Kentucky's ongoing attempt to end racing in state proceeds..

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

And yet, life goes on without Lasix outside of horse racing in athletic competition.

And those horses suffer worse from EIPH than race horses.

I'm starting the think the stupid, ignorant choice that was made was allowing Lasix in the first place.

Who cares what was done 50 years ago? When I was a child, I was taught to drench colic horses with a mixture of turpentine and linseed oil! Now we knows that probably killed alot of horses - yet veterinarians did it!

Medicine advances. Sports medicine advances, in humans and animals. I attended a veterinary conference yesterday on diagnosis and treatment of back and hind end injuries in performance horses, and half the diagnostic techniques, and most of the treatments, were not even available, let alone taught to me, when I graduated veterinary college.

We need to use what we know today. Not pretend we are in the 1800's. Or even the 1990's. It's 2012.

And by the way: several of the recommended treatments are viewed as "race horse trainer cheating" by some lay people because for many years, race horse trainers have abused and misused some things associated with those therapies. Does that make them less valid when used appropriately as a medical treatment? Of course not.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Simple, 93% of horses allegedly need it, yet 100% get it. Sure, that makes sense.

Do you know what is required on the race track to get permission from the stewards to give a horse lasix on race day?

[cmorioles]

Yes, virtually nothing. I know that isn't what is on paper. I've spent plenty of time on the backstretch, and that is reality.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Gary Stevens is going to testify before Congress. Stevens takes a zero-tolerance stance on race-day medication. Stevens must be a terrible guy to take such a stance. He must have some really selfish and negative intentions. It's either that, or he must just be really ignorant on the subject. LOL. Let the attacks on Stevens begin.

http://www.drf.com/news/hovdey-steve...day-medication

[cmorioles]

For me, if all horses need drugs to race, preventive or otherwise, there shouldn't be racing. I can't think of any other sport for any type of being where this would even be considered.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Gary Stevens is going to testify before Congress. Stevens takes a zero-tolerance stance on race-day medication. Stevens must be a terrible guy to take such a stance. He must have some really selfish and negative intentions. It's either that, or he must just be really ignorant on the subject. LOL. Let the attacks on Stevens begin.

http://www.drf.com/news/hovdey-steve...day-medication

Congress are the last people that should be making medical decisions for doctors and their patients, don't you agree?

Veterinarians are quite willing to testify before Congress supporting a complete ban on all possible performance-enhancing drugs on race day in the horse industry. Every major veterinary organization in the country has come out publicly and strongly for that position: see the above position statements.

That doesn't include lasix, however. It does include all race day NSAIDS, and all current "bleeding prevention" adjunct drugs. Why is that? Why only lasix? Hummmm .....

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

For me, if all horses need drugs to race, preventive or otherwise, there shouldn't be racing. I can't think of any other sport for any type of being where this would even be considered.

So you are also against banning banamine? Omeprazole? Clenbuterol? Ketoprofen? Because there wouldn't be any horse racing without those drugs on the backstretch.

Horse racing in other countries use lasix daily as a therapeutic drug during speed training to prevent lung damage. It's just outlawed on race day. How backwards is that? It's allowed as a therapeutic drug on the race track in the morning, but not in the afternoon?

It's 2012. We shouldn't be making medical decisions for horses based upon decades-old outdated information and assumptions from the past.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

For me, if all horses need drugs to race, preventive or otherwise, there shouldn't be racing. I can't think of any other sport for any type of being where this would even be considered.

Other horse sports do. The FEI, the Federation Equestre Internationale, for example at the Rolex International Three-Day Event here in KY now, has a list of permitted competition-day drugs, which includes certain levels of aspirin, banamine, and bute. That's right - on competition day. These drugs are not considered performance-enhancing at the allowable levels.

And the FEI is twice as tough on testing and drugs as horse racing could ever dream of being.

The Olympics has a long list of competition-day allowable drugs, and levels, that athletes can use. Includes albuterol and other "lung" (asthma) drugs.

We need to ban illegal performance enhancers. Not helpful therapeutics.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Riot

Who cares what was done 50 years ago? When I was a child, I was taught to drench colic horses with a mixture of turpentine and linseed oil! Now we knows that probably killed alot of horses - yet veterinarians did it!

This is the closest you've ever come to making any sort of sense.

I assure you, in 50 years, they are going to be saying the same kind of thing as what you said about colic.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

This is the closest you've ever come to making any sort of sense.

I assure you, in 50 years, they are going to be saying the same kind of thing as what you said about colic.

LOL - About lasix? Heck no. We know all about the pharmacology of lasix.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Other horse sports do. The FEI, the Federation Equestre Internationale, for example at the Rolex International Three-Day Event here in KY now, has a list of permitted competition-day drugs, which includes certain levels of aspirin, banamine, and bute. That's right - on competition day. These drugs are not considered performance-enhancing at the allowable levels.

And the FEI is twice as tough on testing and drugs as horse racing could ever dream of being.

The Olympics has a long list of competition-day allowable drugs, and levels, that athletes can use. Includes albuterol and other "lung" (asthma) drugs.

We need to ban illegal performance enhancers. Not helpful therapeutics.

Banning certain drugs could actually backfire. For example, if they banned bute, it would probably make trainers more likely to inject ankles and knees. That would be worse for the horses. I don't know what the answer is.

[Powderfinger]

Certainly looks like furosemide's days are numbered. Hope it works! We all know what this is about. The industry has to drastically reduce the number of catastrophic breakdowns. We can't have Mrs. Alvarado (the NM woman in the NY Times article) bringing her family to the track only to see animals being euthanized. When people go to the track they expect to see a horse race, not a slaughterhouse. If one in five hundred NFL football players died every player start we'd have two players killed every fall weekend. How would that go over? one in five hundred is not an accident; one in five hundred is a bloodsport.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Congress are the last people that should be making medical decisions for doctors and their patients, don't you agree?

No, I do not agree. I totally disagree. The horseracing industry has done a horrible job of policing itself. The fox has not done a good job of guarding the hen-house. They've had the last 20 years to clean up the sport and they won't do it.

I think the doctor/patient argument is a horrible analogy here. In general, doctors usually do what is best for their patients. Doctors work for their patients. In horseracing, the vet does not work for his patient (the horse). The vets works for the owner and trainer, both of whom often do not have the best interest of the horse in mind.

If owners and trainers had the best interest of the horse in mind, you wouldn't have the state vet scratching horses the morning of the race. Why does the state vet scratch horses the morning of the race? Because trainers will sometimes attempt to run unsound horses. This proves that some trainers do not have the best interest of the horse in mind.

Anyway, you have a sport where hundreds of millions of dollars are being bet. When you have that much money being bet, there needs to be a governing body that insures integrity. With the stock market, they don't police themselves. You have the SEC that does that.

There needs to be someone there to protect the horses and protect the public. In my opinion, the racing industry has proven time and time again that they are incapable of policing themselves. Any time someone wants to make a significant change, the owners and trainers start dragging their feet. I'd rather have the industry take charge of itself but if they're not going to do it, then I have no problem with the government coming in.

[cmorioles]

Lets keep this simple. Pretend horse racing wasn't legal today. Now, imagine somebody proposed it as a gambling venture nationally. They give all the positives, the money and jobs it can generate, etc. At the end of the proposal, they mention, "Oh, by the way, pretty much every horse is going to be injected with a drug so they don't bleed in the lungs before they race." What do you think the chances are racing would be approved?

I put it at right around 0%, but certainly no higher than 0%.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Lets keep this simple. Pretend horse racing wasn't legal today. Now, imagine somebody proposed it as a gambling venture nationally. They give all the positives, the money and jobs it can generate, etc. At the end of the proposal, they mention, "Oh, by the way, pretty much every horse is going to be injected with a drug so they don't bleed in the lungs before they race." What do you think the chances are racing would be approved?

I put it at right around 0%, but certainly no higher than 0%.

That's not true.

Some group of self righteous vets would lobby for it, saying the drug is totally safe, and in fact, everyone and everything should be on it.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

That's not true.

Some group of self righteous vets would lobby for it, saying the drug is totally safe, and in fact, everyone and everything should be on it.

Nicely done! (But still 0% chance it would be legalized under those conditions)

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Nicely done! (But still 0% chance it would be legalized under those conditions)

Legalized? Who said anything about legalized?

After the vet and drug lobbies got after them, it would be mandated!

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Horse racing in other countries use lasix daily as a therapeutic drug during speed training to prevent lung damage. It's just outlawed on race day. How backwards is that? It's allowed as a therapeutic drug on the race track in the morning, but not in the afternoon?

That is ridiculous. What percentage of horses in other countries train on lasix during speed training, 5% at the most? It is an extremely small percent. It would only be horses that are considered bad bleeders.

[Danzig]

found this while trying to find info on lasix in foreign countries:

Long Term Lung Changes in ‘Bleeders’
It is well known that once a horse has a ‘severe’ bleed, it’s
subsequent race performance is likely to be reduced. The upper,
back sections of the lung receive high blood flow during
exercise, and is the area which exhibits evidence of vascular
changes and long term damage following a severe ‘bleeding’
episode. Prof. Frederik Derksen and other leading, well known
researchers at Michigan State and Melbourne University,
investigated the effects of bleeding on lung pathology. It is
currently believed that bleeding (or Exercise-Induced Pulmonary
Haemorrhage (EIPH) results from high internal blood pressures
(hypertension) and stress failure of the walls of the lung airsac
(alveolar) capillary arteries in all-out pacing and galloping
horses. However, the pathological changes that would be
expected in this case, with vessel fibrosis, blockage and small
bypass vessels that form within the bronchial walls, were not as
severe as previously identified. The new Michigan study
identified significant lung vascular changes, including increased
vein hypertension in the lung drainage vessels after a ‘bleeding’
episode. It was also found that both lungs had similar changes,
despite previous findings that the hind lobes of the left lung were
more scarred following a severe ‘bleed’. The study found more
collagen ‘scar’ tissue or fibrosis, degenerative red cell/monocyte
accumulation (haemosiderin) and vascular remodelling in the
airsac lining vessels in both the capillaries and drainage veins, as
well as the separating elastic (interstitial) tissues. The diameter
of the supply and drainage vessels were decreased by greater
than 50% during the healing process. This could be the reason
for the poor performance after a ‘bleed’, with increased lung
fluid build-up (oedema) and lower oxygen uptake.
Editor’s Note: The study indicated that restriction of the
veins in the area most effected by a ‘severe’ bleed, may
underlie the other damage seen after a ‘bleed’ and reduce
subsequent performance by affecting lung efficiency in
the long term. Restricting water intake for 6 hours prior
to racing may also help to reduce lung oedema and fluid
retention.



i'd want to prevent a bleed that would cause lasting damage. what would you tell me to do instead, if i was worried about such a thing, knowing the drug has medical uses and can prevent unnecessary damage to a horse that someone potentially invests a lot of money in?
if your concern is that it could move a horse up, but most horses already use it anyway, doesn't that negate any possible move-up? and many articles i've read say it's not a performance enhancer. is that an opinion, and not a proven fact? from what i've read in various studies, it's not a fact.

[Danzig]

http://www.nytha.com/pdf/the_lasix_question.pdf


interesting point regarding witholding hay and water for 24-48 hours before racing.