We have been warned

[TGJB]

They are doing 72 surveillance at the Derby, if they are doing OOC testing that\'s good news but I haven\'t seen it.

Re the article, I scanned it quickly and will read it carefully when I get a chance. But a) Pennsylvania didn\'t even begin TCO2 testing until 2010, and b) his statement about the percentage of horses that test positive is unfounded. You can\'t get test results, so you can\'t come up with a percentage-- that\'s one of the problems. The number the RCI guy keeps quoting is BS-- he\'s extrapolating the number of positives against the number of starters without knowing how many horses are tested, what they\'re tested for, what type of tests are used, and what the actual results of any tests are.

Test results being made public is step one.

[TGJB]

When exactly was EPO banned?

[sighthound]

The public doesn\'t have a clue what to do with test results.  Only positives should be made public.

"People think [horseracing] is a very dirty
industry, nothing but drugs, but that's not true,"
said Dr. Uboh. "We know that only about 0.1
percent test positive. It's a very clean industry.
Very well regulated, believe me. Horses are very
intensely tested. We don't leave stones unturned.
Whenever we see something, we pursue it down.

[sighthound]

2000?  I\'d have to look it up.

[TGJB]

That ridiculous statement-- and I say that advisedly, after talking to the top people working on this in the industry-- is exactly why the results have to be made public. There is not a single serious person working on this who thinks the percentage is close to that low.

Keep in mind the following which is a fact, as solid as a fact can be: Kentucky changed labs because they loaded some samples to see if the previous lab was doing the job, and got zero positives. Which means any \"percentages\" about Kentucky, or about Pennsylvania before they started TCO2 testing (at least that long), are a joke.

[TGJB]

He admitted in 2008 that he had been doing it after 2000.

[sighthound]

They have been doing out-of-competition drug testing in Kentucky since 2010.

Here\'s the state statute

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/kar/810/001/110.htm

     

Section 3. Out-of-Competition Testing. (1) Any horse eligible to race in Kentucky shall be subject to testing without advance notice for the substances specified in Section 2 of this administrative regulation. A horse is presumed eligible to race in Kentucky if:

[sighthound]

Your conspiracy theories have grown old a long time ago.

[miff]

JB,

1.For over two years NYRA has quietly conducted out of competition super testing on app 1200 horses, no positives for anything illegal out of competition.If Tricky gets his day in Federal Court, much will come out including the targeting certain trainers.

2.NYRA has a no question informant line, that has not rung(Im told)

3.NY,not Cali has the most sophisticated testing in the country having received a special grant of funds for this purpose(2 years ago)TAP runners have been tested in NY for several years.

4.Dr.Maylin will be the first to admit that there is no way to stop a trainer who is in possession of a PED for which no test exist.

Unsubstantiated bull does little but fuel the fires of the conspiracy idiots who do not have a shred of knowledge about what is really going on vs what is perceived.

[sighthound]

Then I suggest YOU look up the banning date, if you want to make your accusation stick.

[TGJB]

Interestingly that time frame fits with the lab change and Pletcher going 7 for 96 since then at CD. But that aside, all that statute says is that they can do it, not that they are. I\'m working with those people (one of whom frequents this board), I\'ll find out when I get a chance.

[TGJB]

Okay, I\'m going to answer this one because I\'m getting pissed off, since neither of you two know what the f--k you\'re talking about. Miff, I may get around to that stuff another time, but in the meantime you were going to talk to Maylin about a syringe that got turned in, what happened to that.

Sight-- when I say FACT, I mean FACT. The extremely high ranking person who told me about the reason for the lab change told it to me face to face, and was one of the ones responsible for the decision to load the samples, and to switch labs. The word \"theory\" has no place in the disussion about what took place. I used the word FACT advisedly and you owe me an apology.

[sighthound]

The last I\'m saying on this:

Horses are not testing positive, even when specific trainer\'s animals have been targeted with surprise out-of-competition testing in three different jurisdictions - Kentucky, California, and New York - yet some still allege certain trainers are doping with some magical undetectable incredibly effective move-up drugs on a large scale.

Nope.

Are there substances we can\'t detect yet?  Of course  - mostly various different chemical formulations of various steroids anybody can buy on the internet.

We readily detect erythropoetin, and separate it from the naturally-occuring hormone.

We easily and readily detect opiods, milkshaking, NSAIDS, meth, cocaine, heroin, and thousands of other drugs at minute, unable-to-even-affect-the-horse levels.

Should we test every horse, every time?  I think so.

[sighthound]

How dare you say I don\'t know what the f--k we are talking about.  

I didn\'t say your statement that KY changed labs was wrong, and why, I know that is true.

[TGJB]

Yeah. We can do all that, no problem. And yet when a bunch of samples are loaded we don\'t get a positive.

As a guy said in Atlas Shrugged (paraphrasing), when you have an apparent contradiction, check your premises.