![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I'm not against giving weight breaks to horses running without lasix.
If owners are going to choose not to use this therapeutic drug to protect their horses lungs, then maybe we should try to protect these horses in other ways. There are multiple causes of EIPH, it's a disease of all horses, not just TB race horses. And we know that decreasing the severity of exercise (the pounding, the gasping for air, the effort) decreases EIPH in any horse. So the weight break proposition is more to help prevent these non-lasix horses from bleeding as they are now unprotected from the best drug we have to help them, IMO. If we were doing this scientifically, worried about the actual health and welfare of the horse, related to EIPH, instead of as knee-jerk reaction to "drug problem", there are other things that could be considered: First, diagnosis of lasix eligibility could be done only by an official track vet, not the trainer/owners hired vet, if using endoscopy. This would require the tracks to hire at least two veterinarians to be present during all racing hours, morning and afternoon, to scope horses as needed. This will, however, miss a great majority of EIPH, which we know is undetectable on crude endoscopy, yet present in 97% of horses. So I would add a rule, that any horse not racing on lasix must wear a FLAIR nasal strip. This is based upon the proven efficacy of the FLAIR strip to help decrease EIPH. If the point is to decrease bleeding, do it. This will will allow more of our horses to suffer lung damage, however. Again: I join the rest of the overwhelming of the veterinary community who supports the use of appropriate therapeutic medications on race day, for the improved safety and welfare of the race horse. That means lasix use, not just in the mornings on those days a horse works at speed, but during races, too. It's absurd to protect the horse's lungs in the mornings, and deny them therapeutic protection in the afternoons. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I still dont see why anyone thinks there will some some benefit to racing if horses do not race on lasix?
The breeding theory is ludicious. The expense theory is completely wrong. The idea that lasix somehow prevents the playing field from being level is pointless. Comparing racing in other countries to ours using a single factor like lasix is crazy. Getting rid of lasix wont help racing in this country one bit and in the short term will create more issues than it solves especially considering it doesnt really solve anything. I just wish the fervor that some who stump for the elimination of lasix would be used for real issues that need to be addressed. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I dont think he was even in the country for the famous At the races inerview |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
We know that 93-97% of horses that race have evidence of EIPH via tracheal wash. That is an indisputable, repeatedly-proven fact. It's called "Exercise-Induced" pulmonary hemorrhage because ... it's associated with exercise, with exertion, in all horses and all breeds. It's a horse thing. It's not a racing thing. Thus, IMO, therefor, if we want to race them, we should help them do it in a manner reflective of the best medicine can offer to the health and welfare of these athletes. We do research into how to make their bones strong, so they don't break down, we do research into how to prevent damage to their lungs from EIPH - we need to use our medical knowledge to help these animals we are responsible for. We exercise, race and train young race horses in a manner PETA hates and fights against, because we know it lengthens careers and decreases bone/fracture breakdown rates. We use lasix because we know it decreases both the incidence and severity of EIPH. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:50 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.