Page 33 - New Mexico Horse Breeder Summer 2018

Bleeding has been documented since the early 1800’s but, remember, there were no scopes so only the highest-level bleeders were noticed. The “cures” were nothing more than old wives’ tales. One of the most bizarre practices was in the mid-1940s when some trainers used thin, eight-inch strips of copper wire. They wrapped the wire around the base of a horse’s tail before a race. Huh? Don’t ask.
Then, in 1978, the fiberoptic endoscope was developed. Veterinarians could examine a horse’s upper respiratory system and determine the presence of bleeding as well as its severity. Back then, a vet’s report was needed for Lasix to be approved. For the first time, it was accepted that the origin of the bleeding was the lungs. It was also determined that 100% of Thoroughbreds, when scoped after three successive and strenuous workouts, bled by the third scope.
The Lasix Timeline
Lasix was approved for veterinary use in 1967. The scope debuted in 1978. Also in the 1970s were clinical trials to determine if Lasix could help bleeders. It was in that same decade that the drug was permitted, even on race day. Lasix has now been legal on race day in every state since 1995. The first time Lasix was used was 1964 on Northern Dancer in the Kentucky Derby.
Once again...a nightmare.
Horses bleed. Lasix works.
Why don’t horses in Europe and Australia bleed?
They do. But they don’t allow Lasix, and a horse
is not considered a bleeder until blood flows from one or both nostrils. This, of course, means the animal is in severe distress. So, even though Lasix is not allowed during race-day competition, trainers in Europe do use the medicine during out-of- competition training exercise. Once bleeding starts in a horse, it tends to become a lifelong problem. The worst bleeders in Hong Kong and Germany are forced to retire and are excluded from breeding.
But, still, all those European horses who perform brilliantly without the benefit of race day Lasix remain a mystery. How do they do it? What’s the difference between them and us? One vet, working for a very successful trainer, commented that he
felt one of the basic differences between the North American and European horses was the European trainer’s focus on fundamental husbandry rather than medication; elements such as proper feed, keeping the horse warm with the proper bed, “...the basic things, rather than try and complicate it with this idea you need to be using medication.” Well...
There are some people who have long-insisted that Lasix enhances a horse’s performance. It does lower blood pressure, thus alleviating the stress in the capillaries and allowing performance to return to normal. There is also the matter of significant weight reduction (up to 20 pounds) that results from the loss of several gallons of fluid because of the increase of urine production and urinary frequency.
The Jockey Club commissioned a study in 1988 to determine whether or not Lasix actually enhanced performance. The study concluded there was no
concrete evidence that Lasix prevents bleeding, but it was obvious a horse’s performance improved while on Lasix. Specific statistics emerging from the study said a Lasix-treated horse ran roughly three lengths faster at a mile – whether or not they had a bleeding condition. Older geldings improved by as much as nine lengths. Furthermore, said the study, more than 60% of the horses treated with Lasix still bled.
There is so much conflicting data when it comes to Lasix. A more recent study conducted by American, Australian and South African researchers followed a study group of horses. They found 79% showed some trace of bleeding after running without Lasix. It was further determined that the performance of a grade 1 bleeder is not affected and level 2 is on the borderline.
Continuing the study results, 20% of the horses who were not treated with Lasix did not bleed; 45% bled at the 1 level and another 25% at level 2. There is no true consistency but Lasix did eliminate the most serious cases.
There are very few horses that would not show evidence of at least a little bleeding if scoped after a race. And all they need to show is a little bit to be declared a bleeder and added to the Lasix list. It’s easy and it’s the reason that tiny “L” started marching down program pages. As a result, two things have happened. First, many trainers are using Lasix on their horses as a preventative measure; one of those “just in case” scenarios. Second, no one truly knows whether or not
Lasix enhances performance. What if it does? Everybody wants the same advantage as the guy in the next gate so that means using Lasix. This means administering Lasix on a consistent basis
is no different from those four Ibuprophin. But here’s the deal...popping those four Ibuprophin four days out of seven can be a silent killer, making ugly inroads to ruining a human’s kidneys – among other things. What is the consistent, continuing use of Lasix doing to the horse?
Phenylbutazone Cycle
The other legal race day substance coming under fire is Bute (phenylbutazone), which is a pain-killer. We can be short and sweet on this one, because it’s far less complicated than the Lasix issue. Everybody needs a little help now then. You know, like those four Ibuprophen. And, really, there’s not a lot wrong with that unless it becomes abusive. And abusive is defined as...
A horse is injected with Bute over and over; in this joint and in that joint. Lameness is masked, which presents a problem for the attending veterinarian who is trying to evaluate a horse
and make certain it’s race sound. Ever heard the expression, “No pain, no brain?” Cover up a horse’s lameness and he’ll pound himself into the ground as hard as possible, injuring or even destroying precious cartilage. All too often, this masking can lead to catastrophic injury and even death.
The racing industry has a terrible aversion to something call “rest.”
Rest?
Rest means missing races. Rest means cutting yourself out of money. Rest can also mean having a horse to run next year.
It’s been determined that heavy, continuing use of substances such as Bute can open the gateway to hell for many horses in terms of health. There can be weakness and loss of muscle mass, suppression of the ability to produce natural corticosteroids, ulcers, problems with vision and more.
Once again, there is absolutely no shame in reaching out for help when it becomes obvious we’re just not equipped to handle whatever is going on.
So, Where Are We?
We’re at a crossroads. The industry (track owners, racing commissions, etc.) can continue working their tails off, moving at a sub-
snail’s pace to reach the goal of uniformity throughout the country. We can continue with our headaches and frustrations, popping those Ibuprophen until our throats knot up. Or, we can become fully supportive of the Horseracing Integrity Act of 2017 (H.R. 2651), otherwise known as the Barr-Tonka bill, and allow them to do most of the work for us.
There are organizations dedicated to pushing rocks of resistance out of the way and clearing the path for a clean, safe, respected sport.
All the rules and regs would go into effect
on the same day at the same time. We would
have uniformity at last. A rider leaving one state knows there’s no need to cram a whole new list of operating facts into his/her brain for the next state.
For whatever reasons, horse folks have pushed back hard against this bill. They can’t seem to understand this is the most direct route to reach our goal. We level the playing field. We re-establish our sport’s integrity.
The bill is not a one-size-fits all plan.
The intention is for the Anti-Doping and Medication Control Authority (HAMCA) to work with all breeds to determine what is the best policy on the therapeutics.
If you would like the full picture for H.R. 2651, go to horseracing integrity.com.
We really...honestly...sincerely need help if we’re going to herd these cats. And they really... honestly...sincerely MUST be herded.
SUMMER 2018 31