[Riot]

Originally Posted by Powderfinger

I am curious why you think this? From what I read here only 5% of the current thoroughbred industry's inventory really need lasix. Maybe another 25% should have it.

Where are you getting the false statistic that "only 5% of horses need lasix?" That's not been said here at all, even by those that are trying to deny lasix is a therapeutic medication. It is factually false. The incidence of EIPH is documented to be much higher, and that has been repeatedly said here.

Oh: and horses are not inanimate "inventory", they are more properly and objectively labeled "live stock", with "stock" for short, but actually they are living creatures with lungs that bleed at high intensity exercise levels.

I am still convinced that if the lungs bleed beyond a certain level, the horse is doing something it shouldn't. And for a vet to allow that animal to compete is borderline criminal. And giving it a shot of lasix is animal cruelty.

Please read the basic information page about Exercise-Induced Pulmonary Hemorrhage Kasept posted in the first link and first post of this thread, so you learn the basic facts about EIPH before you join the discussion.

EIPH is a horse problem, not a horse racing problem. It is not confined to Thoroughbred horses racing on the flat or over hurdles. It is not confined to North America. It is not confined to the Thoroughbred breed. It is a long-recognized medical problem, for which we have a therapeutic drug that helps.

Accusing vets of criminality for helping horses that suffer EIPH is ridiculous hyperbole, not to mention insulting. You can "believe" whatever you wish, such as dinosaurs walked the earth with humans and vaccinations cause autism, but that doesn't change the facts surrounding EIPH.

Here are some basic facts about Exercise-Induced Pulmonary Hemorrhage:

EIPH in Horses

EIPH has been reported to occur in a variety of race horse breeds including racing Thoroughbreds (both racing on the flat and over jumps) , American Quarter Horses (incidence of 50-75%), Standardbreds (incidence of 40-60%), Arabians, and Appaloosas. EIPH has also been reported in eventers, jumpers, polo ponies, endurance horses, draft horses that pull competitively,[1] and horses taking part in Western speed events such as reining, cutting and barrel racing. EIPH is now considered to be an inevitable consequence of moderate to intense exercise in horses and other athletic animals. The lowest intensities of exercise which have been reported to cause EIPH are intense trotting (40-60% maximal oxygen uptake)[2] and cantering at speeds of 16–19 miles per hour (26–31 km/h).[3]

It occurs less frequently in stallions than mares or geldings,[4] but it is associated with airway inflammation and increasing age.[5]

The affliction occurs when blood enters the air passages of a horse's lung, due to fractured lung capillaries. Blood is sometimes evident discharging from a horse's nostrils (epistaxis), however, epitaxis usually only occurs in 5% of bleeders.[1][6] If a horse does not exhibit epistaxis but is suspected to have EIPH, an endoscopic exam is performed soon after the horse is exercised.

Prevalence of EIPH in Horses

Based on surveys of horses examined endoscopically following racing, around 40 to 70% of horses have been reported to have blood in the trachea following a single post-race examination. One of the more recent and larger studies found an overall prevalence of just under 60%.[7] The time at which the examination is carried out can determine whether or not blood is seen. The usual time for examination is 30–40 minutes following exercise. If examination is carried out too soon after exercise then blood may not have progressed from the dorso-caudal (top and back) of the lung into the trachea. If the examination is carried out too long after exercise then any blood may have moved up the trachea and been swallowed and therefore not be visible at the time of examination. In one study (Birks et al. 2002), when horses were endoscoped on at least three separate occasions following racing, all horses had blood in the trachea on at least one occasion.

Epistaxis (blood coming from one or both nostrils) is much less common. In a survey of over 220,000 horse starts in UK Flat and National Hunt (jump) racing, 185 cases of epistaxis were identified giving a frequency of 0.83/1000 starts. Similar frequencies have been reported for epistaxis in Japan (1.5 per 1000 starts) and South Africa (1.65 per 1000 starts). However a study of racehorses in Korea reported a much higher frequency (8.4 per 1000 starts).[8]

It is believed that nearly all horses experience EIPH when exposed to strenuous exercise,[9] and it has the potential to decrease lung function over time. However, there are no documented cases of bleeding in wild horses when rounded up[10][unreliable source?] with helicopters from mountain tops in pens miles away.

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.

Again: if people want to eliminate all medication on race day, both illegal, legal and abused, and therapeutic, that's their choice.

But lying about the facts surround EIPH and furosemide simply to meet a political agenda is absurd, and factual lies should and will be called out by those that know better.

The astounding reveal of the factually-bereft position of the anti-lasix crew is that they have not once mentioned banning aminocaproic acid, carbazochrome, tranexamic acid, and conjugated estrogens that are given to try and stop bleeding. If you want to "ban" medications given for bleeding, why have you not mentioned these?