Hey believe whatever you want. Want to believe Lasix masks things and creates genetic mutants, knock yourself out.

Yes that would be more accurate.

So thats how Scav got that way.

Scavs is one of a kind.

19 years later and we are having the same argument.

From your favorite rag no less Chuck.

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/08/sp...-evidence.html

And I still fail to see a reason why banning Lasix would do anything positive. Hell we banned steroids, nothing changed except field size is down. We banned toe grabs with absolutely no positive effect. We tried artificial surfaces with negative results.

Lasix is a false villain.

Well Dr. Gorman thought it could be used to mask things back then. I'm sure two decades later he has changed his mind.

Do we have to go through the list of technological advances since then? I was on a medication committee that met with the KHRA over proposals for updating medication rules a few years ago. One of the chemists on the panel said with absolute certainty that no diuretic (specifically Salix) can prevent detection of known substances at the levels that they can now test at. Of course he was bragging but the explanation was part of an idea that we needed to update the thresholds of allowable medications because the rules were holdovers from a different era of testing. Naturally there was no funding to do the research.

Take a look at the pdf file of the April vet bill. Almost $1,500 , mostly for injections is cause for concern ? Or not ?

The link is within the NYT article itself. About 19 injections for just 3 weeks.

Explain??

One backside, two tracks, complete surveillance 24 hours a day, vets work for Jockey Club, small horse population, good weather, no due process, trainers/owners limited numbers, form stewards, gigantic budget.

There is nothing that is anything but routine on those vet bills. Close to $300 of that is for gastrogard which is an innocuous ulcer treatment. Over $500 is diagnostic work including multiple xrays, ultra sound and endoscopic examination.
From the top it looks he electrolytes/vitamins and fluids which is normal. Naquasone paste is used to reduce minor inflammation and was given in oral form. Liquamycin is an antibiotic. Panacur powerpack is a series of 5 dewormers. On 4/13 he was given what looks like a pre-work series of enzymes, Bute and Adequan which is a joint treatment that helps reduce the inflammation and pain of degenerative joint disease, but also to help stop the degenerative process while stimulating the production of new joint fluid and new cartilage components. Adequan would be given in the muscle in this case.

On the 14th he was given Lasix before the work and scoped afterwards. He must have had some inflammation as they ultrasounded the right leg. he also got another shot of antibiotics.

On the 15th he had his digital tendon sheath injected with what looks like a combo of Amikacin which is an antibiotic used with bacterial infections and possibly polyglycan which is hyaluromnic acid, glucosamine and sodium chondroitan and possibly vetalog which is a corticosteroid used to fight inflamation. He also got a shot of Baytril which is also an antibiotic.

He got antibiotics till the 21st when he worked and was scoped again.

The next week he only got vitamins

On the 28th he worked again and bled (see EIPH slight) and both ankles were injected with hyalrulonic acid.

The next day he got 1 shot of antibiotics and vitamins

The next day he received a DMSO jug, a shot of Robaxin which is a muscle relaxant and a shot of banamine which reduces inflammation.

The day before the derby he got a shot of bute, amino acids, and robinul and sodium iodide. The Robinul and sodium iodide are usually used as a prerace treatment for a bleeder.

The rest is self explanatory.

Fascinating. What is lost here is that IEAH vetted him out and he was, presumably, fine, or fine enough. They should sue their vet and/or insurance company and not Lanzman. And yes, I'm a lawyer so I am fully qualified to speak on this matter.

What do you do with all of those horses then?


All horses have the potential to become bleeders - this is a good and brief article on what is going on in the horses lungs while under exercise:

http://www.ctba.com/03magazine/jul/AskVets.pdf

I'm interested to know on what basis would you sue the vet and insurance co?

Let me take a moment and thank Trainer CS for his time and shared insight into these matters .

They did a study in australia were they scoped 1000 horses after hard work & a amazing result came back 82 % of these horses had bleed in some form , Not all horses bleed out both nostrils which is classed as a "bleeder".
I Have seen & backed unfortunately quite a few bleeders who dont bleed out the nose but when suddenly did not preform or have the classic fly for 800 mtrs the stop come back as what the vet calls white ie when it's scoped it's bleed so much it's white inside.
Bleeders are banned & no laxis is allowed in australia in case the horse falls down dead .but the reallity this never happens, more likely to be a heart attack than a bleeding attack so the non use of laxis is absolutely stupid,
On a completely different note if a racehorse has sore feet but is absolutely safe shouldnt it run on bute as its not affecting it's preformance just easing the horses pain when it runs for 1 min 12 secs.
Drug laws are made for people not horses.

Actually, the vet bill for the six week period was over $3,000. The bills to each owner were for only 50%, presumably reflecting their respective ownership interests.

Chuck, thank you for the detailed explanation. I understand joint injections and Adequan etc (my show hunter gets his hocks done before the show season each year) but is an antibiotic regimen that common in a horse healthy enough to be training as the favorite for the KY Derby?
I think that IWR was purchased before the Wood, meaing that a pre-purchase exam (PPE) must have been done at some point in March. I've seen PPE's done for average pleasure and show horses that reveal the start of tendon strain. I would imagine that if a buyer is paying for a multi million dollar share in a major Derby contender that the exam might be even more thorough-though I'm not sure in what areas.
Chuckles, most vets will tell you that they can do the exam and comment on the horse's current condition but cannot predict future soundness or even assess how he may handle a particlular job in the future. Unless a vet simply didn't do an ordered test or stepped well out of role and advised the purchase of a lame/unsuitable horse, it's hard to sue a vet for anything regarding a PPE.

why should they sue their insurance company? We dont tell people to buy horses or not, thats for sure.

This whole story is a joke. IEAH presumably vetted the horse before they bought him and were sufficiently satisfied to hand over the check. Whatever happened afterwards is what it is. Horses get hurt every day. This deal didn't work out for them so they want to blame everybody else. Witholding payments which they are contractually obligated to make, and not paying for the care and upkeep of the horse shows what kind of people they obviously really are.

They weren't complaining while in the winner's circle after the Wood Memorial were they ?

exactly. Unless the vet knew something and didnt disclose, which is just not probable, ya cant take any action towards the vet.

The insurance company??? :zz: we cant tell anyone whether they can or cannot buy any horse. We can only decide if we want to insure and at what rate & exclusions..

Exactly

You know all insurance companies are evil and corrupt!

I'm bummed I didn't have time to get back to this thread sooner- entertaining read.

Lots of the betting public has no idea what to do with timed workouts, PPs, etc. Does that mean they should be ditched? It's up to the bettor if he or she wants to do the work to learn what the info means (as anyone who can read a racing form had to at one time), but at least make the information public, so they can use it if they want. No one forces a bettor to watch a horse's previous races, but the info is out there if they want it.

As for the possibility of abuse, geez louise, you will ALWAYS have cheaters. Or do you believe the idea for lip tattoos came BEFORE the idea of switching horses in races? You set up the rules and penalties for those who break the rules, and do the best you can to police. But in the end, is more information better than less? Absolutely, especially when you're talking about the bettors, who are the consumers of this product. It's up to them whether they choose to use it or not, but they deserve more information, not less.

Very accurate observation. They wrote very eloquently in 2003 of how we were definitely in imminent danger from Iraq. (Wrong as all get out, but how beautifully they said it!)

I admit though, I did enjoy the On the Rail blog during Kentucky Derby season.

Assuming that all this information deserves to be made public (a point that I don't concede), where would you put all this information? If we were to include a horse's vet records in the PPs, the DRF would probably cost $100. Also, a lot of the meds are given 24-48 hours before the race, so how would that disclosure work?

I am not sure I agree that this should be public information. Does the NFL tell you what treatments or shots the players got each week? Hell they outright lie on a required injury list all the time. I understand that with people there are privacy issues but honestly I dont think that opening up vet records to the public will do anything but create more controversy where there isnt anything controversial. Not to mention who exactly is going to collect and disseminate the records? People who bet horseraces always feel slighted but when you compare the amount of info available now as compared to what was available in the past there is no comparison. In my other post what I was saying is that there is almost no thing that can be gleaned from the information so why bother? The fact that I dont think that anyone but the owner or trainer should be privy to the info is another topic.

Can you imagine the lawsuits that will arise when a guy claims a horse who doesnt pan out and his lawyer starts picking apart the previous trainers/owners vet reports?

I'd just sue the insurance company.

They are preying on our sick and elderly...oops wrong section.

This guy writes a nice piece on the article

http://fuguefortinhorns.blogspot.com...ork-times.html

If only Joe Drape would read the above.

Yeah, but now the NTRA/Breeders Cup announces a handicapping seminar as part of its "Tweeters Cup" at Santa Anita, and who do they have as one of their panelists? Joe Drape. I'm sure that his early season selection of (the supposedly drug-free) Mafaaz as his top Derby candidate qualified him for his spot on this panel. And we wonder why people question the leadership of the sport?

The NY Times seemingly has an institutional policy that its writers must sensationalize at any opportunity any chance to knock the sport of horse racing. Drape has hardly hidden his own leanings with his "reporting", William Rhoden (who is a complete windbag) has taken numerous shots at racing over the years despite having virtually no knowledge of what he is talking about and one of their feature Bloggers is Jim Squires who recently wrote an book about racing full of factual errors, ridiculous innuendo and plain nonsense. Bill Finley was also a longtime racing writer for the Times and he rarely lets an opportunity to knock racing escape him.

I doubt the Times actually cares about racing enough to order an edict to knock it. But the tone of negative articles about racing that emanate from that rag is enough to make you take notice.

LOL. I'm not falling for it this time! :p

http://thoroughbredbrief.wordpress.c...p-and-control/

Very well presented piece

In all candor this reads like a menu at a Diner in Jersey..Chuck this horse was a mess. I think Michael jackson had less meds in him.