kentucky horse racing commission | Horse Racing Free Tips

Clenbuterol Concerns Raised At Kentucky Equine Drug Research Council Meeting

The Kentucky Equine Drug Research Council (EDRC) is considering additional restrictions on clenbuterol use in the state after hair testing reveals widespread use in horses placed on the veterinarian's list after this year's federal indictments.

Dr. Bruce Howard, equine medical director for the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission, revealed at an EDRC meeting Sept. 11 that “a near 100 percent rate” of horses based in Kentucky had shown signs of clenbuterol administration on hair testing. Further, treatment sheets submitted to the KHRC as part of veterinary reporting regulations have shown instances of veterinarians prescribing the drug to entire stables.

“The KHRC office has received concerns from numerous trainers and owners who feel that clenbuterol is being misused,” said Howard, who pointed out California, Maryland, Canada, and Florida all have or are validating rules for a longer withdrawal time than Kentucky's.

Clenbuterol is a beta-2 agonist drug most commonly prescribed as a bronchodilator for horses dealing with breathing issues. As a beta-2 agonist however, it also has the side effect of repartitioning — converting slow-twitch muscle fibers to fast-twitch muscle fibers, which has a similar result to an anabolic steroid.

Currently, Kentucky regulations state clenbuterol may not be given closer than 14 days pre-race. Howard suggested pushing the timeframe back to 21 days pre-race and requiring blood and urine tests after a reported administration before the horse could return to the entry box.

But Standardbred representatives at the meeting, which was held by video conference, raised objections. Because harness horses race so frequently, they claim the 14-day timeline already makes it difficult for veterinarians to prescribe the drug to Standardbreds. Widening the gap further will exacerbate the problem.

“People will refuse appropriate treatment of their horses because of the long withdrawal period,” said council member Dr. Andy Roberts, referring to Standardbred horsemen. “It is not abused in the Standardbred sport to speak of. We have a four-day withdrawal period in the state of Ohio and you don't see horses shipping in from Ohio and just knocking people's heads in. It's really not an issue.

“I think the discussion on this drug has long been a case of people feeling like they're getting beat by somebody else when they're using this drug and I don't think there's any scientific fact that details that. As a matter of fact, the repartitioning effect, when you take the drug away, is very quickly reversed.”

Howard pointed out his intention by suggesting a longer withdrawal time was not to remove veterinarians' ability to treat horses, only to encourage responsible use.

Dr. Naveed Chowhan, chair of the EDRC, questioned whether the committee could recommend separate regulation for the breeds to the commission. Council member Dr. Jim Morehead indicated he thought this was a dangerous precedent to set.

The matter has been tabled for now.

Also at Friday's meeting, the council heard a presentation from ReCellerate, the makers of Equiflow aerosol mist. Equiflow is a non-drug biologic which is supposed to help repair damage from severe incidents of exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage (EIPH) and reduce incidents of bleeding without the use of Lasix. The substance, which is administered as an inhalant, is concentrated protein serum harvested from stem cell collection from donor horses.

ReCellerate representatives sought to get permission from the EDRC and KHRC to allow veterinarians to prescribe the substance to active racehorses in controlled conditions to get a better sense of its efficacy. The product is in the process of getting approval as a drug by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); use of any non-FDA approved substance in a competing horse is required by rule to be approved by the commission.

Council members were interested in Equiflow's initally-promising results, but some voiced concerns about the challenges of getting a biologic product approved by the FDA as a drug, since it's derived from different donor horses at different times in different collections. ReCellerate representatives assured the council that along with safety and efficacy, uniformity was part of the FDA's rubric for approval.

The council also heard an update on plans for Kentucky to participate in a multi-state study on Lasix use as the state has begun its first year of a partial raceday Lasix phaseout. Initial study plans are in the works to collect video scopes on horses running with raceday and non-raceday Lasix, as well as blood samples to look for inflammatory biomarkers that could be related to EIPH incidents. Drs. Will Farmer, equine medical director for Churchill Downs Inc. and Stuart Brown, equine safety director for Keeneland, indicated the study plans are not yet ready for submission to the EDRC as part of a funding request, as organizers are still working out what the cost would be to each participating entity. The current study design would compare scopes and samples from Maryland, Kentucky, California, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware.

The post Clenbuterol Concerns Raised At Kentucky Equine Drug Research Council Meeting appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Kentucky: Lasix, New Medication Rules Take Effect As Legislative Committee Declines Action

The Kentucky Legislature's Interim Joint Committee on Licensing, Occupations, and Administrative Regulations heard debate about the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission's new medication rules on Tuesday, the most controversial of which is the regulation prohibiting race-day Lasix in 2-year-olds this year.

According to bloodhorse.com, the committee declined to take action to stop the regulations, allowing the new rules to take effect immediately.

Tracks in Kentucky have implemented no-Lasix for 2-year-olds this year via house rule, but now the regulation is a part of the KHRC regulatory standard. Dr. Bruce Howard, KHRC equine medical director, told the committee that of 60 juvenile races with a total of 532 starters, only one horse had been observed or reported to have bled from the nostrils.

“Eighty-nine percent of the 2-year-olds showed no evidence of blood in their airways and only two out of the 47 scoped showed anything more than a trace of blood,” Dr. Howard said, referring to a week-long study at Keeneland during the summer meet.

The Lasix ban will extend to all graded stakes races in 2021.

Earlier this year, the Kentucky Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association filed suit against the tracks that first implemented the new regulations. The suit is ongoing.

Additional rules included in the new KHRC regulations include: a pushback of non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) from 24 hours to 48 hours before post time, a rule against stacking NSAIDs, a pushback of intra-articular corticosteroids to 14 days prior to race day, a rule requiring trainers or owners to submit 14 days' worth of a horse's medical records to the commission prior to race day, elimination of bisphosphonates in racing and in horses younger than 4 years old, and a rule requiring a horse be examined by an attending veterinarian in addition to a commission veterinarian pre-race.

Kentucky Legislative Committee Approves Partial Lasix Ban

The Kentucky Legislature’s Interim Joint Committee on Licensing, Occupations, and Administrative Regulations met Tuesday and took measures that allowed regulations that ban the use of Lasix in 2-year-old races this year and also in graded stakes next year to go into effect.

The committee did not hold a vote, a procedure that produced the same results as if had voted to approve the regulations.

Tuesday’s hearing was the latest in what has been a contentious battle between pro and anti-Lasix forces in Kentucky, a fight that may now be over as the committee has the final say on racing regulations in the state.

The Kentucky tracks are among a number of racing jurisdictions that have taken steps to cut back on the use of the controversial drug that is used to control bleeding.

Led by the Kentucky HBPA and the National HBPA, the pro-Lasix forces expressed their displeasure with how the meeting was handled. Each side was allowed only one witness. Dr. Clara Fenger, who spoke on behalf of the horsemen, said she was told that each side was allowed to have three speakers. She also said her testimony was cut off before she had a chance to read her entire statement.

“This was a done deal and we had no shot,” Fenger said. “We knew that going in.”

Committee member Damon Thayer, who is the majority floor leader, said there was nothing unusual about the number of people who were permitted to speak.

“Both sides had equal time to present their case, including the racing commission and a representative of the HBPA and some veterinarians,” Thayer said. “Their complaints are much ado about nothing. This was just the final obligatory step in a long process that has included two meetings of the equine drug research council, meetings of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission and public comments periods that every regulation has to go through. There’s really nothing to that complaint. This is the process that every regulation goes through and there was nothing abnormal about it.”

Fenger, a practicing vet in Central Kentucky, said that any steps to cut back on the use of Lasix would be detrimental to the overall health of the horse.

“The banning of the therapeutic medication, Lasix, is one of the most dangerous proposals ever concocted by our racing commissioners,” she said. “Two horses perished from exercise induced pulmonary hemorrhage in Kentucky since the KHRC has begun posting these deaths on their website. Banning Lasix in any group of horses will guarantee a higher number of such deaths.”

Dr. Bruce Howard, the equine medical director for the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission, was the lone speaker allowed to talk on behalf of the proposed new medication rules.

“By adopting this compromise and moving away from the use of race day furosemide we can come into alignment with the rest of the racing world and help lessen the negative public perception that exists surrounding medication issues in racing,” Howard said. “We will minimize the argument that furosemide enhances performance by causing fluid elimination which reduces a horses weight by an estimated 10 to 20 pounds.”

Howard added that there have been 60 2-year-old races run so far this year in Kentucky without Lasix and that out of 532 starters only one had been observed bleeding from the nostrils after the race.

“This is a compromise between those who want to eliminate Lasix all together and those who want to keep the status quo,” Thayer said. “I think it is a good compromise, by eliminating Lasix use in 2 year-old-races and stakes races. It’s a good starting point for other states to consider and I am happy that Kentucky is leading the way. As the great Lasix debate rages I’d like to think this is a good middle ground.”

Lasix was not the only medication dealt with in the new regulations. New rules include a ban on bisphosphonate use in horses under 4-years-old; non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), may be given no closer than 48 hours pre-race instead of 24; the race day use of electronic therapeutics has been banned; trainers must make veterinary records available if they are asked for by racing officials.

The post Kentucky Legislative Committee Approves Partial Lasix Ban 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: Jerry Brown’s Opening Statement in KHRC Lasix Hearing

Editor’s Note: Tuesday, the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission will hold a hearing before the Joint Committee on Licensing, Occupations, regarding the proposed amended regulation which would partially ban the use of Lasix at Kentucky tracks. The proposed ban would include all 2-year-old horses racing in Kentucky this year and be extended to stakes races in 2021, and is being advanced by a national coalition of racetracks and other racing organizations that includes all of Kentucky’s racetrack operators. On June 1, Franklin (Ky) Circuit Court Judge Thomas Wingate denied a motion by the Kentucky Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association (KHBPA) that sought a temporary injunction that would have kept Churchill Downs and Keeneland from running Lasix-free 2-year-old races, ruling that the KHBPA had no standing in the case. He later vacated that ruling to give the organization time to address the issue of standing. Jerry Brown, the president of Thoro-Graph, will be called as one of the witnesses by the KHBPA to represent the interest of bettors. Brown provided the TDN with the opening statement he plans to make.

Mr. Chairman and other distinguished members of this Committee, thank you for the opportunity to address you in opposition to the proposed amendments to 810 KAR 8:010 Section 6 partially banning the use of furosemide (commonly called “Lasix”). I am the President of Thoro-Graph Inc., which publishes proprietary data used by high-end horseplayers and horsemen around the country. We currently have about 3,000 active customers who bet several times the national average. I personally bet seven figures annually, and some of our customers wager through a joint pari-mutuel venture we have with the New York Racing Association that will handle $25 million this year.

The first thing I need to make clear is that I am not pro-drug; in fact, just the opposite. No one has been fighting longer or harder than I have to stop the use of performance-enhancing drugs in our industry. That’s why The Jockey Club invited me to assist them when they took on the issue with their Safety and Integrity Committee back in 2008, and in the next few weeks will be announcing a new project using our data to identify potential drug cheaters.

Having said that: being pro-Lasix is not being pro-drug. Legal use of Lasix is an entirely separate issue from illegal use of Performance Enhancing Drugs (PEDs). There is no serious claim that Lasix causes unsoundness or other damage to racehorses, in fact, to the contrary, it helps the ones who need it stay healthy. There is also not, to my knowledge, even any claim of a benefit to the business of racing that would come from banning Lasix, let alone any evidence that would back up that claim.

The idea seems to be that they race without Lasix in Europe, so we should. Well, American dirt racing is much different than the grass racing they have over there. In those races they gallop along early and only run full out the last part of the race. Here, on dirt, they are going close to full blast the whole way–every horse in dirt races is tired and decelerating in the stretch, even the ones that make up ground. Running that way causes far more stress on the horses, and horsemen will tell you that bleeding is caused by stress.

The reason racing works as a business is because of wagering. Bettors pay directly for the purses the horses race for, and thus indirectly for the paychecks of everyone in the industry, including ultimately commercial breeders, who only have a market for their products because buyers have an opportunity to race for those purses. And the reason racing is so heavily regulated is those bettors have to be protected, so that they can have confidence the game they are playing is fair and will continue to provide the revenue stream for our industry.

If Lasix is banned, more horses will bleed during races, and it will cause them not to be able to run to their ability. That’s a fact that nobody even disputes. As a result, there will be no way anyone handicapping races will have any idea when that will happen, or to which horses. And they also won’t know whether a horse that ran poorly last time did so because he bled, unless he did so visibly, so there will be no way to know how that horse will run today. And there are only two possibilities–he will run again untreated for bleeding, which is bad not only for the horse but for the betting public, or he will be treated with something else, legal or illegal. But unlike with Lasix, which is listed in the program, the public won’t know the horse’s status, or how to evaluate him, in either case.

Do you know who will? There are people who pay for information like that, and bet accordingly. They will effectively be insider trading–which is exactly the kind of thing regulation of racing is meant to avoid, and instead we will be creating a market for it. Get ready for horses coming off a terrible performance and listed at 20-1 getting bet down to 2-1, and winning by 10 lengths. And get ready for the backlash when honest bettors get upset about it, and take their money elsewhere, to games where they think they get a fair shake.

When Lasix was first used to treat bleeders, those were the kind of jump-ups and betting coups we saw, and it’s the reason Lasix quickly became the only drug listed in the program. For bettors, that’s the Good Housekeeping Seal Of Approval–it tells them the horse will get every chance to run up to its natural level of ability that day. And that is why I have never heard a horseplayer say they will bet more if Lasix is banned–and many, like me, will bet less. As in business, uncertainty hinders investment–and in this case, that investment is wagering.

A point about “optics”: Some people apparently think that banning Lasix will make our game look better to the public, and to PETA. Those people have never seen a horse bleed badly, like Demons Begone did on national TV in the 1987 Derby, when he came back to be unsaddled with blood all over him. If you saw it, you won’t forget it. And in today’s environment, all it takes is that happening once, at any track, on any day, if someone with a cell phone is nearby to take a picture. The photo would quickly be on the PETA calendar. And what happens if the horse in front in the Derby bleeds, chokes and stops, with 19 horses right behind him, on national TV? PETA won’t be calling for the return of Lasix. They will be calling for a ban of racing.

Finally, I would like to say that the Lasix issue is being presented as a false choice–either everyone gets to race on it, or it gets banned. The goal should be to let the horses who need medicine have it, and to not have the others race on it. This can be done by having the state vets examine horses to certify they really are bleeders and therefore eligible for Lasix, which was the original rule, and by taking away the incentive to use Lasix if you don’t need it, by having those that do use it carry a weight penalty. If this issue is dealt with sensibly, within a couple of years you can have the vast majority of horses racing without Lasix.

Jerry Brown

The post Letter to the Editor: Jerry Brown’s Opening Statement in KHRC Lasix Hearing appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post