The World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) 2014 Anti-Doping Testing Figures appear to illustrate that blood tests are not as efficient as urine tests at detecting potential doping. In 2014, a total of 207,571 urine samples were reported by WADA-accredited laboratories through its Anti-Doping Administration and Management System (ADAMS). Of these, 1.1% returned an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF). In contrast, just six AAFs were reported from the 10,191 blood tests reported in ADAMS last year, or 0.06% of the samples collected.

An AAF means that the laboratory has reported the presence of a substance that features on WADA’s Prohibited List in the sample. An Atypical Finding (ATF) means that the laboratory has identified a sample that needs further investigation.

Analysis of the samples recorded through ADAMS by WADA’s accredited laboratories also yielded some unexpected results. London’s laboratory at Kings College was in ninth place in terms of total samples collected (8,273), well behind the two German laboratories, those in Moscow, Beijing, Lausanne, Paris, Montreal and Rome, as you can see by clicking on our infographic above. It was also perhaps unexpected to see the Barcelona laboratory report the lowest number of samples collected (see infographic below), however it collected a much larger number of blood samples (163) than other laboratories. For instance, of the 4,411 samples collected by the Athens laboratory, just one was a blood sample.

You can view the full WADA report by clicking here. Further analysis by the Sports Integrity Initiative will follow later this week.