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

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Gary Stevens is going to testify before Congress. Stevens takes a zero-tolerance stance on race-day medication. Stevens must be a terrible guy to take such a stance. He must have some really selfish and negative intentions. It's either that, or he must just be really ignorant on the subject. LOL. Let the attacks on Stevens begin.

http://www.drf.com/news/hovdey-steve...day-medication

Why does anyone care what Gary Stevens thinks about the topic? And why does his own personal experience matter considering he is not only being disingenious about why he kept coming back to ride not to mention because he is not a horse it isnt really relevant.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

... not to mention because he is not a horse it isnt really relevant.

So anything you or your ex-employee say isn't relevant either? I know you aren't a horse, and I don't think Riot is either.

Seriously though Chuck, if racing were trying to be legalized today and one of the stipulations was that virtually every horse had to receive a drug injection before racing, what are the chances it would, in fact, be legalized?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

No, I do not agree. I totally disagree. The horseracing industry has done a horrible job of policing itself. The fox has not done a good job of guarding the hen-house. They've had the last 20 years to clean up the sport and they won't do it.

I think the doctor/patient argument is a horrible analogy here. In general, doctors usually do what is best for their patients. Doctors work for their patients. In horseracing, the vet does not work for his patient (the horse). The vets works for the owner and trainer, both of whom often do not have the best interest of the horse in mind.

If owners and trainers had the best interest of the horse in mind, you wouldn't have the state vet scratching horses the morning of the race. Why does the state vet scratch horses the morning of the race? Because trainers will sometimes attempt to run unsound horses. This proves that some trainers do not have the best interest of the horse in mind.

Anyway, you have a sport where hundreds of millions of dollars are being bet. When you have that much money being bet, there needs to be a governing body that insures integrity. With the stock market, they don't police themselves. You have the SEC that does that.

There needs to be someone there to protect the horses and protect the public. In my opinion, the racing industry has proven time and time again that they are incapable of policing themselves. Any time someone wants to make a significant change, the owners and trainers start dragging their feet. I'd rather have the industry take charge of itself but if they're not going to do it, then I have no problem with the government coming in.

Horse racing doesnt do a good job of policing itself because it doesnt have the authority to police itself.

And horseracing is far less corrupt than the stock market and its major participants

By the way the government has been supposedly protecting the horses and public for a long time and they obviously do such a poor job it has made guys like you forget that little factoid. The difference between a state racing commission and a national racing commission is the latter will just cost more to operate.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

So anything you or your ex-employee say isn't relevant either? I know you aren't a horse, and I don't think Riot is either.

Seriously though Chuck, if racing were trying to be legalized today and one of the stipulations was that virtually every horse had to receive a drug injection before racing, what are the chances it would, in fact, be legalized?

Gary Stevens is using his own personal medical history as the basis of his argument. That if he has taken time off instead of injecting his knees that he would still be riding. Of course his memory seems to be a bit short as to why he came back (financial issues relating to having too many kids) and that "rest" wasnt really an option. I would also add that jockeys rarely have much idea as to what goes on with individual horses outside of the 15 minutes that they spend on their back but Stevens does have that 3 month training career to fall back on.

As for your speculation I doubt that that issue would be relevant in the legalization as it is still is not required treatment. I undertsand what you are saying but this is being made into a far bigger item than it deserves and because this has become a political correctness battle it is impossible for those in favor of lasix use to win. The real question is what will the fallout be? May not work out so good in the long run.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

As for your speculation I doubt that that issue would be relevant in the legalization as it is still is not required treatment. I undertsand what you are saying but this is being made into a far bigger item than it deserves and because this has become a political correctness battle it is impossible for those in favor of lasix use to win. The real question is what will the fallout be? May not work out so good in the long run.

It sure seems required looking at the entries every day at every track. That is my point, and you guys avoid that. Either 99% of horses need it, or they don't. We aren't talking cheap claimers here. Check out my BC Classic list. Our best horses ALL get Lasix. I find it hard to believe they all need it.

The fallout will probably be hard on the game short term, but long term, I don't think it is nearly as grave as some seem to think.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

We aren't talking cheap claimers here. Check out my BC Classic list. Our best horses ALL get Lasix. I find it hard to believe they all need it.

So what? What difference does it make really? Virtually every horse gets a shot of bute 24 hours out as well and has for 40 years.

There is a certain English trainer that came to the US after a very successful career in Europe. I was helping a vet in FL out one Winter shortly after that trainer came here full time and the vet was tasked with treating this trainers horse which had shipped in for a stake. The instructions were amazing not only in the amount of shots given but the timing which was all listed as well. The vet who did not treat this trainers horses regularly did not follow the detailed instructions and gave all the shots at once when the first shot was supposed to be given. The instructions were 3 days long and shots were to be given 3 or 4 different times a day leading up to raceday. The point being that this trainer was a freaking expert on drugs (all legal meds but given in a far different manner than the Vet or I had ever seen or heard of). It is almost implausible that he hadnt been treating horses in a similar fashion for quite some time in Europe where every thing is supposedly wonderful.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So what? What difference does it make really? Virtually every horse gets a shot of bute 24 hours out as well and has for 40 years.

So what? It should be painfully obvious by now. It is all about perception. Drugging every horse before they race is never going to be perceived very well, and I personally don't think it should be. Every horse shouldn't get Bute either. They don't all need it.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

So what? It should be painfully obvious by now. It is all about perception. Drugging every horse before they race is never going to be perceived very well, and I personally don't think it should be. Every horse shouldn't get Bute either. They don't all need it.

Perception? Who brought this entire debate into the publics eye because it sure hasn't been much of a topic for a long time? This is a issue that was created by those within the game who have their own agenda which is largely misguided. If giving a horse a shot of lasix is "drugging" them then pretty much all of us (with the notable exception of Indian Charlie) are drugging ourselves every day as well.

The perception of this sport has very little to do with lasix.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Perception? Who brought this entire debate into the publics eye because it sure hasn't been much of a topic for a long time? This is a issue that was created by those within the game who have their own agenda which is largely misguided. If giving a horse a shot of lasix is "drugging" them then pretty much all of us (with the notable exception of Indian Charlie) are drugging ourselves every day as well.

The perception of this sport has very little to do with lasix.

We are? All of us are getting injections? I have a herniated disc, so I have had a few this year, but not so I could compete. I would say a very small percentage are getting injections, and of that, how many are doing it to compete in sports?

[Cannon Shell]

The evidence that the general public gives a damn about anything we do in this sport is flimsy. For those which are ardent followers of the sport I can think of many better ways to address the perception issue than elimnating raceday lasix (in other words for the majority of people, taking the L in the program away). This sport has a lot of huge issues staring it in the face and lasix usage or lack there of is hardly going to solve any of them.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

That is ridiculous. What percentage of horses in other countries train on lasix during speed training, 5% at the most? It is an extremely small percent. It would only be horses that are considered bad bleeders.

Well, it's hard to argue against your made up, imaginary guesses when you pretend they are fact.

The lasix haters need to face the truth: lasix isn't a nasty performance enhancing drug, it's an excellent therapeutic drug that prevents a common, rampant bleeding problem in horses lungs. It's a medical problem that is a horse problem, not a racing problem.

Some in the industry have done a good job brainwashing the non-reasoning believers otherwise, based upon old and now-proven-false information from decades ago. This purposeful blindness, while ignoring the real drug problems in this sport, using the silly straw men of steroids and lasix, is a direct threat to the continued existence of this industry due to their purposeful ignorance. Let alone the health and welfare of the horse.

And my statement as zero to do with getting every single illegal and performance-enhancing drug out of the sport - which is exactly what the veterinary community wants to do, and is trying to do. And I agree with that stance of zero tolerance for performance-enhancing drugs completely.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

We are? All of us are getting injections? I have a herniated disc, so I have had a few this year, but not so I could compete. I would say a very small percentage are getting injections, and of that, how many are doing it to compete in sports?

So all those diabetics that give themselves shots are druggies because they use a needle to treat their disease? Lasix comes in many forms including pills, would it make you feel better if we gave them pills? What difference does it make what delivery system you are using? We give electrolytes and fluids to horses using catheters and no one is against them.

Refusing to acknowledge that lasix is a preventative measure clouds your entire argument.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

It sure seems required looking at the entries every day at every track. That is my point, and you guys avoid that. Either 99% of horses need it, or they don't.

Excuse me. Nonsense. I have pointed out repeatedly to you on this thread that research shows that an average of 93% of race horses have evidence of microscopic bleeding in their lungs. Stop blinding ignoring that and saying differently.

We aren't talking cheap claimers here. Check out my BC Classic list. Our best horses ALL get Lasix. I find it hard to believe they all need it.

The veterinary world has shown we have definitive proof, over the years, that 93% of horses bleed, and the "veterinary world" strongly advises lasix's continued use as a therapeutic medication on race day due to proven medical benefits of the drug in attenuating the severity and incidence of EIPH. Stop ignoring that essential truth.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Why does anyone care what Gary Stevens thinks about the topic? And why does his own personal experience matter considering he is not only being disingenious about why he kept coming back to ride not to mention because he is not a horse it isnt really relevant.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So all those diabetics that give themselves shots are druggies because they use a needle to treat their disease? Lasix comes in many forms including pills, would it make you feel better if we gave them pills? What difference does it make what delivery system you are using? We give electrolytes and fluids to horses using catheters and no one is against them.

Refusing to acknowledge that lasix is a preventative measure clouds your entire argument.

There is a whole list of approved therapeutic medications that can be used in horse competitions internationally, (and humans, too) at the Olympic level, etc. All while there is zero tolerance for illegal drugs, and/or excessive levels of therapeutic drugs, with far more aggressive and restrictive - and further advanced - testing and detection procedures than the American horse racing industry.

The American racing industry should stop being a club of old rich but rather ignorant men, harrumping and grunting about lasix and steroids and thinking they are making a difference, and start stepping up into the 21st century like the rest of the world.

It would be good to reflect upon why the racing industry isn't embracing what's common in other elite performance horse sports in the rest of the world, and continues to cry about ... lasix? Seriously? All the problems in racing, and they are setting fire to the straw man of lasix?

[Danzig]

is there a way to know beforehand whether a horse will bleed at any given time? are there warnings, advanced notice? any way to know if it'll be a minor or a major episode? since i've read that major bleeding can cause permanent damage that can lesser a horses ability in future, is there a way to know ahead of time what horses need lasix? or can it occur at any time to any horse? i've read in the past that a horse has bled in a race and had never done so before.

so, if you want to cut down on giving lasix, how do you go about doing that? and when one bleeds, do you just say 'oops' to the owner, the jock and the bettors?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

is there a way to know beforehand whether a horse will bleed at any given time? are there warnings, advanced notice? any way to know if it'll be a minor or a major episode?

Unfortunately, no.

since i've read that major bleeding can cause permanent damage that can lesser a horses ability in future, is there a way to know ahead of time what horses need lasix?

Bleeding into the lungs is detectable in all race horse horses post-exercise:

5% of the time by waiting for blood to bubble up out of the lungs, up through the trachea, and gush from nostrils

75% of the time by using an endoscope to look for evidence of frank blood in the trachea

93% of the time by doing a transtracheal wash or broncheoalvelar lavage and seeing blood cells that have ruptured into the alveoli (air sacs).

The location of scarring is the capillary-aveolar sac interface.

On the track, horses don't get approved for lasix use until a vet documents a bleeding episode via endoscopy.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

So what? It should be painfully obvious by now. It is all about perception. Drugging every horse before they race is never going to be perceived very well, and I personally don't think it should be. Every horse shouldn't get Bute either. They don't all need it.

The solution to bad "perception" is not to choose to undermine the health care of the horse in favor of supporting and giving in to public ignorance about drugs.

The solution is educating the ignorance away.

That's proven to be really difficult in some.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

The solution to bad "perception" is not to choose to undermine the health care of the horse in favor of supporting and giving in to public ignorance about drugs.

The solution is educating the ignorance away.

That's proven to be really difficult in some.

I don't think most people really care that much about the health of horses. Out of sight, out of mind.

Oh they claim they do because who would admit the not caring but this entire debate is not about the health of horses. Most people just havent come to that realization yet.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I don't think most people really care that much about the health of horses. Out of sight, out of mind.

Oh they claim they do because who would admit the not caring but this entire debate is not about the health of horses. Most people just havent come to that realization yet.

Faithful pawns are useful for maintaining power. Burn a straw man, it's as good as solving a real problem to those pawns that like fire, rather than substance.