but like i said, come up with a way to detect who will bleed and the problem is solved.
if it's not harmful, what's the problem? if there's an alternative to lasix to prevent bleeding, present it.
otherwise right now it appears people want to ban it just to say it's been banned.
what about the horse who needs it, or may need it? are we to just cross our fingers and hope horses don't bleed? and some will, what then? people want horses to race longer, constantly decrying early retirements. but older horses become more prone to episodes, what then?
to say just get rid of it is not enough. it's not a solution, other than to say 'ta da, we don't have race day meds'. is that more important than making sure there aren't medical issues? i think this 'cure' is worse than the 'disease'.
if it doesn't cause harm, doesn't enhance performance, and doesn't mask drugs, what's the problem? what potentially costs more, using it, or not using it and having to deal with eiph?
what's best for the horses?
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all.
Abraham Lincoln
|