Yeah, just ignore those 27,000 other horses I mentioned.

Science - it screw up your opinions. Too bad for you.

But the most hilarious thing is, in your silly superficial, shallow arguments about "speed" right now, you completely fail to realize how I've always posted the science that shows horses improve 3 - 5.5 lengths on lasix. Including in this thread. Including the post you dismissed as "yada, yada, yada'

Duh.

So it is a performance enhancer?

You might rather re-read the multiple places where I have already answered that in detail rather than your simplistic statement - good job!

Of course it is, otherwise those horses that don't get Lasix, but get some other form of treatment to stop bleeding, would also improve 3 to 5 lengths. But, they don't.

Isn't it time for you to inject yourself with lasix?

Yes. Furosemide stops EIPH. Other things also help stop EIPH. Currently allowable adjuncts do not reliably work to stop EIPH.

The improvement of return to performance - a horse being able to perform again at 100%, because the horse is not bleeding into their lung from EIPH and suffocating - is about the same for those things that work successfully to stop EIPH.

Science is amazing. Medicine is amazing. How about that?

No, I'm fine, as are many of the horses getting unneeded shots.

Then it's time to get out of horsey racing and into the sports where the performers inject themselves of their own free will....or not.

I really don't need some anonymous clown telling me what to do, but thanks anyway.

Geez.


Talk abut hitting your guilty button.

Stick to NAdvantage where you are more protected.

And stop being such an abysmal hypocrite....googlies!

Since you keep talking in circles I thought keeping it simple might help.

It hasn't.

Trying to score points with vet or something? Let me know when you make your first post worth reading.

It is all she ever does. It would explain a lot if she lived in a crop field.

Are you shore you are not from Less,Oklahoma?



Anyways, I think my reply to you that caused your hissy fit was quite worthy.It made a swell point.I do understand your dodge;was a toughy to answer.So....I will not bug you anymore with things that upset your fragile ego.You may have the last word here.

It don't matter to me what you say as you already have said quite enough....in just a little.



All the best.

I knew I recognized you. Always nice to have a stalker.

You know that's not true, nor is it fair.

Especially as I've tried to answer your questions in good faith, and it appears you deliberately want to ignore that.

Once again, I tried to keep it very simple for you pages ago:

Virtually all TB race horses suffer EIPH.
Suffering EIPH impedes performance.
Lasix attenuates EIPH very successfully.
Horses that don't suffer EIPH - because they have received a shot of lasix - regain their performance level.
Yes, lasix improves performance in horses suffering EIPH, because they are no longer suffering EIPH.
If you give a performance horse not suffering EIPH lasix, does their performance improve?
No. Not at all. No, lasix is not a stand-alone performance-enhancer.

Again, since all horse bleed according to you, how could you possibly prove this? Drug em all, that is the ticket.

Are you deliberately obtuse, or simply unable to understand? I'll give you a bit of credit, I'm guessing the former.

All horses that work at certain speeds and intensities suffer EIPH, all breeds (race horses, event horses, etc). However, not all horses that work hard for shorter intensities suffer EIPH (cutting horses, reining horses). Yes, if you give the second group of horses lasix, no, their performance is not improved.

Yes, all TB race horses are considered to bleed in their fast work (not at slow base-forming gallops).

Anyway, Hinchcliff proved the point in South Africa a few years ago, verifying previous data from NYRA races, and Australia.

Don't you have another conspiracy theory, where you completely ignore science you don't like, to promulgate? Gravity is a lie, or evolution doesn't occur?