No lasix needed here

[Kitan]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

This is not a modern problem; this is the problem of the equine. Vigorous exercise is a high risk for bleeding in the lungs. It's why it's called EIPH. Exercise Induced. For whatever reason, evolution in all its messiness brought about an animal that often bleeds in the lungs during taxing exercise, and for some reason, mild dehydration reduces the chances that will happen. We could stop all horse racing for several dozen millennia while we attempt to selectively evolve the horse past this, because right now, the majority of them do bleed, or we can give them a diuretic before vigorous exercise. One of these two gives us a better chance of seeing a Triple Crown winner again in our lifetimes.

I would think that Lasix actually might be part of the problem, and I don't think its a coincidence that there hasn't been a Triple Crown winner since Lasix became popular and legalized. It's not just a diuretic, it's a powerful one. It causes an unnatural amount of water and electrolytes to be excreted, which in turn results in excessive weight loss. More time is needed to put that weight back on in a healthy manner as well as restore proper functioning of the Sodium-Potassium pump. More time to recover = more time to return to peak performance. I'm no vet or equine scientist but that's basic physiology.

Take for example the fourth place finisher of the Melbourne Cup this past week, Signoff. These are his starts this season:
Aug 30th 7f
Sept 13 8.5f
Sept 26 10f
Oct 11 12f
Oct 18 10f
Nov 1 10.5f
Nov 4 16f

In a span of 9 and a half weeks he ran 7 times, five at group level. This is, as you may know, an extremely common occurrence down there. I cannot recall ANY horse at that level in North America running that many times in a short period of time, never mind the consistency. Add Lasix to these horses and the weeks between starts would slowly add up because they need a longer time to recover in between races.

For the record, I am not for or against Lasix. I just think it's important to consider the dynamics of the drug, rather than say it's just a simple diuretic that somehow decreases pulmonary hemorrhaging.

The majority of horses do bleed, but not at a level severe enough to affect performance. So instead of waiting a million years to selectively evolve, why not just use artificial selection as a method to simply decrease the chance of bleeding and the potential severity of it? Genetic traits can be tracked, you know.

And from a gambling perspective, how often would bleeding affect performance? In a quarter of a percent of all starters? Judging by our posts in the playalong threads, I'd be more worried about other circumstances causing a ticket to be ripped up.