a new IAAF president, which is emerging as a race between English middle distance Olympic champion Sebastian Coe and Russian pole-vault legend Sergei Bubka.
The pre-2009 data is reliable, in fact by their own admission, the IAAF has relied on those data to extend sanctions against athletes