Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin
The truth of the matter is that you are not an iota more qualified than anyone else to decide whether lasix is good for racing or not. I think everyone knows that lasix is somewhat effective in lessening a horse's chances of bleeding. We all know what. That is not the question. If that was the question, I would agree that you have more expertise than most. But that is not the question. The question is whether lasix is good for racing or not. When it comes to that question, most countries believe the answer is "no". Are they right? They're not necessarily right but they weighed all the pros and cons of racing with lasix and they decided the cons outweigh the pros. What is it that you know that these countries don't know? The answer is nothing. You both have all the information. You both looked at all the arguments (in favor of lasix and against lasix) and you came to opposite conclusions. There is not necessarily a right or wrong answer. It is just a matter of opinion.
There is a right and wrong answer as to whether lasix lessens a horse's chance of bleeding. But there is not a right or wrong answer as to whether lasix is good for horseracing.
|
I think Lasix is the least issue people should be taking issue with. But WTF do I know? Im not a vet or a trainer Im just a person who works with and rides horses everyday and from my stand point having ridden races I was never worried the horse was gonna throw one off because it had Lasix.
Why not start with Bute? Or Cortizone or why not make every horse that is on the vets list have a full exam, x-rays and all before it works to get off the list. There is a whole lot of other crap that should be done in racing way before the outlawing of Lasix, but what do I know.
05-13-2012, 02:46 PM
Threaded Mode