Lasix enhances performance

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Fearless Leader

YYaaawnnnnnnn !!!!! Your entire argument is flawed and totally ridiculous. Stop whining already. Your are absolutely 100% incorrect about virtually everything you have said on this topic.

Don't shoot the messenger. Please tell me what is wrong in the article I posted rather than being a blowhard. You sound like another horsemen that would follow the Pied Piper into the sea, which is how we got to this point in the first place.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by docicu3

Good to see you IC.....hope the world is treating you well.

A couple of small points, you already know, I thought might add to what's been said above....

1) Lasix is a sulfur containing diuretic far more similar to Bumex, which is another sulfur containing loop diuretic, than Premarin which is a conjugated estrogen or hormone commonly used in gynecology to limit menstral bleeding by a whole different mechanism. I guess the common thread is the limiting of bleeding to avoid the dreaded 3rd time bleed and a horses forced retirement.

Lasix first works by a) increasing the capacitance of any lung or making more small pipes or cappilaries while holding the same amount of blood in pulmonary circulation, thus lowering pressure in the horse's or human's lungs.

If given IV these effects take place in 20 minutes and last for six hours hence the name. The second effect or b) is to abolish the electrical/osmotic gradient in the kidney cell or nephron responsible for holding on to free water when inhibited a triggering of a fairly massive diuresis of very dilute urine will follow.

It blows my mind that the CHRB compares Lasix to premarin by substitution without making the public aware as Premarin is no where near as effective as a diuretic ..........very very bizarre!!

The metabolic alkalosis it causes does give a horse an advantage racing in that it takes longer and further in a race for a lasix horse to become acidotic or uncomfortable in competition which is another way of saying for it to develop a lactic acidosis because for some period it is neutralizing the acid generated in competition. Further considerations pertaining to aerobic or anaerobic metabolism add more or less to the mechanism above......phew!!

You are going to discuss this with Dr Riot, the hack veterinarian who speaks on behalf of all industry. If she deems your thoughts valid we can have Rollo google your findings for validation.

[Round Pen]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

This vet is the equilivant of Rush Limbaugh commenting on politics.

Kind of what I thought To Chuck he is Definitely better known for Being Dr Dolittle or the Horse Whisperer

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Round Pen

Kind of what I thought To Chuck he is Definitely better known for Being Dr Dolittle or the Horse Whisperer

Yet nobody has disputed anything he wrote, odd.

[Fearless Leader]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Don't shoot the messenger. Please tell me what is wrong in the article I posted rather than being a blowhard. You sound like another horsemen that would follow the Pied Piper into the sea, which is how we got to this point in the first place.

Sid Gustafson, D.V.M., is a novelist and equine veterinarian specializing in thoroughbred sports medicine and equine behavior. He currently practices regulatory veterinary medicine, representing the safety and welfare of thoroughbred racehorses.


The bold type in the guy's resume should tell you all you need to know. This guy is as far off the mark and delusional as Glenn Thompson, another novelist on the subject, is.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Fearless Leader

Sid Gustafson, D.V.M., is a novelist and equine veterinarian specializing in thoroughbred sports medicine and equine behavior. He currently practices regulatory veterinary medicine, representing the safety and welfare of thoroughbred racehorses.


The bold type in the guy's resume should tell you all you need to know. This guy is as far off the mark and delusional as Glenn Thompson, another novelist on the subject, is.

Again, what did he say that was inaccurate?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I just don't find forcing an owner to spend money to drug a horse that doesn't need it to be on a level playing field with the other horses fair. Crazy, I know. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'll never believe that many horses need Lasix when the rest of the world doesn't use it. Also, our country did just fine without it for the better part of a century.

At least you aren't arguing that Lasix isn't a performance enhancer any longer.

So now the concern is the owners financial welfare? Of all the things owners are "forced" to spend the $20 for a shot of lasix is the cheapest and most effective per dollar spent.

Personally I believe trying to turn the clock back 30 years or supposing what goes on in foreign countries to be a waste of time.

[Fearless Leader]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Again, what did he say that was inaccurate?

The novelist hasn't stated a single fact. All he has done is state his opinion to try and support his cleanhorseracing.org/no lasix agenda. For you to accept any of this as gospel speaks volumes.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So now the concern is the owners financial welfare? Of all the things owners are "forced" to spend the $20 for a shot of lasix is the cheapest and most effective per dollar spent.

Personally I believe trying to turn the clock back 30 years or supposing what goes on in foreign countries to be a waste of time.

It isn't just spending the money. In what alternate reality world is it acceptable just to give drugs to nearly every participant, and those that don't take it are at a disadvantage. I mean really, that is nuts.

You are saying if you don't want to drug your horse you are at a disadvantage, but that is fine...just can drug them all. And who cares if they have to spend $20, we rob them so many other ways. So those not using drugs are penalized. Nice. Maybe the NTRA could adapt that as a new slogan. I guess it beats "Go, Baby, Go", right. I like the ring to it..."Drug them all!"

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Fearless Leader

The novelist hasn't stated a single fact. All he has done is state his opinion to try and support his cleanhorseracing.org/no lasix agenda. For you to accept any of this as gospel speaks volumes.

This sounds like a fact to me:

"The more Lasix, and the closer it is administered to the race, the more intense the alkalinization effect of Lasix, according to the science presented at the K.H.R.C. race-day medication hearing. Lasix alkalinizes horses, creating a competitive metabolic advantage similar to milkshaking, rendering the drug Lasix a clear and present doping agent. "

By all means, tell me what is wrong with that statement.

"Drug Them All"...I'm really liking that. I see a real boon to the sport if this takes off.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Don't shoot the messenger. Please tell me what is wrong in the article I posted rather than being a blowhard. You sound like another horsemen that would follow the Pied Piper into the sea, which is how we got to this point in the first place.

Actually we arrived at this point because far too many people have bought into propaganda without understanding the design behind the plan. You are being duped into believing nonsense from people like Sid Guftason who is trying to promote his holistic crap and bs books. Phipps and company have tricked you into believing that the elimination of lasix is going to lead to some sort of prosperity and level playing field, ignoring all other issues by focusing on something that is noted in the program giving it a tangible feel. A ban on lasix makes the sport more expensive for owners a group already shrinking, almost assuredly will lead to more NY Times "incidents" with more horses bleeding severely and less formful races as various treatments (all unknown to bettors) will work to widely varying degrees.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Don't shoot the messenger. Please tell me what is wrong in the article I posted rather than being a blowhard. You sound like another horsemen that would follow the Pied Piper into the sea, which is how we got to this point in the first place.

Originally Posted by cmorioles

It isn't just spending the money. In what alternate reality world is it acceptable just to give drugs to nearly every participant, and those that don't take it are at a disadvantage. I mean really, that is nuts.

You are saying if you don't want to drug your horse you are at a disadvantage, but that is fine...just can drug them all. And who cares if they have to spend $20, we rob them so many other ways. So those not using drugs are penalized. Nice. Maybe the NTRA could adapt that as a new slogan. I guess it beats "Go, Baby, Go", right. I like the ring to it..."Drug them all!"

I'm glad you are stated to be neutral on the subject lol. Let's just agree to disagree because I feel silly having to refute Sid Guftason. This is like trying to explain why dailykos.com isn't a credible source of information on GOP topics.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

This sounds like a fact to me:

"The more Lasix, and the closer it is administered to the race, the more intense the alkalinization effect of Lasix, according to the science presented at the K.H.R.C. race-day medication hearing. Lasix alkalinizes horses, creating a competitive metabolic advantage similar to milkshaking, rendering the drug Lasix a clear and present doping agent. "

By all means, tell me what is wrong with that statement.

"Drug Them All"...I'm really liking that. I see a real boon to the sport if this takes off.

So if every horse is in effect milkshakes then why milkshake?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Actually we arrived at this point because far too many people have bought into propaganda without understanding the design behind the plan. You are being duped into believing nonsense from people like Sid Guftason who is trying to promote his holistic crap and bs books. Phipps and company have tricked you into believing that the elimination of lasix is going to lead to some sort of prosperity and level playing field, ignoring all other issues by focusing on something that is noted in the program giving it a tangible feel. A ban on lasix makes the sport more expensive for owners a group already shrinking, almost assuredly will lead to more NY Times "incidents" with more horses bleeding severely and less formful races as various treatments (all unknown to bettors) will work to widely varying degrees.

Actually, I believe nothing of the sort. I just know Lasix is a performance enhancer and have said so all along. That has really been the only thing I've argued about.

I don't care if horses get Lasix, but it should be fair. There are other ways around it. Why not give horses not using it a 5 pound weight break and/or make the price to claim them higher?

Drug them all...sounds the best answer to me.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I'm glad you are stated to be neutral on the subject lol. Let's just agree to disagree because I feel silly having to refute Sid Guftason. This is like trying to explain why dailykos.com isn't a credible source of information on GOP topics.

Is he the equivalent of listening to a 5% trainer?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

This sounds like a fact to me:

"The more Lasix, and the closer it is administered to the race, the more intense the alkalinization effect of Lasix, according to the science presented at the K.H.R.C. race-day medication hearing. Lasix alkalinizes horses, creating a competitive metabolic advantage similar to milkshaking, rendering the drug Lasix a clear and present doping agent. "

By all means, tell me what is wrong with that statement.

"Drug Them All"...I'm really liking that. I see a real boon to the sport if this takes off.

So if every horse is in effect milkshakes then why milkshake? It is ridiculous to believe this nonsense. It is like saying that going 45.3 to the half is the same in dirt races and turf races because the pacesetters both lost.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So if every horse is in effect milkshakes then why milkshake?

How would I know why cheaters cheat? It isn't like we are dealing with a bunch of Einsteins now is it? Are you trying to tell me all these trainers know all the science of milkshakes and Lasix? Give me a break already.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

This sounds like a fact to me:

"The more Lasix, and the closer it is administered to the race, the more intense the alkalinization effect of Lasix, according to the science presented at the K.H.R.C. race-day medication hearing. Lasix alkalinizes horses, creating a competitive metabolic advantage similar to milkshaking, rendering the drug Lasix a clear and present doping agent. "

By all means, tell me what is wrong with that statement.

"Drug Them All"...I'm really liking that. I see a real boon to the sport if this takes off.

[quote=cmorioles;864342]Is he the equivalent of listening to a 5% trainer?[/

Janet del Castillo sells books on training

[Indian Charlie]

Orioles, when people have too much invested into their belief systems, they are almost always unwilling to look at countering viewpoints with even a tiny bit of objectivity.

Give it up man. You fought the good fight, but zealotry will beat reason every time.

[Danzig]

When there is opposition, how does one decide who is the zealot filled with emotion, and who uses logic? Or is it based solely on who one is in agreement with?

I have asked several times without a reposne from cm. What is your opinion on what is best for the horse?

If

You dont know who will bleed or when, or how severely
You say lasix causes no harm to the horse when used,
Its clearly given info to bettors, And is available to all,

What is the problem? Cm, you say, and reference someone, who says lasix enhances performance. Yet ive seen others who say it does not. How is it an issue tho, if it did enhance but everyone uses it? Exactly what is it that you find so troublesome? What do you expect to occur if there is a ban? I posted where NY had an 80 % reduction in visible bleeding after allowing lasix. Do you wish to see a possible 80% increase should lasix be banned?