Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-01-2012, 03:13 PM
King Glorious's Avatar
King Glorious King Glorious is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Beaumont, CA
Posts: 4,614
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
If you read the PDF proposal, the first thing that becomes clear is the overuse of words such as "perceived" advantage of lasix, etc.

Yes, because there isn't any factual scientific support. If there was, they'd quote it.

Secondly, this phrase stands out as the first sentence in their summary:



"High Risk".

When you know the high risks of eliminating lasix, against the advice of the veterinary medical community, and you acknowledge those risks as the first sentence in your summary conclusion - why are you persisting in trying to do so?

Again: racing has many problems with illegal medications. They need to be addressed. Furosemide, protecting athletic horses from lung damage, most certainly isn't one of them.
My take is that you are giving too much consideration to the word potential, treating it as if the high risks that at stake are GOING to happen and not potentially MAY happen. I feel like every time they send these horses out to race, they are potentially at high risk for a lot of things, not limited to bleeding but also including death. A bad step can be taken at any time. Should we not run them at all because of the potential for life ending injury? I play basketball and used to play at a fairly high level. I have seen numerous injuries to knees and ankles, some to the extent that they ended careers. Should all players wear knee and ankle braces to protect against the potential of that happening? Should I wear eye goggles to protect against the potential for getting a finger in the eye? I don't know if I'm in the majority or the minority on this but I just don't see the need to automatically assume that the horse needs something or should have it to protect against something that they may not even suffer from.
__________________
The real horses of the year (1986-2020)
Manila, Java Gold, Alysheba, Sunday Silence, Go for Wand, In Excess, Paseana, Kotashaan, Holy Bull, Cigar, Alphabet Soup, Formal Gold, Skip Away, Artax, Tiznow, Point Given, Azeri, Candy Ride, Smarty Jones, Ghostzapper, Invasor, Curlin, Zenyatta, Zenyatta, Goldikova, Havre de Grace, Wise Dan, Wise Dan, California Chrome, American Pharoah, Arrogate, Gun Runner, Accelerate, Maximum Security, Gamine
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-01-2012, 04:05 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by King Glorious View Post
My take is that you are giving too much consideration to the word potential, treating it as if the high risks that at stake are GOING to happen and not potentially MAY happen.
Well, I am basing my wording on my knowledge of how they appear to be parsing their words carefully, reflective of the knowledge we have of EIPH.

We know that 93-97% of horses that race have evidence of EIPH via tracheal wash. That is an indisputable, repeatedly-proven fact.

It's called "Exercise-Induced" pulmonary hemorrhage because ... it's associated with exercise, with exertion, in all horses and all breeds. It's a horse thing. It's not a racing thing.

Thus, IMO, therefor, if we want to race them, we should help them do it in a manner reflective of the best medicine can offer to the health and welfare of these athletes. We do research into how to make their bones strong, so they don't break down, we do research into how to prevent damage to their lungs from EIPH - we need to use our medical knowledge to help these animals we are responsible for.

We exercise, race and train young race horses in a manner PETA hates and fights against, because we know it lengthens careers and decreases bone/fracture breakdown rates. We use lasix because we know it decreases both the incidence and severity of EIPH.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.