Lazarus on HISA Anti-Doping and Medication Control

Bit by bit, the pieces of the puzzle are slotting into place for the Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) component of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act, set to go into effect at the start of next year.

Last month, that program was designated an agency to officially run it–namely Drug Free Sports International, an organization that has helped administer drug testing programs to a slew of major human sports leagues.

Then, last week, the draft ADMC rules were for put out public comment. These draft rules can be found here.

Adolpho Birch, Chair of HISA's ADMC Committee, concurrently issued a letter outlining the primary changes to the revised ADMC rules as compared to the draft rules previously issued, when the United States Anti-Doping Agency's (USADA) appeared set to become HISA's enforcement agency.

In the letter, Birch points out that possible sanctions for controlled therapeutic medication violations have been reduced, to make a clearer distinction between medication offenses where banned substances are administered, and those when controlled therapeutic substances have been given.

Furthermore, in the event of a positive test result and a request for a B sample analysis, someone from the enforcement agency itself will choose the laboratory, which may be a different laboratory from the one that did the initial analysis.

Tuesday morning, HISA CEO Lisa Lazarus held a media Q&A to discuss the draft ADMC rules further. The following is a summary of her comments.

Responsible Persons

Lazarus provided interesting context to the reasons underpinning the need for trainers and owners to maintain daily treatment records for the horses in their care, a basic outline for which can be found here.

The registration system designates a responsible person for each horse. And that in turn places the burden on the responsible trainer or owner to make sure that they keep detailed records and documentation–essentially, run a “tight ship,” as Lazarus put it.

In the event of a medication violation, therefore, the HISA Authority can request these documents and records, “and those records can become part of the case,” said Lazarus.

In relation to this, Lazarus also expanded on HISA's “whereabouts” program, which essentially ensures that all horses under HISA's remit are accounted for at all times.

In the first phase of the whereabouts program, set to go into effect early next year, responsible persons are required to submit a whereabouts filing if they remove a horse from a racetrack or registered facility.

In other words, said Lazarus, “If you take a horse to a private facility or a private farm, you have to notify us.” And there are possible penalties for non-compliance, including potential fines for failure to submit a whereabouts filing.

However, failure to produce a horse for drug testing results in a presumptive two-year violation (pending a hearing), irrespective of any test result.

“If you take a horse off a public racetrack where we know where the horse is, you don't tell us where the horse is with the whereabouts filing, we look for the horse, we reach out to the Covered Person–we're going to have access to all of this through our database–and they don't produce [the horse] immediately for testing, then, it's a presumptive two-year penalty,” said Lazarus.

Ultimately, said Lazarus, the plan is for a system in place that identifies the whereabouts of any covered horse at any time.

“But one of the things we want to understand and see is whether or not we can really just mine that data from existing resources without putting a paperwork burden on participants,” she said.

Case Management

Before diving into this section, there are some important nomenclature changes to note, as compared to the previous draft rules' use of “primary” and “secondary” substances.

Under these revised draft rules, “prohibited substances” is an umbrella term for anything that shouldn't be in a horse on race day. Banned substances refers to doping substances, while controlled medications are essentially therapeutic substances.

A list of banned and controlled substances, along with possible sanctions in the event of a positive test result, can be found here.

Lazarus provided a snap-shot of the case management process.

In the event a horse tests positive for a banned substance like a steroid, an anabolic agent or a growth hormone, the responsible person is immediately suspended until a hearing takes place.

“The presumption is that this is a two-year sanction,” said Lazarus.

However, that two-year sanction can be reduced if the responsible person can show “no fault or no significant fault,” said Lazarus, adding how any penalty reduction is predicated upon the responsible person proving how the substance got into the horse's system in the first place.

“So, for example, if you're in a situation of a steroid [positive] and you want to argue that somebody gave the horse a steroid without your knowledge, you have to actually prove that [scenario] to the confidence and satisfaction of the hearing panel,” said Lazarus, who also explained how there will be potential four-year bans in the event of “aggravating circumstances” like trafficking, evading sample collection and tampering with samples.

Public Disclosure of Test Results

Under USADA's version of the ADMC program, one rather controversial component concerned how A samples results weren't necessarily going to be automatically disclosed to the public.

But Lazarus pointed to a change of tune, with A sample results now indeed set to be made available online.

“You'll know the covered person, covered horse, and the substance that was detected in the sample,” she said. “You'll be able to follow the case essentially as it goes through the various steps. [For example,] if there's a hearing to lift a suspension that'll be recorded, the decision will be recorded,” she added.

Shortened Adjudication Timelines

The timeline to hear and adjudicate cases will be “incredibly reduced” when compared to the current model at the individual state level, said Lazarus.

After a hearing, for example, the arbitrator will have to issue a decision within 14 days. In the appeals process, defendants have 30 days to file an appeal to the charges, and then, a hearing must happen within 60 days after initial notice.

When asked if the tightened system provides adequate time for defendants to mount a fair defense–especially in complex cases–Lazarus said that cases will be adjudicated on an individual basis, with wriggle room given in “exceptional circumstances” so as not to compromise due process.

That said, the truncated timeline–along with any provisional suspension in the event of a banned substance violation–could also act as an incentivizing lever, said Lazarus.

“If you're dealing with a two-year penalty and it's a banned substance, you're going to be suspended during the case processing scheduling period, and so they're probably going to be very motivated to have it heard quickly as well, so, it also protects the participants,” she said.

Registration Numbers

According to Lazarus, nearly half the horses and covered persons who need to be registered by July 1 have done so. However, racing offices will soon provide a “can't race flag” if a horse that is entered to race is not registered with HISA, she said.

This is intended more as a prompt, said Lazarus, as it won't necessarily affect the horse's eligibility to race, just as long as that horse is, indeed, registered by July 1.

Drug Testing

The actual ADMC testing program is still being developed, said Lazarus, and so, specifics are thin.

That said, in the past various officials have suggested that under HISA, all winners won't necessarily be tested post-race–something of a departure from the current model.

Lazarus indicated, however, that indeed, the post-race drug testing net could still accommodate all winners.

“We're trying to balance a robust testing program that has a deterrent effect with the intelligence-based advantages you get from looking at intelligence metrics,” said Lazarus.

The post Lazarus on HISA Anti-Doping and Medication Control appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Irwin: USADA Essential To A Successful Horseracing Integrity And Safety Authority

It was not by happenstance that in a 2004 Op/Ed I wrote in The Blood-Horse and eight years later the Water Hay Oats Alliance in its mission statement both singled out the United States Anti-Doping Agency as the one entity that could rein in the rampant use of drugs both legal and illegal in horse racing.

Through several iterations of proposed congressional legislations in different political administrations, WHOA forged ahead, convincing The Jockey Club, Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders' Association, Breeders' Cup and other leading organizations to join its efforts. But WHOA never lost sight of its goal as stated in its original mission statement: USADA needed to be named by congress to oversee drugs in racing.

When Mitch McConnell finally saw the light and agreed to help his state's signature industry by embracing the idea of the federal legislation, he joined the effort for a final push that resulted in the idea of naming an entity, named the Authority, to deal with the Federal Trade Commission in setting up drug controls. The idea from the very get-to and through the rewritten federal law was to bring USADA on board to do their thing.

But between passing the legislation, seating board and committee members and drafting rules for drugs and safety, the Authority lost sight of its mandate and role in the process. Things that plague most political actions and serve as a stark reminder of the corruption to which many humans are capable of brought forth conflicts of interest and the weightiness of power. The Authority shockingly announced during the holidays that it had been unable to come to a meeting of the minds with Travis Tygart, the head of USADA. The newly formed group revealed that it was moving ahead to find an alternative overseer of drugs in racing. 

Conflicts of interest? Abuse of power? Money up for grabs? Really? Yep. Really.

I will save you all from having to read the rest of this and get right to the point: USADA is the only group with the brand, gravitas, respect and tools to save the sport of Thoroughbred racing. Yes, there are other groups that could address testing, investigations and education, but in total none of them has what USADA brings to the table. 

Jeff Novitzky, a storied federal investigator who graduated from breaking open the 2002 BALCO scandal and currently is in charge of athlete performance for the Ultimate Fighting Championship, is a board member of the Authority. He is potentially an important player in determining who gets the nod to oversee drugs in racing, as he actually has experience in hiring USADA to work on behalf of the UFC.

As explained by Novitzky, there are ultimately three tasks that need to be addressed by any anti-doping organization, namely testing, investigation and education. Interestingly, he said that education is perhaps the most important, as it involves an authority figure such as Travis Tygart being able to educate athletes as to how sophisticated and thorough USADA can be in its job. Novitzky says that this aspect of the triple-pronged approach has formed an effective deterrent to cheating by his athletes. Novitzky said that it is possible to find outfits that could do testing and investigation, but very challenging to find a group that could educate the participants like USADA. That is a difference maker for him.

The reason that WHOA and I have pushed so hard for USADA is that a totally independent group is essential in allowing the game to function and give fans and competitors alike the confidence that the sport is on the level.

Here is why an independent group is needed. In a game dominated by super-wealthy, powerfully-connected participants that operate their enterprises on a win-at-all-costs ethos, only an independent body is able to withstand the onslaught of a corrupt individual to assist them in breaking the rules.

In today's environment, within the confines of racing (and not including the Federal Bureau of Investigation), powerful individuals who get caught breaking the rules always seem to find a get out of jail free card. 

The reason so many horsemen and owners seem to be against USADA's involvement in racing is that their reputation has preceded them. They are incorruptible and this scares the crap out of them.

However, with USADA now set to be totally bypassed in favor of some other organizations that have been mentioned, independence will be thrown right out the window and all of our efforts will have been for naught, because the bad guys will have won again and nothing will have changed. Right now forces that want the appearance of change, but behind closed doors actually embrace the status quo, are calling the shots.

Forces working against USADA include those with conflicts of interest. Among them are Authority members that have existing affiliations to other anti-doping doping agencies, rival testing labs lined up for a big payday and individuals pulling any strings they can find to keep USADA from becoming the top cop on the block. There is a lot of money involved and more than one testing lab or doping agency that would like to get their piece of the pie. Cronyism, regional muscle flexing and a good old-fashioned money grab characterizes the battlefield today.

It says here that the Authority has lost sight of its role in the process and that a combination of egos fueled with new-found power, members swayed by passionate enemies of USADA and lots of money up for grabs has corrupted what should have been a simple task. And for all appearances it looks very much like those empowered to guard the palace gates want to ascend to the throne.

Barry Irwin is the founder and CEO of Team Valor International

The post Irwin: USADA Essential To A Successful Horseracing Integrity And Safety Authority appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Irwin: Robust Investigative Force Critical For HISA To Effectively Combat Cheating

The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (HISA) is not scheduled to begin operations until July of next year, but with release of the initial guidelines issued for public consumption last week and any number of Op/Ed pieces appearing in industry trade publications, the direction of the Authority that will steer the ship seems to be given plenty of helpful hints for its future navigation.

As the one who got the ball rolling in a 2004 Op/Ed in The Blood-Horse by urging industry members to consider a way of hiring the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency to oversee drugs in horseracing, I must at this early juncture in the start-up of the Authority register my fears regarding the ultimate success of the new entity and its potentially sweeping changes.

Germination for wishing to get USADA involved in the struggle to rid cheaters from the game was to use CEO Travis Tygart and his team to devise a plan to form an investigative unit capable of discovering through traditional and new-wave policing methods which designer and human drugs were being used to tilt the playing field in North American racing.

If the world of international sport had learned one thing from the 2002 Bay Area Laboratory Co-operative (BALCO) it was that testing was best used not to apprehend suspects but to confirm that they were cheating. The gold standard in catching the crooks was by finding the actual illegal substances first, then developing a test and using that test in the future to nail the bad guys. Testing without knowing what one was testing for was like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

Good old-fashioned cop grunt work and sophisticated FBI-style surveillance is required for the best results. In the eyes of those individuals who formed and drove the Water Hay Oats Alliance, it was foremost in mind that Tygart would use his agency's skills to offer relief to racehorse owners who played the game straight and true.

However, other initiatives, introduced by other stakeholders with alternative agendas, have gotten in the way and now threaten to derail the Authority from their original appointed rounds. And adding further insult to injury, everybody with an agenda is making noises about the Authority widening their sphere of influence by tackling such areas as pari-mutuel wagering.

The last thing HISA needs is to be accused of overreach by encompassing an agenda that goes too far afield from its original mandate. HISA was never envisioned as a so-called “league office” or end-all and be-all to govern the entirety of racing.

HISA is basically divided into two aspects of racing: integrity (preventing cheating) and safety (protecting the horse). While I am extremely interested in protecting the welfare of racehorses, I was personally disappointed in its inclusion in the final legislation, as I thought it could be handled better outside the confines of the law and because it detracted from the focus on cheating with drugs.

I daresay that very well may have been the intention of those proposing and supporting the safety element of the legislation. But I fully understand that with any sort of seminal legislation there must always be compromise and I am positive that without the safety aspect, Churchill Downs would never have been able to use its influence to convince Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell to back the bill.

In reviewing the Authority's releases so far and in reading reports in the media as well as interviews with key members of the Authority, it seems likely to me that testing for illegal substances is being given too much weight, as opposed to investigations. If this turns out to be the case, it would be a misguided, potentially detrimental and disheartening.

I understand why the “safety” advocates pressed so hard to have their initiative appear to be on an equal footing with “integrity.” By shifting the focus away from a single-minded attempt to zero in on drugs, the “safety” crowd hoped that racing would not be placed in a negative light. I get it. I do not agree with this gambit, but I understand it, especially where a major racetrack is concerned.

But unless the industry as a whole is ready to tackle cheating with drugs head on, the specter of altering the results of racing will never cease.

So this is my pitch to members of the Authority, no matter what side of the fence you are on, no matter how you managed to get your seat on the boards and committees and no matter what your agenda: please do all in your power to make sure that Travis Tygart is given adequate funding to carry on investigations that will yield the type of results those of us who have committed our lives to cleaning up the game can feel that all of our work has been worthwhile.

This message is not directed at USADA. It is not directed at Travis Tygart. It is directed at those individuals who may seek to over-fund their own aspects of the legislation.

Without a robust investigative force that is fully funded this entire initiative will fail and HISA will go the way of all other alphabet soup groups in racing. This is our one last chance to get horseracing right, correct the wrongs on the racetrack and clean up the game enough to present it as a viable sport to fans and horseplayers. We owe them that much.

Barry Irwin is the founder and CEO of Team Valor International

 

The post Irwin: Robust Investigative Force Critical For HISA To Effectively Combat Cheating appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

View From the Eighth Pole: A New Sheriff In Town?

The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority is moving quickly to meet several deadlines before its federally mandated July 1, 2022, starting date to become the national regulatory agency for anti-doping and medication control for Thoroughbred racing in the United States.

Earlier this week, in consultation with the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, led by CEO Travis Tygart and Dr. Tessa Muir, USADA's director of equine science, HISA published a draft set of definitions, medication protocols and a list of prohibited medications.

The public has an opportunity to comment and offer feedback on those proposed rules before they go to the Federal Trade Commission next month for a second round of public comment and eventual approval by the FTC.

It's clear, from the proposed rules and comments by Tygart and Muir in a series of media interviews, that racing is in for some significant changes.

Gone will be the good old boy community of racing commissioners with conflicts of interest involving some of the people they are regulating. It is hoped the cavalcade of attorneys appealing fines, suspensions and disqualifications on behalf of trainers will grind to a halt as well, with strict, understandable and loophole-free regulations in place when the transition to the Authority occurs next July.

But first, some caveats.

USADA has yet to sign a contract with the Authority as the enforcement agency for when HISA goes into effect. Tygart and Muir have been instrumental in meeting with HISA committees and staff in developing the rules, and Tygart said USADA is ready to become the enforcement agency IF the final regulations approved by the FTC are “good rules that we can stand by.”

In other words, Tygart is not going to risk USADA's brand or his own good name on a mission if it is hijacked by people who are successful in watering down the rules.

There are also the lawsuits by horsemen's organizations in opposition to the federal legislation that created the Authority. These have yet to be resolved in court. Tygart calls them obstructionists who hope to delay implementation and cause the Authority to burn through limited financial resources.

“We fully anticipate those groups or individuals who have always been opposed to a new uniform policy being in place and independent, robust enforcement of those policies, that they're going to continue to try and obstruct it at every turn,” Tygart said.

If the legal challenges are defeated and USADA becomes the enforcement agency, this will be a different, cleaner game played on a more level field.

For starters, no medications will be permitted by statute for 48 hours prior to race day. A robust out-of-competition testing program will be phased in with “whereabouts” requirements for all horses registered with the Authority. That means if horses are removed from a racetrack stable area, a trainer must notify the Authority where that horse is going so that out of competition testing can be conducted. Violations of the whereabouts rule will be dealt with severely.

So will positive tests for prohibited substances that are now dealt with in many states with a slap on the wrist. For example, primary substances – those that should not be in a horse's system at any time – found in post-race or out-of-competition samples may result in suspensions of up to two years. Included in that group are anabolic steroids, blood-doping agents and clenbuterol.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatories would fall under secondary substance rules that can be met with a 30-day suspension and fine. However, trainers who pick up four of those violations over a five-year period may be suspended up to two years.

And any positive drug test will result in automatic disqualification of that horse from a race.

“For the integrity of racing from the results standpoint, the disqualification of the horse is automatic,” said Muir. “We would take into consideration any mitigating circumstances, with respect to the fine or suspension.”

The days of Bute overages being looked upon as minor violations akin to a parking ticket will be over. Trainers who have been willing to take an edge or have sloppy medication oversight will need to clean up their acts.

A key element of HISA's anti-doping program will be intelligence and investigations that result in “non-analytical” cases where the evidence is something other than a positive drug test.

“The Navarro indictment showed that they were using things they know or believe not to be detectable by current testing methods,” Tygart said. “So if you say you have to have a positive test to be held accountable, you've just given a license to people to go use things there aren't tests for, because science is limited to a certain extent.”

Tygart and Muir both believe whistleblowers will be an important part of the program and said USADA has been receiving tips on wrongdoing for several years since the agency was first mentioned as part of the federal legislation. The draft regulations include language protecting whistleblowers and charging anyone who intimidates a whistleblower.

“The principle there is it takes a community of people who benefit from having good rules that protect their rights,” Tygart said. “Hopefully they will trust whoever the enforcement agency is. If it's us, we will work hard to gain that trust like we have in our human sports to bring forward information and then act appropriately based on that information.”

Long delays in the resolution of cases is another problem the current system has permitted through appeals to the commission and the civil courts. Under HISA, all “covered persons” (including trainers) will need to register with the Authority and in so doing agree to the rules, including an arbitration process that Tygart said has worked well with human athletes. USADA enforces medication rules for Olympic athletes and UFC fighters, among others.

“There are so many loopholes in how the current system works and (trainers and their attorneys) can win,” Tygart said. “Part of this process is to shut the legal, technical loopholes that people can exploit. My guess is a lot of the defense counsels out there who have made a living out of trying those cases are going to be frustrated because they are not going to win many cases, as they shouldn't. Justice should be served, and we don't look at that as a win or a loss.”

As such, under the proposed rules, if a trainer and USADA do not come to a mutual agreement on a resolution and sanctions for any violations, the case goes to an impartial arbitrator or independent steward panel, to determine an outcome.

“We resolve 95% or more of our cases in the human program (without going to arbitration),” Tygart said. “That's historically true because people know that if you break the rule, we're going to be fair in the ultimate consequence and take into consideration the individual facts to get to a fair outcome. People recognize that if you do something wrong, the best thing that you can do, honestly, is to take responsibility for it and not waste your time or their time to get to the inevitable. … People are willing to forgive and move on. What people don't like is those who make excuses or continue to lie or try to cover up their doping, and I think that principle will play very well here because the rules are not going to allow people to exploit them in the way they are currently being exploited.”

Tygart added, “When you sign up to be a 'covered person,' you agree to the rules of the game. If you don't like the rules, you don't have to play.”

Racing has needed a new sheriff for some time. It may finally have found one.

That's my view from the eighth pole

The post View From the Eighth Pole: A New Sheriff In Town? appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights