RaceDay Meds - ban lasix?

ct2346 · Postby **ct2346** » Mon Jul 25, 2011 9:42 am

I've been following with interest the debate/blather about the banning of all meds - most notably lasix - and today's open letter from Earle Mack that attempts to slow down any immediate ban to a four year transition plan is the most recent contribution. While I understand the goal, its practical application to the industry seems like it needs to be on a ten year plan, rather than a four year plan.

A few thoughts - what are owners supposed to do with their stock that need lasix to run? Dump them on an already overburdened transition/rehab system? If your filly or mare is one that actually needs lasix or worse yet "bleeds through lasix", do you choose not to have her enter the breeding shed...or sell her? If you do sell her instead, should you need to certify her lasix usage/bleeding potential? Should it limit her residual value knowing that a full out ban is coming?

These are tricky issues but I think a ten year plan rather than an all out ban or a four year plan is warranted. Would be interested to hear the thoughts of this group, particularly as to the impact on the breeding shed...

zinn21 · Postby **zinn21** » Mon Jul 25, 2011 2:17 pm

IMO the problem with lasix is the perception that if not used a horse is at a disadvantage over those who use lasix, therefore virtually every horse starts their racing career on lasix. There are probably a good percentage of horses who do not perform well on lasix but the fear of a competitive advantage keeps them on the drug.

I would prefer to see horses not run on lasix but at the same time if lasix helps prevent those from bleeding and continue to perform, I think it's a good thing.

The bottom line-if lasix is banned how many horses will be unable to race? And if it is a significant number how willing or patient is this industry committed to saying good bye to those bleeders? How feasible would it be to breed out or genetically rid the pool of bleeders from the population?

griff · Postby **griff** » Mon Jul 25, 2011 2:59 pm

New York had a ban on Lasix for a while.. I had a neighbor with an interest in Summer Squall and I believe Summer Squall did not run in the Belmont because he was a bleeder and needed lasix to preform..

However, I do believe there was a full field that did run the Belmont that year w/o lasix.

griff

Roger · Postby **Roger** » Mon Jul 25, 2011 3:12 pm

I think the main advantage to racing on lasix is the 16 lbs of urine that a horse doesn't have to carry. In the Trainer magazine, there was a good article on bleeding. One thing that stuck in my old mind was the effect of removing water 12 hours out and how that cut down on the pressure in the lungs as there was no slushing around while running. If we went back to having to show proof of bleeding before a horse could run on it, it would be real advantage to the bleeder. That may be how we got to the point we have now.
I really think we could just cut it and all meds out and after a few months no one would care.

griff · Postby **griff** » Mon Jul 25, 2011 5:12 pm

almost any horse can be made to bleed and that's why the Vets don't puch it

griff

winds · Postby **winds** » Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:43 am

I think that if a horse is a bleeder it should be on lasix. But it I think the state vet should be the one to witness the bleed and put the horse on lasix. That might weed out the ones who aren't bleeding and on the drug.

winds

freshman · Postby **freshman** » Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:51 pm

Is lasix permitted at all in other countries, even just for proven bleeders?

BenB · Postby **BenB** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 11:48 am

Overhere, like in almost of the world it is forbidden.

Proven bleeders are weeded out, simple as that.

Lasix is an diuratic, that,s forbidden aswell overhere.

Laurierace · Postby **Laurierace** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 12:28 pm

Ben it isn't as simple as that. People are attempting to keep them from bleeding by undetectable means. It's not like they let them sink or swim. The norm is withholding water for as many as three days to reduce blood volume. "Supplements" galore with little to no guarantee as to what is really in them. Remember the stinky chinese powder you had to give to in the days leading up to the race? Then on race day you ground up the red ball that came in each vial and give those to the horses. What the heck is in there?

winds · Postby **winds** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 1:43 pm

I remember giving Naquasone to a NY bred filly that was a bleeder to help stop her from bleeding on race day. She'd get lasix when she worked.

winds

PS - I was a groom then, not the trainer. I was told to give it to her in her feed the morning of her races. I held her for a couple of races.

griff · Postby **griff** » Wed Jul 27, 2011 2:09 pm

The best chemist in the world do not work for duPont but do their thing on the back side

griff

BenB · Postby **BenB** » Thu Jul 28, 2011 11:07 am

Overhere we have clearly other racing rules than in the states:

A little bit difficult to translate our terms, so forgive me.

Any product that is not natural to a horse, is automatically regarded as
prohibited.

So whatever is found does not matter, automatically there will be a punishment.

Only the punishment will be different.

griff · Postby **griff** » Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:17 pm

BenB

what about antibiotics?

griff

griff · Postby **griff** » Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:19 pm

and is ulcerguard or other ulcer medications allowed?

griff

griff · Postby **griff** » Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:20 pm

and lastly, are you allowed to vaccinate your race horses??

griff