RIP to Mongolian Groom and CA Racing

[BarchCapper]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Fager, THE WORLD ANTI-DOPING AGENCY SAYS LASIX MASKS. They have credibility. You are some anonymous person on the Internet. So I am going to repeat the TRUTH as long as there are deniers like you out there..

As a diuretic, Lasix can have a masking effect. But it also has a therapeutic use (which you may or may not agree is beneficial for racing). Sometimes this “Lasix masks” comes across sounding like “the only reason Lasix is used is to mask.”

[cj]

Originally Posted by BarchCapper

As a diuretic, Lasix can have a masking effect. But it also has a therapeutic use (which you may or may not agree is beneficial for racing). Sometimes this “Lasix masks” comes across sounding like “the only reason Lasix is used is to mask.”

I think most here are aware of that, both for humans and for animals. It has been discussed many times.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by BarchCapper

As a diuretic, Lasix can have a masking effect. But it also has a therapeutic use (which you may or may not agree is beneficial for racing). Sometimes this “Lasix masks” comes across sounding like “the only reason Lasix is used is to mask.”

When Lasix is used indiscriminately, as it is now...how can you blame people for fixating on its "masking effect"?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by BarchCapper

As a diuretic, Lasix can have a masking effect. But it also has a therapeutic use (which you may or may not agree is beneficial for racing). Sometimes this “Lasix masks” comes across sounding like “the only reason Lasix is used is to mask.”

I have never said the only reason Lasix is used is to mask.

Indeed, I strongly believe that racing came to Lasix in at least a somewhat honest way. It does treat bleeding.

The problem is, racing then got rid of the controls, the bleeders' lists and the detention barns and the surveillance, which was all set up to ensure that Lasix was only being used as a medication to treat proven bleeders, not as a masking agent or a performance enhancer. And given that trainers and vets are allowed to use Lasix willy-nilly on race day, they are able to take advantage of its performance enhancing and masking effects, which are precisely why serious anti-doping agencies ban the stuff.

[Jeff P]

There's also the matter of reduction in body weight.

Earlier this year, The Paulick Report ran an article citing a peer reviewed study from 1999 that concluded thoroughbred race horses treated with lasix improve 3 to 5.5 lengths when running a six furlong race because of weight loss resulting from being treated with lasix.

Commentary: The Performance-Enhancing Effects Of Lasix:
https://www.paulickreport.com/news/r...ects-of-lasix/

The definitive study
The peer-reviewed study was published in the Sept. 1, 1999, issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. Its title: Effects of furosemide on performance of Thoroughbreds racing in the United States and Canada.

The authors analyzed 22,589 race records provided by the Daily Racing Form. These records were of horses that finished a race on a dirt surface in the United States and Canada between June 28 and July 13, 1997, in jurisdictions that allowed the use of furosemide. Of that total, 16,761 (74.2%) had been administered Lasix.

The authors concluded that:

“Horses that received furosemide raced faster, earned more money, and were more likely to win or finish in the top 3 positions than horses that did not. The magnitude of the effect of furosemide on estimated 6-furlong race times varied with sex with the greatest effect in males.”

When comparing horses of the same sex in six-furlong races, the authors determined the difference between racing with Lasix versus without was 3 to 5.5 lengths.

The authors attempted to sort out possible explanations for the superior performance of horses on Lasix. The discussion on weight loss is worth revisiting.

“Another explanation for the performance-enhancing effect of furosemide is the acute reduction in body weight that occurs after furosemide administration. Intravenous administration of furosemide has been shown to induce a 2 to 4% reduction in body weight within 4 hours. Because work is a product of mass, velocity and distance, and given the acknowledged importance of weight carriage when handicapping Thoroughbred horses, it would be expected that loss of this amount of weight would have a beneficial effect on the athletic ability of furosemide-treated horses. This contention is supported by reports that the furosemide-induced reduction in body weight increases the maximal rate of oxygen consumption, reduces accumulated oxygen deficit and apparent rate of lactate production, and decreases the rate of carbon dioxide production of horses during intense exercise.”

Purely from a physics standpoint, it's really hard for me to think lasix doesn't enhance performance.




-jp

.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

When Lasix is used indiscriminately, as it is now...how can you blame people for fixating on its "masking effect"?

That is my opinion of why it is used 99% of the time.

[The_Turf_Monster]

It is used on non-bleeders to reduce the amount of weight they're carrying, not as a masking agent. Everybody is looking to scream drugs but the prof is right in front of your face why it's being used

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I have never said the only reason Lasix is used is to mask.

Indeed, I strongly believe that racing came to Lasix in at least a somewhat honest way. It does treat bleeding.

The problem is, racing then got rid of the controls, the bleeders' lists and the detention barns and the surveillance, which was all set up to ensure that Lasix was only being used as a medication to treat proven bleeders, not as a masking agent or a performance enhancer. And given that trainers and vets are allowed to use Lasix willy-nilly on race day, they are able to take advantage of its performance enhancing and masking effects, which are precisely why serious anti-doping agencies ban the stuff.

That is the problem now, if you don't use it, you are at a disadvantage. It is a mess.

[cj]

Originally Posted by The_Turf_Monster

It is used on non-bleeders to reduce the amount of weight they're carrying, not as a masking agent. Everybody is looking to scream drugs but the prof is right in front of your face why it's being used

I think many would prefer not to use it, but if you don't, you are spotting the field a few lengths.

[46zilzal]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

There's also the matter of reduction in body weight.

Earlier this year, The Paulick Report ran an article citing a peer reviewed study from 1999 that concluded thoroughbred race horses treated with lasix improve 3 to 5.5 lengths when running a six furlong race because of weight loss resulting from being treated with lasix.


Purely from a physics standpoint, it's really hard for me to think lasix doesn't enhance performance.


.

There have been other studies that showed next to no effect only in geldings

[46zilzal]

KNOWN pharmacology: Furosemide is a loop diuretic agent that has been used to treat hypercalcemia because it increases renal calcium excretion.

Is it a wonder that any animal on this drug LONG TERM would have more connective tissue injury particularly BONEY pathology.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by 46zilzal

There have been other studies that showed next to no effect only in geldings

You can see a horse, or a number, in the clouds if you look long enough, or if you happen look at the right cloud at the right time....

Partly because of the amount of information and the amount of misinformation (on the internet, in 2020), faith in, reference-to 'studies' has become a pseudoscience in it's own right.

A gelding(or colt, i'm not even sure as to the intended designation) is going to lose the water weight which is being inferred to in the model. That's what diuretics do.
Unless a horse becomes dehydrated to the point of negatively impacting performance, we're talking about a horse carrying less mass over a distance because he peed some of it out.

Now, maybe there is some extremely unlikely/unique hormonal thing that makes a gelding not pee when taking diuretics, but the point is, such studies should be taken with a grain of salt.


Same general "studies" bro-science regarding claimers and breakdown rate. The model being referenced is in regards to examples of horses who've been dropped in class due to an injury/underlying-issue. Survivorship bias(even though, were talking about death) brings the recollection of times when a horse had broken down, and we all saw the red flags everywhere regarding the drop-down, and the 'flipping' between trainers to squeeze the lemon dry... A (loosely labeled)study or an alleged stat, may show that Charles Town has a lower breakdown rate than Keeneland, but we take it with a grain of salt, and look to whether the models that we are looking at are significant, and whether we have the competence to form a critical opinion.

but yea, studies do have a place

/rant

[clicknow]

This topic can (and probably will) go on forever. And I don't want to see the connections of Mongolian Groom scapegoated for *everything that's wrong with racing".

My idea is that everyone should make a top-5 list of things you would like to see improved/changed in our sport, then follow up to find the organizations (WHOA) and legislative efforts (Horse Racing Integrity Act) that support your beliefs, then join in to help accomplish *some* of those things.

Perhaps a good thing to add to this topic would be organizations, bills, associations, etc. that people here can reach out and support, either with $$ or letters to representatives, track officials, etc.

This would be something POSITIVE to add to the topic.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Fager, THE WORLD ANTI-DOPING AGENCY SAYS LASIX MASKS. They have credibility. You are some anonymous person on the Internet. So I am going to repeat the TRUTH as long as there are deniers like you out there.

As for steroids, they are illegal now, and it's perfectly obvious that you would need out of competition testing to enforce the ban. Which was my point.

If you refuse to educate yourself on a topic, then you should keep quiet on it. For MANY years we've known how to make sure that Lasix doesn't mask for other drugs. For MANY years we've known that given within a certain timeframe in a certain amount, it does NOT mask other drugs.

So be against it if you want, but the FACT is that it does NOT mask other drugs so quit spreading a LIE.

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...k-other-drugs/

Once Lasix started to become a widely-used medication in racing, chemists and racing commissions realized they had to take steps to stop those who might try to use the drug to make more illicit drugs undetectable. Dr. Rick Sams, a professor with Ohio State’s Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, and Dr. George Maylin, the longtime head of the drug testing program for the New York Gaming Commission, were put in charge of finding a solution to what could have been a serious problem. The two concluded that a horse should not be administered Lasix within four hours of its racing because any shorter period of time would make the dilution effect problematic. The four-hour rule has been universally adopted across the U.S.

“The rules we have now are a direct result of studies that George Maylin and I did in the mid-eighties,’ Sams said. “We dosed horses with performance-enhancing drugs and therapeutic drugs, we administered Lasix, we collected urine samples at various times and we determined that with the conditions that Lasix must be administered four hours before a race and with a maximum dose of 25 milligrams, there was no significant effect on the concentration in the urine sample. That was an issue that was paramount leading up to the mid-eighties when Lasix administration was banned by the predecessor to the ARCI. They recommenced a ban on furosemide nationwide due to its potential to help hide others drugs, just like you saw with this baseball situation.”

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

If you refuse to educate yourself on a topic, then you should keep quiet on it. For MANY years we've known how to make sure that Lasix doesn't mask for other drugs. For MANY years we've known that given within a certain timeframe in a certain amount, it does NOT mask other drugs.

So be against it if you want, but the FACT is that it does NOT mask other drugs so quit spreading a LIE.

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...k-other-drugs/

Once Lasix started to become a widely-used medication in racing, chemists and racing commissions realized they had to take steps to stop those who might try to use the drug to make more illicit drugs undetectable. Dr. Rick Sams, a professor with Ohio State’s Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, and Dr. George Maylin, the longtime head of the drug testing program for the New York Gaming Commission, were put in charge of finding a solution to what could have been a serious problem. The two concluded that a horse should not be administered Lasix within four hours of its racing because any shorter period of time would make the dilution effect problematic. The four-hour rule has been universally adopted across the U.S.

“The rules we have now are a direct result of studies that George Maylin and I did in the mid-eighties,’ Sams said. “We dosed horses with performance-enhancing drugs and therapeutic drugs, we administered Lasix, we collected urine samples at various times and we determined that with the conditions that Lasix must be administered four hours before a race and with a maximum dose of 25 milligrams, there was no significant effect on the concentration in the urine sample. That was an issue that was paramount leading up to the mid-eighties when Lasix administration was banned by the predecessor to the ARCI. They recommenced a ban on furosemide nationwide due to its potential to help hide others drugs, just like you saw with this baseball situation.”

Take it up with the World Anti-Doping Agency:

https://www.wada-ama.org/en/content/...masking-agents

And one reason I trust WADA and don't trust equine veterinarians is because there's a GIGANTIC economic incentive to for equine vets to produce "research" that concludes that Lasix isn't a masking agent.

If you go back, I can find lots and lots of studies that purported to show that nicotine was not addictive. The tobacco industry pumped them out constantly.

The fact of the matter is, unless horse racing can convince WADA that furosemide (Lasix) is not a masking agent, I don't care what anyone in the industry says. The banned substance list should contain whatever WADA says should be on there, because they are trustworthy and have no industry to protect.