![]()  | 
![]()  | 
![]()  | 
| 
	 | 
| 
		 
			 
			#1  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#2  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Are they ever better horses here on dirt?  What happened to Daddy Long Legs in the Derby against our 3 year old dirt lasix diluted horses? 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	 | 
| 
		 
			 
			#3  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Using this argument as proof is silly. I recall a lot of Europeans coming over here and tharshing our best horses on turf prior to lasix being used. 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	 | 
| 
		 
			 
			#4  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 It still doesn't answer the question though. Why aren't our horses getting more competitive since they aren't suffering this permanent damage instead of getting less competitive? There is only one real answer. This alleged damage caused by EIPH doesn't affect horses' future performances. Last edited by cmorioles : 05-12-2012 at 12:42 AM.  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#5  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
|||
		
		
  | 
|||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 and since you brought it up, regarding euros. don't they train with lasix? and as soon as they get over here, they race them on it. seems hard for them to be holier than thou when they jump at the chance to use it asap. and they'd use it at home the moment it was legalized. many push for it-and with reason. and in australia, they remove the better bleeders after an episode, because after a second there, they can't breed. so they send them here. why do you suppose they do that? because they can run on lasix to prevent further bleeding and it's potential consequences. 
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#6  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 ![]()  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#7  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 Furthermore, a racehorse's reputation is (or should be) made on raceday, not during training sessions, so a "drug dependent" horse would still have to compete clean to have a shot at entering the breeding population.  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#8  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#9  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 Quote: 
	
 Lasix has been shown to reduce the incidence of epistaxis. So the potential is there for lasix to "mask" severe bleeders, theoretically allowing them to race competively and subsequently become breeding prospects.  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#10  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
|||
		
		
  | 
|||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 another thing about euros-they send their 'bleeders' here to race.  not exactly removing them from the gene pool by doing that...and if breeding is culling bleeding, why do they still have bleeders? 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
			and, if they want to know who's a bleeder...why do they train with it? 
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#11  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
|||
		
		
  | 
|||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 for starters on europe and lasix, there's this pdf from grayson-jockey club: http://www.grayson-jockeyclub.org/ne...singmatter.pdf an excerpt: .'....“Lasix” to race? Yes, these drugs are illegal when racing in Europe, but it is not illegal for a European trainer to administer these drugs to a horse when he is training it.' and keep in mind, most euros run on lasix when here. i've always found it odd when euro trainers sneer at us for using it, and then use it themselves as soon as they get the chance. 
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln Last edited by Danzig : 05-11-2012 at 08:32 PM.  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#12  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
|||
		
		
  | 
|||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 then there's this: 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
			The Horsemen's Journal: Archive Medication Committee Corner: Are We Winning the Lasix War? The Horsemen''''s Journal - Fall 2011 by Kent H. Stirling, National HBPA Medication Committee Chairman A lot has happened in the last few months dealing generally with race-day medication and specifically with Lasix/Salix, which is used to reduce or prevent Exercise Induced Pulmonary Hemorrhage (EIPH) in racehorses. Lasix (I still can’t bring myself to call it Salix after all these years) is permitted for administration to racehorses three to four hours before post time in all United States racing jurisdictions. It is also legal on race-day in Canada, South America, and Saudi Arabia. Horses train on it in virtually every country in the world with a 50-nanogram threshold in urine or, in other words, don’t work a horse on it within two days of your race or your horse will be “positive” for Lasix. Since EIPH is a progressive condition that gets worse with age and every bleeding incident, one would be well advised to train on Lasix for speed works in those countries that don’t permit its use in racing. imo, if they use it in training, where a horse seemingly would NOT be at maximum exertion, why would they ban it's use when he would be needing to run his best and hardest? what matter if it's not in the system within 48 hours of an actual race if it's used otherwise? how is that logical? https://www.nationalhbpa.com/Horseme...n=3&key1=13747 there's the link to the whole article. and for those who don't read it through, this is toward the end: Dr. Tobin gave a presentation on the expected increased risk to horse and rider from acute/sudden death EIPH due to the banning of Lasix. This risk was fairly obvious because when New York permitted Lasix in 1995, the incidence of Epistaxis (visibly bleeding from the nostrils) immediately dropped 80 percent! 
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#13  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	Gentlemen! We're burning daylight! Riders up! -Bill Murray  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#14  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 Another poster in this thread, when discussing the safety of using lasix, seemed to suggest that even American racehorses only receive lasix for races, not training. So Europeans are allegedly using lasix like hotcakes inbetween races, but their US counterparts wait until only raceday? Seems counterintuitive, and bad practice besides, since a racehorse can suffer bleeding in training (even simply galloping) just as it can in a race. Quote: 
	
  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#15  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Graham Motion on Lasix (note what he says about Britain) 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
			Team Valor’s Barry Irwin has said he can’t convince you that you don’t need Lasix on raceday. Why is that? My problem with doing away with Lasix is that we’re going to go back to how it was before in New York (the last state to permit the drug), where everybody is trying to use things under the table that nobody knows about. I honestly don’t believe that in some of these other countries people don’t use alternative medications to Lasix. It’s better the devil you know than the devil you don’t know. Most horses bleed to a degree. Lasix is one medication that we know helps horses that have this hemorrhaging. My feeling is let’s control the administration like they do in Canada. 5 cc’s are to be given by a state veterinarian. If we do away with Lasix, we’d better step up security big time. No one’s going to like that. You cannot tell me that people are not going to use other things. Are you suggesting the rest of the world should adopt our rules? That’s a tough point. No, I’m not. In England, everyone gives Lasix up to the race, then they take it away. A lot of it comes to the horsemanship side. We are so much more proactive over here in scoping our horses. I want to be on top of our horses. When we consider a horse to bleed, it might just have a spot in his lungs. In many places bleeding is only identified if it’s external. http://www.paulickreport.com/feature...graham-motion/ 
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	Gentlemen! We're burning daylight! Riders up! -Bill Murray  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#16  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
|||
		
		
  | 
|||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 i don't buy the assertion from some that it's performance enhancing.  to me that's akin to people still saying the turns are tighter at pimlico.  it's not true, but people believe it.  those who've done studies say it is not, that's enough for me. 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
			horses who 'move up' do so because they aren't suffering eiph, not because lasix gave them talent they didn't have before. and yes, there are other articles and studies that say euros train on lasix-as did the second article i posted...then there's the study done by the irish that said the same thing. go google it, that's what i did. it's all there. also, in the irish study, one of their points was to 'send bleeders to the u.s.'. obviously they get that lasix prevents bleeding, why else send them here? 
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#17  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Trainers can be dumb about some things, but they aren't idiots.  Anybody can figure out that Lasix enhances performance even for non-bleeders...unless of course you are a zealot that doesn't want to admit it. 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	 | 
| 
		 
			 
			#18  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Science doesn't depend upon how hard you "believe".  That's called "religion".  It appears you've confused the two. 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	"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  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#19  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 For god's sakes, stop this baloney and just go and effing ASK THEM.  Everyone knows it.  It's not illegal.  Vets know it, trainers know it, the stewards know it, it's entirely permitted. 
		
	
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
				__________________ 
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
		
		
	
	
	"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  | 
| 
		 
			 
			#20  
			
			
			
			
			
		 
		
		
	 | 
||||
		
		
  | 
||||
| 
	
	
		
		
		
			
			 Quote: 
	
 With your reappearance, I guess the couple of pages of civilized discourse have abruptly come to an end. Get ready for hyperlinks, misinformation, half-truths, and psychobabble to the VO2 max.  |