A new group called Clean Horse Racing posted on their Facebook page a 9-page letter sent by Sheila Lyons, DVM to Gov. Cuomo regarding lasix and drugs and how the sport should be managed. Since I don\'t know how to do it, I\'m hoping someone can find this and post it here for all to read and comment on. I\'d want to hear Jerry\'s opinion on this. Thanks, Ken
\"Sheila Lyons, DVM, ACVSMR\"
Lasix has not ended EIPH in race horses. The permissive use of lasix has however, led to under-reporting of the true incidence of this condition\"
Dr Lyons well known shill for those stumping on the Clean Up The Game bandwagon.They have a website @www.cleanhorseracing.com where you will find the usual suspects on that side of the aisle.
This group is a bunch of fools with the agenda that lasix is the root of all ills in horse racing.
Received no less than 3 solicitations, from this group, in various mannners asking me to sign a pre-written letter to Gov Cuomo to ban lasix.
So what are you saying? Those who want to clean up the sport are dead wrong? We should keep things just the way they are - there\'s no drug problems in the sport? She went into a lot of subjects besides just lasix - is she wrong on all of her other points?
Lasix Problem/issue Highly exaggerated, check the results of other national vets stats.Perception far worse than facts. A group with an agenda behind most of this.No question racing has issues, many besides drug thing but of equal importance to racings survival.
When was the last time you read about an effort to substantially reduce takeout, pool integrity,transparency/disclosure by track management?
Many Substantial players would throw the lasix issue under the bus for some meaningful takeout relief, for example.
Missed all the articles on that stuff, sick of hearing about Lasix which is available to all and used by the disingenuous phonies that are stumping against it.The implications of eliminating lasix are off the charts negative for racing and will knock out MANY small/medium outfits,without question.
So are you saying that the rest of the planet (Europe, Japan, etc) that don\'t allow lasix are all fools and we\'re the only ones who know what we\'re doing?
2) They race without Lasix in Europe, in Hong Kong, in Japan. Why do we need it in the U.S.?
• Outside of the United States, the majority of racing jurisdictions still use archaic medical
science when it comes to an official diagnosis of EIPH.6 If a horse does not show evidence of
epistaxis (bleeding from one or both nostrils), they are not considered bleeders. With the modern
technology available to aid in diagnosis, this is the medical equivalent of refusing to use an X-ray
machine to diagnose fractures. It is irresponsible to wait for a horse to be in crisis to make a
diagnosis.
• Outside the United States, the majority of racing jurisdictions fail to officially acknowledge the
prevalence of EIPH, despite the incontrovertible
evidence that it affects the majority of horses.
BUT, trainers in Europe and Australia use Lasix
during training on a regular basis. The trainers
acknowledge its effectiveness in treating EIPH--
the ONLY motivation for using Lasix during
morning workouts is the alleviation of EIPH.
Horses are not allowed to race on Lasix in
Europe or Australia, but it is regularly
used during morning workouts. Why
would horsemen use it in the mornings, if
not to treat EIPH?
kencbs,
http://www.nytha.com/pdf/the_lasix_question.pdf
Thanks,
Flighted iron
I am not in the business, but the US used to run horses without meds when I was growing up and it seems the horses survived as well as the smaller operations. Could someone in the business tell me why would it be so much more expensive for those operations to run their horses without Lasix and Bute and other drugs? I am truly interested because it seems to work in other parts of the World. Why can\'t it work here?
They do Not race nearly as often as we do and that is bullshit that they do not \"treat for blood\" in some way.Testing is not nearly as sophisticated either. Australian racing a cess pool in my time there buying horses, home of the milkshake.
They race off farms also, a recipe for cheating/experimenting with \"stuff\"
Who cares what they do in other countries ???
Cost not the sole issue,it\'s about income per start vs expenses, no lasix equals = less starts/income with the same expense.How\'s that work?
Purists should buy a few horses and get bills, your attitude would change in a heartbeat toward lasix and other helpful drugs presently being used.
I know that they train with it. So could we and possibly so did we when we had no raceday med rules. But the fact still is that they do not allow it on the raceday itself, and it doesn\'t seem to have hurt the European, Australian or Japanese thoroughbred. Bleeding isnt acknowledged in Europe because the horse would be banned from racing for a certain amount of time, or at least that used to be the rule. That is why they do not acknowledge a horse is a bleeder. If a horse was seen bleeding, it was banned from racing for a certain amount of time. If it bled and was reported a certain amount of times, the horse was banned from racing for life. It obviously was not a rule in the day of Flying Childers, who I believe bled profusely each race he ran, but it might still be a rule today. It makes alot of sense to me to do that for the welfare of the horse. Then the horse can become a show horse or a hunter/jumper, etc. Lasix does not stop bleeding. There is no drug used, as far as I know, that will stop a horse from bleeding. Do you know if horses are still banned if seen bleeding in Europe? If everyone is trying to hide it I would say yes, which means Lasix is not the answer to the bleeding problem, but masks the bleeding problem, possibly. But many trainers have come out in favor of Lasix. Could use in training but not on raceday work here? Or are we just to inundated to stop it now? I am not that knowledgeable all the intricacies of the drug, so I would like to hear others opinions and be corrected if there is proof I am wrong.
Thanks for the response. I\'m not that knowledgeable of Australian racing, and I do know that cheating and experimenting happens everywhere. I do know that in Europe, according to the rule, any foreign substance found in the blood is grounds for a DQ. Is it upheld everytime? Probably not. Thanks for breaking down the problem for the smaller outfits. I can understand that. I\'m not trying to be a purist. But when I first started following racing, in the early 60\'s, I would always go to Arlington Park. They still had cheap claimers running and no meds were supposedly allowed on raceday. Did they just test the stakes races back then?
Footlick,
It sounds very hypocritical to me. It\'s ok to train with Lasix,but taboo to
race with it? I looked into the archives more specifically last years breeders cup. I went up to and through the 2yr boys grass mile. 20 euro/foreign entrants
and 75% used Lasix. From what i\'ve read/heard from experts i\'m 100% for the use
of Lasix.
Flighted Iron
When Miss Alleged was a 4 yr old, the rumor in Europe was that she was bleeding. Since the automatic use of Lasix wasn\'t permitted for Euros at that time in the US, if I remember correctly, she was shipped over here to run in a race and bleed so that she could run on Lasix for the BC. Euros want to use it when they are here because they want the same advantages the US horses have and want a level playing field. No horse can have it in their system in Europe by raceday, so that is their level playing field. If it is as beneficial as you feel, then they should be lauded for using it in training, which is the only way the are allowed to use it there. Since so many Euros ship here, when they do they want to run on it, because the American horses are running on it. I can\'t judge if they are hypocritical or not. When in Rome.......
You have good points. I\'m just not sold on all the virtues of Lasix. I\'m sure it has made it easier to try to control the issue. I guess I see the trend of our society overmedicating overflowing into other realms. Maybe my perception is off.
LASIX.
1-- A major problem right now is that people are conflating the Lasix issue with the real one involving performance enhancers that are being used daily by many top trainers-- this is like living in the projects, with heroin dealers in the stairwells, and trying to ban the sale of beer.
2-- For the most part, racing abroad (as far as I know, anyway) is conducted in more or less rural areas, and here it takes place in or near cities. Air quality is an issue.
3-- As those who have been around long enough can remember, when bleeder drugs were first developed, but before Lasix was listed in the program, it was the wild west-- horses that had been stopping and were 15-1 in the program would go off 5/2 and run off the screen because they had been treated and somebody knew it. The advantage to the current Lasix rules is that it\'s listed in the program. There are other things that can be used and while they are not as effective they will produce dramatic form reversals-- and the public will have no idea it\'s coming because the drug change won\'t be published. That would be serious chaos on a large scale.
4-- When Lasix was first introduced the state vet had to certify horses as bleeders in order for them to run on it. Then, as with everything else involving drugs in this industry, it became too much work/too expensive to do the right way, and they let everyone run on it. I don\'t remember the numbers on this (Sight?), but you could get most horses off Lasix simply by going back to the old rule and using it just on actual bleeders.
Pretty smart article about Lasix by Steve Zorn of Castle Village Farm here.
http://therail.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/the-case-for-using-lasix/?ref=sports
My problem with lasix, as well as bute, is that when they were first proposed for legalization, the argument for them was that they would enable horses to run more often. Before any drugs were legalized, horses ran on average about 10 times a year. Now it\'s down to about 6. And I have yet to hear a single person in the industry argue that horses today are healthier, stronger, and more durable than they were before legalization. I realize there\'s other issues involved like bad breeding, but it just doesn\'t seem like the original argument for legalizing drugs is holding up.
Ken
I never ever heard anyone make that argument, but one thing\'s for sure, Lasix lets bleeders run more often. It used to be something like 60 days vets list for a first time bleeder, 6 months second time. No matter whose stats you use, a bunch of horses will be bleeding if you stop Lasix use-- except if they start using something else. Which as stated creates other problems.
I\'m trying to figure out, what\'s the good thing that happens because we ban Lasix? We get to be like other countries, and that\'s automatically good? All drug use is automatically bad? Anyone out there want to swear off all prescription drugs for the rest of their life?
By the way, an awful lot of the Euros that come here mid-career do so because they\'re bleeding over there.
That was also part of my thought process.
It is interesting to me, and has cleared many things up for me, to hear from the people in the industry. Since I am an outsider, hearing the pros and cons of people in the industry has softened my stance on Lasix. I have another question. If horses train on it, and then are not allowed to run on it, does Lasix xtill have a beneficial effect on the horse during the race or does it need to be in the system during raceday to have the beneficial effect?
From all of the very informed posts the problem is evident.
Not enough money.
Not enough money to enforce the rules.
Not enough money returned to the owners. Purse money doesn\'t cover expenses.
Not enough money returned to the bettors. Take out is too high.
Not enough money returned to the owners of the racetracks. If I\'m not mistaken Gareden State Park was demolished and sold for the value of the land.
Maybe racing needs to fail. And only through this failure can it be rejiggered into a succesful format.
Thanks
Wild Again
Jerry - I\'ve sworn off prescription drugs. Haven\'t had one since 1983. I\'ve gotten into the natural health movement. But that\'s a whole other story.
I go back and forth on the lasix issue. There\'s pros and cons for me. And that\'s partly why I started this thread in the 1st place - to have us talking about this stuff. I\'d rather solutions come from us than the NY Times and PETA.
Ken
Yes.
Lasix is given via intravenous injection four hours before a race. It starts working in about 5 minutes to make a horse urinate. It\'s peak effect is in about 30 minutes to an hour. Then it\'s half-life is 2 hours or so.
That means that, four hours after the shot, when the horse runs, there isn\'t even a therapeutic dose left in the horses system.
Lasix is only used during a race, or during a hard work - not for regular training. That\'s because EIPH is a recognized problem of all horse breeds that work at speed and great intensity: race horses, barrel racers, weight-pulling horses, cross-country horses.
Why would you allow a horses lungs to be damaged by EIPH if you can help prevent it?
Lasix is a good theraputic drug for Exercise-Induced Pulmonary Hemorrhage. There is zero reason to ban it. Steve Zorn wrote a 100% accurate article. Very nice.
It \"enhances performance\", the same way an athlete who has asthma \"enhances performance\" by taking his asthma inhaler before he runs. The same way your grandma \"enhances her performance\" by taking her lasix pill (her \"water pill\") so she can breath due to her congestive heart failure and her lungs don\'t feel wet.
The problem with \"using lasix on actual bleeders\" is that our ability to diagnose has gotten so much better.
To diagnose \"bleeding\" (EIPH):
5% bleed visibly out their nose - the way we diagnosed it 120 years ago
70-75% bleed with blood visible in their trachea via endoscopy after race (if you time it correctly when you look) - the way we\'v diagnosed since the 1970\'s
85-93% bleed with blood found in lungs if you do a transtracheal wash (endoscopy cannot get back into tiny airways of lungs where EIPH actually occurs) - the way we\'ve been able to do it since the 1980\'s
The incidence of EIPH in race horses has not changed in over 100 years - only the diagnostic methods have gotten better.
Lasix isn\'t a problem - it\'s a solution to a problem.
The American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Association of Equine Practitioners
Position on Therapeutic Medications in Racehorses (2009)
The AAEP policy on medication in pari-mutuel racing is driven by our mission to improve the health and welfare of the horse.
The AAEP policy is aimed at providing the best health care possible for the racehorses competing while ensuring the integrity of the sport.
The AAEP expects its members to abide by the rules of all jurisdictions where they practice.
The AAEP condemns the administration of non-therapeutic or unprescribed medications to racehorses by anyone.
The AAEP believes that all therapeutic medication should be administered to racehorses by or under the direction of a licensed veterinarian.
Health care decisions on individual horses should involve the veterinarian, the trainer and owner with the best interests of the horse as the primary objective.
The AAEP strongly encourages continued research in determining the therapeutic levels and appropriate withdrawal times that represent responsible use of medication in the racehorse.
The AAEP is aware of the dynamics of the development of new products, as well as the continuing evaluation of current medications, and will continue to evaluate its policy based upon available scientific research and the best interests of the horse.
In order to provide the best health care possible for the racehorse, veterinarians should utilize the most modern diagnostic and therapeutic modalities available in accordance with medication guidelines designed to ensure the integrity of the sport.
To this end, the following are the essential elements of AAEP policy concerning veterinary care of the racehorse:
- All racing jurisdictions should adopt the uniform medication guidelines set forth by the Racing and Medication Testing Consortium Inc. (RMTC). Including the RMTC testing procedures with strict quality controls and penalty schedules, these guidelines and procedures strive to protect the integrity of racing as well as the health and well-being of the horse.
- Race day medication must be in accordance with current RMTC guidelines. In the absence of a more effective treatment/preventative for exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage (EIPH), the AAEP supports the use of furosemide as a day-of-the-race medication to control EIPH. The AAEP advocates the research and development of new treatments to help prevent and/or control EIPH.
- The AAEP encourages proactive and constructive communication between regulatory bodies and practicing veterinarians and other industry stakeholders.
- The AAEP believes that all veterinarians should use judicious, prudent and ethical decisions in all treatments to ensure the health and welfare of the horse.
- The AAEP strongly endorses increased surveillance and enforcement of the above-mentioned regulations.
Thanks. I am assuming that there is no difference between bleeding with Lasix and without it as far as the damage the bleeding causes. Lasix lessens the frequency of the incidents.
Finally someone putting it down in writing; FACTS.
I am totally AGAINST the ban of lasix for a couple of reasons.
1. Lasix helps horses.
2. Handicapping is hard enough now, how in the world are we gonna know if a horse is gonna react negatively because it is not running on lasix. The horse can bleed and stop, fall, or not run a lick. It can be much more dangerous to horses and jockeys.
There are many astute people on this board, for those of you who are FOR the ban of lasix answer this question: How are you going to be confident in placing a sizable bet? Or any bet?... for that matter!
\"There are many astute people on this board, for those of you who are FOR the ban of lasix answer this question: How are you going to be confident in placing a sizable bet? Or any bet?... for that matter\"
Beau,
Rest assured in all of these circle jerks by the Clueless Clowns, the player is irrelevant!
Mike