NYTHA Lasix Primer & Letter to NYS RWB

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

This is also true when discussing the significance of bleeding in racehorses as it pertains to actual performance. How much is a horse's performance actually affected by bleeding at grades below the most severe?

It goes back to what cmorioles was saying about the vast majority of racehorses receiving lasix on raceday.

I've always wondered if you need a scope to find bleeding, how bad is it really? Does it affect performance? How do we know? Who can give an accurate measurement?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I've always wondered if you need a scope to find bleeding, how bad is it really? Does it affect performance? How do we know? Who can give an accurate measurement?

You know that you don't need a scope to find bleeding. You know there are other ways that are far more accurate. Why are your purposely ignoring that? Why are you misleading people with your statements?

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Riot

You know that you don't need a scope to find bleeding. You know there are other ways that are far more accurate. Why are your purposely ignoring that? Why are you misleading people with your statements?

The issue at hand, since clearly you don't follow, is the significance of bleeding, not the diagnosis.

Ketchup.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

The issue at hand, since clearly you don't follow, is the significance of bleeding, not the diagnosis.

Ketchup.

Oh, I love it when those ignorant of science try to use it in an argument, then reveal themselves to be ... well, ignorant of science.

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?

Your question was: "How much is a horse's performance actually affected by bleeding at grades below the most severe?"

We have that information. Do you know the answer?

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?

[RolloTomasi]

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.

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.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

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.

But that is not the most accurate method of quantifying severity. You know that. In fact, it's known that endoscopy misses the diagnosis the majority of time.

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.

Damn! Science! Truth! How dare I!

Even though I've not mentioned "lab coats, plastic catheters, and half liters of saline". Seriously: does reality ever intrude upon you?

Actually, we were discussing the signficance of bleeding on performance. That in and of itself need not include discussing lasix.

Yet it means everything when one wants to ban the use of a valuable therapeutic drug - lasix - on race day.

But let's discuss your first premise: tell me, what does science tell us about the significance of EIPH, bleeding, on performance? We have that answer. Tell us what science has found about the significance of EIPH on performance.

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.

Yeah. You might take your own advice. Because believe me, you aren't doing any of that. You are deliberately ignoring any science at odds to your opinion.

The question is not if lasix should be used on race day. The question is: do we want to allow the use of proven effective therapeutic medications on race day, or not?

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Riot

But that is not the most accurate method of quantifying severity. You know that. In fact, it's known that endoscopy misses the diagnosis the majority of time.

Didn't you just post a whole list of purported facts that gush over the advent and widespread use of endoscopy?

Please be consistent.

Damn! Science! Truth! How dare I!

Even though I've not mentioned "lab coats, plastic catheters, and half liters of saline". Seriously: does reality ever intrude upon you?

I was presuming that the more accurate method of diagnosis you were referring to was a bronchial lavage. My bad.

Yet it means everything when one wants to ban the use of a valuable therapeutic drug - lasix - on race day.

I never said I wanted lasix banned.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I've always wondered if you need a scope to find bleeding, how bad is it really? Does it affect performance? How do we know? Who can give an accurate measurement?

One logical course of action would be to observe the quality and success of racing in jurisdictions that don't allow raceday lasix.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

One logical course of action would be to observe the quality and success of racing in jurisdictions that don't allow raceday lasix.

Heck no. "Observing the quality and success of racing in jurisdictions that don't allow raceday lasix"would give us absolutely zero information about, "finding bleeding, how bad is it really? Does it affect performance? How do we know? Who can give an accurate measurement?"

You know what would be a great way to find out how many horses bleed, how bad is the problem "really", does it affect performance? You know who could give us an accurate measurement?

That would be to let scientists actually look at thousands of race horses, and actually measure how badly they bleed, with and without lasix.

We have that information. What is the answer? Do you know?

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Riot

Heck no. "Observing the quality and success of racing in jurisdictions that don't allow raceday lasix"would give us absolutely zero information about, "finding bleeding, how bad is it really? Does it affect performance? How do we know? Who can give an accurate measurement?"

If other jurisdictions are able to successfully maintain a viable racing industry without the permitted use of lasix on raceday, doesn't that suggest something with regards to the signficance of EIPH on racing in general?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

If other jurisdictions are able to successfully maintain a viable racing industry without the permitted use of lasix on raceday, doesn't that suggest something with regards to the signficance of EIPH on racing in general?

From the horses point of view? From the gamblers? From the track's profit line? From horse breeders point of view? Whose interest should be put first in the racing industry?

What it says is only that uncontrolled EIPH on race day will not prevent a viable racing industry from existing.

Do you think we should base our use of race day medications on what scientific facts tell us is best for the horse, or not?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

If other jurisdictions are able to successfully maintain a viable racing industry without the permitted use of lasix on raceday, doesn't that suggest something with regards to the signficance of EIPH on racing in general?

...and these very same horses routinely destroy our horses when they don't use Lasix.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

...and these very same horses routinely destroy our horses when they don't use Lasix.

Not only that, but apparently most of the scientific evidence that validates the use of lasix comes from a single study (from 2009--took a while to prove, didn't it?) done under racing conditions in...wait for it...South Africa.

I thought we weren't supposed to care what happened with racehorses across the Atlantic.

Their system and methods are totally different. Right?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Not only that, but apparently most of the scientific evidence that validates the use of lasix comes from a single study (from 2009--took a while to prove, didn't it?) done under racing conditions in...wait for it...South Africa.

False. Completely false. Again, you are simply ignoring that which you do not want to hear. There are 127 studies on lasix in the race horse, including many in the US. In fact, I have posted several on the previous thread, that you have certainly seen.

So are you just ignoring that? Or did you forget it exists? Or are you deliberately misstating in the above paragraph? Because your statement is grossly factually untrue.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

...and these very same horses routinely destroy our horses when they don't use Lasix.

Can you please provide some quantitative proof to that? Thanks!

Like, all the times your horses over 30 years have not used lasix in their races, and have beaten their peers.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Riot

Can you please provide some quantitative proof to that? Thanks!

Like, all the times your horses over 30 years have not used lasix in their races, and have beaten their peers.

I think you misunderstand. I'm asking why we can't seem to win any race that matters overseas? Sure, our turf horses aren't the greatest, but they do win a decent number of BC races. Overseas, without Lasix, well, it is getting embarrassing. I'd settle for a horse that could run 10th at this point.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

...and these very same horses routinely destroy our horses when they don't use Lasix.

I'm confused about this.

On turf? On dirt? Both surfaces? are we talking about euro shippers to american or american shippers to europe?

I just cant think of a high number of euro's who routinley destroy our best dirt horses when they do not use lasix.

On turf? sure it seems that way. Though you would think it would be expected considering America focuses on dirt racing and Europe focuses on turf racing... which of course has nothing to do with lasix.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I'm confused about this.

On turf? On dirt? Both surfaces? are we talking about euro shippers to american or american shippers to europe?

I just cant think of a high number of euro's who routinley destroy our best dirt horses when they do not use lasix.

On turf? sure it seems that way. Though you would think it would be expected considering America focuses on dirt racing and Europe focuses on turf racing... which of course has nothing to do with lasix.

i have tried several times without success to find a bloodhorse story from a few years ago that showed even tho some believe euros routinely thrash us when we meet, that it isn't actually the case. very frustrating to say the least that i can remember reading the thing, but can't produce a link.