Paulick: Time for Anti-Lasix advocates to move on to other doping problems

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/1011669585622208512

Excerpt:

It pains me to say this, but it's time for the anti-Lasix advocates to move on and focus on more important areas of the drug problem our industry faces. I say this as someone who is embarrassed over our industry's inability to do what the rest of the world is perfectly capable of doing and compete drug-free on race-day.

[PaceAdvantage]

Makes you wonder what, exactly they are protecting by not going drug free on race day...and whom.

Will certain careers go down the toilet?

[thaskalos]

Makes you wonder what, exactly they are protecting by not going drug free on race day...and whom.

Will certain careers go down the toilet?

It couldn't be that the trainers are using lasix as a "masking agent" for other drugs...could it?

[cj]

Lasix sucks. Having been following this game long enough to remember no lasix, lasix for those that really bled, and now lasix for basically every horse, I have little doubt it has hurt the game and not in a small way.

Is there other stuff going on? Almost undoubtedly. That should go as well. But I wouldn't abandon the fight against lasix. Drug free on race day is a good start to the finding other stuff.

[Augenj]

Lasix sucks. Having been following this game long enough to remember no lasix, lasix for those that really bled, and now lasix for basically every horse, I have little doubt it has hurt the game and not in a small way.

Is there other stuff going on? Almost undoubtedly. That should go as well. But I wouldn't abandon the fight against lasix. Drug free on race day is a good start to the finding other stuff.
Agree. Another issue is the long recovery time for Lasix horses which I feel contributes to the shorter fields we see.

[Appy]

Wow! Blown away by the steady stream of anti drug support here. I very much appreciate that, and am confident that to be the attitude of all genuine horsemen for whom object #1 is to "do what's best for the HORSE".

Seems to me abandoning the fight against lasix due to severity of other issues is another example of hammering your finger to make your toe stop hurting. I'm in the camp that believes eliminating lasix would simultaneously provide relief/improvement in other areas as well.

[Jeff P]

Interesting that as of about 4:15 pm eastern time today:

More than 2100 viewers at Ray's site took the time to answer a survey.

And of those, just over 73% voted Yes in support of the Horse Racing Integrity Act, which would provide national oversight of medication in the sport.

Screenshot:

[clicknow]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/1011669585622208512

Excerpt:

It pains me to say this, but it's time for the anti-Lasix advocates to move on and focus on more important areas of the drug problem our industry faces. I say this as someone who is embarrassed over our industry's inability to do what the rest of the world is perfectly capable of doing and compete drug-free on race-day.

If they couldn't even successfully address the lasix problem, good luck on troubleshooting "special feed", and druggists who technologically are able to stay one step ahead of the testing procedures and more "severe issues" ...:lol:

When the fork you're using doesn't have the capability of cutting thru an overcooked soft potato, its not going to be able to attack a tough steak or raw hard-as-a-rock red beet.

[Parson]

Here is an older study from the Horse magazine, a non racing publication
https://thehorse.com/118316/eiph-and-furosemide-use-in-racehorses-explained/

It is several years old but it concludes with the following:

"All racing horses suffer (from EIPH) at some level," Tobin said in closing. A conservative, science-based interpretation is that furosemide acts to protects the welfare of racing horses and also their riders, he added.

And, in a salute to American horsemen and to the community at large, he noted that American horsemen had "correctly determined the benefits of furosemide 40 or so years ago, while it has taken science more than 30 years to confirm that the horsemen were on the right track, so to speak, all along with furosemide."

As an owner I am opposed to the lasix ban as it is written now. I am not opposed to any other anti doping legislation or a commission established, just not as this bill is written. Read the bill for yourself and form your own opinion.

An immediate ban on Lasix with the mandatory layoffs when they do bleed will hurt field size. If you ban it now as it is proposed, get ready for a steady field of 4 5 and 6 horse fields. IMHO

[kingfin66]

It couldn't be that the trainers are using lasix as a "masking agent" for other drugs...could it?

There is some debate about this. MLB suspends Robinson Cano for 80 games for having lasix in his system, but there are some in the horse racing industry who argue that "Lasix cannot be administered in a way that can manipulate a drug test."

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/horse-racing-robinson-cano-and-can-lasix-really-mask-other-drugs/

[dilanesp]

There is some debate about this. MLB suspends Robinson Cano for 80 games for having lasix in his system, but there are some in the horse racing industry who argue that "Lasix cannot be administered in a way that can manipulate a drug test."

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/horse-racing-robinson-cano-and-can-lasix-really-mask-other-drugs/

As Upton Sinclair said, it is difficult to get the truth out of someone whose livelihood depends on a falsehood.

[Fager Fan]

Let the conspiracy theories abound.

There are zero trainers who think Lasix has anything at all to do with unclean racing. Zero. What they do think is that Lasix is needed because horses bleed in their lungs at speed. Guess what? Do away with Lasix, and then we'll just do what they do in Europe and what we did in the old days, which is tie the horse up to the side of the stall for 9 hours and withhold all water, you know, really good stuff like that. Or letting them bleed, which is very uncomfortable for the horse when he suddenly finds he can't breathe. Or worse, let him bleed so severely that he actually dies of bleeding. You think that's more humane than giving the horse a simple shot before a race and then giving him electrolyte replacements after the race?

Lasix is the MOST HUMANE treatment for EIPH in horses. Treating the horse humanely should be the top priority.

If humans experienced bleeding in the lungs when they ran, which of you would just let your child bleed in his lungs, resulting in scarring the child's lungs, instead of giving the child a simple treatment that allowed him to play safely?

LASIX is NOT THE PROBLEM, and it's absurd that we keep talking about it.

[PaceAdvantage]

Don't they withhold water from horses prior to races even WITH Lasix?

And why would you have to tie the horse to the side of the stall? The water buckets aren't removable?

[jay68802]

What I found interesting about the latest hearing on the Integrity Act was that the Owners, Trainers, and Racing Commissions were all against it. The two main objections were Lasix and funding.

Would these groups be behind this act if Lasix was removed and the money issue was spelled out and affordable? Or are they against the act because it would bring in oversight from a "outside" organization?

Seems to me that the second one is probably the real fear.

[dilanesp]

Let the conspiracy theories abound.

There are zero trainers who think Lasix has anything at all to do with unclean racing. Zero. What they do think is that Lasix is needed because horses bleed in their lungs at speed. Guess what? Do away with Lasix, and then we'll just do what they do in Europe and what we did in the old days, which is tie the horse up to the side of the stall for 9 hours and withhold all water, you know, really good stuff like that. Or letting them bleed, which is very uncomfortable for the horse when he suddenly finds he can't breathe. Or worse, let him bleed so severely that he actually dies of bleeding. You think that's more humane than giving the horse a simple shot before a race and then giving him electrolyte replacements after the race?

Lasix is the MOST HUMANE treatment for EIPH in horses. Treating the horse humanely should be the top priority.

If humans experienced bleeding in the lungs when they ran, which of you would just let your child bleed in his lungs, resulting in scarring the child's lungs, instead of giving the child a simple treatment that allowed him to play safely?

LASIX is NOT THE PROBLEM, and it's absurd that we keep talking about it.

Fager, the problem is it also masks doping.

[Tom]

Interesting that as of about 4:15 pm eastern time today:

More than 2100 viewers at Ray's site took the time to answer a survey.

And of those, just over 73% voted Yes in support of the Horse Racing Integrity Act, which would provide national oversight of medication in the sport.

Screenshot:
It is a start, but the way the entire game is run needs to be controlled by a third party and subject to on-site compliance audits with severe penalties for non conformance. A Federal license to operate should be a requirement that has to be renewed annually. And the owner must be identified as the one with sole responsibility for the horse - that meaning, an OWNER gets days for an infraction, and when the owner is on time off, his entire stable is on days off.

The trainer may also be fined/suspended, but the owner is ultimately responsible.


When I sub contracted another manufacturer to make a part for me, I was 100% responsible to GM for the quality of that part, not the other guy.

It is a COMMON practice in the real world, which horse racing is not presently a member in.

0 race day drugs, 0 tolerance.

[Tom]

Don't they withhold water from horses prior to races even WITH Lasix?

And why would you have to tie the horse to the side of the stall? The water buckets aren't removable?

How many trainers does it take to change a light bulb? :rolleyes:

[biggestal99]

It is a start, but the way the entire game is run needs to be controlled by a third party and subject to on-site compliance audits with severe penalties for non conformance. A Federal license to operate should be a requirement that has to be renewed annually. And the owner must be identified as the one with sole responsibility for the horse - that meaning, an OWNER gets days for an infraction, and when the owner is on time off, his entire stable is on days off.

The trainer may also be fined/suspended, but the owner is ultimately responsible.


When I sub contracted another manufacturer to make a part for me, I was 100% responsible to GM for the quality of that part, not the other guy.

It is a COMMON practice in the real world, which horse racing is not presently a member in.

0 race day drugs, 0 tolerance.

Agreed. Horses runs without race day lasix (and that is what we are talking about) in other jurisdictions, why is the United States a holdout?

I am a proud member of WHOA.

The way racing was meant to be.

Allan

[cj]

LASIX is NOT THE PROBLEM, and it's absurd that we keep talking about it.

The problem is most horses don't need Lasix but they or forced to use it or race at a competitive disadvantage. It also seems to prevent horses from running as often.

[papillon]

Let the conspiracy theories abound.

There are zero trainers who think Lasix has anything at all to do with unclean racing. Zero. What they do think is that Lasix is needed because horses bleed in their lungs at speed. Guess what? Do away with Lasix, and then we'll just do what they do in Europe and what we did in the old days, which is tie the horse up to the side of the stall for 9 hours and withhold all water, you know, really good stuff like that. Or letting them bleed, which is very uncomfortable for the horse when he suddenly finds he can't breathe. Or worse, let him bleed so severely that he actually dies of bleeding. You think that's more humane than giving the horse a simple shot before a race and then giving him electrolyte replacements after the race?

Lasix is the MOST HUMANE treatment for EIPH in horses. Treating the horse humanely should be the top priority.

If humans experienced bleeding in the lungs when they ran, which of you would just let your child bleed in his lungs, resulting in scarring the child's lungs, instead of giving the child a simple treatment that allowed him to play safely?

LASIX is NOT THE PROBLEM, and it's absurd that we keep talking about it.

This is a really specious argument you've got here.

No human would give their kid Lasix in order to run, or do any other noncritical for life activity, unless they were a narcissistic stage mom/dad, living vicariously through their child, in a sad attempt to ease the crushing pain of their own failure, at the no wire hangers level parental sociopathy.

Lasix is extremely unpleasant. It is debilitating. Animals with a say in the matter only take it in what they deem grave necessicity...congentital heart failure, say, or WADA knocking on the door.

If horses are biologically incapable of running, then the answer is not to run them, not to force them to run on Lasix. Lasix is not humane at all. It's a human drug, there will likely be someone within 6 degrees of seperation from you, who can let you try some of theirs. I guarantee they'll have extra--refusing to continue, is the number one out come with the drug.

http://www.doping-prevention.com/substances-and-methods/diuretics-and-other-masking-agents/diuretics-and-other-masking-agents.html

FWIW the denying water by any means has nothing to do with preventing EPIH, but it has everything to do with why Lasix is used. It creates a more beneficial power to weight rato by reducing water weight.

[Jeff P]

It is a start, but the way the entire game is run needs to be controlled by a third party and subject to on-site compliance audits with severe penalties for non conformance...

Agree 100%.

It's obvious (to me at least) that a single regulatory authority (one that is truly independent from those being regulated) would be light years better than what we have now.

When I look at the 37 or so state regulatory bodies that we have now...

I can't think of a single one that is truly independent from those being regulated.

Imo, one predictable result of that is: Many of the regulatory bodies have a history of sweeping things under the rug if they can. And in cases where they can't - they have a history of showing reluctance (and in some cases outright refusal) to take meaningful action against those they consider to be one of their own.

One comment about the point I was trying to make in my previous post:

My understanding of Paulick Report demographics is that Ray's site draws a higher percentage of readers from the horse community (breeders, owners, trainers, people with jobs in the industry, etc.) than readers who identify as horse players.

Please correct me if I'm wrong about that.

Based on past surveys that we've run at HANA, or past surveys created by consulting firms hired by The Jockey Club:

If that same Paulick Report survey were put in front of horseplayers I'd expect 75% or more to vote yes.

But if 70 plus percent of horse people recently voted yes:

Imo, that's really interesting.


-jp

.

[Tom]

If horses are biologically incapable of running, then the answer is not to run them

Bingo!:ThmbUp:

[Cholly]

If horses are biologically incapable of running, then the answer is not to run them

...or breed them

[clocker7]

Give up on the lasix.

The US is not like other jurisdictions, so the comparison is invalid. Any lawyer worth his salt could go into court armed with scientific data and win any case against a vet for using it ... easy peasy.

People are such drama queens about this minor issue ... focus on the real abuses.

[Fager Fan]

Fager, the problem is it also masks doping.

It doesn’t as long as given in certain timeframes, and also has zero effect in blood testing.

[Fager Fan]

Don't they withhold water from horses prior to races even WITH Lasix?

And why would you have to tie the horse to the side of the stall? The water buckets aren't removable?

Because they’re keeping them from eating too, which includes picking at the straw.

And withholding water an hour or two before the race is different that withholding from the night before onwards.

It’s sheer stupidity to allow Lasix to be the hold up in important changes being made. It’s a non-issue. There is a valid argument that it’s the most humane way to treat the horse. In Europe, they train on it, just don’t give on race day. Here, we have probably 50% who do the opposite with only racing on it (the other 50% train and race on it).

Debating Lasix is a waste of time. There are far more important fish to fry.

[biggestal99]

Give up on the lasix.

The US is not like other jurisdictions, so the comparison is invalid. Any lawyer worth his salt could go into court armed with scientific data and win any case against a vet for using it ... easy peasy.

People are such drama queens about this minor issue ... focus on the real abuses.

How so. Do they have special air in the uk that prevents bleeding.

And who cares about lawyers.

I care about the horses.

Allan

[biggestal99]

Because they’re keeping them from eating too, which includes picking at the straw.

And withholding water an hour or two before the race is different that withholding from the night before onwards.

It’s sheer stupidity to allow Lasix to be the hold up in important changes being made. It’s a non-issue. There is a valid argument that it’s the most humane way to treat the horse. In Europe, they train on it, just don’t give on race day. Here, we have probably 50% who do the opposite with only racing on it (the other 50% train and race on it).

Debating Lasix is a waste of time. There are far more important fish to fry.

Race day lasix is not humane.

Allan

[Tom]

Race day lasix is not humane.

Allan

:ThmbUp:

Bill Finley predicted that lasix would pretty much devastate the game when NY legalized it. He was correct.

Lasix is a MAJOR issue.
But not nearly so much as horsemen's ATTITUDES about the customers.

[dilanesp]

It doesn’t as long as given in certain timeframes, and also has zero effect in blood testing.

I believe the World Anti Doping Agency, which says it does mask and has no reason to lie, over the claims of horsemen who repeatedly lie about everything relating to the health of their horses.

[clocker7]

How so. Do they have special air in the uk that prevents bleeding.

And who cares about lawyers.

I care about the horses.

Allan
You obviously do not understand the differences between the US legal system and those overseas. Ours is built on the basis of the benefit of the doubt belonging to the defendant. Trying to prosecute a person for applying a drug that has some beneficial health effects is a non-starter.

Also, comparing horse racing to the major league team sport situation is a failure, too. Those have player unions, which make voluntary concessions about drug usage.

We have more freedoms here, and concentrated central power is less existent. It's more than a nuance ... it's our governance, like it or not. I like it because the upside is much more beneficial than these minor downsides.

[Fager Fan]

Race day lasix is not humane.

Allan

Let’s see, who do I believe? The top equine vets in the world, or Allan? I’ll take the top equine vets in the world, thanks.

[Fager Fan]

I believe the World Anti Doping Agency, which says it does mask and has no reason to lie, over the claims of horsemen who repeatedly lie about everything relating to the health of their horses.

The world anti-doping agency wasn’t talking about horses, if that’s true.

Lasix being a masking agent hasn’t been an issue for many years. The timeframe in administration and quality of testing make masking a non-issue. There are plenty of studies which prove this if you care to research it.

[biggestal99]

You obviously do not understand the differences between the US legal system and those overseas. Ours is built on the basis of the benefit of the doubt belonging to the defendant. Trying to prosecute a person for applying a drug that has some beneficial health effects is a non-starter.

Also, comparing horse racing to the major league team sport situation is a failure, too. Those have player unions, which make voluntary concessions about drug usage.

We have more freedoms here, and concentrated central power is less existent. It's more than a nuance ... it's our governance, like it or not. I like it because the upside is much more beneficial than these minor downsides.

Hence the need for federal oversight. Make a law and states have to follow via the supremacy clause.

Nice and easy and fully constitutional.

Allan

[biggestal99]

Let’s see, who do I believe? The top equine vets in the world, or Allan? I’ll take the top equine vets in the world, thanks.

Dehydrating a horse on purpose isn’t humane.

That’s known as a no brainer.

I know how to read lasix side effects labels.

Allan

[Tom]

Trying to prosecute a person for applying a drug that has some beneficial health effects is a non-starter.

Ever hear of marijuana? :rolleyes:

[Tom]

I think horsemen are afraid of federal regulations because they know they will not be able get away with the crap they do now. The local race tracks are no real threat anyone who wants to cheat. And 3rd party regs would require accurate record keeping as proof the rules were met.

Racing operates in the 19th century.

[Fager Fan]

Dehydrating a horse on purpose isn’t humane.

That’s known as a no brainer.

I know how to read lasix side effects labels.

Allan

They're going to dehydrate the horse with or without lasix. Do you want them to do it quickly so there's less negative effect on the horse or do it slowly?

You think a very short-lived temporary dehydration is less humane than having the horse experience bleeding or even death, not to mention developing lung scar tissue which makes his bleeding worse?

[Fager Fan]

I think horsemen are afraid of federal regulations because they know they will not be able get away with the crap they do now. The local race tracks are no real threat anyone who wants to cheat. And 3rd party regs would require accurate record keeping as proof the rules were met.

Racing operates in the 19th century.

Keep telling yourself that, as we witness how well the feds operate the post office among other things.

[Tom]

I have said that before.
However, racing is in such sorry shape, even the feds would be an improvement.

[Fager Fan]

I have said that before.
However, racing is in such sorry shape, even the feds would be an improvement.

I don't necessarily disagree, but only because there is NO WAY for the sport to govern itself. No group or person can wrest control from the powers that be in each state. Nor will the tracks give up what power they have. So while we bitch about the sorry shape of the sport, that's a big reason why, and it's no one's fault.

[ubercapper]

Let the conspiracy theories abound.

There are zero trainers who think Lasix has anything at all to do with unclean racing. Zero. What they do think is that Lasix is needed because horses bleed in their lungs at speed. Guess what? Do away with Lasix, and then we'll just do what they do in Europe and what we did in the old days, which is tie the horse up to the side of the stall for 9 hours and withhold all water, you know, really good stuff like that. Or letting them bleed, which is very uncomfortable for the horse when he suddenly finds he can't breathe. Or worse, let him bleed so severely that he actually dies of bleeding. You think that's more humane than giving the horse a simple shot before a race and then giving him electrolyte replacements after the race?

Lasix is the MOST HUMANE treatment for EIPH in horses. Treating the horse humanely should be the top priority.

If humans experienced bleeding in the lungs when they ran, which of you would just let your child bleed in his lungs, resulting in scarring the child's lungs, instead of giving the child a simple treatment that allowed him to play safely?

LASIX is NOT THE PROBLEM, and it's absurd that we keep talking about it.

As a prophylactic treatment in horses, IV Lasix is NOT Humane in my opinion.

I have had IV Lasix twice in my life (both during Chemo) and it was a HORRIBLE experience both times. It felt like someone reached into my body and squeezed both kidneys and my bladder as hard as possible. I couldn't be more than 10 feet from the toilet for the next 45 minutes to an hour. I would never agree to have IV Lasix again unless the potential cost to my health were significant compared to the harm.

Considering horses feel pain and discomfort the same way humans do there is absolutely no reason to put them through this to prevent EIPH if they have never had it previously.

Perhaps it is Humane for horses who have had EIPH because there is a benefit worth the cost (in terms of pain and discomfort). I will leave that to others to decide.

On a related topic, I've read comparisons of the pill form of Lasix most humans take as a basis for statements Lasix is safe for horses. There is NO comparison to the pill and IV forms of the drug. IV Lasix kicks in within minutes while pills dissolve and reach the kidneys over time.

[GMB@BP]

As a prophylactic treatment in horses, IV Lasix is NOT Humane in my opinion.

I have had IV Lasix twice in my life (both during Chemo) and it was a HORRIBLE experience both times. It felt like someone reached into my body and squeezed both kidneys and my bladder as hard as possible. I couldn't be more than 10 feet from the toilet for the next 45 minutes to an hour. I would never agree to have IV Lasix again unless the potential cost to my health were significant compared to the harm.

Considering horses feel pain and discomfort the same way humans do there is absolutely no reason to put them through this to prevent EIPH if they have never had it previously.

Perhaps it is Humane for horses who have had EIPH because there is a benefit worth the cost (in terms of pain and discomfort). I will leave that to others to decide.

On a related topic, I've read comparisons of the pill form of Lasix most humans take as a basis for statements Lasix is safe for horses. There is NO comparison to the pill and IV forms of the drug. IV Lasix kicks in within minutes while pills dissolve and reach the kidneys over time.

That is sobering. I am all for the ban of this drug.

[ubercapper]

They're going to dehydrate the horse with or without lasix. Do you want them to do it quickly so there's less negative effect on the horse or do it slowly?

You think a very short-lived temporary dehydration is less humane than having the horse experience bleeding or even death, not to mention developing lung scar tissue which makes his bleeding worse?


Dehydration is an easy issue to solve. State vets and Racing Stewards are in the barns every day and can determine when a horse has been denied water. Then they scratch the horse. End of the practice quickly ensues.

[Fager Fan]

As a prophylactic treatment in horses, IV Lasix is NOT Humane in my opinion.

I have had IV Lasix twice in my life (both during Chemo) and it was a HORRIBLE experience both times. It felt like someone reached into my body and squeezed both kidneys and my bladder as hard as possible. I couldn't be more than 10 feet from the toilet for the next 45 minutes to an hour. I would never agree to have IV Lasix again unless the potential cost to my health were significant compared to the harm.

Considering horses feel pain and discomfort the same way humans do there is absolutely no reason to put them through this to prevent EIPH if they have never had it previously.

Perhaps it is Humane for horses who have had EIPH because there is a benefit worth the cost (in terms of pain and discomfort). I will leave that to others to decide.

On a related topic, I've read comparisons of the pill form of Lasix most humans take as a basis for statements Lasix is safe for horses. There is NO comparison to the pill and IV forms of the drug. IV Lasix kicks in within minutes while pills dissolve and reach the kidneys over time.

You don't think the top equine vets in the world would know if a lasix shot is causing pain to the horse?

Humans aren't horses, and no, we don't react the same way to medications. And thankfully, we don't have similar waste removal systems as the horse.

[Fager Fan]

Dehydration is an easy issue to solve. State vets and Racing Stewards are in the barns every day and can determine when a horse has been denied water. Then they scratch the horse. End of the practice quickly ensues.

Um, no they're not. And who said they'd be interested at all in ending the practice?

[ubercapper]

You don't think the top equine vets in the world would know if a lasix shot is causing pain to the horse?

Humans aren't horses, and no, we don't react the same way to medications. And thankfully, we don't have similar waste removal systems as the horse.

I haven't seen any articles or studies discussing the effect of prophylactic administration of IV Lasix measured by pain/discomfort in horses that haven't had EIPH vs any potential benefit of IV Lasix.

Specifically, I don't think vets have ever been specifically asked the question "Is the administration of IV Lasix painful or uncomfortable to a horse."

That needs to be part of the discussion as well considering both sides state the health and welfare of the horse comes first.

I will start asking that question when I encounter a vet. You are welcome to do the same. Then we can share our results.

As far as your opinion humans don't react the same way to medications, point me to the basis in fact that proves horse's don't react to IV Lasix the same as humans.

Until then, my empirical evidence of how IV Lasix makes a human feel and my being told (by horse owners) horses feel pain and discomfort as we do will is what I have to go on.

I would be open to the experience of other people who may have had IV Lasix to concur or disagree with my statement it is uncomfortable to the point of being painful in humans but I'm pretty confident that is the majority experience after having discussed the topic with a number of doctors and nurses.

[ubercapper]

Um, no they're not. And who said they'd be interested at all in ending the practice?

I would recommend viewing the recent "Welfare & Safety of the Horse Summit" video, particularly the 2:30 panel on Integrity and Security. https://www.grayson-jockeyclub.org/WelfareSafety/includes/2018Wss_agenda.asp

You will find more and more tracks are installing stable surveillance as well as using Safety Stewards.

Safety Stewards, who along with the state vets do pre-race exams, are in the barns every morning.

If the state vet or steward notices a dehydrated horse, I'm confident they would have a discussion with the trainer or groom and then notify the racing stewards so the horse be scratched in the same way a lame horse or sick horse would be scratched.

[Denny]

Having switched to Harness racing practically full-time as far as betting is concerned, I have some questions for you t-bred players.

How is it that standardbreds can race every week for long stretches of time. Sometimes as many as 40 races a year and be on LASIX?

How can it be as bad as most of you seem to think?

Any of you have medical degrees? (With Tom, it's did you graduate HS?)

How can so many of you think LASIX is that bad if it can be used every week in Harness racing without ill effects?

Answer that.

[Tom]

If you don't know, maybe you are playing the wrong game.

[Fager Fan]

I would recommend viewing the recent "Welfare & Safety of the Horse Summit" video, particularly the 2:30 panel on Integrity and Security. https://www.grayson-jockeyclub.org/WelfareSafety/includes/2018Wss_agenda.asp

You will find more and more tracks are installing stable surveillance as well as using Safety Stewards.

Safety Stewards, who along with the state vets do pre-race exams, are in the barns every morning.

If the state vet or steward notices a dehydrated horse, I'm confident they would have a discussion with the trainer or groom and then notify the racing stewards so the horse be scratched in the same way a lame horse or sick horse would be scratched.

It's cuckoo day at PA.

I'll be sharing the fact there are "Safety Stewards" going from stall to stall around the country with my trainer friends. That's a good one.

[Fager Fan]

I haven't seen any articles or studies discussing the effect of prophylactic administration of IV Lasix measured by pain/discomfort in horses that haven't had EIPH vs any potential benefit of IV Lasix.

Specifically, I don't think vets have ever been specifically asked the question "Is the administration of IV Lasix painful or uncomfortable to a horse."

That needs to be part of the discussion as well considering both sides state the health and welfare of the horse comes first.

I will start asking that question when I encounter a vet. You are welcome to do the same. Then we can share our results.

As far as your opinion humans don't react the same way to medications, point me to the basis in fact that proves horse's don't react to IV Lasix the same as humans.

Until then, my empirical evidence of how IV Lasix makes a human feel and my being told (by horse owners) horses feel pain and discomfort as we do will is what I have to go on.

I would be open to the experience of other people who may have had IV Lasix to concur or disagree with my statement it is uncomfortable to the point of being painful in humans but I'm pretty confident that is the majority experience after having discussed the topic with a number of doctors and nurses.

I'll take one Bramlage, and you can have your personal experience.

I win.

[PaceAdvantage]

I win.Not for much longer you won't be, if you keep this bullshit up.

[Fager Fan]

Not for much longer you won't be, if you keep this bullshit up.

I’m terrified.

You’re one of the worst offenders around here. That’s called hypocrisy.

[Tom]

No, it's called ownership.

[Spalding No!]

It's cuckoo day at PA.

I'll be sharing the fact there are "Safety Stewards" going from stall to stall around the country with my trainer friends. That's a good one.
From the CHRB website:

Safety stewards are assigned to each racetrack to focus rules and procedures designed to insure the health and safety of racehorses. This responsibility requires safety stewards to spend considerable time in the stable areas and race track monitoring environmental safety and proper treatment of horses. Dangerous working conditions and mistreatment of horses is not tolerated.

In fact, I think one of the members of this message board served in this capacity in the past.

[ubercapper]

From the CHRB website:

Safety stewards are assigned to each racetrack to focus rules and procedures designed to insure the health and safety of racehorses. This responsibility requires safety stewards to spend considerable time in the stable areas and race track monitoring environmental safety and proper treatment of horses. Dangerous working conditions and mistreatment of horses is not tolerated.

In fact, I think one of the members of this message board served in this capacity in the past.

Thanks for that. I posted the URL from the Welfare & Safety of the Horse Summit earlier in the thread which included a good deal of the discussion about safety stewards as well as video clips from the barns.

It was enlightening (to say the least) to see the level of surveillance as well as to hear how proactive the state vets and safety stewards are at the tracks they serve. Some of them are retired jockeys such as Luis Juaregui and they really care about maintaining integrity on the backside.

[ubercapper]

I'll take one Bramlage, and you can have your personal experience.

I win.

Do you know Dr. Bramlage personally?

Can you cite a quote from him on the topic of whether horses feel pain and discomfort following IV Lasix?

Since I live in Lexington and see Dr. Bramlage quite a bit I will ask him directly whether horses feel the pain and discomfort of IV Lasix and I will report his response on this thread whether it agrees with my previously stated position or not.

[PaceAdvantage]

No, it's called ownership.BAZINGA! :pound:

[Fager Fan]

From the CHRB website:

Safety stewards are assigned to each racetrack to focus rules and procedures designed to insure the health and safety of racehorses. This responsibility requires safety stewards to spend considerable time in the stable areas and race track monitoring environmental safety and proper treatment of horses. Dangerous working conditions and mistreatment of horses is not tolerated.

In fact, I think one of the members of this message board served in this capacity in the past.

So CA. That’s hardly around the country. The statement was that if we do away from Lasix and horsemen withdraw their water instead, that all these safety stewards and revaluation stewards and state vets would stop horsemen from withdrawing water. I laughed at the idea that the people mentioned are going barn to barn and stall to stall every day. They’re not. Only the state vets come around, and on race morning. They’re only doing lameness exams. There’s no evidence that commissions and tracks are going to involve themselves and make regulations about water not being withdrawn. I can’t even imagine the uproar if they decide they’re going to start regulating hay and water.

[Fager Fan]

Do you know Dr. Bramlage personally?

Can you cite a quote from him on the topic of whether horses feel pain and discomfort following IV Lasix?

Since I live in Lexington and see Dr. Bramlage quite a bit I will ask him directly whether horses feel the pain and discomfort of IV Lasix and I will report his response on this thread whether it agrees with my previously stated position or not.

Yes, I do.

He’s on the record as saying he thinks it’s most humane for the horse to be treated with race day Lasix.

Regarding pain, do you really think hundreds of horses are experiencing pain and no trainer or vet has noticed? You really think that if they were experiencing pain that it wouldn’t be negatively affecting their racing?

[Spalding No!]

[Dr. Bramlage]’s on the record as saying he thinks it’s most humane for the horse to be treated with race day Lasix.
I don't think Dr. Bramlage specified that race day Lasix was the most humane treatment for bleeders. In fact, he posited that it was likely that Lasix could be used in a fashion that did not require raceday administration but would still have a positive effect on bleeding.

Bramlage also is on record declaring Lasix as a performance enhancer.

Furthermore, he has stated that pro-Lasix supporters are in the wrong because they aren't considering the bad publicity and other media and sponsorship considerations that it negatively effects.

[Fager Fan]

I don't think Dr. Bramlage specified that race day Lasix was the most humane treatment for bleeders. In fact, he posited that it was likely that Lasix could be used in a fashion that did not require raceday administration but would still have a positive effect on bleeding.

Bramlage also is on record declaring Lasix as a performance enhancer.

Furthermore, he has stated that pro-Lasix supporters are in the wrong because they aren't considering the bad publicity and other media and sponsorship considerations that it negatively effects.

Negative publicity is far different than what is most humane.

Race day, non race day, same thing. It’s still in the horse’s system and would have to be declared.

And yes, he does state it is a performance enhancer, but then anything that reduces blood pressure would also be a performance enhancer like withdrawing food and water for an extended period of time.

[biggestal99]

I don't think Dr. Bramlage specified that race day Lasix was the most humane treatment for bleeders. In fact, he posited that it was likely that Lasix could be used in a fashion that did not require raceday administration but would still have a positive effect on bleeding.

Bramlage also is on record declaring Lasix as a performance enhancer.

Furthermore, he has stated that pro-Lasix supporters are in the wrong because they aren't considering the bad publicity and other media and sponsorship considerations that it negatively effects.

Yes but what % of horses need it vs horses that use it becuase it is a performance enhancer and need to keep up with the jones.

Not all horses need race day lasix, they are in the vast minority.

Allan

[Fager Fan]

Yes but what % of horses need it vs horses that use it becuase it is a performance enhancer and need to keep up with the jones.

Not all horses need race day lasix, they are in the vast minority.

Allan

The 50% or so who give for breezes and then scope after every work, you think they’re going for enhancing the performance of their works?

Or in Europe, where they give for works, just not race day?

The bad bleeders that you note as s vast minority probably bleed through Lasix anyway.

If it’s not a masking agent, which it’s not, and it’s the most humane way to treat a horse, why is it a big deal? Why do we keep talking about it? Of the guys we think are cheating, do we think Lasix is what they’re cheating with?

[cj]

The 50% or so who give for breezes and then scope after every work, you think they’re going for enhancing the performance of their works?

Or in Europe, where they give for works, just not race day?

The bad bleeders that you note as s vast minority probably bleed through Lasix anyway.

If it’s not a masking agent, which it’s not, and it’s the most humane way to treat a horse, why is it a big deal? Why do we keep talking about it? Of the guys we think are cheating, do we think Lasix is what they’re cheating with?


Good luck convincing the public that injecting 95% of the participants is humane. That will really help the sport grow.

[ubercapper]

Yes, I do.

He’s on the record as saying he thinks it’s most humane for the horse to be treated with race day Lasix.

Regarding pain, do you really think hundreds of horses are experiencing pain and no trainer or vet has noticed? You really think that if they were experiencing pain that it wouldn’t be negatively affecting their racing?


At others have stated, whether IV Lasix is humane for horses who have experienced EIPH is totally different than my point IV Lasix is not humane if given prophylactically to horses who have not experience EIPH.



My opinion is based on the likely discomfort or pain horses feel following administration if the action is similar to what I felt and other people feel after getting IV Lasix.



Your opinion appears to be based on a question never asked to Dr. Bramlage, or anyone else.

As to whether Lasix negatively affects their ability to race - Lasix is given hours before a race, then they urinate profusely, so any pain and discomfort is gone long before they race. I know I felt fine after an hour or so and if horse's are similarly predisposed it's long forgotten by the time they go to the paddock.

Regarding trainers or vets noticing any discomfort - Unless the vet or trainer sticks around for the next hour immediately after IV Lasix administration (if the effect is the same as in humans), they would not notice any pain or discomfort. So, I really do think there are few people noticing and those that are probably are grooms who have no reason to suspect the horse is uncomfortable because all they notice is the gallons upon gallons of urine.

I hope you never have to get IV Lasix. I am 100% confident if you did you would understand it is not humane to give it to horses prophylactically.

[ubercapper]

Good luck convincing the public that injecting 95% of the participants is humane. That will really help the sport grow.


This.

[Tom]

Yes but what % of horses need it vs horses that use it becuase it is a performance enhancer and need to keep up with the jones.

Not all horses need race day lasix, they are in the vast minority.

Allan

They use lasix to stop the OWNER's bleeding, not the horse's.

[thaskalos]

They use lasix to stop the OWNER's bleeding, not the horse's.

Is there a medication to stop the HORSEPLAYER'S bleeding?

[Tom]

Is there a medication to stop the HORSEPLAYER'S bleeding?

Poker. ;)

[jay68802]

Is there a medication to stop the HORSEPLAYER'S bleeding?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOUtsybozjg

[outofthebox]

At others have stated, whether IV Lasix is humane for horses who have experienced EIPH is totally different than my point IV Lasix is not humane if given prophylactically to horses who have not experience EIPH.



My opinion is based on the likely discomfort or pain horses feel following administration if the action is similar to what I felt and other people feel after getting IV Lasix.



Your opinion appears to be based on a question never asked to Dr. Bramlage, or anyone else.

As to whether Lasix negatively affects their ability to race - Lasix is given hours before a race, then they urinate profusely, so any pain and discomfort is gone long before they race. I know I felt fine after an hour or so and if horse's are similarly predisposed it's long forgotten by the time they go to the paddock.

Regarding trainers or vets noticing any discomfort - Unless the vet or trainer sticks around for the next hour immediately after IV Lasix administration (if the effect is the same as in humans), they would not notice any pain or discomfort. So, I really do think there are few people noticing and those that are probably are grooms who have no reason to suspect the horse is uncomfortable because all they notice is the gallons upon gallons of urine.

I hope you never have to get IV Lasix. I am 100% confident if you did you would understand it is not humane to give it to horses prophylactically.I have witnessed thousands of horses treated with lasix. It usually takes an average of 10 minutes for their first urine release. I have never noticed any of them pawing, looking back at their stomach, or showing any other sign that would make me think they were uncomfortable. I did witness one occasion when a horse dropped with a combo of lasix and Vit E and Selenium.. I am sorry you felt such pain with your dose of lasix.

[biggestal99]

The 50% or so who give for breezes and then scope after every work, you think they’re going for enhancing the performance of their works?

Or in Europe, where they give for works, just not race day?

The bad bleeders that you note as s vast minority probably bleed through Lasix anyway.

If it’s not a masking agent, which it’s not, and it’s the most humane way to treat a horse, why is it a big deal? Why do we keep talking about it? Of the guys we think are cheating, do we think Lasix is what they’re cheating with?

Giving horse unnecessary medication on race day is not the way to go imho.

Our opinions differ. Viva la difference.

Allan

[clocker7]

In summary, lasix is no big deal. It is settled science, resisted only by rabid animal rights activists and perpetual gripers. Sure, the truth can be twisted in the media, but so what? Why give into the liars?

[cj]

In summary, lasix is no big deal. It is settled science, resisted only by rabid animal rights activists and perpetual gripers. Sure, the truth can be twisted in the media, but so what? Why give into the liars?

Far from it. Plenty of people are opposed to Lasix that are neither of the two things you categorize them as.

[clicknow]

In summary, lasix is no big deal. It is settled science, resisted only by rabid animal rights activists and perpetual gripers.

Many Hall of Famer trainers are in favor of phasing out furosemide in U.S. racing.

Unless you characterize Lukas, Pletcher, Bill Mott, Shug McGaughey, Christophe Clement, Richard Mandella, Neil Drysdale, Kieran McLaughlin, and Graham Motion as "rabid animal rights activists and perpetual gripers". :rolleyes:

There is also the question of horses that can only run on Lasix may be questionable breeding prospects.


But I doubt any kind of ban will happen any time soon.

When Baffert ran West Coast in the Pegasus he was offered a weight advantage if horse ran w/out lasix. He chose Lasix ---- which pretty much nailed that he believes it is a "performance enhancing drug."

[Fager Fan]

Much ado about nothing.

Yet again we let the drug debate center around something as insignificant as Lasix.

[Tom]

If it is so insignificant, why do essentially all horses race on it?
Are you suggesting the bleeding rate is about 100%?

[Fager Fan]

If it is so insignificant, why do essentially all horses race on it?
Are you suggesting the bleeding rate is about 100%?

Yes, studies prove 90+% of horses bleed. Most presumably not enough to affect their performance noticeably, but bleeding tends to get worse over time, and bleeding severely enough cause permanent scarring of the lungs (which of course makes them bleed worse).

Trainers view this differently. I estimate probably 50% of top trainers use lasix and scope in both training and racing. The other 50% only use lasix in races and scope only if looking for a reason for a poor performance. It’s too expensive to use lasix and scope after all works for the horses at the lower end, since this would total $100 a week just for this and not counting other vet expenses.

I know of no trainer who is really concerned about Lasix.

You made mention that Lasix is only to stop owner bleeding. You maybe meant it snidely, but I don’t think it’s totally untruthful. Imagine if you bought a $40k horse, or a $400k horse, and he’s like Silver Charm. A good horse but a bleeder who is able to be controlled. There was no test for you to determine that he was a bleeder when you bought him, but here’s what you’ve got -a bleeder. Thinking of it non-snidely, how would you feel about there being a simple humane fix but not being able to use it? Would you be happy that this is money flushed? Wouldn’t you prefer an easy fix over your trainer experimenting with herbs and natural dehydration and perhaps other drugs, etc, to try to solve the problem?

There are so many other real issues in racing, real drug cheating, and don’t even get me started on how dirty the sales are, it’s just frustrating that Lasix gets so much ink.

[biggestal99]

Yes, studies prove 90+% of horses bleed. Most presumably not enough to affect their performance noticeably, but bleeding tends to get worse over time, and bleeding severely enough cause permanent scarring of the lungs (which of course makes them bleed worse).

Trainers view this differently. I estimate probably 50% of top trainers use lasix and scope in both training and racing. The other 50% only use lasix in races and scope only if looking for a reason for a poor performance. It’s too expensive to use lasix and scope after all works for the horses at the lower end, since this would total $100 a week just for this and not counting other vet expenses.

I know of no trainer who is really concerned about Lasix.

You made mention that Lasix is only to stop owner bleeding. You maybe meant it snidely, but I don’t think it’s totally untruthful. Imagine if you bought a $40k horse, or a $400k horse, and he’s like Silver Charm. A good horse but a bleeder who is able to be controlled. There was no test for you to determine that he was a bleeder when you bought him, but here’s what you’ve got -a bleeder. Thinking of it non-snidely, how would you feel about there being a simple humane fix but not being able to use it? Would you be happy that this is money flushed? Wouldn’t you prefer an easy fix over your trainer experimenting with herbs and natural dehydration and perhaps other drugs, etc, to try to solve the problem?

There are so many other real issues in racing, real drug cheating, and don’t even get me started on how dirty the sales are, it’s just frustrating that Lasix gets so much ink.

There are different degrees of bleeding, FF.

To say 90% of horses need race day lasix is just not true.

Allan

[outofthebox]

Belmont 1st race. Lasix runners run 1-2-3. No lasix 4-5-6. This was a 2yo race. I'm sure none of them needed it, but no matter what they scoped afterwards, trainers Mott, Lynch and Clement will certainly add it next time to level the playing field.

[Tom]

Right now, hearings on banning lasix in 24 hour window leading to a race, until 4:40pm.

Some of those being questioned - horsemen - sound like idiots, to put it bluntly.
I think the gov smells blood in the water.

Humane Society gal was spot on, delivered facts, no fluff. She has all the credibility in the discussion.

[cj]

Right now, hearings on banning lasix in 24 hour window leading to a race, until 4:40pm.

Some of those being questioned - horsemen - sound like idiots, to put it bluntly.
I think the gov smells blood in the water.

Humane Society gal was spot on, delivered facts, no fluff. She has all the credibility in the discussion.

Think those hearings took place a few weeks ago I haven't heard much about them. Going to see if I can find them again and watch.

[cj]

Voila, here it is.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?447431-1/house-panel-considers-horse-racing-anti-doping-legislation

[Tom]

I guess they wer ereruns!
You missed you chance, CJ - you could have bet me on replay races and I would never have known! :lol:

My biorhythm says I am in the not-too-bright cycle right now.
Guess those charts are pretty good!

[clicknow]

Humane Society gal was spot on, delivered facts, no fluff. She has all the credibility in the discussion.

Kitty Block.

She is actually the international president of HSUS, so she has a global perspective, and can see how the U.S. is lagging behind in policies.

No hysterics, no hype, no fluff --- she's a very good speaker. She has testified before Congress on numerous occassions, and has a law degree, so she knows how to state her case and she made some very good points.

[Tom]

The horsemen were not impressive at all.
I kept hearing "if ALL the horses are on lasix, then who has the advantage?"

Give me a break.

And one said something to the effect of lasix is not a drug.
Not that there was an excess of brain cells on the government panel.......!