Proficiency Tests for WADA Labs?

One intervention proposed at the WADA Madrid Conference was a rating system of WADA accredited labs based upon proficiency tests. A very good idea if the tests are to be administered at random and by an outside testing agency independent of WADA/IOC and member governments. For example, there are allegations that the French anti-doping authority AFLD paid an "independent" firm COFRAC to perform yearly accreditation audits on LNDD. Investigations into these audits have produced no paper trail. Records of COFRAC audits are not available upon request. Perhaps the Floyd Landis AFLD hearing will shed some light on whether LNDD audits were performed or not by COFRAC. Nevertheless, "conflict of interest" should be avoided at all costs by political interests in doping affairs, no matter what nationality.

The proper method would be proficiency tests without warning, much like out-of-competition tests WADA uses to try to catch athletes who are tempted to use performance enhancing drugs covertly between events. A carefully prepared calibration mix with known carbon isotope values and background markers would be presented to a lab with known "sloppy practices." Hint: LNDD. A score sheet could be devised, can the lab replicate the control Lab Document Package? Is the lab capable of making corrections that adhere to WADA code; for example, mistakes with a line through them, signed, dated, and a corrected value substituted? Summary pages without whiteout? Based upon good performance a lab would receive positive points. Of course, for every violation of WADA code, points would be subtracted.

Much like revisions of WADA code that call for suspensions of athletes who fail "A" and "B" tests, WADA labs would be placed under probation if they fail to meet a criteria of minimum test points. Inability to pass an proficiency examination would be considered failure of an "A" test, and an immediate suspension would be enforced. At this point a mandatory plan would be written by the lab focusing on "benchmarks for improvement." After several surprise inspections observing behavior of lab personnel and testing methods to ascertain overall adherence to WADA ISL and IST, the independent testing agency would recommend a further course of action. A failure by a WADA accredited lab to meet the goals of the benchmarks would be considered a "B" test failure and would result in an immediate two year suspension. Three failed proficiency tests would result in immediate revocation of accreditation as a WADA/IOC laboratory for life.

To the person who coined the intervention, thank you. Sanity in WADA labs will not be achieved under the current monopolistic regime. WADA is incapable of policing these labs and the IOC shows an inability to invest in equipment or talent needed to bring all WADA accredited labs to the same level of quality. An outside agency independent of WADA, the IOC, or any signatories is the only way to ensure a measure of control that reflects an honest assessment of WADA accredited laboratories. Oversight by a competent organization would convince more people that presumption of WADA lab results are viable. It would also enforce the notion that one WADA lab has the same ability to produce reliable and valid results as any other. Currently, as the Iban Mayo EPO results show one lab finds a positive finding (LNDD) while the same sample tested elsewhere (Ghent) found a "non-negative." WADA cannot justify a presumption when it is obvious that standards and methods among WADA accredited labs produce such contradictory results.

If WADA is serious about attracting additional funding for doping detection, they need to show the world that they are serious about reform of WADA accredited laboratory standards and performance. All is not lost or hopeless on the WADA front however. Revisions of the code are currently being considered, Dick Pound will soon be replaced. I think the era of "deny, deny, deny," by Pound of problems within his laboratories is over. John Fahey is the new president of WADA, so there is new hope for a sensible reform.