A second round of reanalysis of samples from the 2008 Beijing and 2012 London Summer Olympic Games has unveiled 45 additional positive tests.
This second wave came after an initial retest of samples from those two Olympics unveiled 23 positive tests from London and 31 positive tests from Beijing.
Much like the first round, the IOC did not specifically announce which sports, countries, or athletes were responsible for the latest round of tests (bringing the total up to 103 after using improved testing methodologies). They did, however, break down the numbers by sports and federations for the targeted re-test of medal-winning athletes. 38 of the 45 athletes from the 2nd wave were medalists.
First Wave
- Beijing: 454 selected samples / 30 AAFs / 12 NOCs / 6 sports **
- London: 265 selected samples / 23 AAFs / 6 NOCs / 5 sports
Second Wave
- Beijing: 386 selected samples / 30 PAAFs / 8 NOCs / 4 sports
- London: 138 selected samples / 15 AAFs / 9 NOCs / 2 sports
**Please note that two of the 31 originally announced PAAFs from Beijing (press release on 17 May 2016) did not turn into AAFs, but one additional PAAF was detected and did become an AAF. An AAF is an Adverse Analytical Finding, colloquially a ‘positive test.’ PAAF is Provisional Adverse Analytical Findings. NOCs is National Olympic Committees.
While there is still much unknown about the 103 medalists, no swimmers have included in the tests, including from Russia, where a large number from the first wave came from.
The full press release from the IOC is below:
The latest results bring the total number of athletes who tested positive for prohibited substances from the first and second waves of reanalysis to 98. The third and fourth waves are expected to continue throughout and after the Olympic Games Rio 2016.
The protection of clean athletes and the fight against doping are top priorities for the IOC, as outlined in Olympic Agenda 2020, the IOC’s strategic roadmap for the future of the Olympic Movement. To provide a level playing field for all clean athletes at the Olympic Games Rio 2016, the IOC has put special measures in place such as targeted pre-tests of identified sports and countries. Using the very latest scientific analysis methods, the reanalysis of stored samples from the Olympic Games Beijing 2008 and London 2012 followed an intelligence-gathering process that started in August 2015 and included the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and International Federations (IFs).
“The new reanalysis once again shows the commitment of the IOC in the fight against doping,” IOC President Thomas Bach said.
The second wave of the Beijing 2008 retests focused mainly on medallists, as will subsequent testing. Of the 30 latest PAAFs from Beijing 2008, 23 were medallists. The 30 athletes were from four sports and eight National Olympic Committees (NOCs). The 15 athletes with AAFs from London 2012 represented two sports and 9 NOCs.
In total, 1,243 doping samples from Beijing 2008 and London 2012 were selected to be reanalysed in wave one and wave two.
The athletes, NOCs and IFs concerned are being informed, after which the proceedings against the athletes can begin. All athletes found to have infringed the anti-doping rules will be banned from competing at the Olympic Games Rio 2016.
First Wave
Beijing: 454 selected samples / 30 AAFs / 12 NOCs / 6 sports **
London: 265 selected samples / 23 AAFs / 6 NOCs / 5 sports
Second Wave
Beijing: 386 selected samples / 30 PAAFs / 8 NOCs / 4 sports
London: 138 selected samples / 15 AAFs / 9 NOCs / 2 sports
* Please note that for legal reasons the IOC cannot currently give more detailed information on the cases. This will follow in due course.
** Please note that two of the 31 originally announced PAAFs from Beijing (press release on 17 May 2016) did not turn into AAFs, but one additional PAAF was detected and did become an AAF.
Would like to know the most common banned substance(s) detected. Also, to what (low) concentration can the tests detect?
A question . So then if a sample from Bob McBlogg passes in this round -does that mean it can’t be tested with expected superior analyses in the future? I can’t imagine with the seal broken it could & also are there DNA tests done on the sample given that there are swapping possibilities.
Secondly – how close do the assistants watch the urination ? I know of all the older tricks but if anyone speaks to a person who is undergoing genital surgery -it is quite amazing what can be done (also in treating long term catheter users). I once read an allegation prior to her London race XYZ was in a cubicle with a male doctor .… Read more »