Why does this feel like a mistake...

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Having a vet interpret the data after 1 year seems like a mistake in that conclusions may be drawn that simply arent valid.

I know you have little respect for vets in general, but did ya miss the part where he's got internationally respected epidemiology bonafides?

Ignoring that doesn't make it go away.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Fine. What can you compare it to?

The problem is these organizations in a usually desperate attempt to do "something" will impose some new regulations or standards using one year worth of data without any knowledge if it is bad or good. I have no issue with what they are doing other than it should have been started a long time ago. What i do have a problem is using incomplete or faulty data to change rules like they did with the shoes. The ironic part about that is different tracks STILL have different rules about the toe grabs.

You can look at the data and evaluate some of it. You CAN NOT draw conclusive opinions. You can perhaps lean towards certain directions which the data suggests make some sense. CLEARLY jumping to conclusions is not prudent

[Riot]

Originally Posted by freddymo

You can look at the data and evaluate some of it. You CAN NOT draw conclusive opinions. You can perhaps lean towards certain directions which the data suggests make some sense. CLEARLY jumping to conclusions is not prudent

Hey, it may show that synthetic tracks haven't changed much compared to non-synthetics regarding injuries.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Riot

Hey, it may show that synthetic tracks haven't changed much compared to non-synthetics regarding injuries.

I know it's hard to believe but Cannon Head is finally right.. 12 months of data is helpful because it is better then zero months of data but I think it makes sense not to jump to conclusions.. The FDA requires Phase 1 2 and 3 trails before a drug is approved. Let's just agree that 12 months is phase 1 and while results may be consisent in phase 2 and 3 there is certainly no guarantee that years 2 3 or 4 reveil the same conclusions that year 1 did..

I suggest looking at year 1 with an open eye and leaning not jumping..

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Riot

Honu, I think we have become so far removed from being an agricultural society, that a basic level of "animal common sense", as you relate, probably doesn't exist any more to any great extent.

If this is definitively true and furthermore is prevalent amongst even those who can claim to be "horsemen" (basically anyone with fingerprints and $20-$100), then you've solved the majority of racing's problems. Racing jurisdicitions just need to be more severe with regards to evaluating candidates for racing licenses (particularly trainers and their assistants).

Of course, theoretically, that would also mean that all this research (geared towards telling said horsemen when and when not to run their horses) would become moot.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Of course, theoretically, that would also mean that all this research (geared towards telling said horsemen when and when not to run their horses) would become moot.

I think the research is more fairly described as as trying to improve the health and safety of the TB racehorse, especially in a world that contains PETA.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by Riot

I think the research is more fairly described as as trying to improve the health and safety of the TB racehorse, especially in a world that contains PETA.

You cant improve on stupid and there are more than enough people with a licence that really should not be around horses and this goes for riders , trainers and the whole lot.
The data can try and improve the health and safety of horses but when its not reaching people who are to dumb to even know they are dumb whats the point?
I watched a trainer here at S.A. one morning send a horse out to work with standing bandages still on it , Im not kidding and really the dumbazz pinhead that was on it didnt even know until I pointed it out. Just one example , the other being watching a trainer jog a horse on a shank with the bandages still on with mud up to its knee's , I tell you the poster was very correct when they said their need to be more stringent standards of applicants.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

You can look at the data and evaluate some of it. You CAN NOT draw conclusive opinions. You can perhaps lean towards certain directions which the data suggests make some sense. CLEARLY jumping to conclusions is not prudent

The horse racing business is a world leader in jumping to conclusions....hence the title.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

I know you have little respect for vets in general, but did ya miss the part where he's got internationally respected epidemiology bonafides?

Ignoring that doesn't make it go away.

I have great respect for many vets.