Is the Drug Bill about the destroy the business of Horse Racing?

[Cannon shell]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

If a horse has a sore foot...and giving it a break from training and racing is not an option, what else is there?

Shooting it up with a numbing agent and sending it right back to the warzone?

The problem is that most injuries are fairly minor and in a lot of cases keeping them in training to some degree is beneficial.

The language of the bill seems to say that I can't give anything at any time.

[FenceBored]

Originally Posted by Cannon shell

Football and baseball players are tested twice a season with no out of competition testing. The levels at which a human are tested at are far higher than a horse. Football players can go into the lockerroom at halftime and get shot up. If I give my horse an Aleve the day before a race he will come back positive, a baseball player can take it between innings if he wishes.

The problem if you read the bill is there is no specified withdrawal times anymore. Read the bill. ANY substance ...at any time.

I've read the bill. You're overreacting.

[FenceBored]

Originally Posted by Cannon shell

Football and baseball players are tested twice a season with no out of competition testing. The levels at which a human are tested at are far higher than a horse. Football players can go into the lockerroom at halftime and get shot up. If I give my horse an Aleve the day before a race he will come back positive, a baseball player can take it between innings if he wishes.

Oh, you want to be like the alcoholic, drug abusing pros of the NFL and MLB?
Talk about setting your low standards for comparison.

Here I thought you were talking about those athletes in "Olympic tradition," the ones who compete in national and international competitions and have to adhere to the WADA code. My mistake.

[Tom]

Perhaps racing could improve itself if they gave drugs to the bettors as they came through the turnstiles. Beats the hell of Tee shirt day.

[papillon]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I can't believe that anyone other than those with a short term economic interest in putting themselves above the integrity of the sport, welfare of the animals, and interests of horse players could be arguing for allowing any drugs except to treat horses out of training.

IMO the standards in racing should be HIGHER than for human beings because animals are not in a position to agree to compete while injured and drugged up, the integrity of the sport is critical to its popularity and ability to attract dollars, and the entire breeding industry (and thus owners) would be best served by buying and selling horses (and their offspring) who reputations were not drug enhanced.

This is a long term no brainer in every way. The problem is short term and self centered thinking.

this!

horses could be switched from lasix to flair strips today if the concern is truly only to prevent bleeding--numerous high quality studies using BAL (which is the most definitive test for bleeding outside of autopsies--the only 100% definitive test for bleeding), have shown that FLAIR strips work as well as lasix, and they have no adverse side effects, except maybe the loss of a few hairs on the horse's nose when the strip is removed.

i disagree that lasix is making the horses more consistent. horses seem much less consistent today than they ever have in the past, tbh--the horses of the 1940s and 1950s ran many more times a year and had far more consistent results than the horses of today, and look at how frequently aussie horse run without lasix and yet seem pretty consistent. US horses today can run lights out in one race and then show up a few months later and lolly-gag all over the course coming in dead last for no apparent reason (coil anyone?).

maybe i'm just naive and all the horses in the US have always been doped (i am aware that in the 1930s many were hop-headed heroin addicts because horses on heroin will literally run until their hearts burst...but...even if that's true it doesn't change the fact that lasix without steroids is not producing consistency in anything other than career ending injuries, despite only racing in a minimal number of races a year).

[andymays]

I don't think horseplayers are going to be too happy when a horse they need for a score bleeds and doesn't finish. How are they going to account for that in the PP's? They would have to scope every runner and somehow indicate the level of bleeding if any. I know that once in a while we see a notation that a horse bled but without lasix I give it about a month before Horseplayers start screaming.

I don't know much about his so maybe someone else on the board like a Trainer can comment of the levels of bleeding and how much a small amount of bleeding can affect performance.

[matthewsiv]

The only drug that should be allowed IS Lasix's.

I do not think that race goers would like to see horses bleed after a race.

What is the percentage of bleeders?

I would guess 50%+

Without this drug horses will not last 2 years and especially in hot climates.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Cannon shell

So if my horse in training steps on a rock and has a sore foot I should not be able to treat him for a few days?

Or should I "take him out of training"?

You can't just send them to the beach for a week so they can have a break. It isn't as clear cut as people want to make out.

The standards are significantly higher than human sports.

IMO you should treat him, but take him out of training until the treatment is over, he is healthy, and pain free without treatment. Then resume training.

That standard is higher than for athletes who might continue to play through the treatment and pain etc... But the only reason players are doing that is because they are being compensated. They weigh the risks to health and career vs. the money and making the final decision for themselves. IMO human beings with an economic interest can't be trusted to make decisions for animals in pain or that are unhealthy.