Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin
That sounds like a contradiction. You say that no horses are "med dependent". If the horses don't need meds, then why give them meds?
With regards to genetics, there is strong evidence that bleeding is genetic.
"According to data presented at the Summit, bleeding is to some degree an inherited trait, and the more horses whose bleeding was controlled by Lasix go to the breeding shed, the more that trait will tend to appear in subsequent generation."
http://businessofracing.blogspot.com...o-be-done.html |
from the drf article:
In large part, those studies have concluded that horses suffer from bleeding as a result of genetic conditions
that evolved in the species millions of years ago and because of the vast volumes of blood pumped at high pressure through a horse's lungs during exercise. Other studies have concluded that furosemide has been proven to mitigate those effects and prevent long-term damage to lung tissue.
as for your query-horses given lasix don't have to have it to run, it's something they can run without. in that regard, they aren't dependent. however, the issue is bleeding, in some horses it can be significant. lasix prevents that. and as romans pointed out, they would have allowed it throughout training, just not on race days which is when he said 'they would need it most'. and as was pointed out, lasix can prevent long-term lung damage.
if ky wants to lead the way on meds, perhaps they should do more to go after the ones that enhance performance, rather than worrying about a drug that prevents bleeding and tissue damage?