But with new evidence suggesting that the steroid can be produced naturally inside the body, should the IAAF have been more lenient?

Scientists at Aberdeen University recently discovered that some food supplements can produce high levels of nandrolone when taken alongside excessive physical exercise.

UK Athletics overturned initial bans for all three athletes in light of this evidence.

But the IAAF ignored the findings, making Christie the first Olympic 100m champion to be suspended since 1988 gold medallist Ben Johnson.

Should the IAAF have waited until more research was completed? Or were they right to protect the image of a sport whose public image has already been badly tarnished?

How come Christie and company did not test positive before this? Is it that they just started taking drugs? Or is it that they are only now just getting caught? Are all those great athletes from America running clean? If so why are other athletes unable it seems, to match them without taking performance enhancing stuff? These are a few of the questions that come to mind.
Bernard Channer, Jamaica

There is no doubt all those currently testing positive for nandrolone should be banned. This is not a new drug, it has been around a long time. If the human body could indeed produce this drug naturally, why is it only now athletes are testing positive for it, and not in previous years? The human body has not changed in the last two years. And why are only sprinters testing positive for it? Common sense says these athletes are cheats.
Jon B, Canada

Why is it that whenever British athletes are found guilty of taking drugs the tests are flawed, implying that they are the victims. Criminals will always protest there innocence. The "research" has been found to be flawed and inconclusive by the IAAF. If you do the crime you have to do the time.
Kevin Roberts, Herts

The problem with sports is that all athletes take "supplements" now. You would have to ban all "supplements" from the athletes diet but realistically that will never happen.
Steve Bass, England

This is typical British hypocrisy. If it was foreign athletes then they would be guilty without a doubt and branded cheating foreigners.Why have only sprinters been found with nandrolone in their systems. If it can be produced naturally due to excercise then why haven't other athletes been caught? These people have been cheating and should now pay the price.
Steve, Netherlands

Linford Christie should now resign. He was caught with approximately 100 times the natural level produced in the body by the steroid nandrolene and he knows which foods produce nandrolene as do they all. Cheating is cheating and for these athletes to behave in this manner to try to con the public as well is just cheating for the second instance.
Adam Kingdon, UK

These athletes would be fools to take the IAAF to court. Unlike UK Athletics, the IAAF has plenty of money to defend themselves.
John, England

I sincerely hope that Linford Christie will be allowed to coach at the Sydney Olympics. He has been a great ambassador to the sport and long may it continue. This country needs to make a stand and show Linford the support that he more than deserves.
Mrs Helen Knight, England

At last we finally know that Linford Christie is a cheat. He's been dodging dope tests his whole career and should now be labelled alongside Ben Johnson as a disgrace. He has disgraced himself and his country and should be stripped of all his medals and accolades.
Asif, UK

Athletics is the same as any other modern sport, it's a business and people should not be fooled into thinking otherwise. We can delude ourselves thinking that we can return to some sort of drugs free golden age but as with most things this never existed. We should wake up and allow people to use drugs and have the courage to vote with our feet.
Richard Shaw, Sweden

Ban them. None of the athletes deny having it in their bodies. What difference does it make whether they take the stuff itself or a supplement which turns into nandrolone?
Andy, UK

The idea that a governing body can impose such life changing decisions without fully looking into all the possibilities is intolerable. Whilst the possibility remains that substances can be produced naturally by the body and even enhanced naturally in the body further research needs to be carried out before suspensions are imposed.
Del, England

I think that until a thorough survey into nandrolone is carried out, leniency must be given in cases such as these. I cannot see any reason why a retired athlete of the calibre of Linford Christie would take drugs.
Vicky, England

Why is it when foreign athletes are found guilty of drug taking the British press and athletes are all over them? When a British athlete is found guilty the British bury their heads in the sand and insist "surely it must be some mistake". It isn't a mistake, athletes cheat, footballers dive - this is sport in the 21st Century.
ER, N. Ireland

It is an absolute disgrace that livelihoods can be near ruined by the shortsightedness of the IAAF. There is clearly a case for examining the findings of the Aberdeen research and until this nandrolene question is clarified, I think some degree of leniency should be given.
Richard Lane, England

They should banned. The research in question appears to be one which is not widely accepted and the onus is on the three banned sportsmen to come up with creditable proof.
Ho Cham, Hong Kong, China

Those who consume drugs to win illegally should be suspended. Those who need medications for their health or can produce steroids internally, should have their cases reviewed on an individual basis and then the decision should be made.
Roberto C. Alvarez-Galloso, CPUR, Miami

How can you not expect these athletes to be banned? If this was a naturally occurring substance, most athletes would have failed tests. Maybe the only way around this problem is to have two classes, one for drug takers and a drug free competition for people who believe in natural talent and ability.
Gary Taylor, UK

Given the subtleties of the human body, it seems likely that athletes will always find a way to take performance-enhancing drugs. That being the case, why not allow freedom of human choice and legalise all drugs for competition purposes? How much more exciting would athletics be if we were to see world records tumble every time a group of doped-up hybrids pounded round the track? The alternative is constant confusion over apparently damning results, something which can only harm the credibility of the sport.
Jimmy McWhitwell, Scotland

These athletes should not have been banned until the full extent of nandrolone produced in the body is known. The IAAF should have been more lenient, instead they have tarnished the careers of two retired athletes and one very promising one.
Lisa O'Donnell, Scotland

This is a clear case of restraint of trade. Christie and the other athletes are being denied the right to earn a living without proof that they took drugs. Just because there was evidence of drugs in their systems doesn't mean that they took them. I would be surprised if the IAAF wasn't taken to court
Simon, England