Have Lasix and other drugs ruined racing?

Gallop58 · Postby **Gallop58** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:02 pm

Some report up to 40 lbs of weight loss in the 4 hour window....I think temperature and some other factors affect it....

Makes the Hong Kong strategy of posting actual prerace horse weights seem quite sensible. Also, if I'm not mistaken in some places you can elect to do a 1/2 or full dose ... How's the handicapper to know?

So do you think 1st time lasix is a legitimate angle and if so why :

A) more to do with the blood pressure drop/ bleeding effect of the drug
or B) the weight drop
or C) the alkanizing (milkshake) effect
or D) all of the above?

KH

Bid · Postby **Bid** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 4:28 pm

I didn't read the whole article, but I'm guessing that it finds that the playing field is leveled with the introduction of the drug. This may speak to the earlier posts on this thread about the lack of totally dominant horses and the subsequent destruction of the breed by perpetually breeding inferior horses who would never have made it w/o Lasix.
Chuck and I had the fluid loss discussion this weekend. Seems to me that when I ran distance, we tried to hydrate before, during and after races. Is the body weight reduction actually beneficial? I could understand if you took the weight off the horse's back, but not off his body weight.
Maybe it's different in horses, but dehydration just doesn't seem to be the best way to go. It certainly has to have a negative effect on the body over the long haul. As bodybuilders, we would remove all the fluid and diet down to peak for a show. If you were really gifted, you could only do this twice a year(w/o steroids). We do this to the horses every race. Just a thought...

Entry Blank · Postby **Entry Blank** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:01 am

How many people here think that before advanced testing was used on horses or any testing for that matter that horses ran on just , hay , oats and water?
I would have to think before tests were developed to detect drugs that perhaps trainers could and would have put all kinds of things into their horses for races. Either way its hard to prove since most of us werent around back in the day.

madelyn · Postby **madelyn** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:09 pm

you gotta be kidding. They used things like arsenic back in the day. Cocktails of their own concoction. The playing field, in my opinion, has never been safer for the horse, or more level, than it is today.

Entry Blank · Postby **Entry Blank** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:35 pm

madelyn wrote::D you gotta be kidding. They used things like arsenic back in the day. Cocktails of their own concoction. The playing field, in my opinion, has never been safer for the horse, or more level, than it is today.

I concur

BenB · Postby **BenB** » Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:04 pm

This is how we handles cases with stuff like lasix in europe
http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-ra ... sh/603989/

Mickey the Marcher · Postby **Mickey the Marcher** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:36 am

BenB wrote:This is how we handles cases with stuff like lasix in europe
http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-ra ... sh/603989/

That's a farce really, banning a jumps trainer for 3 months in the summer time. Should have got something with teeth, a 6-9 month suspension that would have kept him out of action until early next year. The fine should hurt him though, £40,000 is nothing to sneeze at.

Entry Blank · Postby **Entry Blank** » Sat Jul 04, 2009 1:11 pm

Trainers in Europe train horses on theraputic drugs and work horses on Lasix........so they have to withdraw by a certain time frame doesnt mean they dont use them when they can. American horses run all over the world without Lasix and compete at a pretty high level. I personally feel that all drugs could be withdrawn from 72 hours with the exception of Lasix and there wouldnt be a profound effect on the outcome of races.
People try and compare giving Lasix to a human to giving Lasix to a horse when their body chemistry's are alot diffirent.

Bid · Postby **Bid** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 1:55 pm

I still fail to see how pulling that much fluid from a horse's body every race,just as they are about to tax their mucles to the max, can be anything but detrimental. The physiology isn't that much different. As for the 72 hour withdrawl period- if that includes Winstrol and the like, I beg to differ.
If American horses compete so well around the world w/o Lasix, then why don't we run without it here? The best would separate themselves rather quickly then(both runners and trainers).

Entry Blank · Postby **Entry Blank** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 5:07 pm

Bid wrote:I still fail to see how pulling that much fluid from a horse's body every race,just as they are about to tax their mucles to the max, can be anything but detrimental. The physiology isn't that much different. As for the 72 hour withdrawl period- if that includes Winstrol and the like, I beg to differ.
If American horses compete so well around the world w/o Lasix, then why don't we run without it here? The best would separate themselves rather quickly then(both runners and trainers).

,

They dont run without it here because its legal. Henry Cecil ran his filly in the American Oaks today at Hollywood on lasix and Henry is a pretty notable trainer from across the pond. So if its so good for horses to run without it in other places around the world then why when they come to America to race do a majority of the trainers run their charges on lasix?

going4stamina · Postby **going4stamina** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 7:38 pm

I think Lasix is fairly effective as mask for other drugs as well.

Entry Blank · Postby **Entry Blank** » Sun Jul 05, 2009 8:43 pm

going4stamina wrote:I think Lasix is fairly effective as mask for other drugs as well.

That has never been proven it is total speculation. If lasix is a masking drug then how come jockey's who take lasix get bad drug tests?

Tucumcari · Postby **Tucumcari** » Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:55 pm

madelyn wrote::D you gotta be kidding. They used things like arsenic back in the day. Cocktails of their own concoction. The playing field, in my opinion, has never been safer for the horse, or more level, than it is today.

Back in the day??? How about today. People still use caco copper which contains arsenic which increases appetite. Who knows what was used on "x" horse before testing became a legit and sensitive thing. It is far more sensitive now than it was last year or last decade or last century.

pokeyman · Postby **pokeyman** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:59 pm

We race 100% drug free. Our horses are usually the only ones on the ENTIRE day running drug free.

We just scoped our older filly after her race yesterday and she showed zero signs of bleeding.

I don't think it's fair we have to run against lasix, bute, jug, etc horses as they must have an advantage or else why would every horse run on them?

Entry Blank · Postby **Entry Blank** » Thu Jul 09, 2009 5:53 pm

pokeyman wrote:We race 100% drug free. Our horses are usually the only ones on the ENTIRE day running drug free.

We just scoped our older filly after her race yesterday and she showed zero signs of bleeding.

I don't think it's fair we have to run against lasix, bute, jug, etc horses as they must have an advantage or else why would every horse run on them?

You might feel slighted but it is your choice to run your horses as you want just like it is other people's choices to run them on legal medications.
So why did you scope your filly ?