Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
Yes, the issue at hand is the significance of bleeding. And to know if a horse has bleed, you have to ... you know ... see if it bled, first. Then you measure the change in performance.
Right?
|
I think it was fairly obvious from both cmorioles question and my own, that we were satisfied with the most accessible and commonplace method of diagnosing EIPH (ie endoscopy) as a means of quantifying severity.
You're attempt to roadblock any further discussion of the issue at hand with your bluster about lab coats, plastic catheters, and half liters of saline is duly noted.
Quote:
Let's base the use of lasix in race horses on the facts surrounding lasix in race horses. Don't you agree? Let's let the facts tell us what we should do for the horses in our care?
Rather than making up scientific-sounding nonsense, or ignoring the 127 papers published about lasix in race horses, pretending the information we don't want to hear just doesn't exist?
|
Actually, we were discussing the signficance of bleeding on performance. That in and of itself need not include discussing lasix.
A good scientist would be able to separate and isolate the components of a multi-variable problem. Investigate each independently to ensure the most accurate definitions. Only later will those components be put back together, so that all the information can be integrated to form a cohesive whole from which to draw a logical, and hopefully valid, conclusion.
Try harder.