Not to mention there is less of a chance for them to test for a non-approved drug. AP happens to be using the "super" test which isnt really super but means that they are screening for a far greater number of drugs than usual. places like FL sometimes are only screening for 5 or 6 drugs and almost always test for lasix which is a huge waste of money for the most part. The fact that two of the trainers got multiple positives in a short period of time means they probably have been using it for a while but they recently just started testing for it. Of course we have no idea what the levels were or if there were any chance that the positives affected performance because there is almost zero research done in this area.

I'm sure I sound like a broken record but detecting a legal medication at a minute level that has zero chance to effect the performance of a horse is not my idea of a solid, dependable testing program. But for the vast majority of positive tests that is exactly what happens. If trainers can elude the testing simply by using a non-equine approved med that is easily attainable, what makes anyone think that the real juice will ever be found? Does anyone really think that AP is the only place these trainers use this particular med?

Couldn't you draw the blood levels prerace and match them versus a baseline? If a horses prerace hematocrit level is off the charts then it would be scratched?

I think the cyclists do 50% level = a "positive" test.

In racehorses I like to see the levels over 40 though the "normal" range is usually called at 34-42. Sometimes in the summer we might see a higher level because of dehydration.

Yes exactly. You could do baseline testing on horses in their stall the morning of the race. You would need a couple to establish a horses' own baseline range, though, but easy to do.

The PCV will increase a bit within a couple hours of giving them their lasix for training or racing (the lasix dehydrates them) so a holding barn wouldn't work (plus the anxiety/fretting = splenic contraction = increased hematocrit)

Racing (exercise) brings the PCV to 60-65%.

Horses "dope" themselves via splenic release.

Because the horse "does it naturally" (increases the oxygen carrying capacity during exercise stress) and will still do it anyway even if EPO is used, or altitude training is used, I personally don't see the attraction of increasing the resting hemocrit (and red cell mass, thus hemoglobin) with EPO very much. The PCV can be literally too high. And you risk having a fatal immune reaction if you give human EPO - the horse can mistakenly destroy its own red cells and kill itself.

There was a study done back in the 1960's, that showed elite TB racehorses (the fastest) had a slightly less hematocrit than their slower compatriats did (34-35 vs 36-37) Interesting.

Too many RBC's can be a bad thing - the lungs still have to be able to upload with oxygen. And suck in max oxygen. And RBC's have to circulate. And the tissues have to download that oxygen. All that has to work at maximal efficiency, too. That can all be "trained" into a horse.

I'm into optimal training via monitoring heartrate/lactic acid levels, and nutrition - feeding for sprinting vs feeding for classic distances.

This is the very reason the sport should be completely shut down. If they cannot afford to keep the sport legitimate, it shouldn't exitst.

How in the f^&%k can you have federal laws on the books which make it a felony to alter the outcome of a sporting event/wagering event and not have the means to enforce it?

The game needs to be stopped completely until they take seriously the need to run legitimate events.

Good article. Most positives are for trace amounts of common therapeutic meds that, no way, no how, could ever, remotely, possibly at those levels, have affected the outcome of a race.

Good article.