HIWU’s Scollay: New Medication Rules ‘Your New Bible’

Despite all the legal jockeying these past few weeks and months, the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act's (HISA) anti-doping and medication control program still appears set for launch on Jan. 1 in the vast majority of states that conduct pari-mutuel wagering.

This means on the first day of 2023, thousands of trainers, veterinarians and other backstretch workers must grapple with a new set of rules guiding how and when to administer a set of everyday medications–the list of which can be found here–to avoid falling foul of a post-race and out-of-competition positive.

Is there much of a difference between the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ACRI)'s current therapeutic medication schedule and that as outlined by the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU)?

Turns out there is–one that, in short, boils down to the differences between the current world of withdrawal guidelines and thresholds, and the looming system of detection times and screening limits.

“There is a substantial difference and if the terms are used interchangeably, there is a profound risk of a medication violation,” warned Mary Scollay, chief of science at HIWU, established by Drug Free Sport International.

Some of the key points as Jan. 1 looms large:

 

  • Detection times do not necessarily provide an accurate medication withdrawal guide;

 

  • New screening limits will require different administration protocols;

 

  • There will be no enforcement “grace period” for stakeholders to adjust.

 

  • This different medication schedule will require adjustments well before Jan. 1;

 

Withdrawal Guidelines vs. Detection Times

Traditionally, withdrawal guidelines are based on administration studies with a “statistically derived margin of safety built in,” said Scollay.

“The idea is that if you follow the administration protocol described in the study–dose, route of administration–and you comply with the withdrawal guidance,” said Scollay, “you should have a high degree of confidence that you will not have a medication violation.”

In other words, withdrawal guidelines provide a reliable cut-off point to administer a medication to avoid post-race positives.

This is in contrast to detection times under HISA, calculated through studies on a group of horses administered a certain medication.

These horses are then tested to determine the earliest time the drug is eliminated from all the horses' systems–a level below either the lowest concentration identified by the laboratory or below a defined screening limit.

This means that detection times “do not have any margin of safety calculated in,” warned Scollay. “It is the starting point for determining a withdrawal interval. So, the burden for establishing an appropriate withdrawal interval for medication now lies exclusively with the horses' connections.”

In any of these given studies, for example, the horses may metabolize drugs at different speeds–and potentially quicker than a racehorse given the same drug at the same dose.

Studies with a very small cohort of horses–like hydroxyzine, with a detection time of 96 hours from a study with only two horses–provide another reason why detection times can provide a very thin margin of error.

Imagine a study testing a doorframe set at six feet, explained one regulatory veterinarian. If the study participants are all under six foot, no problem. But what about all the six-foot plus individuals not studied?

For practicing veterinarians accustomed to concrete withdrawal times, therefore, this constitutes a sea-change in the way medications can be safely prescribed and administered to avoid costly post-race positives.

“There's no easy answer to this,” admitted Scollay. “I fully understand what a philosophical change this is, and yes, I understand that the vets can feel like they're flying blind right now.”

Aim of Schedule

Aside from a select few substances–like electrolytes, orally administered vitamins and anti-ulcer medications which can be administered up to 24-hours before a race–there is a mandatory 48-hour restricted administration time for all controlled medications.

For a number of these routine controlled medications, the dosage, withdrawal time and stipulated threshold in the current ARCI schedule are the same as the dosage, detection time and screening limits outlined by HIWU.

But where these differ, the differences might be subtle, easily over-looked. The ARCI's phenylbutazone threshold is 0.3 micrograms per millimeter, but is 0.2 micrograms per millimeter under HISA, for example–a small change with significant implications when it comes to its use in the days prior to a race. What's more, Scollay is unable to provide veterinarians and horsemen with specific withdrawal numbers. “HIWU and HISA are not in a position to provide withdrawal guidance,” she said. “I cannot say, 'I think you're going to be fine if you back out to 82 hours.'”

Things can get even trickier when HIWU provides zero dosage, detection time and screening limit guidance on a drug listed on the controlled medication list. But that doesn't necessarily mean veterinarians and trainers are indeed “flying blind.”

The corticosteroid betamethasone has no dosage or detection time listed, but it comes with a Restricted Administration Time (RAT) to race of 14 days (7 days for a work).

The Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac–commonly found in a topical ointment to treat swelling and inflammation–similarly has no listed dosage and detection time.

As Scollay explains, that's because the process of calculating elimination times in an ointment–and therefore, one routinely applied in wildly different amounts to different parts of the body–is extremely difficult.

But this underscores, she said, the overarching aim of the new medication schedule–to foster a more conservative approach to veterinary medicine.

If diclofenac is used to treat a problematic joint, said Scollay, “from my perspective, once you've got that joint quieted down, I think you'd still want to assess that horse's response to treatment and assess the horse's recovery by breezing him.

“And so, you're not talking about ceasing treatment on a specific joint that has been inflamed and problematic going into a race in three days.”

In other words, if a topical diclofenac ointment is being used to treat certain musculoskeletal problems, then racing probably shouldn't be on the horse's imminent agenda, said Scollay.

Clearance Testing

More broadly, there's a very rough rule-of-thumb when it comes to calculating withdrawal times. One is that a short detection time is typically indicative of fast elimination from the system, said Scollay.

“But if something takes 96 hours to clear, I would be more conservative because I know it clears slowly,” said Scollay, speculating that “if I add just 24 hours onto that, I may not have allowed enough time for it to clear.”

But perhaps the most accurate guide for veterinarians and trainers concerned about a positive test, said Scollay, would be to conduct “clearance testing” well before race-day–a service provided through HIWU.

“We'll collect the sample from the horse, and then send it to the laboratory that's doing the testing. The trainer would have to provide information about the treatment, the drug, the dose, the frequency–when it was halted,” said Scollay.

It's not a free service, however.

“I don't know what that fee is yet,” Scollay added. “That would be paid for by the horse's connections.”

Importantly, the new controlled medication rules are primarily germane to post-race testing, not HISA's out-of-competition testing program, which is largely focused on banned substances.

That said, the new rules prohibit the presence of more than one NSAID or corticosteroid in both post-race and post-work samples–a prohibition designed to nix the practice of “stacking.”

HIWU's new common controlled medication list provides secondary detection times for three common NSAIDS, to help avoid a stacking offense.

Enforcement

Though the new drug rules might prove a marked change from the current status-quo, don't expect an enforcement grace period for stakeholders to acclimatize to their new regulatory expectations.

“The regulations don't provide for it,” said Scollay, categorically.

So, what are some of the implications for a positive of a controlled substance? An outline of the sanctions can be found here.

The majority of post-race positives are for everyday therapeutic medications–like phenylbutazone, a class C controlled drug, a first time positive for which would result in a fine of up to $500 and the automatic disqualification of the horse.

Which leads to another question: Who will be held responsible in the event of a positive?

The ultimate-insurer rule places the burden of responsibility on the shoulders of the trainer. But in the language of the law, there appears to be room for the veterinarian (and perhaps others) to be similarly held culpable.

As Scollay describes it, such a scenario would be case-specific. “The facts of the case would have to determine who else might be complicit,” she said. “To be fair, if it's an overage of a medication one would say, 'well, the vet didn't administer that without the trainer's knowledge and consent.'”

And so, when should veterinarians, trainers and others start applying these new controlled medication rules?

Given the 14-day stand down on all intra-articular injections–along with a 15-day detection time for the NSAID firocoxib–Scollay recommends familiarization with, and application of, the new rules as soon as possible, to avoid regulatory consequences come Jan. 1.

In other words, if trainers and veterinarians are deciding on withdrawal decisions after a horse is entered to race after Jan. 1, “they've waited too long,” said Scollay.

“I think more important is for veterinarians and trainers to review the document together and develop a shared approach to interpreting detection times,” she said. “And there is no time like the present for that.”

Education

Between now and Jan. 1, HIWU will apparently be releasing educational materials aimed towards regulatory and practicing veterinarians, and the trainers themselves.

Another intended event, said Scollay, is a webinar with a noted European veterinarian to explain how detection times and screening limits translate in Europe, where they've been in effect for much longer. Scollay was unable to provide details about then that might be, however.

The Racing Medication and Testing Consortium (RMTC) can act as an information intermediary, said Scollay, who added that industry stakeholders can contact her directly with any drug-related questions.

She also recommends printing off HIWU's controlled medication list—once again linked to here–before laminating and pinning it to the barn wall.

“I've been using the 'L' word every chance I can get. Laminate it, put it on your clipboard. Give them to your staff. That's your new bible,” Scollay said.

“There's no easy answer to this other than be more conservative and be more cautious of medication than you have been,” she said. “And ask yourself, 'does this horse really need it?'”

The post HIWU’s Scollay: New Medication Rules ‘Your New Bible’ appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Letter to the Editor: Sport of Kings vs. King of Sports

by Ken Lowe

(TDN is re-running this letter to the editor, which originally appeared in Wednesday's newsletter, due to editing errors).

There were many empty seats at the table when HISA was invented, that being “Middle America Racing”, comprised of almost every jurisdiction between “the moon (California) and New York City (NYJC).” Now, being “blue collar horse folks,” we all know it takes three (3) legs for a stool and in this “fixed race” it was Kentucky. Throw kerosene on the flames, when certain trainers were indicted by the Feds and…as Fred Capossela and Costy Caras echoed, “It's now POST TIME!”

For years, horse racing was sometimes called the “sport of kings” but more appropriately resembles the “king of sports.” Few have billions of dollars to purchase a professional franchise, but actually every Thoroughbred owner has their own professional sports team. An athlete (horse), coach (trainer), quarterback (jockey), athletic trainer (veterinarian), and other similarities including a team name (Seabiscuit), uniform (colors) plus you can legally wager on your own team, (Pete Rose), now that's Americana.

Reading the Small Business Administration Act (1953), an act of congress, one could conclude that every owner/trainer in this country is a small business. The SBA was created as an independent agency of the federal government “to aid, counsel, assist, and protect the interests of small business concerns; preserves free competitive enterprise; and maintain and strengthen the overall economy of our nation. Small businesses fuel economic growth by insuring job opportunities and raising employment rates.”

The U.S. government often favors small businesses with incentives, tax cuts, grants, and good access to help to keep them competitive. Now that's more Americana.

But, “Whoa, Nellie!” Does HISA interfere with the SBA Act (1953) causing potential ending, hardships, unemployment, etc., to the racing industry? Is this government overreach, personified only to be overturned by the courts (Appeals and U.S. Supreme Court) as unconstitutional? Where in the U.S. Constitution does it allow to be formed an ill-conceived, forced mandate with little input by the industry, especially the hard-working horse caring and loving persons, numbering tens of thousands of people and thousands of horses potentially, in “Middle America Racing?” Folks up at 4-5 a.m., 6-7 days a week, calloused hands, stiff backs, and “boots on the ground,” who never had a say. That's not Americana!

The elimination of Middle America Racing will occur with the prohibition of Lasix, an approved medication for humans and equine. If you ever witnessed a horse bleed, you would condone the use of the diuretic. Humans take Lasix in tablet form. Reduce the public perception of treating horses with a “syringe?” and conclude, “there is no medical evidence that Lasix is harmful or a masking agent for horses” and Middle America Racing will continue….otherwise, it's the Golden Rule: “He with the gold makes the rules and that is anything but American!”

All across the United States, this wonderful Constitutional Republic, founded on a capitalist economic system, the end of racing by eliminating Lasix with an unfounded mandate, threatens all but the high echelon of the industry and we deserve better. Remember this quote from “Seabiscuit” the movie: “They say my horse is too small, my jockey's too big, my trainer's too old, and I'm too dumb to know it!” Well, the “racing heart of America” does know it and HISA should be on an indefinite hold until all the voices have a chance to be heard, the true facts known, and we all get along together, with the care and safety of horses and humans finishing first in every race. Now that's the Americana we all hope for!

Ken Lowe spent his earliest years around horses, began working in the mutuels at Charles Town in his teens until he graduated from Shepherd College, Shepherdstown, WV. He “scratched” the idea of attending law school and attended the New York Jockey Club School for Racing Officials, where twice Mr. Kenny Noe asked him to stay and work with the NYRA as a racing official. After years as a successful businessman, he became an owner and breeder within the Mid-Atlantic region. He served as President of the CTHBPA and is now serving as Chairman, WV Racing Commission, and RCI Board of Directors

The post Letter to the Editor: Sport of Kings vs. King of Sports appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Weekly Rulings: Nov. 22-28

Every week, the TDN publishes a round-up of key official rulings from the primary tracks within the four major racing jurisdictions of California, New York, Florida and Kentucky.

Here's a primer on how each of these jurisdictions adjudicates different offenses, what they make public (or not) and where.

With the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) having gone into effect on July 1, the TDN will also post a round-up of the relevant HISA-related rulings from the same week.

CALIFORNIA
Track: Del Mar
Date: 11/26/2022
Licensee: Abdul Alsagoor, jockey
Penalty: Three-day suspension
Violation: Careless riding
Explainer: Apprentice Jockey Abdul Alsagoor, who rode Mastermind in the third race at Del Mar Race Track on Friday, November 25, 2022, is suspended for 3 racing days (December 3, 4 and 9, 2022) for failure to maintain a straight course in the stretch and causing interference. This constitutes a violation of California Horse Racing Board rule #1699 (Riding Rules – Careless Riding).

Track: Del Mar
Date: 11/26/2022
Licensee: Hector Berrios, jockey
Penalty: Three-day suspension
Violation: Careless riding
Explainer: Jockey Hector Berrios who rode Sunshine Babe in the fifth race at Del Mar Race Track on November 25, 2022, is suspended for 3 racing days (December 3, 4 and 9, 2022) for failure to make the proper effort to maintain a straight course in the stretch, causing interference which resulted in the disqualification of his mount from first to second place. This constitutes a violation of California Horse Racing Board rule #1699 (Riding Rules – Careless Riding).

FLORIDA
Track: Gulfstream Park
Date: 11/22/2022
Licensee: Victor Barboza, trainer
Penalty: $500 fine and 15-day suspension
Violation: Medication violation
Explainer: Steward's Ruling Final Order # 2022-025402 – F.S. 550.2415 violation + 2-(hydroxyethyl) promazine sulfoxide. $500 Fine imposed and due to GSP/BOR by 12/7/22; Purse to be returned by Owners; and 15 day Susp to be served 12/15/22 through and including 12/29/22.

NEW YORK
Track: Aqueduct
Date: 11/26/2022
Licensee: Jalon Samuel, jockey
Penalty: Seven-day suspension
Violation: careless riding
Explainer: You are hereby suspended Seven (7) NYRA racing days for careless riding on November 18,2022 during the running of the 6th race at Aqueduct Racetrack.

Track: Aqueduct
Date: 11/26/2022
Licensee: Omar Hernandez Moreno, jockey
Penalty: Three-day suspension
Violation: Careless riding
Explainer: For having waived his right to appeal, Jockey Omar Hernandez Moreno is hereby suspended three (3) NYRA racing days, December 3,2022, December 4, 2022 and December 8, 2022 for careless riding on November 18, 2022 during the running of the 8th race at Aqueduct Racetrack.

NEW HISA STEWARDS RULINGS
The following rulings were reported on HISA's “rulings” portal, except for the voided claim rulings which were sent to the TDN directly.

Violations of Crop Rule
Golden Gate Fields
Kevin Radke–violation date November 25; $250 fine and one-day suspension, seven strikes; Appealed, stay granted

Remington Park
Weston Hamilton–violation date November 25; $250 fine and one-day suspension, eight strikes
Voided Claims
Hawthorne
Lord Dylan–ruling date November 20, 2022
Maystart–ruling date November 25, 2022

Parx Racing
Iconic Legacy–ruling date November 22, 2022
Emma and I–ruling date November 23, 2022

Penn National
Commissioner Biggs–ruling date November 23, 2022

The post Weekly Rulings: Nov. 22-28 appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

HISA Opponents Spar On Fifth Circuit’s Unconstitutionality Ruling

With the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit set to hear oral arguments Dec. 7 in a case that seeks to reverse a lower court's decision to dismiss a constitutional challenge of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA), the two opposing sides have filed new documentation pertaining to a separate but related Nov. 18 decision by the Fifth Circuit that did, in fact, declare HISA unconstitutional.

Although it's tough at this stage to get a consensus on what might happen with HISA over the next six weeks until an expected Jan. 10 mandate gets issued by the Fifth Circuit to enforce its order (petitions for legal stays, rehearings, or potential actions by Congress are all in play), there is one issue that HISA proponents and opponents seem to agree on: If the Sixth Circuit renders an opinion that is in direct conflict with the one the Fifth Circuit just came up with, HISA's fate could very well end up getting decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the Sixth Circuit case, the plaintiffs are the state of Louisiana; Oklahoma and its racing commission, plus West Virginia and its racing commission. Three Oklahoma tracks-Remington Park, Will Rogers Downs, and Fair Meadows-are also plaintiffs, as are the Oklahoma Quarter Horse Association, the U.S. Trotting Association, and Hanover Shoe Farms, a Pennsylvania Standardbred breeding entity.

The defendants are the United States of America, the HISA Authority, and six individuals acting in their official capacities for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

On Apr. 26, 2021, the plaintiffs had sued, alleging that “HISA gives a private corporation broad regulatory authority.” On June 2, 2022, that claim was dismissed by a judge in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky (Lexington) for failure to state a claim of action. The plaintiffs then appealed to the U.S. Sixth Circuit.

While that Sixth Circuit appeal was pending, the Fifth Circuit came out with its decision in the similar case against HISA that was led by the National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (NHBPA).

That Nov. 18 ruling stated that HISA is unconstitutional because it “delegates unsupervised government power to a private entity,” and thus “violates the private non-delegation doctrine.” The order remanded the case back to U.S. District Court (Northern District of Texas) for “further proceedings consistent with” the Appeals Court's reversal.

So naturally, both parties prepping for the Dec. 7 oral arguments in the Sixth Circuit case wanted to let that court know of this similar U.S. Appeals Court order, with each side putting its own spin on the recently issued unconstitutionality decision.

The plaintiffs/appellants led off with a Nov. 21 filing.

“The Fifth Circuit reversed the Northern District of Texas's decision on which Defendants-Appellees and the district court below relied, and the court emphatically rejected the very arguments that Defendants-Appellees assert in defense of HISA here,” the document stated.

“The Fifth Circuit held that HISA violates the Constitution's private nondelegation doctrine because 'the Authority is not subordinate to the FTC' [and] 'Congress has given a private entity the last word over what rules govern our nation's Thoroughbred horseracing industry' [and the] 'Authority's power outstrips any private delegation the Supreme Court or our court has allowed.'”

The plaintiffs' filing summed up: “The Fifth Circuit cogently rejected all of the arguments that Defendants-Appellees' raise here. This Court should do the same and reverse the judgment of the district court.”

The U.S., HISA and FTC defendants had a different interpretation in their own Nov. 28 filing.

“The Fifth Circuit panel's decision to invalidate HISA rests on at least two fundamentally mistaken premises,” the pro-HISA reply stated.

“First, the panel determined that 'the FTC's consistency review does not include reviewing the substance of the rules themselves.' That is untrue: HISA requires the FTC to apply its independent judgment in reviewing the substance of all proposed rules for consistency with HISA's standards.

“Whether characterized as an exercise of policy discretion or evaluation for statutory compliance, the FTC (not the Authority) ultimately decides, e.g., if a proposed medication amount is 'the minimum necessary to address the diagnosed health concerns identified during the examination and diagnostic process,' or if a proposed racetrack-safety standard is 'consistent with the humane treatment of covered horses…'”

“Second, the panel determined that the FTC lacks power to modify HISA rules,” the pro-HISA filing continued. “That contradicts (without addressing) the FTC's interpretation of its independent rulemaking authority [and] turns constitutional avoidance on its head….”

The pro-HISA reply summed up: “For both reasons, the Fifth Circuit panel's decision is wrong-and stands at odds with not only the two other federal courts that have upheld HISA, but also 80 years of precedent from the Supreme Court [and] the courts of appeals.”

The post HISA Opponents Spar On Fifth Circuit’s Unconstitutionality Ruling appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights