Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)

- The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - Lasix (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21478)

Quote:

You don't see this across the POND, because they don't want to breed bleeders. Easy that way

The same number of Thoroughbred horses seem to bleed in England, France, Japan, Australia as bleed in the US. Check the research (google, PubMed, etc)

We in the US are allowed to try and prevent bleeding by administering medication before a race, the other countries do not allow that (the horse is allowed to bleed while racing)

Here's the AAEP general comment on EIPH:

Quote:

Exercise-Induced Pulmonary Hemorrhage (EIPH) or bleeding

This occupational disease is a major lower respiratory problem of athletic horses. Horses with EIPH bleed from the lungs during intensive exercise. Usually the hemorrhage is minor but can at times be profuse. Fatalities are extremely rare.

The cause of EIPH is unclear but several factors are evident. There is a definite relationship between small airway disease (bronchitis), alterations in the vasculature of the lung in the dorsal-caudal (upper back) tip of the lung field, and EIPH.

Until about 20 years ago, the condition was termed epistaxis (nosebleed) and the hemorrhage was thought to originate somewhere in the head. The introduction of the fiberoptic endoscope to equine veterinary practice in the early 1970s allowed the safe and effective visualization of the upper respiratory tract of horses for the first time. It showed that the blood actually originated from the lungs. Furthermore, less than one horse in 20 which has EIPH has blood at the nostrils.

University studies indicate a significant percentage of racehorses, as high as 85% in one study, experience EIPH to some degree at one time or another.

There are no indications to suggest that the incidence of EIPH has increased in recent times as the incidence of epistaxis (bleeding from the nostrils) has remained essentially constant over the last century. Only the diagnostic capabilities have improved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

WCW.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...ficial-effects

I particularly enjoy this part

Once the study results are widely circulated, the authors anticipate that some racing jurisdictions may reconsider their ban on the use of furosemide.

“It is likely that racing jurisdictions will reconsider, in one way or another, their position on the use of furosemide,” they said in a statement. “However, the decision to allow or disallow the use is based on the balance of a number of factors, and resolution of this complex situation will take some time.

“The challenge will now be for countries such as England, Hong Kong, Australia and South Africa that do not currently permit race-day use of furosemide. The challenge that they will face is balancing the animal-welfare aspect of being able to prevent or reduce the condition against the imperatives for drug-free racing. Additionally, instituting race-day administration of furosemide would be a significant added expense to racing.”

dont need it anymore

the usefulness of FTL as well as 2nd Lasix and sometimes 3rd time as a handicapping measure hasnt been relevant to finding prices now that most are aware of the benefit..early on and with certain trainers I know it was masking something else..lets get rid of it and bring the pedigree aspect of "bleeders" back into play

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrajf

See post #42 regarding the myth of "pedigree aspect".

When lasix is discussed, it is the horse - only - that should be considered. Not handicapping. Handicappers will have to work around whatever is decided best for the horse.

Lasix hasn't been able to mask anything via urine dilution for a long time, detection methods are too good for that.