why is the lasix debate turning into a strawman arguement?

[bdw0617]

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/ ... -racetrack


so I'm reading this article and the guy makes the earth shattering revolution that if you take horses off lasix, more horses will bleed.


(in best Guinness beer voice) YOU MEAN IF I TAKE HORSES OFF BLEEDING MEDICATION, THEY WILL BLEED? BRILLIANT!


That's like saying if I took every person who has high blood pressure off their high blood pressure medication, there will probably be more heart attacks.

It still does not solve the issue as to WHY DOES EVERYONE ELSE NEED IT, EXECPT US?

you can't say it's blood lines, i mean there are some country specific stallions but what's fashionable here is fashionable in Australia is fashionable in europe for the most part.


why can't we just figure out what they hell they are doing, and do that thing? is it really that damn complicated? I have my ideas as to what's different, but i'm not going to get on a soap box and profess to know for sure. But the fact is, our horses 1. bleed too much, bleed more than the avg thoroughbred is supposed to bleed nor 2. can they run as far as horses from across the country on the same level.

We are the only country in the world that has a freaking 10F "derby race". The Australian derby is 12F, the Epson derby is 12F the Japanese derby is 12F, the new Zealand derby is 12F, the Irish Derby is 12F, the Italian derby, or derby italiano is 11F, the south African derby is 12 and a half F... hell and half the horses in those races want to run further than that.

they have horses that are getting cranked up with 12F and 15 of the 20 horses in the Kentucky derby, usually don't' want to run 9F, while drugged out of their minds.


In short, the problem isn't that there will be more bleeders if we stopped the use of lasix. I'm not so much anti lasix as much as i am anti every horse must have lasix. lasix has it's place. The problem is, why does every freaking horse in the entry box have to run on it, and even then, why can't they compete with their counterparts across the world.


horses overseas seem to be able to run more often and run further while not bleeding. bleeding as I understand it, is caused by stress, or tearing of putting too much stress on a horse to perform a physical act. Does that mean that we are under training our horses?

[Bast]

horses overseas seem to be able to run more often and run further while not bleeding. bleeding as I understand it, is caused by stress, or tearing of putting too much stress on a horse to perform a physical act. Does that mean that we are under training our horses?

Yes.

Go back and look at the "European" horses entered in the Breeders Cup races. Most of them were foaled in Kentucky; one was an Arkansas-bred. They ran without medication.

It isn't bloodlines. It's training and management.

[Dave C]

Everyone who pays attention to racing around the world comes to the same conclusion your coming to bdw. It isn't a problem with the horses.

[Crystal]

"why can't we just figure out what they hell they are doing, and do that thing? is it really that damn complicated?"

In you're own crude way you hit the nail on the head.

EDUCATION..

An owner doesn't know what is going on 24/7 at the track. They relay on professionals (a vet and trainer). The trainer keeps the body fit, and the vet diagnoses/treats ailments.. so it seems. They trainer/vet work together. The vet prescribes it, the trainer does it, the owner pays for it. In a perfect world the horse shows up and wins..

However, diagnosing a vet bill is almost a rediculous list of ingredients given to a horse to help them do a job (run) that they have since the beginning of time.

Honestly if a horse bleeds, give them Lasix.. Don't banned it, just don't over use it. Lasix has long term effects on the body beside just stopping bleeding once.
A horse can stop bleeding from the lungs. It doesn;t just happen and he's a bleeder for the rest of his life. But it has become such common pratice of "oh I see blood in the endoscope, he's a bleeder sign him up in the office as a bleeder". There are times when taking a horse off meds and letting his own body do its job will help him perform better.

Really seeing the vet bills for one horse in training on body builder, lasix, other bleeders meds, gasto guard, bute, supplements, xrays, scopes, injections, blisters, will run $300-$1,000 a month, plus your trainer day rate..Forget about ever running in low purse races because you might as well turn your horse out and burn your money.

[casallc]

Furosemide is included on the World Anti-Doping Agency's banned drug list for humans, due to its use as a masking agent for other drugs.

Guess what? It is one of the main uses for horses too. When it was discovered in the late 70's that Etorphine would make a horse run fast, the key to it not testing was lasix (furosemide). Many horses died before perfecting the proper dosage. In addition lasix gives you a 16 to 20 # weight advantage in loss of fluids - if your horse is strong enough to handle it. Lasix has a debilitating effect on horses making them take longer to recover from a race and weakening bones as well as creating dehydration and fatigue - the #1 cause of breakdowns. I don’t understand how all of those great iron racehorses did it before the 1970’s when lasix was first used on horses.

Either get rid of lasix or quit testing for anything and let the best pharmacist be the leading trainer.

[Mickey the Marcher]

The answer is really friggin simple.
Every horse in America runs on Lasix because that is what American owners and trainers want. And American owners and trainers (Horsemen's Associations) have a much greater say in how racing is run than their counterparts do in other parts of the world, where racing is usually run by governing bodies that act more like benevolent dictatorships that tell the Horsemen "this is how it's going to be".

Why do American owners/trainers want Lasix? The simple answer is $$$. If you go to the sales and buy a horse and that horse turns out to bleed sufficiently to make him noncompetitive, then you are out a chunk of money (purchase price, training fees etc). It's not that horses don't bleed in other parts of the world, they certainly do, but the ones that bleed badly enough just can't race. They have to find something else to do. They race a time or two and finish down the field and the connections decide "well, he ain't cut out for racing".

It probably doesn't help that they insist on racing in the summer in America when large parts of the continental US are hot and humid. It's funny to see people scream "Horse Welfare Issue!" when it comes to lasix, but have no problem with horses going to post at 3pm in the afternoon of a 95-100f July day. That to me is friggin' abusive.

[ratherrapid]

my answer would be that every horse runs on lasix because trainers and owners want to prevent EIPH lesions from developing. If you have $20,000 invested in a horse, $20,000 in training fees, do you want your horse to turn into a bleeder? Maybe BDW, as a player, can answer this simple Q.

Lasix does zero harm to horses, and because a horse has received a lasix shot means other than that the horse is "drugged out of its mind". take a little lasix your self. You'll see little effect other than a few trips to the bathroom. Is the choice to lead your horse back to the barn coughing and with developing lung lesions, or lasix? In USA likely cause of EIPH is dirt tracks and weather--humidity/air pressure with some other factors contributing.

[casallc]

my answer would be that every horse runs on lasix because trainers and owners want to prevent EIPH lesions from developing. If you have $20,000 invested in a horse, $20,000 in training fees, do you want your horse to turn into a bleeder? Maybe BDW, as a player, can answer this simple Q.

Lasix does zero harm to horses, and because a horse has received a lasix shot means other than that the horse is "drugged out of its mind". take a little lasix your self. You'll see little effect other than a few trips to the bathroom. Is the choice to lead your horse back to the barn coughing and with developing lung lesions, or lasix? In USA likely cause of EIPH is dirt tracks and weather--humidity/air pressure with some other factors contributing.

"Years later, those claims are laughable. Horses have never run less, the breed has never been more injury plagued and the problem of small fields has never been worse. And Lasix is not just given to bleeders, but to virtually every horse competing in North America, whether they've ever had a bleeding problem or not.

So, what has the sport gained by the legalization of Lasix? Obviously, nothing. And it's probable that the widespread use of the medication has contributed to the amazing brittleness of the breed that is causing racing so many problems. It's probably too much to ask that the sport comes to its senses and goes back to the good old days when no drugs were permitted ... then again, why not?

Back in 1970, when Lasix was not part of racing's lexicon and no one imagined using a diuretic as a medication to control bleeding, the average number of starts per runner was 10.22. There's little doubt that horses were stronger and healthier back then. It was common for a top horse to race 16 or 17 times a year or more and for them to race for several years".
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/ ... id=2150040

Furosemide is a potent diuretic. It acts by inhibiting the reabsorption of electrolytes within the kidney. The excreted electrolytes then "draw'" excess water along with them.

INDICATIONS
Furosemide is used in the treatment of non-inflammatory edema (e.g., allergic reaction, heart failure, excessive swelling of the udder after weaning). Furosemide has also been used extensively to help control the severity and frequency of "lung bleeding" in racehorses, although this is not an FDA-approved use of this drug.

DOSAGE AND ROUTE OF ADMINISTRATION
The recommended dose of furosemide is 0.5 mg/lb of body weight, or approximately 1.0 mg/kg of body weight. Tablets are available (human preparations), or large boluses (bovine formulation), but the usual route of administration for horses is intravenous or intramuscular.

SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS
In cases of heart failure, other appropriate cardiac medications should be continued.

SIDE EFFECTS/TOXICITY
The major side effect of all diuretics is the danger of dehydration and electrolyte imbalance. Of particular importance is potassium, which is lost in increased amounts in the urine. Furosemide may also cause decreased levels of blood calcium. Both of these electrolytes are important in normal functioning of heart and skeletal (body) musculature.

Rapid intravenous injection, particularly at high dosages, has been reported to cause a temporary hearing loss in experimental cats.

Furosemide should be used with great caution, if at all, in cases where renal (kidney) function may be impaired; with preexisting dehydration and known, or suspected electrolyte imbalance; and, in horses with liver disease or suspected tumors of the pituitary gland. (In the latter. furosemide may cause a worsening of the centrally induced diabetes.)

DRUG INTERACTIONS
The concurrent use of corticosteroids in horses treated with furosemide can result in worsening of potassium and calcium loss.

The concurrent use of furosemide and aminoglycoside (the -mycin group antibiotics may result in increased risk of damage to the kidneys or deafness.

Furosemide may decrease the response to drugs such as epinephrine used to maintain blood pressure during general anesthesia. Furosemide can also decrease sensitivity to commonly used paralyzing agents (e.g., curare! a horse may receive during general anesthesia. Furosemide may increase the sensitivity to other paralyzing agents (e.g., succinylcholine). Therefore, furosemide should not be given for at least one day prior to general anesthesia. THE SURGEON AND ANESTHETIST SHOULD BOTH BE INFORMED IF THE HORSE HAS A HISTORY OF RECEIVING FUROSEMIDE AND REQUIRES EMERGENCY SURGERY.

[bdw0617]

basically, it sounds like horse racing has been "processed" just like any other copreation/indsutry that gets it's foot in a door and doesn't want it to get out.

The more I think about this, the more I realize, the problem isn't so much that we have lasix and other countirs /jurisdictions don't, the real issue at hand, is that we let them in, and other jurisdictions DIDN'T.

What do I mean by that? It's like well.. let's take..... Adderall just to use a regular example.

Adderall, like lasix, can be very easily abused in the wrong hands. But at the same time, it does provide a real benefit if used correctly in the proper manner.

Once addreall was approved, once they got the foot in the door with the medical industry, the game was over at that point. Patients wanted it because it "helps" them. For those of you have never had the pleasure of taking adderall, it provides a very mild buzz, and while it helps you concentrate in small doses, it provides...let's say "wild" thoughts and dreams if taken in heavier doses.

The doctors don't want to stop prescribing it, from the kickbacks, and the money they are charging clients for the visits, they are raking in the door. Imagine a drug dealer that gets paid, just so he can tell you where to go find drugs. That's what a licensed doctor has the ability to do.

The pharma companies are making money hand over fist.

And while all this is happening you are getting people abusing scripts, becoming addicted to it, and in some cases (alot more then some), once they have reached the limit to how high they can get from adderall, switching to heavier, more potent drugs.


Who actually WANTS lasix banned? It's not trainers. What incentive to do trainers actually have to ban lasix? There ar some whose numbers would probably improve because the playing field is level but the vast majority of trainers probably couldn't hold a trainer from 40 years ago's jock strip and they need all the medical help they can get. As long as the trainer is getting his day rate most could care less.

The owner, like the people who use /abuse addreal, while are probalby made aware of all the benefits, i sincerely doubt most know the pitfalls of having a horse that is basically abusing lasix if it's not needed. Then you have the "well everyone else is doing it" crowd that feel if they want to compete they have to fork it over

Vets / the companies that supply it have no reason to want it banned.


Once we let the beast in, we were never going to get rid of it. This was always going to happen.

Horse racing is a drug addicted industry. Not just the horse. The money that's made off the drug, everyone is addicted to it. It scratches more than one back and no one wants to cut off the perverbal hand that's feeding them.


Europe, Dubai, Japan, Aussie land, they were all smarter than us in this sense. Ironically I would venture to say they are smarter than us in other senses but that's for another post and not entirely true anyway. But they knew that if allowed virtually every trainer would use it as a default training tool...


it would be like, saying okay it's legal for you to buy marijuana now, and we will sale it in gas stations, but only buy it if you really need it. lol yeah right. That fairy tale world doesn't exist.

[Crystal]

sell and sale..

[ratherrapid]

my take is casalc makes unwarranted connection between lasix and weakness of the breed. that the breed is weaker is an assumption that may be dead wrong. there's lots of evidence including in my back yard that TBs are stronger than they've ever been. hardly protects from rampant training idiocy, but even that is better of late.

as to that list of the 20 horrors of lasix that have been circulating for 25 years now as the reason to ban lasix, it's poop. You'd have to give a lasix shot every single day to come close to achieving any of those. If e.g. lasix reduces this or that electrolyte, its blood stream stuff only, replaced immediately by correct husbandry way before any bone damage.

a few years back a neighbor was put on lasix for some kind of heart condition. I asked him how it affected him. His reply to me was zero effect except that he runs to the BR a lot and was put on additional supplements by the doc.

if u're the one racing the horse, r u going to rationally chance your horse developing EIPH. BDW is correct--the anti-lasixs are 99% non-horse owners/trainers. reasons for that imho.

[casallc]

my take is casalc makes unwarranted connection between lasix and weakness of the breed. that the breed is weaker is an assumption that may be dead wrong. there's lots of evidence including in my back yard that TBs are stronger than they've ever been. hardly protects from rampant training idiocy, but even that is better of late.

as to that list of the 20 horrors of lasix that have been circulating for 25 years now as the reason to ban lasix, it's poop. You'd have to give a lasix shot every single day to come close to achieving any of those. If e.g. lasix reduces this or that electrolyte, its blood stream stuff only, replaced immediately by correct husbandry way before any bone damage.

a few years back a neighbor was put on lasix for some kind of heart condition. I asked him how it affected him. His reply to me was zero effect except that he runs to the BR a lot and was put on additional supplements by the doc.

if u're the one racing the horse, r u going to rationally chance your horse developing EIPH. BDW is correct--the anti-lasixs are 99% non-horse owners/trainers. reasons for that imho.

Most horses that get lasix don't need it. All horses bleed to some extent with or without lasix. When you have a "TRUE" bleeder they bleed by the bucket full and lasix probably won't help them anyway. Those horses should be known and shunned as breeders. Lasix has proved to weaken bones and be physically debilitating. I took it for years - I can vouch for it. I have never heard of supplementing or even checking the potassium levels of horses like they do human lasix users.

I know drugs and I know trainers and vets. Most are eager to get results with a needle rather than put in the time and effort to condition their horses properly. Lasix gives needle trainers an edge and cost owners unnecessarily, initially then from resulting injury and day money while recovering. The same argument can be made for any drug as the one for lasix. Why not give a shot of morphine to a sore horse? He won’t feel any pain he might have and it will make him run better than he usually does. I contend that if a horse “needs” any drug he shouldn’t be running. If you are going to test horses – don’t make exceptions for levels or certain drugs. Secretariat didn’t need it and there hasn’t been another like him since it’s use (or a triple crown winner).

[Mood Swings]

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/nation ... t.facebook

[Shammy Davis]

http://www.ker.com/library/proceedings/04/EIPH_p95.pdf

http://www.grayson-jockeyclub.org/newsi ... forair.pdf

[Shammy Davis]

www.breedingracing.com/pdfs/ARCHIVE/76/p10_23_lead.pdf