Testing times: Schänzer says that doping control can be a frustrating task. Credit: A. SCHIFFER-FUCHS

Unlike the lives of the athletes they police, the work of the antidoping scientists is far from glamorous. Thousands of samples, each held in tamper-proof bottles, must be subjected to a set of standardized analyses. It is easy to get bored with the routine, says Wilhelm Schänzer, who heads the International Olympic Committee (IOC)-accredited doping control lab in Cologne. Last year, the 35 scientists in his lab tested 10,800 samples, 159 of which proved positive. Two-thirds of the positives were for anabolic steroids, most of the rest for stimulants such as ephidrine.

Each sample is divided into two, so that a retest can be done in the event of a positive result. For the retest, the athlete involved, or witnesses representing them, can attend. This is always “uncomfortable” for the scientists, says Jordi Segura, head of the IOC-accredited lab in Barcelona.

Doping control labs are also always on the alert for biochemical clues that athletes may have started to abuse a new compound for which no test is available, or which may not yet have been put on the banned list. Suspicions are usually aroused by the presence of unknown nitrogen-containing molecules in an athlete's urine. In some cases, it is possible to predict which drugs they are likely to experiment with. “We do try to anticipate the abuse potential of new drugs which come onto the market,” says Schänzer.

What the antidoping scientists find most frustrating is the validity of their work being challenged by athletes' lawyers. “A new approach or methodology may take scientists years to develop, yet as soon as there is a positive test all the science is thrown into question,” says Francesco Botrè, head of the IOC-accredited doping control laboratory in Rome. And if a disputed positive test ends up before an international arbitration panel, or even in court, it can be a harrowing experience for the scientists on both sides. “It is not that easy being beaten for hours by a barrister in a court-like setting,” says John Honour, an endocrinologist at University College London who on several occasions has acted as an expert witness for accused athletes.