horse breakdows

[lamboguy]

this might explain why there are so many breakdowns on tracks with tremendous racing surfaces like Churchill Downs and Saratoga.

personally, i never heard of Betamethasone before. it shows how little i know. but what i am fairly sure of, is that stuff helps a horse run faster than he should!

this article only names Baffert, but i am fairly sure there are plenty of others using this shit on their horses. for my last guess, i am fairly sure this stuff can't be to great for horse longevity.

https://paulickreport.com/news/the-b...betamethasone/

[Mulerider]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

personally, i never heard of Betamethasone before. it shows how little i know. but what i am fairly sure of, is that stuff helps a horse run faster than he should!

It's a corticosteroid. Paulick has a good article on it.

Fact Check: The Pharmacology of Betamethasone in Horses

Excerpt:
“Although more comprehensive pharmacodynamic studies are necessary, these findings suggest that the anti-inflammatory effects may continue even though drug is no longer detected in blood,” wrote the Knych team. “A major concern with this finding is that horses may be able to return to racing before they are completely healed following an injury. Even though blood concentrations would be below the recommended threshold, allowing the horse to race, therapeutic drug concentrations in the joint may mask the clinical signs of an injury that is not completely healed. This could ultimately increase the risk of additional damage to the joint.”

[Bustin Stones]

What exactly is our position? That any drug used to allow a horse to run to its full potential should be avoided? Some drugs improve respiration. Some mask issues in leg areas. Some address general health. Is there an ethical dilemma with any injections? Should we race horses without any medication even though we know it's painful for them? Or that it may be deadlier for them to withhold certain injections? How exact is the science?
How far does it make sense to err on the side of caution, assuming we even fully understand where caution lies in any exact way?

[classhandicapper]

How about using therapeutics to reduce pain, inflammation, speed healing, treat ailments and other similar things we would do for ourselves or our children, but not running the horse until he's fully recovered and fit enough to race?

IMO, the last thing we want to do is mask problems just to get them on the track, but the terrible economics of the sport sometime interfere with doing what's best for the horse.

[Bustin Stones]

Someone needs to decide in each type of situation how many days after treatment that the pain is no longer simply masked. And every animal responds to treatment differently. And every animal's capacity to endure pain without wincing is different. It seems like, at some point, the vet reports will have more value than the running lines.

[Hambletonian]

Originally Posted by Bustin Stones

What exactly is our position? That any drug used to allow a horse to run to its full potential should be avoided? Some drugs improve respiration. Some mask issues in leg areas. Some address general health. Is there an ethical dilemma with any injections? Should we race horses without any medication even though we know it's painful for them? Or that it may be deadlier for them to withhold certain injections? How exact is the science?
How far does it make sense to err on the side of caution, assuming we even fully understand where caution lies in any exact way?

Full potential? How about faster than its limbs can handle. That has always been the issue, use drugs to reduce pain so a horse has no idea it has an issue. And they run pain free until they break down. That is a safety issue for evey horse and rider in the race. Horses injured and in pain should not be raced, period.

Horses that are injured should be treated and rested, but that costs money, and why not do anything to keep the horse going until it can't run anymore or becomes someone else's problem. This has gone on with cheap claimers forever, but seems out of place with higher class horses. But for all the safeguards in place, NY Thunder was a lightly raced horse with a repetitive soundness issues and was still cleared to run at the premier meet in the country.

If removing horses with chronic soundness issues from the racing pool reduces the amoint of racing nationwide, so be it. You will never end all injuries, but taking out the disasters waiting to happen will make for a more sustainable industry.

[VeryOldMan]

Originally Posted by Hambletonian

You will never end all injuries, but taking out the disasters waiting to happen will make for a more sustainable industry.

Along those lines, here's a long interesting piece in TDN about the various scanning technologies and StrideSAFE, and their ability to assist in identifying horses with latent problems:

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...cings-big-fix/

On a somewhat related note - some disturbing stuff is appearing on Twitter about Havnameltdown's necropsy results and how badly deteriorated his joints were. It's Twitter, so you never know the veracity - I'm just flagging that there could be more news coming out.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by Hambletonian

Full potential? How about faster than its limbs can handle. That has always been the issue, use drugs to reduce pain so a horse has no idea it has an issue. And they run pain free until they break down. That is a safety issue for evey horse and rider in the race. Horses injured and in pain should not be raced, period.

Horses that are injured should be treated and rested, but that costs money, and why not do anything to keep the horse going until it can't run anymore or becomes someone else's problem. This has gone on with cheap claimers forever, but seems out of place with higher class horses. But for all the safeguards in place, NY Thunder was a lightly raced horse with a repetitive soundness issues and was still cleared to run at the premier meet in the country.

If removing horses with chronic soundness issues from the racing pool reduces the amoint of racing nationwide, so be it. You will never end all injuries, but taking out the disasters waiting to happen will make for a more sustainable industry.

^^^^This.

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

...IMO, the last thing we want to do is mask problems just to get them on the track, but the terrible economics of the sport sometime interfere with doing what's best for the horse.

^^^^And This.




Fyi, California made some significant changes to medication and treatment withdrawal times horse after Santa Anita had 30 horse deaths from December 2018 to June 2019.

Brown: Santa Anita has blueprint Churchill Downs should use to address rash of horse deaths:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...e/70196656007/

The two areas Ferraro pointed out that have helped curve deaths at Santa Anita included more independent eyes on the horses.

The track began to utilize multiple exams from different veterinarians. It also added spotters to watch horses train and look for anything out of the ordinary. Horses that raced at Santa Anita were subject to a five-member panel that considered when horses were entered, their work pattern, and previous races to make sure there were no red flags that indicated the horse needed to be re-examined.

What Ferraro called the most obvious, yet hardest, change to make was to limit medication in racing. CHRB research at the time showed that nine out of every 10 fatal breakdowns occurred in horses that had pre-existing injuries.

Ferraro said when they moved pre-race medication allowances back to 48 hours before a race, it “made a big difference right away.” Ferraro is also against the use of intra-articular injections, which are administered into the open space between the bones in the joint capsule. The process is often used to give horses anti-inflammatory medication that reduces pain and increases range of motion.

My understanding is California also changed their rules on joint injections from 14 days pre-race to 30 days (the idea being the extra time makes it harder to mask pain.)

From the article:

Since implementing its rule changes, Santa Anita had single digit racing deaths in 2020 (6), 2021 (9) and 2022 (4), according to the Equine Injury Database. Last year, that meant only 0.63 fatalities per 1,000 starts.

IMO --

Minimizing breakdowns CAN be done (provided the will exists to do so.)

If industry leaders want to reduce breakdowns:

They should consider implementing standardized medication withdrawal times 48 hours pre-race and standardized joint injection times 30 days before the race.

Imo, making it harder to mask pain had a LOT to do with reducing breakdowns in California.


-jp
.

[Bustin Stones]

Originally Posted by Hambletonian

Full potential? How about faster than its limbs can handle. That has always been the issue, use drugs to reduce pain so a horse has no idea it has an issue. And they run pain free until they break down. That is a safety issue for evey horse and rider in the race. Horses injured and in pain should not be raced, period.

Horses that are injured should be treated and rested, but that costs money, and why not do anything to keep the horse going until it can't run anymore or becomes someone else's problem. This has gone on with cheap claimers forever, but seems out of place with higher class horses. But for all the safeguards in place, NY Thunder was a lightly raced horse with a repetitive soundness issues and was still cleared to run at the premier meet in the country.

If removing horses with chronic soundness issues from the racing pool reduces the amoint of racing nationwide, so be it. You will never end all injuries, but taking out the disasters waiting to happen will make for a more sustainable industry.

You're stating these things like we are in disagreement on something. I don't understand what that is?

[Bustin Stones]

Originally Posted by VeryOldMan

Along those lines, here's a long interesting piece in TDN about the various scanning technologies and StrideSAFE, and their ability to assist in identifying horses with latent problems:

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...cings-big-fix/

On a somewhat related note - some disturbing stuff is appearing on Twitter about Havnameltdown's necropsy results and how badly deteriorated his joints were. It's Twitter, so you never know the veracity - I'm just flagging that there could be more news coming out.

That's a very informative article about recent developments in protecting race horses. What I wonder is why we need an expensive wearable device to measure a horse's stride? With all our video technology, there must be less expensive methods to cull the 10% of horses whose strides are shortening and possibly need to get that PET scan. Maybe not as accurate, but less costly and almost as effective. If expense is the barrier to implementation, let's try something simpler like video technology.

[bisket]

If you listen to Baffert’s complaints about the positive in Gamine. He said he didn’t inject within 2 weeks of the race like the rules state. What I think the problem is the horse was injected continuously. The 2 week period would be long enough for a one time injection, but if the horse is injected regularly it will need a longer time to clear the system. I don’t think Baffert runs his horses on stuff, but he can train them harder if they’re on it all the time. I think maybe his horse could feel her leg raceday, but probably for the first time in months… If what some of these articles are saying is true then Gamine probably was still numb in her legs. Everyone is worried about whether a horse is running on something race day, but the real problem is horses are trained on these medications. That’s what needs to be cracked down on.

Another thing there is a common denominator to breakdowns in Kentucky and New York this year. Many of the horses were running new tops. Lol nobody wants to hear that….

[bisket]

Jockey Clubs just don’t get it… Racing wants rules that makes the product “fair” and they’re concerned about the welfare of the horse on race day. What about the other 364 days of the f’n year!!!!!!

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by bisket

Another thing there is a common denominator to breakdowns in Kentucky and New York this year. Many of the horses were running new tops. Lol nobody wants to hear that….

Thorograph has been making that claim for a long time, but I've never seen comprehensive data on it. I've seen isolated examples. I would guess there is some correlation between extreme exertion and injury.

[ranchwest]

I think I could draw the dopers out of a database just as well as with a post-race sample.

Don’t ask how, but I will just say that the tell-tale signs are there.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by ranchwest

I think I could draw the dopers out of a database just as well as with a post-race sample.

Don’t ask how, but I will just say that the tell-tale signs are there.

Some trainers are better than others, but new tops are less likely if the horse is fully mature, has had plenty of races, and has already been in the hands of multiple high level trainers.

Jerry Brown has created a tool that isolates suspicious new tops. If you see a trainer with a lot of flagged tops, that’s a pretty good indication something is amiss. I don’t know if anyone is using it, but they should be.