NYTHA Lasix Primer & Letter to NYS RWB

[Honu]

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.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

It must be very dark where your head is. You think that because you are a vet, you are the only one with a valid opinion?

Not at all. But I'm not the one forming my opinion by deliberately ignoring science and reality. You are.

We don't need more uneducated lasix conspiracy nuts. We need leadership.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Honu

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.

Those are good points. I agree with everything you said.

I would be in favor of all of those things. I wish they would implement everything you are suggesting. As we both know, I'm sure they aren't going to do all of those things overnight. If they start doing them, it will probably be one thing at a time. I don't care which one they start with, as long as they start somewhere.

I think lasix should be somewhere on that list too. And as I said, I don't care what comes first on the list.

[Riot]

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.

The truth of the matter is that I am far more qualified than you. I actually treat animals, including horses, with lasix, I am trained in it's pharmacology and use, I have a license and degree that proves that, and I am a published researcher regarding the pharmacologic effect of lasix in race horses.

You? You're a rude guy on the internet. You're entitled to an opinion on race day medications, but when you start saying false things about lasix to advance an agenda, I call bullsh.i.at. on the lasix lies. Because, yes, I know far more about lasix than you do.

But that is not the question. The question is whether lasix is good for racing or not.

The question is do you think using therapeutic medications that help protect the lungs of race horses should continue to be allowed?

You say no. Good luck with that. I'll fight you and your ilk every step of the way.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Keep it up you could get a de facto license one day to practice in Argentina?

You might be on to something. I have connections in Buenos Aires.

I hear it's nice as long as you can avoid getting shanked.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Not at all. But I'm not the one forming my opinion by deliberately ignoring science and reality. You are.

We don't need more uneducated lasix conspiracy nuts. We need leadership.

What part of science and reality am I ignoring? I never said that laisx is totally ineffective in lessening the chances and severity of bleeding.

The one ignoring reality is you. You say that "eliminating lasix will ruin horseracing". To make a statement like that you must be totally out of touch with reality. For years we had no lasix in this country and racing was great. In other countries they have no lasix and racing is great. So how would eliminating lasix ruin racing?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

What part of science and reality am I ignoring? I never said that laisx is totally ineffective in lessening the chances and severity of bleeding.

The one ignoring reality is you. You say that "eliminating lasix will ruin horseracing". To make a statement like that you must be totally out of touch with reality. For years we had no lasix in this country and racing was great. In other countries they have no lasix and racing is great. So how would eliminating lasix ruin racing?

Well, me and 60,000 other professionals in the American Veterinary Medical Association, the American Association of Equine Practitioners, and many a trainer.

But you hold on to your tiny minority opinion about lasix as a root of evil in horse racing.

Either you believe in therapeutic medication and modern veterinary medicine for hard-working equine athletes, or you do not.

You don't.

Yeah: I say that attitude isn't good for the horse, and will ruin racing.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Riot

Either you believe in therapeutic medication and modern veterinary medicine for hard-working equine athletes, or you do not.

Is the issue of therapeutic medication really that black-and-white? No grey areas?

Do you think there are instances where therapeutic medication is used when not indicated, overused, or even abused?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Is the issue of therapeutic medication really that black-and-white? No grey areas?

Do you think there are instances where therapeutic medication is used when not indicated, overused, or even abused?

Do you think therapeutic medications can be allowed on race day, or not?

The very definition of therapeutic medication is that used at the proper dose, under veterinary supervision, for the proper indication.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

The truth of the matter is that I am far more qualified than you. I actually treat animals, including horses, with lasix, I am trained in it's pharmacology and use, I have a license and degree that proves that, and I am a published researcher regarding the pharmacologic effect of lasix in race horses.

You? You're a rude guy on the internet. You're entitled to an opinion on race day medications, but when you start saying false things about lasix to advance an agenda, I call bullsh.i.at. on the lasix lies. Because, yes, I know far more about lasix than you do.



The question is do you think using therapeutic medications that help protect the lungs of race horses should continue to be allowed?

You say no. Good luck with that. I'll fight you and your ilk every step of the way.

You are more qualified than most to discuss the efficacy of lasix in preventing and/or lessening bleeding.

I've been in the business for 29 years as a bettor, owner, and racing manager. I talk to trainers every day. I talk to vets all the time. I look at our horses several times a week. I've been directly involved with close to 100 horses over the years. Do I know as much about lasix as you? Of course not. But I know enough about it and enough about all aspects of the business to have an informed opinion on the issue.

My opinion isn't necessarily right but it is at least an informed opinion.

You say I'm a "rude guy on the internet". I've posted on this board for several years and I think at least 95% of the posters would disagree with you. I think most people would tell you that I am one of the most polite people on this board.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Well, me and 60,000 other professionals in the American Veterinary Medical Association, the American Association of Equine Practitioners, and many a trainer.

But you hold on to your tiny minority opinion about lasix as a root of evil in horse racing.

Either you believe in therapeutic medication and modern veterinary medicine for hard-working equine athletes, or you do not.

You don't.

Yeah: I say that attitude isn't good for the horse, and will ruin racing.

I don't think too many of those 60,000 people would say that "eliminating lasix will ruin horseracing". I think you are in the minority there.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You are more qualified than most to discuss the efficacy of lasix in preventing and/or lessening bleeding.

That's right. And when the anti- lasix proponents start lying about the drug, and the science surrounding it, in order to further their agenda, that's when I entered the conversation.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I don't think too many of those 60,000 people would say that "eliminating lasix will ruin horseracing". I think you are in the minority there.

How about 60,000 professionals advising that, "eliminating race day lasix is bad for the health and welfare of the horse".

Considering that the health and welfare of the horse enables horse racing's existence, it's not really hyperbole.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Riot

Do you think therapeutic medications can be allowed on race day, or not?

What do you mean "can be"? Therapeutic medications are already allowed on race day.

The very definition of therapeutic medication is that used at the proper dose, under veterinary supervision, for the proper indication.

So your contention is that legal medications at the racetrack are used only in a therapeutic fashion?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

What do you mean "can be"? Therapeutic medications are already allowed on race day.

Type. Can continue to be

So your contention is that legal medications at the racetrack are used only in a therapeutic fashion?

Nope. Stop changing the subject. I gave the definition of therapeutic medication. Do you agree with therapeutic medication use on race day, or not?

There is a cadre of people that want all medication eliminated from race day use. That's great.

Unfortunately for some of these old, white, rich guys who run racing, the veterinary and scientific community dared to say back to them, "We agree, eliminate all adjuncts, all NSAIDS, all illegal drugs - but not lasix - it's a valuable therapeutic and beneficial and necessary for the health and welfare of the horse".

So now that cadre is pissed. They don't want to allow lasix on race days. They want all drugs eliminated. How dare the veterinary community tell them they are wrong on this.

So some are now outright lying about lasix, nitpicking sentences from science papers to misinform, doing anything to try and prove lasix isn't therapeutic and helpful, that the science community is wrong, that old white rich horse owners are right, and lasix deserves being banned.

"The science community is lying about the research". False.
"Vets want lasix use just for the money". False.
"Lasix masks other drugs". False.
"Lasix is a hop". False.
"Vets are lying about the amount of bleeding". False.

The plutocrats have attacked the messengers, and attacked and lied about the message. It goes on and on. It's beyond absurd.

I don't give a damn what someone elses' opinion is on race day medications, as long as it's formed from reality and not lies.

If we eliminate lasix on race day, we had better be prepared for the physical damage we will do to race horses.

The "eliminate all drugs" plutocrats better stop trying to slide out of that responsibility by making up lies about the drug and the veterinary community. Because we know better, and the public will, too.

We're not going to stand for silly old rich guys agreeing to harm race horses just so their egos and preconceived ideas are not threatened. No matter how often they call us liars and say we really don't put the horse first. Eff you, old rich white racing guys. Somebody is putting the horse first, and it certainly isn't you.

[Cannon Shell]

The idea that the outcome of races can be manipulated by the amount of lasix given is completely without merit.
While I dont agree that the elimination of lasix will ruin racing, it surely wont have a positive effect in the short or long term especially as it contributes to a continued decline in the number of owners nationwide. Surely the added expense along with the decrease in value of a large number of horses cant be a positive regardless of how you look at it. The idea that the playing field is leveled w/o lasix is just plain wrong, it will be muddled as trainers and vets try new techniques with widely varying results.
There is a serious shortage of owners coming into the game and the number of empty stalls at tracks across the country is increasing. The decline in foal crop is far less significant than the decline in people to own them.

The common theme that less racing is going to lead to some revival as all the horses from the tracks that close are going to migrate to the surviving tracks is just not going to happen either. Racing has been shrinking for 20 years, getting smaller wont help except to further marginalize it and create more barriers to finding new participants. What racings leaders have failed to grasp is that people will choose to walk away and have been doing it for years now. Both owners and bettors are leaving yet the new strategy we get from the people with the money is a crusade against a diureitic with the side effect of enormous negative publicity giving every potential enemy of the game a free shot to stick a fork in its side.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The idea that the outcome of races can be manipulated by the amount of lasix given is completely without merit.
While I dont agree that the elimination of lasix will ruin racing, it surely wont have a positive effect in the short or long term especially as it contributes to a continued decline in the number of owners nationwide. Surely the added expense along with the decrease in value of a large number of horses cant be a positive regardless of how you look at it. The idea that the playing field is leveled w/o lasix is just plain wrong, it will be muddled as trainers and vets try new techniques with widely varying results.
There is a serious shortage of owners coming into the game and the number of empty stalls at tracks across the country is increasing. The decline in foal crop is far less significant than the decline in people to own them.

The common theme that less racing is going to lead to some revival as all the horses from the tracks that close are going to migrate to the surviving tracks is just not going to happen either. Racing has been shrinking for 20 years, getting smaller wont help except to further marginalize it and create more barriers to finding new participants. What racings leaders have failed to grasp is that people will choose to walk away and have been doing it for years now. Both owners and bettors are leaving yet the new strategy we get from the people with the money is a crusade against a diureitic with the side effect of enormous negative publicity giving every potential enemy of the game a free shot to stick a fork in its side.

all worrying about new owners aside chuck, what about the non-horseracing-fan public? how do we explain to people who don't a damn about the sport about giving medication on raceday?? you know, because they ask about such things all the time. surely that is the biggest issue facing the sport!

and yeah, so tongue in cheek in case anyone was wondering....

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

all worrying about new owners aside chuck, what about the non-horseracing-fan public? how do we explain to people who don't a damn about the sport about giving medication on raceday?? you know, because they ask about such things all the time. surely that is the biggest issue facing the sport!

and yeah, so tongue in cheek in case anyone was wondering....

It is interesting that in a society where we are medicated at a far higher rate than ever before, bombarded with ads for various medications/drugs at every turn and seemingly have a drugstore at on every corner there are those who firmly believe that people have a problem with a fairly innocous medication given to horses as a preventative measure.

Of course when the hyperbole begins and it is called abuse and tied to all kinds of other completely separate issues public sentiment (the public being pretty stupid in general) can turn.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You are more qualified than most to discuss the efficacy of lasix in preventing and/or lessening bleeding.

I've been in the business for 29 years as a bettor, owner, and racing manager. I talk to trainers every day. I talk to vets all the time. I look at our horses several times a week. I've been directly involved with close to 100 horses over the years. Do I know as much about lasix as you? Of course not. But I know enough about it and enough about all aspects of the business to have an informed opinion on the issue.

My opinion isn't necessarily right but it is at least an informed opinion.

You say I'm a "rude guy on the internet". I've posted on this board for several years and I think at least 95% of the posters would disagree with you. I think most people would tell you that I am one of the most polite people on this board.

You are far more qualified to comment on lasix then a hack vet standing behind 60k other hack vets. Just because you did 8 years of school in Guadalajara doesn't make your opinion more qualified. Rollo just googles the stuff she alleges to know about and rebuts this hack at every turn. CJ points the proliferation of the drug in 99% of the horses, the hack reps they dont all NEED the drug, yet she is OK with horses getting it when it is not indicated. Why? simple she earns on treating horses and while nobody including a hack vet is getting rich sticking horses in the neck with 60 bucks worth of lasix its all the goodies that come with the "therapeutic drug" that such vets are after. It's a job they get paid to fix horses and make them feel better. You think its for the love of the animal these people work? I have nothing against earning and appreciate that some vets love horses, they also have trailer loads of Lubrisol etc to move and bills to pay. Hence 60k think its ok to juice a horse up with anything perceived to me safe.

The Vets are the real stars in todays racing world, not the horses, not the jock and not the trainers.

[Powderfinger]

What if they banned not only lasix but "bleeders" from racing? Say that after every race, the track vet examines the contestants and anyone with more that level 2 bleeding, or whatever, is disqualified from purse money. This certainly would change the picture, wouldn't it? Trainers would not only have to be concerned with how fast the horse is running but whether the horse is hurting himself or not.

Why is the horse's lungs bleeding? Because he's doing something he shouldn't. We've bred this animal to win and try at all costs. If I had an animal act where poodles jumped through a hoop 1000 times a second but , darn, their lungs bleed at the end, I'd be arrested for animal cruelty.