Disciplinary action against a further 28 athletes has commenced following the retesting of samples taken at the 2005 and 2007 IAAF World Championships

Reanalysis of samples taken at the Helsinki 2005 and Osaka 2007 World Championships has revealed 32 adverse findings from 28 athletes, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) announced on Tuesday.

None of the athletes have yet been named, but the world governing body has stated that “a large majority” of the 28 athletes are now retired. The IAAF adds that some have already been sanctioned and “only very few” remain active in sport.

“The IAAF is provisionally suspending them and can confirm that none of the athletes concerned will be competing in Beijing,” read an IAAF statement in part, with the IAAF World Championships taking place in China from August 22-30.

Six adverse findings from the Helsinki event had already been revealed in 2013 following a “first round” reanalysis of urine samples. With the World Anti-Doping Code having extended from eight to 10 years the period during which samples can be tested, the IAAF did a second reanalysis of Helsinki 2005 and Osaka 2007 samples and it is this retesting which has revealed a further 28 athletes with 32 adverse findings.

“The latest scientific breakthroughs in anti-doping technology and analysis have been employed in the reanalysis of these samples to allow us to find previously undetectable substances,” commented Martial Saugy, director of the Swiss Laboratory for Doping Analyses (LAD).

“We are at the cutting edge of the fight against doping. In our 10-year partnership with the IAAF we have been using every scientific advance and legal opportunity at our disposal to catch the cheats.

“The IAAF and the IOC, working in cooperation with the LAD, clearly showed the way 10 years ago and other anti-doping organisations and sport federations, on WADA’s recommendation, are now considering or have started implementing such a retesting policy.”

The IAAF statement went on to read in part: “This successful re-analysis, which commenced well before the recent criticisms of the IAAF anti-doping programme, confirms once again the extent to which the IAAF is willing to go in order to target and discover those who wish to cheat in our sport.”