The biggest news in the crusade against performance-enhancing drugs slipped under the radar in the United States, perhaps because—for a welcome change—no American athletes were involved. But a few weeks ago the International Olympic Committee announced that six additional Olympians from last summer's Beijing Games had been caught in a blood-doping scandal. The athletes—from track, cycling and weightlifting—included two medalists, most notably Bahrain national hero Rashid Ramzi, who had won the country's first-ever track Olympic gold medal in the showcase 1,500 meters.

The six were among nearly 1,000 athletes whose samples from Beijing were retested earlier this year. That retesting was mandated following the development of a new test that can detect an advanced and, reportedly, widely used form of EPO called CERA. EPO increases endurance in athletes by stimulating the production of red blood cells. The advantage of CERA was that remains in the system longer, meaning it doesn't have to be taken as frequently. But with the development of this new test, that advantage may come with a huge downside. IOC doping protocol makes it standard procedure for samples to be frozen so that they can be retested as developments in detection occur. The World Anti-Doping Agency code permits results to be accepted up to eight years after the original test was administered.

The positive test for the 1,500-meter champion was another blow for the beleaguered sport of track and field, which has endured a succession of major scandals and had already seen three athletes stripped of medals in Beijing following failed drug tests. Though it may be meager consolation, it could also be viewed as a sport that has learned the lessons from past scandals and is finally moving aggressively against the cheats.

Most sports still face tremendous obstacles—often obstructionism from both management and union leadership—in trying to bolster their testing programs or to make them more proactive. Storing test samples can be costly and is potentially controversial. But right now it is a singularly scary weapon for the anti-drug forces. I suspect we would see instant ripples in baseball if it were agreed that samples could be retested for human growth hormone once a reliable urine test for HGH is finally developed.

Baseball and other sports may not have quite the power that the IOC does, the ability to strip an athlete of medals. It would be impossible to recalculate team standings retroactively and, as we've seen, difficult even to remove names from the record books. Still, in recent years we have witnessed what a powerful weapon shame can be. It must be a huge shock for athletes who expected to live out their lives in remembered glory only to discover that they are pariahs rather than heroes.

© 2009