Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sumitas
The Colorado State doctor that Rupert uses. Didn't he testify in DC that there is a blood test, or they are researching that test, that identifies a horse with a micro injury or a horse prone to have that sort of bone injury. Hopefully that test will be reliable and cost effective.
|
I don't know the specifics of the research, but a seemingly likely problem with this is that the whole basis of conditioning any athlete human, equid, or otherwise for full performance, relies on some degree of overexertion to stimulate the body to heal and/or adapt at a stronger level (ie "no pain, no gain"). Therefore, "micro injury" should be anticipated in an athlete as it achieves peak form, without necessarily meaning there is an impending catastrophic or debilitating injury. The balancing act that is required here to avoid significant injury is that the athlete's rate of healing/adaptation is greater than the rate of microdamage from continued training.
Seeems to me, as opposed to dubious vague blood tests and garbage-riddled surfaces, all that's needed to decrease an excessive amount of breakdowns is to have more thorough pre-race examinations by the track vets (something that people assume already takes place, but in reality does not in many instances) and a more strict licensing procedure for trainers/assistant trainers with an emphasis on true horsemanship (as opposed to ability to read a condition book, a racing form, or medication withdrawals and guidelines). You can throw outlawing raceday medication in the mix if you want, but certainly judicious use of medication is more beneficial than harmful.