Ban On Lasix

[jay68802]

Coalition Representing Major U.S. Tracks Announces Lasix Ban For 2-Year-Old Races, Then Stakes
SPONSORED BY:Gulfstream Park
by Press Release | 04.18.2019 | 10:07am


A coalition of leading Thoroughbred racing associations and organizations announced today a new horse racing initiative committed to phasing out the use of the medication Furosemide (Lasix) beginning in 2020 and eliminating the use of Lasix in stakes races held at their racetracks beginning in 2021.

Coalition racetracks that have signed on to this initiative include all tracks owned or operated by Churchill Downs Incorporated (CDI), the New York Racing Association, Inc. (NYRA) and The Stronach Group as well as Del Mar, Keeneland, Lone Star Park and Remington Park, Los Alamitos Racecourse (Thoroughbred), Oaklawn Park and Tampa Bay Downs. Taken together these tracks represent 86% of the stakes races assigned graded or listed status in the United States in 2018. The coalition tracks will work diligently with their respective horsemen's associations and racing commissions towards implementing this effort.

Under the new program, beginning on January 1, 2020, two-year old horses would not be allowed to be treated with Lasix within 24 hours of a race. Beginning in 2021, the same prohibition would extend to all horses participating in any stakes race at coalition tracks. Accordingly, in 2021 the races comprising the Triple Crown would all be run under the new rules regarding race day medication.

Breeders' Cup Limited, the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders' Association (TOBA) and the American Graded Stakes Committee of TOBA, and the Kentucky Thoroughbred Association have also joined the coalition in support of this new policy.


Kirkpatrick & Co

“This is a progressive and unified approach to the subject of race day medication, achieving consistency with international standards for young horses and those that form the foundations of our breeding stock,” said David O'Rourke, president and chief executive officer of NYRA.
“This is a huge moment that signals a collective move to evolve this legacy sport. While there is still more work to be done, these reforms are a good start. This industry coalition has taken an important step forward toward a uniform policy and we are committed to focusing our attention and resources on how to make further improvements that directly prioritize equine health and safety. We applaud our industry partners and we look forward to continued collaboration,” said Belinda Stronach, chairman and president of The Stronach Group.

“Over the past several years, we have met with numerous stakeholders to drive action on many of our sport's central issues,” said Bill Carstanjen, chief executive officer of CDI. “This is a significant and meaningful step to further harmonize American racing with international standards. We will continue to work with other stakeholders, including our horsemen and regulatory agencies, to fully implement this and other important reforms.”

“This new program is an essential step as we look toward the long-term sustainability of US-breds on the national and international stages. Protecting the integrity of our sport is core to our mission and is our collective responsibility to the industry,” said Keeneland president and chief executive officer Bill Thomason.

The coalition racing organizations invite other North American race tracks to join this effort and adopt the same policies. Participating tracks include Aqueduct Racetrack, Arlington International Racecourse, Belmont Park, Churchill Downs, Del Mar, Fair Grounds, Gulfstream Park, Gulfstream Park West, Keeneland, Laurel Park, Lone Star Park and Remington Park, Los Alamitos (Thoroughbred), Oaklawn Park, Pimlico, Presque Isle Downs, Saratoga Race Course and Tampa Bay Downs. Golden Gate Fields and Santa Anita Park will continue to run under the previously announced limitations to race-day medication.

[jay68802]

Statement from Kentucky HBPA on Proposed Partial-ban of Race-day Lasix
(press release from the Kentucky HBPA)

The Kentucky Horsemen’s Benevolent & Protective Association (KHBPA) unalterably opposes the recently-announced plan of several North American tracks, including Keeneland and Churchill Downs, to run 2-year-old races without the anti-bleeder medication Lasix in 2020 and all stakes races in 2021. The KHBPA is the recognized representatives at all five Thoroughbred tracks in the Commonwealth.

It is untenable that the majority horsemen’s organization and equine medical professionals were not consulted before a fundamental policy change — banning Lasix on race-day — was unilaterally made by the racetracks. That would have provided the opportunity to stress the efficacy of Lasix in treating exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage (EIPH) in racehorses. Churchill Downs racetrack president Kevin Flanery, in a meeting with horsemen did indicate a willingness to discuss the issue following the running of the Kentucky Derby.

“Frankly, it is inconceivable to many horsemen and racetrack practitioners that I have talked with that based on the credible evidence of the importance of Lasix in preventing exercise induced pulmonary hemorrhage that this is even being contemplated,” said KHBPA president Rick Hiles. “We applaud the actions of both Woodbine Entertainment Group CEO Jim Lawson and Dennis Drazin, the chairman and CEO of Darby Development LLC, which operates Monmouth Park, for basically taking a wait-and-see approach and communicating with horsemen prior to instituting such drastic measures.”

The perception that race-day Lasix is implicated in the issues at Santa Anita or any racetrack is misguided. In fact, the American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP), along with other credible scientists, have determined that Lasix provides the most effective treatment and prevention to controlling and/or mitigating the possible disastrous impact of EIPH in racehorses.

In the definitive South Africa study, commissioned by The Jockey Club, and authored by Paul Morley, Kenneth Hinchcliff and Alan Guthrie, three scientists with impeccable credentials, they concluded that “pre-race administration of Furosemide (Lasix) markedly decreased both the incidence and severity of EIPH in Thoroughbred race horses.”

Interestingly, the study also points out that “the challenge will be for countries such as Australia, England, Hong Kong and South Africa that do not currently permit race-day use of Furosemide, to balance the animal welfare aspect of being able to prevent or reduce the condition, i.e. EIPH, against the imperatives for drug-free racing.”

The racetracks are quick to point out that any medication policy must place the health and welfare of the equine athletes first. Yet, when proposals are presented contrary to their proclamation, one is left to question the reasoning behind the decision.

Bettors are another group that should have been consulted prior to taking such a drastic measure as eliminating race-day Lasix. Some would have you believe that this will inspire more confidence from the betting public in the sport. In reality, the reverse is true.

Stephen Crist, long-time Daily Racing Form executive and advocate for the betting public, has said that “over the past decade, I have conducted over 100 question-and-answer seminars with tens of thousands of fans and players at tracks and betting parlors across the country. The next player I meet who thinks Lasix is a major issue, or a reason not to play the races, will be the very first. Customers are not shy about voicing numerous complaints about the game, but in my experience, Lasix is not even on their radar.”

Thoro-Graph president Jerry Brown said: “My handle is seven figures a year. I’ve found that people bet when they have an opinion. The stronger the opinion, the more likely they are to bet, and the more money they will bet. There is not a single horse player I have talked with who will bet more if Lasix is banned. Things that create uncertainty hinder investment in business, and the same applies here as well, not knowing whether the reason a horse stopped last time was because he bled and whether the problem has been resolved creates uncertainty.”

The KHBPA looks forward to meaningful discussions with racetracks on behalf of the owners and trainers that we represent, along with the members of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission and representatives of the wagering public.

— Kentucky HBPA board of directors

[jay68802]

More than 600 horse racing-industry stakeholders sign letter against banning Lasix
Benjamin Tobin, Louisville Courier JournalPublished 5:34 p.m. ET Sept. 20, 2019

Lasix use on race days has caused a controversy in the thoroughbred racing world. Here's a quick look at the controversial practice. Nikki Boliaux, Louisville Courier Journal

READ THE REST HERE:

https://www.courier-journal.com/stor...an/2388339001/

[jay68802]

The time for this is getting nearer. And once again, when this is brought up, the horsemen and trainers say "We need it, for the welfare of the horses." And yes, it is a subject that has been hashed around a thousand times. One thing I find interesting is that they are stating that handicappers oppose the banning of this drug. I for one think of it this way. If the trainers and horsemen want it so badly, then give it to them. But as a compromise, they have to give up all other drugs. Meaning that a horse, in order to pass a pre-race drug test, cannot have any other drug in its system, at any level. The other choice is to ban lasix, and lower the amount of other drugs allowed in a horses system to 0. To me, lasix is really a non-issue, it is the ability to stack other drugs, that is my major concern.

[jay68802]

Posted: Nov. 20, 2019

A group of racing organizations that account for 85% of graded stakes in the United States on Nov. 19 officially launched the Thoroughbred Safety Committee, which it said is designed to develop reforms to ensure the safety of racehorses and riders.

During a press conference at Keeneland in Lexington, Ky., members of the coalition said they will focus on safety, medication, operational and integrity guidelines as well as increase transparency and accountability. The founding members include Breeders’ Cup, Churchill Downs Inc., Keeneland Association, the New York Racing Association Inc, Del Mar Thoroughbred Club and The Stronach Group.

READ THE REST HERE:

http://tharacing.com/thoroughbred-sa...-push-reforms/

[clicknow]

Off top of my head thoughts, based on my own opinions, which some will agree and disagree with:


--taking a wait-and-see approach and communicating with horsemen prior to instituting such drastic measures

We've already been doing that. Wait-and-see has been going on for decades now, and we keep putting bleeders back into the breeding pool so they can have careers on the race track and be consistently shot in the neck with lasix simply in order the have the very careers they shouldn't even be in in the first place

--pre-race administration of Furosemide (Lasix) markedly decreased both the incidence and severity of EIPH in Thoroughbred race horses

Of course it did. Because trainers here do not seem to be able to train w/out it and have not learned other ways to manage it; plus years of breeding a certain level of bleeders and allowing them to have careers on the race track, instead of culling them from careers on the race track, has led us to where we are now. Where every horse on our track NEEDS medication in order to race.

Trainers the world over do not rely on it......where are THOSE studies?

They certainly aren't relying on race day meds for horses that "need help" or can't win w/out a raceday boost and would be better suited for careers not on the race track.

---The racetracks are quick to point out that any medication policy must place the health and welfare of the equine athletes first

So sticking a needle in their neck so that they can be racers is good for their health and welfare? And top trainers the world over who don't use it are somehow disregarding the heath and welfare of the equine athletes? How is it that they have learned how to manage EIPH?

---There is not a single horse player I have talked with who will bet more if Lasix is banned

Did he interview bettors who are walking away from U.S. racing? Many of the ones he didn't talk to have moved their $$ over to racing jurisdictions that do not permit lasix. Is he only addressing died-in-the-wool bettors who support the status quo, or is he addressing the many POTENTIAL bettors who might turn into racing fans, who aren't now, because they are suspicious of drugged horses and perceive race day medications as PEDs and thus want no part of that? Did Mr. Brown or Mr. Crist talk to trainers/bettors who want a Clean Sport and Uniformity in the industry?

[clicknow]

and finally, shouldn't our breeding industry select for durable horses, instead of allowing trainers to practice "volume disposable training"....one horse doesn't work out and they have 10 more waiting in the wings. Has anyone done studies on how many horses end up in this category and which barns are most guilty of this practice?

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by jay68802

The time for this is getting nearer. And once again, when this is brought up, the horsemen and trainers say "We need it, for the welfare of the horses." And yes, it is a subject that has been hashed around a thousand times. One thing I find interesting is that they are stating that handicappers oppose the banning of this drug. I for one think of it this way. If the trainers and horsemen want it so badly, then give it to them. But as a compromise, they have to give up all other drugs. Meaning that a horse, in order to pass a pre-race drug test, cannot have any other drug in its system, at any level. The other choice is to ban lasix, and lower the amount of other drugs allowed in a horses system to 0. To me, lasix is really a non-issue, it is the ability to stack other drugs, that is my major concern.

Re: The bolded part of the above quote --

Horseplayers have actually been polled several times about whether or not they favor abolishing raceday meds including lasix.

The Jockey Club hired McKinsey & Co. to do it in advance of their Round Table one year at Saratoga. We at HANA have surveyed horseplayers several times as well (dating back to 2009.)

The interesting thing to me is that in each of those polls approximately 70% of horseplayers indicated they were in favor of abolishing raceday meds including lasix.

Carry on...

-jp

.

[Redboard]

The last time they tried this in KY, they got a judge to issue an order to prevent it. It's illegal not to drug your horse in the bluegrass state.

[Tom]

So why wait until 2021 to start the stakes ban?

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by Tom

So why wait until 2021 to start the stakes ban?

Following the 2 yr olds that go on to run in the graded races the following year, is my guess.

[ubercapper]

Originally Posted by jay68802

The time for this is getting nearer. And once again, when this is brought up, the horsemen and trainers say "We need it, for the welfare of the horses." And yes, it is a subject that has been hashed around a thousand times. One thing I find interesting is that they are stating that handicappers oppose the banning of this drug. I for one think of it this way. If the trainers and horsemen want it so badly, then give it to them. But as a compromise, they have to give up all other drugs. Meaning that a horse, in order to pass a pre-race drug test, cannot have any other drug in its system, at any level. The other choice is to ban lasix, and lower the amount of other drugs allowed in a horses system to 0. To me, lasix is really a non-issue, it is the ability to stack other drugs, that is my major concern.

When I read "give it to them" at first I thought you were recommending giving IV Lasix to the horsemen and trainers. I now see what you meant.

However, when the HBPA president went before congress to testify and basically said Lasix is no big deal because he takes it every day, I laughed out loud because, at least for humans, the difference between oral lasix and IV lasix is bigger than night and day (if that were possible). I've had IV lasix, and it's one of the most horrible experiences one can imagine (probably a bit less painful than kidney stones).

It occurred to me just how interesting it would be to see some of the Lasix proponents felt after getting a dose of IV Lasix.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by ubercapper

I've had IV lasix, and it's one of the most horrible experiences one can imagine (probably a bit less painful than kidney stones).

Similar to how they prescribe biophosphonates for osteoporosis and now finding out that while it's supposed to build bone (on xrays) the more sophisticated scans are showing same results as in race horses..."spider webby" bones that really are not being strengthened at all.

I guess we have no idea how painful IV lasix could be to a horse. Not something that most people even think about, because winning is everything.

When you said kidney stones I recoiled in horror, having been there done that. I imagine that lasix can cause them as well, since duretics can certainly up the incidence of getting stones and staying well hydrated at all times is one of the keys to not getting kidney stones.

[PaceAdvantage]

PLEASE STOP POSTING THE FULL TEXT OF COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL FROM OTHER SOURCES

1-2 paragraphs PLUS THE LINK is all that has EVER been allowed.

THANKS

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

PLEASE STOP POSTING THE FULL TEXT OF COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL FROM OTHER SOURCES

1-2 paragraphs PLUS THE LINK is all that has EVER been allowed.

THANKS

It’s a press release, that means they are asking for anyone and everyone to post it.