Last week I was disheartened to read the Maryland horsemen had relented to outside pressure to hold 2-year-old racing without Lasix. However, I saw a silver lining in the mentioning of a possible three-year study. No matter what side of the debate you fall on, we can all agree that the race-day administration of Lasix might be the most divisive issue in an industry full of divides.
In the back and forth debate over Lasix and its need, I have heard differing numbers. I have heard anti-Lasix people say between five and 10 percent of horses experience Exercise Induced Pulmonary Hemorrhaging (EIPH), commonly known as bleeding. On the pro-Lasix side I’ve heard over 50 percent. This three-year study gives us the chance to answer that debate.
We have decades of anecdotal evidence through experience at the track and through studies such as the South African study partially funded by the Grayson Jockey Club Research Foundation. That landmark study demonstrated the effectiveness of Lasix and, also importantly, showed no harm with its usage. Knowing this, the prevalence of EIPH should be the deciding factor in the administration of race-day Lasix. What if we had a large comprehensive study answering the question of prevalence of EIPH under real-world racing conditions in horses running in the United States that have not been administered Lasix on race day?
Vital to truly understanding the extent of EIPH, we must determine the numbers of horses who might not bleed through the nostrils, to where it can be observed by the naked eye, but who experience blood in the airways that is detected only by endoscopic exam. Whether visible or not, bleeding is damaging to a horse and often is progressive.
Not having the expertise to come up with the conceptual framework of a peer-reviewed study, this just seems like the most common-sense approach to me: We scope all 2-year-olds that run in a race in Maryland for the next three years. Scope them all 45 minutes to an hour post race. This would be for the simple binary ruling of yes or no. Other things will need to be recorded as well such as sex, surface, distance, weather conditions and track conditions as these things could be contributing factors.
Certainly any such study will face hurdles, including owners and trainers objecting to participation for fear of their horses being put on some sort of bleeder list. Submitting to the study would be a condition of entry. Also people’s minds can be put to rest with the condition of anonymity for the horse. The only purpose for identifying the horse post race is to confirm that the horse was in fact one that ran in that race.
Also: who will do the scoping and who will pay for this study? I think it should be the veterinarians currently working at Maryland tracks doing the endoscopic exams. Vets aren’t going to scope horses for free, so who will pay for the scoping and compiling of the data? This might be pie in the sky, but I think every industry stakeholder should make an effort to chip in for such a study because it benefits everybody and most of all our horses. This issue of prevalence of EIPH brings us to a new starting point in a conversation over Lasix based in science.
I think any owner, trainer, breeder or stakeholder who is genuinely curious and willing to learn would contribute. Such a study would give the world as a whole a chance to learn and grow.
So many decisions in this industry seem to be emotionally based. A study like this gives the industry a chance to base policy-making on Lasix on science rather than emotion.
Given the importance of such a study, the industry shouldn’t limit the scope to just Maryland. Every racing jurisdiction that has adopted a no-Lasix policy for 2-year-old racing–whether by regulatory authority or utilizing a track’s “house rules”–should launch a parallel project.
I sincerely hope the anti-Lasix camp with their numbers of between 5 and 10 percent are correct. Given my own experiences, I don’t believe the anti-Lasix camp’s numbers to be accurate (or they’re only counting horses who visibly bleed), but I don’t know for sure. A study like this would give us a clear view moving forward in our policy-making rather than the emotionally blinded view it seems we’ve been using thus far.
Kentucky-based Bentley Combs began training horses in late 2017 after serving as assistant trainer to Dallas Stewart. The Lexington product graduated from the University of Louisville’s Equine Industry Program in the College of Business and received an MBA from the University of Mississippi.
The post Open Letter to the Industry: Bentley Combs appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.
Source of original post
