Kentucky's ongoing attempt to end racing in state proceeds..

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Riot

And your insulting passive-aggressive attempt to say that vets care more about money than the horses is duly noted.

I said that? I don't thinks so.

However, you said that veterinary world cares only about the welfare of the horse. I simply pointed out that a lot of money is thrown around treating bleeders.

Money that goes to the veterinary world.

Abstract:

Your half-truthed, holier-than-thou, cut-and-pasting crusade only weakens the reasonable platform built up by the sensible sorts who are against a lasix ban. Results suggest that you are effective at reducing confidence in pro-lasix sentiment and may cause complete reversal of opinion in extreme (> Grade 2) cases.

Tomasi, Rollo. "Kentucky's Ongoing Attempt To End Racing". Derby Trail: The Paddock. p120-240. derbytrail.com

[Riot]

UOTE=RolloTomasi;854279]I said that? I don't thinks so.

I do. Why would you otherwise bring it up, discuss it in depth? How much money vets make from giving a lasix injection has no bearing on the efficacy of lasix, nor upon why the veterinary world advises the racing world to not eliminate lasix.

You don't have to believe that. And I don't have to pretend you haven't insulted veterinarians by saying that the financial aspect is one of their concerns when they make this medical recommendation.

The only financial concerns vets routinely have is being unable to treat an animal that needs help, because an owner won't pay for it.

But believe me: diagnosing and treating a horse for a bleeding episode, inflammation of the lungs, chronic cough or respiratory infection for a few weeks will pay much, much better than giving that horse a lasix injection. I wonder if owners who want to eliminate lasix have thought the cost argument through?