PDA

View Full Version : Jumpers disqualified for doping ???



Nancy
Aug. 21, 2008, 12:58 PM
I only saw part of this ticker tape. Anyone know the details ??

actcasual
Aug. 21, 2008, 01:06 PM
By MARGARET FREEMAN Ž
Associated Press Writer Ž

HONG KONG (AP) — Four horses in the Olympic equestrian team jumping competition, including one from Norway’s bronze-medal team, have been provisionally suspended after testing positive for a banned pain reliever.
The drug test results — positive for capsaicin in each case — were announced Thursday afternoon by the sport’s international governing body.
The horse Camiro, ridden by Tony Andre Hansen, was part of Norway’s bronze-medal team, and the team could lose its medal. The other three horses are Ireland’s Lantinus, ridden by Dennis Lynch; Brazil’s Chupa Chup, ridden by Bernardo Alves; and Germany’s Coster, ridden by Christian Ahlmann.
Hansen, Lynch and Alves will not be allowed to ride in Thursday night’s individual competition. Ahlmann wasn’t entered in the event.
A second blood sample for each horse will be tested in an “accelerated procedure,” in the next two days, said FEI secretary general Alexander McLin.
Capsaicin, a derivative of chili peppers, is prohibited for its pain-relieving properties.
“I can’t tell how it was applied,” Paul Farrington of the FEI’s veterinary commission said. “It’s usually in a topical lotion or a paste. It’s not administered by mouth.”
He said 15 of 49 horses in the competition were randomly chosen for testing, including one from each team that won medals.

retreadeventer
Aug. 21, 2008, 01:37 PM
Calling capsaicin "doping" is just too much! It's a topical substance usually used to bring relief to tired muscles, a liniment, for goodness' sake. It's "hot". We used to use it on racehorses after warmup but before racing to keep the muscles warm and joints loose. It's a rub. I personally would feel it on my skin so I had to always put it on with rubber gloves. But other liniments didn't bother me as much so I knew it was the Capsaicin. I imagine it's used on the jumpers to get them to pick up their feet, since it's a heating rub -- it will get a horse to snapping its knees and hocks! Gotta be careful where you rub it! But doping, come on. Not hardly. It's just a liniment. About same as Bigeloil or something!

BLBGP
Aug. 21, 2008, 02:33 PM
But doping, come on. Not hardly. It's just a liniment. About same as Bigeloil or something!

Or maybe exactly the same, since apparently capsaican is in bigeloil.

shawneeAcres
Aug. 21, 2008, 03:42 PM
There is an indepth discussion on this forum about this "What is Capsacian?" (and soem usual mudslinging going on in there as well!). However, THis whole "doping" and drug testing stuff is getting WAY out of hand in my opinion. The problem is that many "banned substances" are in so MANY things that, if you go by FEI "no tolerance" rules, you would not be able to put nearly ANY topical product on your horse and not be able to feed him many of the supplements available today! I think there needs to be a compromise made somewhere at some point in this. Testing is becomign more and more sofisticated and more and more sensitive, so that very minute amounts of a substance can be detected. Although I doubt that this is what happened it is VERY possible that a groom could have handled a hrose, and have used a topical product such as ben-gay on himself and the horse licked his hand for crying out loud! I'm sorry but all of this has gone WAY over the top and it has gotten laughable what they will throw a horse out of competition for!

shea'smom
Aug. 21, 2008, 04:11 PM
I respectfully disagree.
IF_____ they used this product to increase the horses sensitivity to hitting rails, well.... that sucks. It needs investigating.

Fixerupper
Aug. 21, 2008, 04:16 PM
How can the same substance be banned for both 'pain relieving properties' and 'hypersensitization'... just saying

shawneeAcres
Aug. 21, 2008, 05:14 PM
I respectfully disagree.
IF_____ they used this product to increase the horses sensitivity to hitting rails, well.... that sucks. It needs investigating.

I am not talking about this aprticular substance, except to say that this substance could ahve inadvertently shown up in a blood test and been adminstered some other way. No one has actually ADMITTED to putting it on their legs. My point is that yes, some thigns ARE used to enhance performance, but sometimes things are innocently in another product, i.e. bigeloil contains capsacian. My point is that perhaps we need to be more specific in testing, looking at AMOUNTS of a substance and trying to determine WHERE the substance has been administered. It is hard for me to believe that someone would knowingly put this on a horses legs (much less four horses from different teams) KNOWING it is a banned substance and will be tested for. I really feel that it is more likely that four horses had some sort of a product used on them that was unknowingly producing these results. Of course, there are people who will do anything, but honestly there is NO WAY that most riders are going to knowingly allow a substance to be used that is going to test positive.

Mozart
Aug. 21, 2008, 05:15 PM
How can the same substance be banned for both 'pain relieving properties' and 'hypersensitization'... just saying

Because depending on how you use it, it can do both things.

Wellspotted
Aug. 21, 2008, 06:42 PM
If the people know a substance is banned, why do they use it?

Pony+ an inch
Aug. 21, 2008, 07:01 PM
If the people know a substance is banned, why do they use it?

Most of the time, they don't. Or, in Lynch's case, having been drug tested numerous times before while using the ointment, blood tests have always come back negative. Only this time, either they were specifically looking for capsaicin or there was enough capsaicin in Latinus' blood stream to test positive. I'm personally of the opinion that the FEI (as well as USEF) really need to collaborate more with the int'l riders to come up with a better solution for "banned substances" and drug testing. There's still too much confusion and fuzziness. Gosh knows I barely understand it at times and have to take the trainer's word for it.

jdmcg
Aug. 21, 2008, 07:19 PM
You people are amazing! When it is a Tennessee Walking Horse being tested with a sniffer for foreign substances, many of you say, hooray. When the shoe is on the other foot, well, well, well.
There is press all over the United States about the horrible practices of the TWH trainers, using caustic chemicals to enhance the gait of the horses. But when jumpers are "enhanced" with something to magnify the pain of a hit, that's different?
The Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration is going on as we speak. The trainers KNOW that every horse entered in competition will be examined, palpated, sniffed and now infrared analysis tested. Yet many still accuse the trainers of using chemical agents to sore the horses, carte blanche. Come on, give me a break. The 97% compliance rate going into the Celebration is not good enough for some folks. What is the compliance rate with the Olympic horses?
If a substance is banned, it is banned. If it is in a product commonly used, that is no excuse for its use, period. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

jetsmom
Aug. 21, 2008, 09:27 PM
Capsacian is in Black as Knight and Paprika. It is also in many linaments. It doesn't stop them from hitting rails, make them pick up their legs higher, or anything else. It's 180 degrees different than what the TWH crowd sores with.

MissIndependence
Aug. 21, 2008, 09:46 PM
My understanding of FEI show jumping rules is that NOTHING can be used as a pain reliever or outside substance. No bute, banamine, etc - so nothing that can change the internal chemistry of the horse. Same at Young Riders. That's why it's so hard to do that level of competition. There are VERY few horses in the world that can jump those tracks for days on end and have NOTHING to offset the stress on their bodies other than ice, massage and some electro therapy treatments. If these people are at that level of competition - they (or members of their support teams) know what substances are banned - and it's their responsibility to stay away from them. Sorry.....but I'm continually amazed at the amount of "chemistry" that's applied to our sport on a daily basis.

BLBGP
Aug. 21, 2008, 09:50 PM
http://www.chronofhorse.com/index.php?cat=1212907081280700&ShowArticle_ID=1282108080439110

Siswai
Aug. 21, 2008, 09:55 PM
There are VERY few horses in the world that can jump those tracks for days on end and have NOTHING to offset the stress on their bodies other than ice, massage and some electro therapy treatments.

Hmmm. Slightly OT, but I think that if it's true that many horses get sore from competitions like those without the aid of bute or other medications, that is a MAJOR problem. Of course horses randomly can get sore whenever, but I think it is inethical to ask a horse to do something that has a relatively high chance of making them sore/lame/in pain as a result.

shawneeAcres
Aug. 21, 2008, 10:45 PM
Hmmm. Slightly OT, but I think that if it's true that many horses get sore from competitions like those without the aid of bute or other medications, that is a MAJOR problem. Of course horses randomly can get sore whenever, but I think it is inethical to ask a horse to do something that has a relatively high chance of making them sore/lame/in pain as a result.

My take on it (as well as my veterinarian's) is that EVERYTHING we ask a horse to do is not "natural" and going to cause wear and tear, stress and ultimately some discomfort. How many times have you worked out and had enough discomfort that you took ibuprofen, tylenol, aspirin or alleve??? Over time, jumping, dressage, reining etc, all of which are EXTREME sports on a horses body will have a detrimental effect to their joints and soft tissue. It is how we MANAGE these effects that determines (in my opionion) how "ethical" or how pain free our horses remain. I do not feel that JUDISCIOUS and LIMITED use of antiinflammatories, topical steroids like Surpass, adequan, joint injections and the like are a "MAJOR problem". They assist our horses in being able to perform to the optimum without discomfort. There is a LEVEL at which the use of such substances DOES become abusive, and in my opinion, THAT is the level at which we should be screening these equine atheletes. However, as long as the FEI continues a zero tolerance policy, they will fidn more and more substances to ban and it will become an increasingly complex issue for grooms, riders etc. to have to monitor

Carol Ames
Aug. 21, 2008, 11:14 PM
This not just a bit too much:no: bute, but, truly performance enhancing:yes: especially in jumpers!, no different than spiked poles or boots:o:mad:

Wellspotted
Aug. 21, 2008, 11:24 PM
You people are amazing! When it is a Tennessee Walking Horse being tested with a sniffer for foreign substances, many of you say, hooray. When the shoe is on the other foot, well, well, well.
There is press all over the United States about the horrible practices of the TWH trainers, using caustic chemicals to enhance the gait of the horses. But when jumpers are "enhanced" with something to magnify the pain of a hit, that's different?
The Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration is going on as we speak. The trainers KNOW that every horse entered in competition will be examined, palpated, sniffed and now infrared analysis tested. Yet many still accuse the trainers of using chemical agents to sore the horses, carte blanche. Come on, give me a break. The 97% compliance rate going into the Celebration is not good enough for some folks. What is the compliance rate with the Olympic horses?
If a substance is banned, it is banned. If it is in a product commonly used, that is no excuse for its use, period. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Well, but my goodness, TWHs aren't shown in the Olympics (at least not in TWH classes)! They're shown with artificially enhanced hooves/fancy padded shoes, etc.! Whereas here the discussion is about international-calibre, upper-level Olympic horses! A completely different species than the lowly local (read "US") TWH! When one is competing for one's country on the international stage, one is above mere competitors in breed shows.

(I hope you can pick up on my sarcasm here, jdmcg. ;) ) You are absolutely right. What's good for the goose ought to be good for the gander (or rather, what's bad for one is bad for all ...)

Pony + an inch (does that equal 14.3hh?)-- Thanks for your response. The situation does make more sense now to me, on one level, that is, if people don't know what is banned, or how much, how can they know what not to use? I had thought it was more clear cut, i.e., a published list of banned substances and amounts. As in drinking and driving over the limit vs half a beer at a party, or, one knows cocaine is illegal so don't use it at all.

On the other hand, a horse in pain shouldn't be competing anyway, so I agree with Siswai about that.

Carol Ames
Aug. 21, 2008, 11:28 PM
similar to cayenne pepper, , it increases blood flow,ie., circulation to the area to which it is applied to It is used as a topical arthritis ointment in humans, and horses; it creates a burning sensation, do not get it near your eyes!:no:, or, on sensitive areas:cry:; similar to putting gasoline on horses legs, in (the "old days" :mad:) it makes horses super careful to NOT touch a pole:o
__________________
breeder of Mercury!

justridin'
Aug. 21, 2008, 11:58 PM
i doubt very much if the capsaicin is being used for that purpose.

nice to recall the old days, when men were men, and trainers just poled a careless horse. Nowadays, there's another technology that works- the boots.

Open fronted boots with elastic and velcro can increase the pressure on the legs and make the horses *lots* more careful. So, it's not so much about making them sensitized as it is whether or not the horse has the scope, or it gets the ride.

so more likely, it was on the horses backs or haunches as a balm for the five or six rounds of jumping in a week over 1.60 courses.

as for those who say it's wrong for the horses to incur any pain- hey, they are athletes. Ever read about "trainers" of pro and college athletes? They administer rest ice compression and elevation, therapeutic massage approaches, and yes, topical and oral medications.

The difference: we ask an athlete if he or she can go on. And they make a choice. With a horse we do the next best thing; we get an impartial jury of vets to watch all these athletes jog. if they limp they're out, whether they limp a little or a lot, and whether they can warm up out of it and "want" to go.

There's a lot of protection built in, and an understandable desire on the part of riders and grooms to make their horses comfortable. And if you've looked at labels, particularly of imported products, it's pretty hard to tell what's in what. And herbal? who knows??

It's tragic, particularly for the young Irishman who was having a good week.

atr
Aug. 22, 2008, 12:48 AM
No. It's not tragic. It's stupidity.

I'm sorry, but this is the Olympics. If you were a rider/groom/trainer/team manager for an Olympic competitor, would you not make damn sure--SCREAMINGLY damn sure that everything that was used on that horse, fed to that horse, came within the breathing space of that horse, was absolutely Kosher?

I just can't fathom that people would be that careless in this day and age. Really.

paw
Aug. 22, 2008, 12:53 AM
I've wondered before whether we're getting _too_ much on the "anti-doping" wagon, and this may be yet another indication. Without knowing how much of a banned substance (or its metabolite - not all tests test for a banned substance directly) has been found, how are we really to know whether what was found is truly indicative of cheating, or just something that's perfectly explainable? And if the latter, is "being clean" really so very important?

Not that I'm all about better living through chemistry (at least for horses - I figure adult humans should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else), but c'mon - the guy's using the moral equivalent of BenGay or TigerBalm - is that so terrible?

I can't wait until it's decided that magnetic therapy is somehow bad, too... :(

Sandy M
Aug. 22, 2008, 07:14 AM
I've wondered before whether we're getting _too_ much on the "anti-doping" wagon, and this may be yet another indication. Without knowing how much of a banned substance (or its metabolite - not all tests test for a banned substance directly) has been found, how are we really to know whether what was found is truly indicative of cheating, or just something that's perfectly explainable? And if the latter, is "being clean" really so very important?

Not that I'm all about better living through chemistry (at least for horses - I figure adult humans should be able to do whatever they want to their bodies as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else), but c'mon - the guy's using the moral equivalent of BenGay or TigerBalm - is that so terrible?

I can't wait until it's decided that magnetic therapy is somehow bad, too... :(


One also wonders if it is this particular item and its effect (essentially a linament), or that it is banned because it might mask something that truly DOES affect performance?

As for Capsaicin, it's a pretty powerful linament and I remember reading that it was what Sandy Koufax used to use to try to keep going with his extremely painful elbow (and her retired fairly prematurely due to that elbow. Sports medicine wasn't all that good in his day). Powerful deep heating and PAINFUL (at least on human, relatively hairless skin). It's very diluted in linaments such as Bigeloil, and I would think it would be counterproductive to use it full strength on a horse unless it was being used as a blister(also a very "old-fashioned" treatment) - hardly something one would do to a competing horse, but rather one on layup. But what do I know....

ESG
Aug. 22, 2008, 07:59 AM
I think it has to do with the concentration of the "drug". All peppers contain capsaicin, which is why it's possible to test (or so I've been warned) positive for drugging if you give your black horse paprika in its feed to keep its coat black. Paprika contains traces of capsaicin. Enough to affect performance? I seriously doubt it. But given the FEI's penchant for banning anything not naturally occurring in the body (and, as in the case of Ulla Salzgeber's Rusty, an overabundance of things that do), I can see how it might happen. But I think it's ridiculous that we, as human athletes, are allowed the odd aspirin or Tylenol, but can't give our horses the same relief.

JMO. :cool:

Edgar
Aug. 22, 2008, 12:24 PM
http://www.rte.ie/sport/olympics2008/2008/0821/lynchd1.html

Riding Fool
Aug. 22, 2008, 01:01 PM
Capsaicin CAN definitely impact a horse's performance if rubbed on and used in a certain way on their legs and stifles right before the horse goes to the ring.

I tried using Equiblock on my horse's stifles early last year - someone had told me it's great for stimulating blood flow, etc. My horse freaked out about 5 min after I applied just a nickels' worth to each stifle - he started bucking like crazy in the cross ties. We washed it off immediately. I asked our vet about the reaction - he said it can produce a performance-enhancing effect in those joints especially in hypersensitive animals. He also said, while a useful liniment when used "correctly", that he had seen it increasingly used ringside to "sharpen" response in front legs, and this use led to it being a banned substance.

He went so far as to say "never ever use any product containing Capsaicin, including Magic Cushion 2 weeks out from a rated competition." This advice came from a very prominent vet on the A circuit. My farrier had never heard of Magic Cushion being a problem, but I've never taken the risk in using it since!

The FEI rules are very strict for a reason. Mistakes can be made easily with topical ointments, but if you bend it for one person, then why not for the next guy and the next? The rules are the rules in order to make it even playing field across the board regardless.

CoolMeadows
Aug. 22, 2008, 04:20 PM
i doubt very much if the capsaicin is being used for that purpose.

nice to recall the old days, when men were men, and trainers just poled a careless horse. Nowadays, there's another technology that works- the boots.

Open fronted boots with elastic and velcro can increase the pressure on the legs and make the horses *lots* more careful. So, it's not so much about making them sensitized as it is whether or not the horse has the scope, or it gets the ride.

Where in the world did you hear that? I've never known open fronts to make a horse careful, and I can't imagine anyone thinking that pulling velcro tabs tight around a horses leg would do anything other than cripple the horse. What the?

jse
Aug. 22, 2008, 04:37 PM
Where in the world did you hear that? I've never known open fronts to make a horse careful, and I can't imagine anyone thinking that pulling velcro tabs tight around a horses leg would do anything other than cripple the horse. What the?

I've never heard of that, like you said tightening the boots could do some damage, right?
I know of people who use boots that have inserts velcro'd in WITHOUT the inserts in an effort to discourage them from knocking a rail.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 22, 2008, 04:44 PM
Where in the world did you hear that? I've never known open fronts to make a horse careful, and I can't imagine anyone thinking that pulling velcro tabs tight around a horses leg would do anything other than cripple the horse. What the?

No kidding.

Pat
Aug. 22, 2008, 10:07 PM
I'm amused beyond compare that a TWH person has the guts to actually compare the use (intentional or other wise) of Capsasin to soreing. Seriously. Get your tiny pin head out of your ass. Where do you get off comparing widespread, systematic and far from under control daily abuse of such lovely horses to the rare occaison of a person trying to be 'underhanded'. More to the point, even the asshats that do such things to tune up horses still don't do it on a dailly basis. BL TWH's have to live in those dreadful shoes 24/7, and those who have been sored have to live with that EVERY FREEKING DAY OF THIER LIVES.

Don't go there. It will not go well.

It is used in liniments, which are NOT generally used to 'tune a horse up'. Sorry to burst that bubble, sweetie.

There are other things that *can* be misused and therefore are prohibited. But that doesn't mean that thier presence automatically leads to the conclusion that something is rotten in Denmark.

Raise your hand if you've ever used Absorbine liniment on your horse. Did you do that to help or hurt?? Riiiiight, you used it to rub down your horse. Well, under FEI rules that is PROHIBITED. It contains camphor. Some asshat somewhere used camphor on a horse's coronet bands to tune them up. nice, right? Well, that means you can't use topicals that contain camphor too. Doesn't mean that you planned on tuning up your horse, but rules are rules. If you are showing in FEI classes, you need to be careful, aware, and educated. Should be simple, right?


Yup this is fairly stupid. The rules are clear and care should be taken to avoid substances that are prohibited. It's the rider's job to be sure what is used on a horse is not in violation of the rules.

Pony+ an inch
Aug. 22, 2008, 10:17 PM
Pony + an inch (does that equal 14.3hh?)-- Thanks for your response. The situation does make more sense now to me, on one level, that is, if people don't know what is banned, or how much, how can they know what not to use? I had thought it was more clear cut, i.e., a published list of banned substances and amounts. As in drinking and driving over the limit vs half a beer at a party, or, one knows cocaine is illegal so don't use it at all.

On the other hand, a horse in pain shouldn't be competing anyway, so I agree with Siswai about that.


Yes it does! My first horse was a 14.3 QH mare. She was (still is actually) quite the SS packer at the A shows, big booty and all! :)

And yes, it's really a lot of shades of gray when it comes to the drug rules. And heck, I only know the small amount I do because one day I had a drawn out convo with both the trainer and the vet, and holy cow it could have been discussed all day. And there is a published list, but a) you need to have it on hand, which people don't always do (but should) or b) be sure all ingredients and their amounts are listed in anything you give your horse--and that doesn't always happen, especially with herbal/alternative medicine or foreign stuff.

Now, as for competing in pain, I try and view it as a college athlete. Someone on this thread earlier had a great post about all we do for human athletes and how we transfer that over to horses. When you're competing at an elite level, there is going to be pain. But it's for the love of the sport you keep going (hence why 99% horses at those olympics have a ton of heart), and most riders (especially at that high a level) try to protect and help their horses stay comfortable any way they can, and they try to do it legally. Unfortunately, sometimes when you think you're helping you end up hurting.

It is my personal opinion that it is highly unlikely Lynch was out to hurt his horse or drug his horse illegally. There was too much of a scandal with Cian O'Conner back in 2004--that to me seemed far a more sketchy and potentially intentional illegal drugging than Lynch, and the Irish I'm betting would have put quite the pressure on Lynch for this time around. Overall, it sucks to be caught. It's like you've always managed to make it through the light on yellow without getting caught by the red light camera, but one day it just so happens you get caught and pay the ticket. Doesn't really matter if you were trying to run the red light 'cause you were impatient or if the person in front of you just stopped in the intersection and you got stuck--you still have to pay the consequences.

MissIndependence
Aug. 22, 2008, 11:14 PM
Hmmm. Slightly OT, but I think that if it's true that many horses get sore from competitions like those without the aid of bute or other medications, that is a MAJOR problem. Of course horses randomly can get sore whenever, but I think it is inethical to ask a horse to do something that has a relatively high chance of making them sore/lame/in pain as a result.

I don't get why you think it's "off topic". The whole point of any doping is to increase performance - and this is a discussion of possible performance changing substances being given to horses in a clear "no drug" alley. As for your point that if horses get sore - they shouldn't be asked to perform.....well - athletes of any kind get sore. I'm sure anyone with high performance horses can tell you - the ones that make it to that level are freaks. The ones that can jump like that with nothing and stay sound are the "michael phelps" of the horse world.

The point is that these guys (riders AND their grooms/trainers and support people) are supposed to know and follow FEI rules. If they don't - then they are either stupid - or purposefully trying to push the rules. The rules of FEI competition are clear - NO DRUGS or performance enhancing substances of any kind. Remember the fear of Beezie Madden when Authentic colicked during the Athens games? They were allowed to give him NOTHING for days. I'm sure it was torture - but if he was going to stay in contention for medal - no drugs. The facts of this case obviously aren't out and it's possible there was a screening error - or that something else happened - but at first glance, it makes these people (or their support staffs) look like fools. Don't pick the largest athletic games in the world to mess with questionable substances.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 22, 2008, 11:57 PM
Remember the fear of Beezie Madden when Authentic colicked during the Athens games? They were allowed to give him NOTHING for days. I'm sure it was torture - but if he was going to stay in contention for medal - no drugs.

I don't know anything about the circumstances surrounding that but I will say if my horse ever was in need of medical treatment he would get it and screw the medal; I would withdraw from the competition. No medal is worth risking your horse's life by denying needed medical attention. That is absurd.

AiryFairy
Aug. 23, 2008, 12:05 AM
Powerful deep heating and PAINFUL (at least on human, relatively hairless skin)

I used some capsaicin cream on a sore knee once, put on my pants and went walking. Couldn't get home fast enough. It doesn't so much relieve the pain as make you forget about it, because the place you put it that once throbbed is now ON FIRE. I can't imagine what that feels like to a horse.

flshgordon
Aug. 23, 2008, 01:05 AM
The thing that makes no sense is that 4 people from different teams with no relationship to each other all of a sudden show up with positive tests for a substance so obscure as this? Did they just invent a new test or tweak the mechanism for the olympics? Because if these horses have been competing and tested all year as the article states and they have been using the same "Ben-gay" like substance and this is the first time it's tested, then something is obviously amiss with the testing process. And if it actually says on the label "does not test", you can bet that company will be getting a nasty piece of more than one person's mind in the near future.

I also cannot even believe that someone would suggest this is in the same league with the systematic abuse of some TWHs :no:

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 23, 2008, 05:38 AM
The thing that makes no sense is that 4 people from different teams with no relationship to each other all of a sudden show up with positive tests for a substance so obscure as this? :

Note also that as of late this week, only 15 showjumpers had been drug-tested, and of those, one from each medal-winning team. So that is 4/15 that tested positive for capsaicin (from 4 different countries, as you pointed out). The thing is, capsaicin isn't that obscure, and in fact is present in all sorts of things, including lots of food items for human consumption. On another thread I pointed out the possibility of sample or lab contamination, and was of course immediately flamed, and there were denials of "conspiracy" all around. But I wasn't talking about any kind of conspiracy - rather, just the possibility of accidentally tainted samples, which can and does occur frequently enough for discomfort, and is especially an issue when dealing with highly sensitive test procedures. Now suppose for a moment that the tests WERE screwed up, and we are looking at false positives. As we also already have an admission by Lynch that he used Equi-bock, he probably is going to be SOL regardless, as that product in fact contains a prohibited substance. But I think it is somewhat ironic that in fact the product may not have tested at all. For all we know at this point, the lab tech might have grabbed a spicy potato chip while doing the tests, and voila, 4 positive tests. Have any of the other riders provided statements regarding their test results? Because at this point, if for example all the B samples come back clean or they are otherwise cleared as far as testing goes, it seems that the only one who might end up in trouble is the one guy who came forward and was honest about his use of Equi-block, and that is kind of a perverse result if in fact the others were using similar products that did not *really* test (but unlike Lynch have kept quiet).

bluemoonfarms
Aug. 23, 2008, 08:37 AM
Note also that as of late this week, only 15 showjumpers had been drug-tested, and of those, one from each medal-winning team. So that is 4/15 that tested positive for capsaicin (from 4 different countries, as you pointed out). The thing is, capsaicin isn't that obscure, and in fact is present in all sorts of things, including lots of food items for human consumption. On another thread I pointed out the possibility of sample or lab contamination, and was of course immediately flamed, and there were denials of "conspiracy" all around. But I wasn't talking about any kind of conspiracy - rather, just the possibility of accidentally tainted samples, which can and does occur frequently enough for discomfort, and is especially an issue when dealing with highly sensitive test procedures. Now suppose for a moment that the tests WERE screwed up, and we are looking at false positives. As we also already have an admission by Lynch that he used Equi-bock, he probably is going to be SOL regardless, as that product in fact contains a prohibited substance. But I think it is somewhat ironic that in fact the product may not have tested at all. For all we know at this point, the lab tech might have grabbed a spicy potato chip while doing the tests, and voila, 4 positive tests. Have any of the other riders provided statements regarding their test results? Because at this point, if for example all the B samples come back clean or they are otherwise cleared as far as testing goes, it seems that the only one who might end up in trouble is the one guy who came forward and was honest about his use of Equi-block, and that is kind of a perverse result if in fact the others were using similar products that did not *really* test (but unlike Lynch have kept quiet).

Yankee Lawyer: If I am the supposed "flamer" you are referring to, I just cut to the chase and go directly to the root of the problem. If any of my posts have offended you I am truly sorry.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 23, 2008, 09:35 AM
Yankee Lawyer: If I am the supposed "flamer" you are referring to, I just cut to the chase and go directly to the root of the problem. If any of my posts have offended you I am truly sorry.

No, Bluemoon, you didn't offend me. I do take your comments to heart in particular because yours is one of the breeding programs I admire most, so your posts definitely get my attention : ). But I felt bad because I felt like I was offending a bunch of other people, and was frustrated because I think people were missing my point or thought I was defending cheating, which I was not. Ultimately I think we come out the same -- either they broke the rules or they didn't, and if they did, they have to face the consequences of that. And, to the extent people did in fact cheat, I am angry with them not just because of the violation itself, but also because it reflects poorly on the sport and reportedly may even jeopardize its place at the Olympics. Not to mention the fact that there were alternates and others who worked hard trying to make the teams who then had to watch this unfold from the sidelines.

I do think the whole issue is really perplexing -- I guess because I cannot believe people would be so obtuse as to use any kind of prohibited substance when competing, especially at that level, and especially knowing that they will drug test the competitors. And I do believe in allowing the FEI process to reach its completion before jumping the gun and condemning anyone, and I stand by my statements that it was not helpful for commentators, particularly ones that are otherwise very knowledgeable and respected in our sport, to suggest only the worst case scenario, without pointing out, too, that there might be other reasons and that the investigation is still pending.

canyonoak
Aug. 23, 2008, 10:19 AM
For me, it is really simple:

Capsaicin has been around a long time.

The OC offers a pre-event drug test.
The horses are tested and at least Lynch's horse is told he is fine.

Lynch carries on doing what he has been doing for over a year.

ANd then-voila! a new test--and he is suspended for doing what he has been doing and being tested for, for over a year.

To the posters who think he used the capsaicin to make his horse burn or whatever--I guess Im naive, because I believe him when he says he used it on the horse's back; that he used this particular susbtance because it says it does not test and IT DID NOT TEST for over a year--and it helped his horse's back. As, call me naive again, but I do not think he stuck it on his horse's back so it would jump him out of the tack before during and after fences.

Sure--he could be putting it on its back all year and then, suddenly, decided to put it on its legs for the burn effect etc etc..but this just seems silly. I do not know one rider at this level who does anything different at a competition of this size and significance.

Why have they not tested all the show jumping horses who at least made it to medal rounds? So they would have a bottom line of comparison?

Just in case, heaven forbid, it should turn out to be a lab problem and a matter of contaminant rather than illegality?

I know the Hong Kong lab is state of the art and in a different league from the dreadful French lab that the FEI so adores and which has obviously botched bunches of tests...but still-- mistakes can and do happen.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 23, 2008, 10:30 AM
Sure--he could be putting it on its back all year and then, suddenly, decided to put it on its legs for the burn effect etc etc..but this just seems silly. I do not know one rider at this level who does anything different at a competition of this size and significance.
.

Canyonoak, you might offer that opinion up on the capsaicin thread, but I will caution you that you will be sternly informed that you must be sequestered in a hotel room with a "Bible" and completely oblivious to the fact that blistering and similar cheating practices are widespread and that everyone knows someone who does it, but no one does anything because of the SJ code of silence. I must have been competing on a different A circuit, as far as I can tell. ; ).

canyonoak
Aug. 23, 2008, 10:37 AM
well, Yankeelawyer...I think we have both posted on that thread...I just think this is definiotely a subject where no one is really going to cvhangte anyone else's mind.

Must add, the other weak link here for me is the GERMAN rider.

They won gold at AThens and had it whisked away in a bitter b itter set-dwon from FEI over Ludger Beerbaum's ointment. A substance that everyone involved agreed he used ONLY for welfare of the horse and that in NO WAY had anything whatsoever to do with performance enhancement.

ANd yet, they took the medal away.

How anyone on this German team would expose the team to another such situation is totally beyond me.

jse
Aug. 23, 2008, 11:19 AM
For me, it is really simple:

Capsaicin has been around a long time.

The OC offers a pre-event drug test.
The horses are tested and at least Lynch's horse is told he is fine.

Lynch carries on doing what he has been doing for over a year.

ANd then-voila! a new test--and he is suspended for doing what he has been doing and being tested for, for over a year.

To the posters who think he used the capsaicin to make his horse burn or whatever--I guess Im naive, because I believe him when he says he used it on the horse's back; that he used this particular susbtance because it says it does not test and IT DID NOT TEST for over a year--and it helped his horse's back. As, call me naive again, but I do not think he stuck it on his horse's back so it would jump him out of the tack before during and after fences.

Sure--he could be putting it on its back all year and then, suddenly, decided to put it on its legs for the burn effect etc etc..but this just seems silly. I do not know one rider at this level who does anything different at a competition of this size and significance.

Why have they not tested all the show jumping horses who at least made it to medal rounds? So they would have a bottom line of comparison?

Just in case, heaven forbid, it should turn out to be a lab problem and a matter of contaminant rather than illegality?

I know the Hong Kong lab is state of the art and in a different league from the dreadful French lab that the FEI so adores and which has obviously botched bunches of tests...but still-- mistakes can and do happen.

Lynch is going to be wrong whether the tests come back negative or positive. He used the product, which clearly contains the substance...whether it said it would not test or not. Even though he states that he was using it to make his horse more comfortable. It's still against the rules to use Capsaicin while competing under FEI.
As for the others. Who knows? We'll all find out sooner or later.

I'm gonna tell you right now based on conversations with people who have been very involved working in the jumper world that the method of burning is quite common and the more and more I discuss, the more and more I feel like it's something that goes on a lot more than anyone thinks it does.

I was super naive before the conversation even came up, I wouldn't have ever thought that people would do this to the horses. For one, I can't see how it works. For two, I couldn't consciously put a horse in pain for my own advances. But from what I now know...you would all be surprised. That's all I'm gonna say. I'm not in any way saying that these Olympians were banned because they were doing this to their horses...but I just want people to know that it does go on, and maybe more often that we would like to believe it does. :(

FrenchFrytheEqHorse
Aug. 23, 2008, 01:00 PM
Yes it does! My first horse was a 14.3 QH mare. She was (still is actually) quite the SS packer at the A shows, big booty and all! :)

And yes, it's really a lot of shades of gray when it comes to the drug rules. And heck, I only know the small amount I do because one day I had a drawn out convo with both the trainer and the vet, and holy cow it could have been discussed all day. And there is a published list, but a) you need to have it on hand, which people don't always do (but should) or b) be sure all ingredients and their amounts are listed in anything you give your horse--and that doesn't always happen, especially with herbal/alternative medicine or foreign stuff.

Now, as for competing in pain, I try and view it as a college athlete. Someone on this thread earlier had a great post about all we do for human athletes and how we transfer that over to horses. When you're competing at an elite level, there is going to be pain. But it's for the love of the sport you keep going (hence why 99% horses at those olympics have a ton of heart), and most riders (especially at that high a level) try to protect and help their horses stay comfortable any way they can, and they try to do it legally. Unfortunately, sometimes when you think you're helping you end up hurting.

It is my personal opinion that it is highly unlikely Lynch was out to hurt his horse or drug his horse illegally. There was too much of a scandal with Cian O'Conner back in 2004--that to me seemed far a more sketchy and potentially intentional illegal drugging than Lynch, and the Irish I'm betting would have put quite the pressure on Lynch for this time around. Overall, it sucks to be caught. It's like you've always managed to make it through the light on yellow without getting caught by the red light camera, but one day it just so happens you get caught and pay the ticket. Doesn't really matter if you were trying to run the red light 'cause you were impatient or if the person in front of you just stopped in the intersection and you got stuck--you still have to pay the consequences.
Remember, Pony+, that we are talking about FEI competition, not USEF governed stuff. This means that per FEI rules, all foreign substances are illegal, and unnatural levels of naturally occuring substances are also grounds for punishment.
Unreasonable as this rule may be, as seasoned competitors in FEI sanctioned competitions, every single one of the individuals being set down should have known using *anything* with a banned substance in it would cause problems, liniments or not. To me, it doesn't much matter whether the product was used to rub a horse down, or to produce hypersensitivity- it was used of a banned substance.
FWIW, I just asked my boyfriend (who's an M.D.) what kind of human products contain Capsaicin. The biggest thing is the IcyHot patches- I had one on my shoulders the other day, and while it did get a bit warm, there was definate theraputic relief present, and my muscles felt much better after a few hours. Not to say that there are not individuals who are hypersensitive to Capsaicin, it's just not as strong as a lot of people here have made it out to be. Especially not in its liniment form.

Pat
Aug. 23, 2008, 10:56 PM
I think this stuff reacts differently for individuals. I've tried it once. Had a sore back and had the other half start putting some on. DEAR GOD!!! I ran for the shower to wash that stuff off!!! Not only did it not help, I was desparate to get it off. But the stuff is still used so I'm guessing that it effects other people less strongly.

Banned is banned. Read the rules, read the labels, DONT USE the stuff with banned substances in them. Not all that hard, really.

Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I'll go out on a limb and say that the product was used with the most earnest desire to soothe strained muscles. But it's still illegal. Rules are for everybody and if a governing body starts interpreting such CLEAR no-tolerance rules to fit individuals, well, then the whole thing falls apart.

For those saying that no horse should be showing 'in pain', take off the rose colored glasses. There's a difference between pain and lame, and you know it. You can be tired, sore, thirsty, hungry. You can get a nice rub down, a nice dinner and drinks, and a good night's sleep and be just fine and ready to go in the AM. Where you lame?? NO. And these horses are closely watched and there are soundness checks. If they are lame, they don't go. period.

Oh, and BTW, there's no amount of that Caspisn crap to make a lame horse sound, so just get that idea out of your head. Maybe a boatload of Dormosedan or Torbogesic, but not hot pepper cream. The stuff isn't performance enhancing, it's illegal because the FEI is covering all bases including it's butt.

gottagrey
Aug. 24, 2008, 08:03 AM
I just Googled "Equi-Block and below is from the Manufacturer's Label -

It clearly states Will not test positive
and states it contains 0.025% Capsiacin

Now call me stupid, call me naive, whatever, but I'm thinking 0.025% would not exactly be performance enhancing amounts. I am with the crowd that believes the FEI drug testing is getting a little out of hand. The problem w/ some of the drug testing is its now so sensitive it is no wonder there are many positive tests. There have been some instances where a rider got a positive test for a medication his horse had over a month prior to competition - they followed the protocols for the medication but got nailed anyway because there were trace amounts left in the horse's system.

I am not so naive to think that certain people would not stoop so low as to do crazy things to their horses to supposedly enhance their horse's performance, but I will say that to state or imply that people whose horses test positive are all of a sudden guilty of purposefully doping to enhance performance might not be fair or the case at all.


I think before anyone is too harsh to judge - please remember there are so many banned substances - a positive test does not necessarily = abuse, cheating etc.

However the FEI states pretty clearly that basically nothing is allowed - topically or orally so if one is going to compete at that level evidently they have to be more than diligent.

And thanks to this thread, I now know that I best keep certain human snack foods (I.e. Doritos) away from my horse as he too could test positive for Capsaicin. He loves Doritos.



Equi-Block™
EquiFlite Technologies Inc
Description:
Racehorse Strength topical pain reliever with Capsaicin. Will not test positive.

Indications:
For the temporary care of rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, neuralgias, simple backache, strains and sprains of ligaments and tendons, curb and splints in horses.

Ingredients:
Active Ingredient: Capsaicin (0.025%)
Other Ingredients: Deionized Water, Chamomile Extract, Carbomer 940, Polysorbate 20, Triethanolamine, Propyl Gallate, Methylparaben, Imidazolidinyl Urea, Propylparaben, Fragrance.
This product contains natural products and is subject to color change over time.

lucretia
Aug. 24, 2008, 08:20 AM
i do feel the comment on this forum has generally been much more educated than some other forums i have visited and the point above is a good one. are there noth threshold levels for positive tests anymore? if its zero tolerance with a substance as common as capaicin then ther will be alot more positives in the future of people entirely innocent of any thought of cheating.
also as another person has said on here i cnnot get past the fact that four separate horses form four different nations out of the small percentage tested on this occasion were positive? for the same substance? i am not buying it.
and as the substace in question is a really recent addition to the list and as the FEI do not seem to send screaming emails to the national federations when they change something i reckon its easy to make a mistake. ask phillip dutton. he has been using those boots for two years i hear, i know many people who also use similar and i havent seen them being weighed anywhere this season ( i go to a far few FEI shows eventing and showjumping by the way) and if i had ten dollars for everyone who has expressed amazemaent at hearing there even was a rule for their weight, i wouldnt be working for the next few months.... so they certainly didnt make a big deal of that rule change.

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:21 AM
I just Googled "Equi-Block and below is from the Manufacturer's Label -

It clearly states Will not test positive
and interestingly states it contains 0.025% Capsiacin



Ok, but just because a MANUFACTURER'S label says does not test doesn't make it true!! Particularly in light of the fact that a banned substance is clearly listed in the label.

Plus, I'm pretty sure it's referring to USEF rules not FEI. Pretty big difference there, as plenty of things are done under USEF rules that are flatly illegal for FEI.

Then again, maybe not. You can't use Black as Knight because of the paprika, right?

While I doubt that a Dorito or two wouldn't test, it's still the responsibility of the humans to keep things on the up and up.

Do ya'll remember the blow up over some kind of "herbal tonic" type thing that a bunch of random BNT's got in trouble for??? Yeah, OK, I got the skinny on that thing the other day. It didn't have any banned substances in it when the importer (a BNT themselves) first got the stuff. They even had it tested here, in the beginning. People wanted it, so they started sellling it. Apparently there was shoddy quality control at the other end, and a certain *very, very banned* substance (for good reason) was getting mixed in!! And nobody knew. ANd the label still said does not test. And a WHOLE BUNCH of unrelated people in different places got in plenty of trouble over it.

Don't rely on the guy trying to make a buck off of ya to keep ya out of trouble. I point the finger at the manufacturer in that case, not the importer. Plus, as Lucretia pointed out, this is a recent addition to the list. The manufacturer cannot be relied upon to change labels quickly and they are not going to recall old jars just to change a label. Unless there's a safety recall, those old "Does not test" labels will still be out there.

But just the words, "Does not test" irratates me. That alone implies that there is something dicey there. Like they were tweeking with ingredient levels so that they pass under a threshold. Again, don't rely on somebody else to keep your butt out of a sling. If there's a banned substance in there, then just don't use it. There are other ways to alleviate pain and swelling. Ice, whirlpools, heck a nice plain alcohol rub and standing wraps work just fine.

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:30 AM
I just read gottagrey's post again. I'm now thinking that Does Not Test label applies to RACE HORSES. It calls the stuff "race horse strength". They just printed Does not Test to get people to buy it.

There, again, RACE HORSES vs. USEF vs. FEI. Three differnt organizations, three sets of rules. And race rules vary by state and TYPE of race horse!

CoolMeadows
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:50 AM
I just read gottagrey's post again. I'm now thinking that Does Not Test label applies to RACE HORSES. It calls the stuff "race horse strength". They just printed Does not Test to get people to buy it.

There, again, RACE HORSES vs. USEF vs. FEI. Three differnt organizations, three sets of rules. And race rules vary by state and TYPE of race horse!

I think you're right Pat... is Capsaicin banned for racehorses? Or do they just not test for it?

justridin'
Aug. 24, 2008, 11:28 AM
Where in the world did you hear that? I've never known open fronts to make a horse careful, and I can't imagine anyone thinking that pulling velcro tabs tight around a horses leg would do anything other than cripple the horse. What the?

Not if you use the extra long ones, and they are brand new, and put on just before they go in the ring. but, they won't give one more scope, or make up for a bad ride...

and they can make a horse so careful it won't jump. I always watch the schooling area, and someone told me about that a few years ago.

I'm more with the crowd that says zero tolerance is pretty extreme as far as liniments are concerned and not sure how you police it effectively...

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 01:08 PM
I'm more with the crowd that says zero tolerance is pretty extreme as far as liniments are concerned and not sure how you police it effectively...

The "problem" isn't liniments. The "problem" is that some ingredients found in some liniments *can* be used on thier OWN for nefarious reasons. (capasin on "shins" and camphor on coronet bands will sting like a SOB if the horse has a rub) Since the testing can't determine WHERE, HOW or WHY the product was used, they therefore banned the substance.

I don't mind people 'lookin' to get a rub' in the warm up ring. I do mind people trying to make that rub hurt so bad the horse is terrified to hit a jump. Extreme or not, I'm fine with rules to make that kind of thing harder to do.

Dunno for sure about the race rules. And it could vary by state any way.

Foxtrot's
Aug. 24, 2008, 01:41 PM
WADA has a list of name brand products it allows athletes to use.
Silken Lauman mistakenly bought Benelyn DM from a pharmacy when she should have only used Benelyn. She was cleared of all infractions, but it could have been devastating for her career and post-athletic career. If there was a list of name-brand products for horses, caretakers would not have to run the risk of using a banned substance by mistake, be it creams, supplements, etc. But then what would an armchair know-nothing like me know!! I'm one who believes a certain level should be acceptable for the welfare of the
horse, since a zero tolerance policy is always going to produce some problems.

Jumphigh83
Aug. 24, 2008, 01:46 PM
Since unfortunately there has been a doping issue for some riders in international competition, have the drug screens for them come back yet or will we all be surprised with an eleventh hour change in the medaling a la the last Olympics? What a mess. Either something is going on with the use of "nutraceuticals/herbals" or the testing is too sensitive or there are a lot of arrogant individuals who perceive themselves as above the rules. Hmmmmm? Not sure what to think.

Mardi
Aug. 24, 2008, 02:05 PM
I'm gonna tell you right now based on conversations with people who have been very involved working in the jumper world that the method of burning is quite common and the more and more I discuss, the more and more I feel like it's something that goes on a lot more than anyone thinks it does.
(

Will the day come when USEF has stewards checking for soring/burning before jumpers enter the ring ?

jse
Aug. 24, 2008, 03:50 PM
Will the day come when USEF has stewards checking for soring/burning before jumpers enter the ring ?

It's a possibility! I'm not so sure it's a common thing in the competition ring, I think they mainly use it while schooling.
I was told that once the horse is finished being ridden, they rinse with yogurt...which helps relieve the burning and prevent blistering. So it's easily covered up.

Mardi
Aug. 24, 2008, 06:22 PM
Do USEF stewards check bits and/or other equipment before/after a jumper competes ?

In dressage the bits are checked at the out gate after an upper level test.

CoolMeadows
Aug. 24, 2008, 06:32 PM
jse, could you PM me about who you're getting this info from? I still don't get the putting open fronts on really tight and I'm hoping you're being terribly misinformed.... just curious about what crowd you're hanging with.

I've never seen it in any barn I was with or when visiting other barns. The worst I saw was an eventer-turned-jumper who had 4' X 4's, tack rails and bell boots with ball bearings in the coronet band all over the barn. Her horses all ended up as dirty stoppers, and neurotic rides (I had one after he lost it in the ring and shutdown with her... took a lot of fixing but he came back to be a nice 4'6 horse).

bluemoonfarms
Aug. 24, 2008, 06:46 PM
I think this stuff reacts differently for individuals. I've tried it once. Had a sore back and had the other half start putting some on. DEAR GOD!!! I ran for the shower to wash that stuff off!!! Not only did it not help, I was desparate to get it off. But the stuff is still used so I'm guessing that it effects other people less strongly.

Banned is banned. Read the rules, read the labels, DONT USE the stuff with banned substances in them. Not all that hard, really.

Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I'll go out on a limb and say that the product was used with the most earnest desire to soothe strained muscles. But it's still illegal. Rules are for everybody and if a governing body starts interpreting such CLEAR no-tolerance rules to fit individuals, well, then the whole thing falls apart.

For those saying that no horse should be showing 'in pain', take off the rose colored glasses. There's a difference between pain and lame, and you know it. You can be tired, sore, thirsty, hungry. You can get a nice rub down, a nice dinner and drinks, and a good night's sleep and be just fine and ready to go in the AM. Where you lame?? NO. And these horses are closely watched and there are soundness checks. If they are lame, they don't go. period.

Oh, and BTW, there's no amount of that Caspisn crap to make a lame horse sound, so just get that idea out of your head. Maybe a boatload of Dormosedan or Torbogesic, but not hot pepper cream. The stuff isn't performance enhancing, it's illegal because the FEI is covering all bases including it's butt.

Pat - I totally agree with you.



Do ya'll remember the blow up over some kind of "herbal tonic" type thing that a bunch of random BNT's got in trouble for??? Yeah, OK, I got the skinny on that thing the other day. It didn't have any banned substances in it when the importer (a BNT themselves) first got the stuff. They even had it tested here, in the beginning. People wanted it, so they started sellling it. Apparently there was shoddy quality control at the other end, and a certain *very, very banned* substance (for good reason) was getting mixed in!! And nobody knew. ANd the label still said does not test. And a WHOLE BUNCH of unrelated people in different places got in plenty of trouble over it

I had completely forgotten about this one and it brings up a whole lot of other concerns over what the manufacturers are actually putting in these products.

CoolMeadows
Aug. 24, 2008, 06:55 PM
OK, OK I can't take it anymore!! Between the one poster acting as though Bute and Banamine are worlds apart as far as effectiveness, and someone saying that putting new boots on reallllly tight will make a horse so careful it won't jump (it's not being careful, it's breaking down - lame horses stop!), and the dorm and torb being named as drugs to mask lamenesses (are they not sedatives??), my head's going to pop off.

It feels like I'm stuck in some alternate universe thread.... or maybe my knowledge of drugs and anatomy is all wrong. Certainly could be!

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 24, 2008, 07:13 PM
Oh, and BTW, there's no amount of that Caspisn crap to make a lame horse sound, so just get that idea out of your head. Maybe a boatload of Dormosedan or Torbogesic, but not hot pepper cream. The stuff isn't performance enhancing, it's illegal because the FEI is covering all bases including it's butt.

I am sorry, but that made me laugh. Dormosedan? I would like to see someone try to use any amount of that stuff to mask lameness, and if you were to use anything approaching a boatload you would have a dead horse. You do know that it is a fairly potent tranquilizer, don't you (and btw one accidental injection of that to a human will stop the heart immediately). Small doses sedate them and if you accidentally give too much the horse will barely be able to stand.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 24, 2008, 07:25 PM
OK, OK I can't take it anymore!! Between the one poster acting as though Bute and Banamine are worlds apart as far as effectiveness, and someone saying that putting new boots on reallllly tight will make a horse so careful it won't jump (it's not being careful, it's breaking down - lame horses stop!), and the dorm and torb being named as drugs to mask lamenesses (are they not sedatives??), my head's going to pop off.

It feels like I'm stuck in some alternate universe thread.... or maybe my knowledge of drugs and anatomy is all wrong. Certainly could be!

CoolMeadows, I think we are both in the same alternative universe ; ).

Ruby G. Weber
Aug. 24, 2008, 07:29 PM
This is an age old conundrum.

The cheaters will always try - and usually do for a period of time - stay one step ahead of the authorities, the authorities catch on, ban the use of whatever and the cycle continues. It occurs to me that some of the horse which were presented for "voluntary" testing prior to the start of the Games may have been attempting to determine if certain topicals, etc. were being detected.

I'm afraid, however, just like USEF, the FEI has backed itself into a corner. They proved after Athens they are not going to ease their stance on banned substance, even though it was one of their "darlings" who was "guilty" and caused his team to loose it's Gold medal. (Personally, in that case I don't believe for a minute the culprit was an ointment. I do believe Goldfever had some joint or joints injected prior to Athens and the steriod used along with the HA was what was detected. )

No question Cian O'Conner flat out cheated.

Keeping these elite performance horses sound and at the top of their game for important competitions is no easy task. No matter how much massage, chiropractic, deep muscle stimulation, magnetic therapy, Game Ready along with the normal icing and bandaging it would greatly benefit the horse if a therapuetic dose of anti inflammitory were permitted.

If these labs' tests are so sensitive they should be capable of determining what amount of a substance is therapeutic and what amount is abusive.

At this point I believe the FEI is just as guilty of cruelty as those who abuse capsaicin and the like.

jse
Aug. 24, 2008, 08:02 PM
I am sorry, but that made me laugh. Dormosedan? I would like to see someone try to use any amount of that stuff to mask lameness, and if you were to use anything approaching a boatload you would have a dead horse. You do know that it is a fairly potent tranquilizer, don't you (and btw one accidental injection of that to a human will stop the heart immediately). Small doses sedate them and if you accidentally give to much the horse will barely be able to stand.

Yeeeeah I totally missed this one.
Dormosedan? Masking lameness? How about masking consciousness? lol
If you'd like for either you and/or your horse to be seriously injured, I wouldn't ever attempt this. :)

CoolMeadows
Aug. 24, 2008, 08:19 PM
Funny dorm story... ok not funny at all, terrifying and ridiculous story about dorm. I worked very briefly for a nefarious (word du jour) GP rider who I discovered had some serious addiction problems. This person had a rankish GP horse who had to have 4 cc's of Ace for vetwork. The vet was scheduled one morning and trainer-in-a-stupor administered 4 cc's of dorm and *dropped* GP horse in the aisle. Luckily he was fine after an extended nap. Did I mention I worked very briefly for that person?

jse
Aug. 24, 2008, 08:25 PM
Funny dorm story... ok not funny at all, terrifying and ridiculous story about dorm. I worked very briefly for a nefarious (word du jour) GP rider who I discovered had some serious addiction problems. This person had a rankish GP horse who had to have 4 cc's of Ace for vetwork. The vet was scheduled one morning and trainer-in-a-stupor administered 4 cc's of dorm and *dropped* GP horse in the aisle. Luckily he was fine after an extended nap. Did I mention I worked very briefly for that person?

4cc's!??! Oh my goodness!
We seldom use it when body clipping difficult horses but it's never more than like half a cc or maybe 1cc. Even that knocks them out cold!
I worked with a mare who was extremely difficult for the farrier and we gave her a little dormosedan and she STILL fought! She was a feisty little booger!

CoolMeadows
Aug. 24, 2008, 08:29 PM
Yeah, lucky pony to live right?? How can you be so trashed at 8 a.m. that you can't read the labels on a bottle? GP horse wasn't all that bad really, she was just never sober enough to hang onto him. How she rode him around I'll never know. It was an interesting 6 weeks, I can't deny that!

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:27 PM
Well, darlings, got news for ya. Copied from the manufacturer's web site:

DORMOSEDAN®
(detomidine hydrochloride)
Sterile Solution

Description

DORMOSEDAN® (detomidine hydrochloride) is a nonnarcotic, synthetic (alpha-2 adrenoreceptor agonist) equine sedative/analgesic that contains the active ingredient detomidine hydrochloride. DORMOSEDAN can be used safely for a variety of minor surgical and diagnostic procedures.

Approved Uses

DORMOSEDAN is approved for:
Use as a sedative and analgesic to facilitate minor surgical and diagnostic procedures in mature horses and yearlings.
Use in calming fractious horses, providing relief from abdominal pain, and facilitating bronchoscopy, bronchoalveolar lavage, nasogastric intubation, nonreproductive rectal palpations, suturing of skin lacerations, and castrations.
Additionally, an approved, local infiltration anesthetic is indicated for castration.Key Features



Produces nonnarcotic, reliable, dose-dependent sedation and analgesia
Flexible dosing allows the veterinarian to regulate the depth and length of sedation and analgesia
Allows equine chemical restraint and pain relief to simplify minor surgical and diagnostic procedures, such as suturing and intubation
Uses include calming fractious horses, relieving abdominal pain, and facilitating bronchoscopy
May be administered through intravenous or intramuscular methods
Provides a wide margin of safetyPackaging

5- and 20-mL multidose vials

Dosage and Administration



For Sedation: Administer DORMOSEDAN IV or IM at the rates of 20 or 40 mcg detomidine hydrochloride per kg of body weight (0.2 or 0.4 mL of DORMOSEDAN per 100 kg or 220 lb), depending on the depth and duration of sedation required. Onset of sedative effects should be reached within 2–4 minutes after IV administration and 3–5 minutes after IM administration. Twenty mcg/kg will provide 30–90 minutes of sedation, and 40 mcg/kg will provide approximately 90 minutes to 2 hours of sedation.
For Analgesia: Administer DORMOSEDAN IV at the rates of 20 or 40 mcg detomidine hydrochloride per kg of body weight (0.2 or 0.4 mL of DORMOSEDAN per 100 kg or 220 lb), depending on the depth and duration of analgesia required. Twenty mcg/kg will usually begin to take effect in 2–4 minutes and provide 30–45 minutes of analgesia. The 40 mcg/kg dose will also begin to take effect in 2–4 minutes and provide 45–75 minutes of analgesia.
For Both Sedation and Analgesia: Administer DORMOSEDAN IV at the rates of 20 or 40 mcg detomidine hydrochloride per kg of body weight (0.2 or 0.4 mL of DORMOSEDAN per 100 kg or 220 lb), depending on the depth and duration of sedation and analgesia required.
Before and after injection, the animal should be allowed to rest quietly.

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:29 PM
Sorry about all the extra code on the above. When ever I copy and paste that happens. Can't figure out why and it's a PITA to fix.

I never said that Dorm is a good choice. I just said it can relieve pain. It was one of the things that came quickly to mind that I knew to do so. So, there, smart arses, it is NOT just a sedative. Try reading the WHOLE label, not just the dosing instructions.

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:44 PM
and the dorm and torb being named as drugs to mask lamenesses (are they not sedatives??)

WOW

Torbugesic, as in ANALGESIC. Sheesh.

Torbugesic (Butorphanol Tartrate) is a synthetic narcotic simlilar chemically to Morphine. Like Morphine it is an analgesic.


Come on, guys, read those bits of paper that the bottles are packaged with. They really aren't that hard to discypher. I got a C in Chemistry and I understand them!

Yes, there are drugs that are more likely to be used than Dorm, but sorry, Torbugesic is certainly a pain masking drug.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:47 PM
I never said that Dorm is a good choice. I just said it can relieve pain. It was one of the things that came quickly to mind that I knew to do so. So, there, smart arses, it is NOT just a sedative. Try reading the WHOLE label, not just the dosing instructions.

This is what you said:


Oh, and BTW, there's no amount of that Caspisn crap to make a lame horse sound, so just get that idea out of your head. Maybe a boatload of Dormosedan or Torbogesic, but not hot pepper cream.

Whatever its pain-relieving properties might be, you can't separate those out from the fact it knocks horses flat on their butts. Also, I wonder if it actually relieves pain or simply changes the perception of pain by knocking them out -- there is a difference. But in any event, if you are going to essentially shout down someone else about their supposed views of one substance (capsaicin), then at least get your meds straight. If you had any familiarity with Dormosedan and its properties, it would have been perhaps the last thing that would come to mind as an example of masking lameness (though I suppose if one were to shoot a horse dead it might be hard to discern whether it was lame also). The idea that anyone would administer Dorm and even attempt to ride the animal is scary. But there is no dose that you could give of dorm to make a lame horse appear sound.

CoolMeadows
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:48 PM
Oh lighten up! Have you ever seen a horse on those drugs? LMAO, I can just see someone shooting a lame one up with the amount of Dorm it recommends to act as analgesic (for abdominal pain) and trying to pass it off as sound. You'd have every vet on the grounds running for your suddenly acutely neurological horse!

Hey I don't want to get into a pissing match, but in my experience both Torb and Dorm have been used primarily for their sedative properties. The fact that they have an analgesic effect as well has always been secondary in the cases I've seen them used. It would be hard to tell if a horse was sound or not through the staggering. ;)

MHM
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:50 PM
Do USEF stewards check bits and/or other equipment before/after a jumper competes ?

In dressage the bits are checked at the out gate after an upper level test.

At the Olympics and other top level competitions, the jumpers have a boot check as they come out of the ring. The horses go directly from the out gate to a rubber mat, and all boots are removed from the horse in front of a steward to make sure there are no foreign objects in them. It's done on a mat so they can see if anything falls out, and the mat is swept clean after each horse.

gottagrey
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:50 PM
Rub G Weber states that Cian O'Connor flat out cheated - I'm either missing something but I seem to recall that his statement and the statement of his vet was pretty much the horse had been given a sedative when they were treating him w/ swim therapy which was more than a month prior to the Olympics.

ut after a 12-hour hearing in Zurich, Switzerland on Sunday, a judicial committee of the Federation Equestre Internationale (FEI) said it was satisfied O'Connor had not been involved in a deliberate attempt to affect the performance of the horse.

From CNN.Com International March 28, 2005
O'Connor has always denied cheating, insisting the drugs -- which are used as sedatives and anti-psychotic medication in humans -- were given to the horse by his vet for therapeutic reasons.

He had told the FEI the substances were used as a mild sedative during hydrotherapy treatment on a minor fetlock injury.

"I am delighted that the judicial committee has accepted and affirmed that I was not involved in any deliberate attempt to affect the performance of my horse Waterford Crystal -- as I have always maintained," said O'Connor.

"While I am disappointed that a technical infraction has resulted in the loss of the gold medal for Ireland, I wish to re-emphasise again that neither I nor my vet James Sheeran have done anything wrong.

Also - I only Google Equi-Block as that was the ointment one of the riders said they had used. On the particular website I located it on its claim to fame was for race horses. Also. Capsaicin is also listed on the banned substances for USEF - so no more Doritos etc for my horse. Actually my trainer and I discussed this today - she seemed surprised about the Capsaicin and had not heard of it being used for performance. She did also say that she keeps close tabs on what her clients give their horses at shows - no sharing sodas, no horse/human treats, nada.

As one of the other posters here mentioned - it is a banned substance so sadly for some of those riders they should have known better. Again, I would like to think that some of these riders did have good intentions but were not diligent in following the banned substances list - but w/ 4 of them testing it might seem more like the latest/greatest performance "edge".

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 10:52 PM
Ok, so sue me. I didn't pick the right drug fast enough. GEEZUS CHRIST lady. You kill me.

Yes, I'm fairly familiar with the stuff. Yes, actually you can adjust a dose of Dorm and have a horse still rideable. it's a pretty low dose.

But since I don't go around drugging my horses into rideable soundness and I utterly refuse to work for those who do, I'm not all that well versed in making lame horses sound enough to ride. Sorry. I'm not that kind of girl.

Who am I shouting down about Capsaicin? Really, I missd that.

MHM
Aug. 24, 2008, 11:02 PM
You'd have every vet on the grounds running for your suddenly acutely neurological horse!

Hey I don't want to get into a pissing match, but in my experience both Torb and Dorm have been used primarily for their sedative properties. The fact that they have an analgesic effect as well has always been secondary in the cases I've seen them used. It would be hard to tell if a horse was sound or not through the staggering. ;)

"Doctor, doctor, come quick, he's so lame he can't walk!"

Seriously, when I've used those drugs to body clip a really bad one, they can barely stand, let alone walk, never mind trot. If you can evaluate lameness at a halt, maybe it could make a difference to their soundness.

CoolMeadows
Aug. 24, 2008, 11:04 PM
Ok, so sue me. I didn't pick the right drug fast enough. GEEZUS CHRIST lady. You kill me.

Yes, I'm fairly familiar with the stuff. Yes, actually you can adjust a dose of Dorm and have a horse still rideable. it's a pretty low dose.

But since I don't go around drugging my horses into rideable soundness and I utterly refuse to work for those who do, I'm not all that well versed in making lame horses sound enough to ride. Sorry. I'm not that kind of girl.

Who am I shouting down about Capsaicin? Really, I missd that.

Ok I just.can't.resist. How do you know you can ride a horse on Dorm? You don't drug so you must have seen it? I've been around a few catastrophic injuries and pre-op situations (vet tech as a kid every summer) and after having my own you-can't-clip-me mare who dragged her head on the ground with 0.5 cc of Dorm, I just can't imagine anyone attempting to ride on it. That's insane.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 24, 2008, 11:14 PM
Ok, so sue me. I didn't pick the right drug fast enough. GEEZUS CHRIST lady. You kill me.

Yes, I'm fairly familiar with the stuff. Yes, actually you can adjust a dose of Dorm and have a horse still rideable. it's a pretty low dose.

But since I don't go around drugging my horses into rideable soundness and I utterly refuse to work for those who do, I'm not all that well versed in making lame horses sound enough to ride. Sorry. I'm not that kind of girl.

Who am I shouting down about Capsaicin? Really, I missd that.

I am not the one here calling people names. And I don't drug my horses either or otherwise cheat, so to the extent that you are implying that those of us who know the effects of various medications do that, well, you can shove it.

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 11:17 PM
No need to be nasty. Just because I don't cheat and *make* my horses sound if they are not, doesn't mean I've never used medications.

As prescribed by a vet, for a horse that was coming back into work after a long run of stall rest. The horse was a known nut bucket and was in no physical position to jump about and be a jerk. He was, however, ready for light exercise. About .5 was faaaar too much. .10 was noooot enough. We settled at about .20 to .25. It was enough to keep him in the middle of his feet and enough to keep the feet on the ground instead of 10 feet above.

Wasn't my horse, wasn't my idea. I also don't work for that trainer any more for many reasons, one of which was that he was a freek show himself.

CoolMeadows
Aug. 24, 2008, 11:23 PM
I am not the one here calling people names. And I don't drug my horses either or otherwise cheat, so the extent that you are implying that those of us who know the effects of various medications do that, well, you can shove it.

I caught that implied thought as well and was hoping she didn't mean it. Hurts my feelings. ;)

For the record, I don't drug or cheat either and way back in the day (when did I get so old??) when I had a superstar little horse, he had one bute once the night before a classic late in the year at the suggestion of my trainer. I thought it made him hard in the mouth and never used it again... I was extremely anti-drug and still am pretty unreasonable about drugging. Now he did get massages at shows and wow did he ever jump well after them. He didn't get pounded, rarely showed more than once a month or as finances allowed but still managed to be Zone champ and 8th in the country. He never had a joint injected or had to go on joint supplements either and now he's 24, on MSM and still flexes 100%. He's a little machine and I know they can't all be like him, but it can be done.

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 11:23 PM
I am not the one here calling people names. And I don't drug my horses either or otherwise cheat, so the extent that you are implying that those of us who know the effects of various medications do that, well, you can shove it.

No, sweetie, YOU can shove it.

READ what I said. All of it. I SAID that people NEED to read the package inserts. I do. Any package insert I can get my hands on, I read. Even the stuff I don't use. I like to know how these things work. I make a point of trying to understand.

Hence I knew that the drugs mentioned have analgesic properties. Maybe not the best choices to make a horse sound and rideable, but they are analgesics.

When, exactly did I SAY that YOU or anyone else here is cheating?? Really, wow. There's a leap. If you think I've impled that then you need to calm the heck DOWN and get over yourself.

Pat
Aug. 24, 2008, 11:30 PM
I caught that implied thought as well and was hoping she didn't mean it. :cry:

For the record, I don't drug or cheat either and way back in the day (when did I get so old??) when I had a superstar little horse, he had one bute once the night before a classic late in the year at the suggestion of my trainer.

I didn't. Yankee is jumping, very, very far, to conclusions.

I don't have any problems with the proper use of legal drugs administered at the legal levels as laid down by the USEF. But we are talking about FEI rules in this instance.

I don't like Bute all that much because of the higher incidence of gastric issues, but again, I don't have a problem with it. Particularly in the way you describe, it's not like you are trying to make a horse appear sound. You'd have to give an awful lot of bute to mask serious pain and that amount would certainly push past the allowed plasma concentration. Typically, in a 1000 pound horse, One gram given 12 hours out will be acceptable if drug tested.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 24, 2008, 11:43 PM
No, sweetie, YOU can shove it.
.

For the record, I am not your "sweetie", your "Darling," or even your "smart arse."
Your response, when it was pointed out to you by multiple people that your claims about Dormosedan were incorrect (as far as its ability to mask lameness), was to go on the offensive and call those who disagreed "smart asses" and whatnot. And when further pressed, you retreated to the position of hey, sorry, how would you know anyway as you don't drug your horses to mask lameness, implying that those of us who are familiar with the drug's properties do. Obviously, I am not the only one who interpreted your remarks that way. Try re-reading your posts in the context of the discussion.


In any event, none of this has anything to do with what occurred at the Olympics, and does little to further the discussion regarding whether the FEI might be able to more effectively regulate the sport for the greater good of the horses.

Moderator 1
Aug. 25, 2008, 07:27 AM
OK, hopefully any confusion here has been cleared up, and we can all cool down and return to the main topic of discussion. No shoving of anything required... ;)

Thanks!
Mod 1

lauriep
Aug. 25, 2008, 07:44 AM
If I am not mistaken, Cian O'Connor was also caught for the same drug (different horse?) at a different time the same year.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 08:09 AM
If I am not mistaken, Cian O'Connor was also caught for the same drug (different horse?) at a different time the same year.

Well, if true the incident at the Games would be even more incredibly dumb. But, if someone is going to declare he intentionally cheated at the Games, it would be more fair to at least point out that despite that poster's opinion, the FEI did come to the conclusion he had not acted intentionally. The same poster also made serious allegations about Ludger Beerbaum and Goldfever which, as far as I can tell, are not supported by anything the FEI found or any other publicly-available information.

Jumphigh83
Aug. 25, 2008, 09:27 AM
Well, darlings, got news for ya. Copied from the manufacturer's web site:

DORMOSEDAN®
(detomidine hydrochloride)
Sterile Solution

Description

DORMOSEDAN® (detomidine hydrochloride) is a nonnarcotic, synthetic (alpha-2 adrenoreceptor agonist) equine sedative/analgesic that contains the active ingredient detomidine hydrochloride. DORMOSEDAN can be used safely for a variety of minor surgical and diagnostic procedures.

Approved Uses

DORMOSEDAN is approved for:
Use as a sedative and analgesic to facilitate minor surgical and diagnostic procedures in mature horses and yearlings.
Use in calming fractious horses, providing relief from abdominal pain, and facilitating bronchoscopy, bronchoalveolar lavage, nasogastric intubation, nonreproductive rectal palpations, suturing of skin lacerations, and castrations.
Additionally, an approved, local infiltration anesthetic is indicated for castration.Key Features



Produces nonnarcotic, reliable, dose-dependent sedation and analgesia
Flexible dosing allows the veterinarian to regulate the depth and length of sedation and analgesia
Allows equine chemical restraint and pain relief to simplify minor surgical and diagnostic procedures, such as suturing and intubation
Uses include calming fractious horses, relieving abdominal pain, and facilitating bronchoscopy
May be administered through intravenous or intramuscular methods
Provides a wide margin of safetyPackaging

5- and 20-mL multidose vials

Dosage and Administration



For Sedation: Administer DORMOSEDAN IV or IM at the rates of 20 or 40 mcg detomidine hydrochloride per kg of body weight (0.2 or 0.4 mL of DORMOSEDAN per 100 kg or 220 lb), depending on the depth and duration of sedation required. Onset of sedative effects should be reached within 2–4 minutes after IV administration and 3–5 minutes after IM administration. Twenty mcg/kg will provide 30–90 minutes of sedation, and 40 mcg/kg will provide approximately 90 minutes to 2 hours of sedation.
For Analgesia: Administer DORMOSEDAN IV at the rates of 20 or 40 mcg detomidine hydrochloride per kg of body weight (0.2 or 0.4 mL of DORMOSEDAN per 100 kg or 220 lb), depending on the depth and duration of analgesia required. Twenty mcg/kg will usually begin to take effect in 2–4 minutes and provide 30–45 minutes of analgesia. The 40 mcg/kg dose will also begin to take effect in 2–4 minutes and provide 45–75 minutes of analgesia.
For Both Sedation and Analgesia: Administer DORMOSEDAN IV at the rates of 20 or 40 mcg detomidine hydrochloride per kg of body weight (0.2 or 0.4 mL of DORMOSEDAN per 100 kg or 220 lb), depending on the depth and duration of sedation and analgesia required.
Before and after injection, the animal should be allowed to rest quietly.

Sorry but smooth muscle analgesia is not even comparable to striated muscle/joint/tendon/ligament analgesia. Those types of drugs provide smooth muscle analgesia (gut) which is why they are used for colics. Any amount of dorm would render your horse pretty sedate and prob not wanting to jump an Olympic track cleanly...maybe not at all! Note the LAST LINE of your post. Enough said.

Edgar
Aug. 25, 2008, 11:36 AM
Cian O Connors case was completely different, so was Jessica Kurtens and I do think Ludger 's claim was also some ingredient in a liniment but do not remember what lost them the gold specifically. The Irish have had issues with banned substances for sure, bad luck or intentionally, however it seems with that in mind if not the rider, since his routine was OK in his mind after all the previous negative tests including the one in Hong Kong, the Irish vet, coach and whoever else represents them would be all over this before something happens. I think this last case was a very stupid mistake.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 11:44 AM
Cian O Connors case was completely different, so was Jessica Kurtens and I do think Ludger 's claim was also some ingredient in a liniment but do not remember what lost them the gold specifically. The Irish have had issues with banned substances for sure, bad luck or intentionally, however it seems with that in mind if not the rider, since his routine was OK in his mind after all the previous negative tests including the one in Hong Kong, the Irish vet, coach and whoever else represents them would be all over this before something happens. I think this last case was a very stupid mistake.

I would agree with that assessment.

bluemoonfarms
Aug. 25, 2008, 12:18 PM
I posted this on the other thread.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/olympicsNews/idUKPEK30997520080823

bluemoonfarms
Aug. 25, 2008, 12:25 PM
Any news on the B Samples?

mares tails
Aug. 25, 2008, 12:38 PM
If these labs' tests are so sensitive they should be capable of determining what amount of a substance is therapeutic and what amount is abusive.


Sorry, but qualitative analysis (is it there?) is A LOT easier than quantitative analysis (how much is there?), and determining quantitative therapeutic thresholds is even more complicated.

Did you want to pay a $10,000 drug testing fee at your next show? :eek:

Pat
Aug. 25, 2008, 01:16 PM
it's responses like the one's I've recieved here that illustrate why other BB's refer to COTH as crotch.

Janet
Aug. 25, 2008, 01:21 PM
Cian O Connors case was completely different, so was Jessica Kurtens and I do think Ludger 's claim was also some ingredient in a liniment but do not remember what lost them the gold specifically.
Not positive, but I seem to remember "testosterone in an ointment".
But maybe that was someone else.

Mozart
Aug. 25, 2008, 01:40 PM
Not positive, but I seem to remember "testosterone in an ointment".
But maybe that was someone else.

I think you are thinking of Rusty and Ulla Salzgeber. Wasn't that their problem?

Ruby G. Weber
Aug. 25, 2008, 01:48 PM
I'm afraid there is a bit of naivity here. Most of the Olympic athletes and their connections, Jamican sprinters, Chinese gymnists, Russian weight lifters and yes, equestrians push the envelope in some fashion. Maybe it's a new fabric for swim suits, maybe it's a thinner tire for the bicycle racers, maybe it's a better designed running shoe or just maybe it's injecting a horse's joints as close up to the competition as possible. Team vets are invaluable at Championships like the Olympics. You can bet one of their jobs is to be up to date as to the outer limits of said envelope.

In the case of all of these positive A samples, from Athens, to HK and everything in between these riders admitted (often before the results of the B sample have been made public) they Did have their hand in the cookie jar.

Why if these riders were innocent did they admit the use of an ointment, linament or anything? (As far as Cian goes, if my memory serves me, somehow his B sample mysteriously disappeared. And I'd be curious to know why his vet chose those sedatives, instead of something more commonly used for the purpose stated. Especially when one of those more commonly used sedatives is undetectable in a relatively short period of time.)

Several years ago three horses were tested at the FEI jog before a WC event in the US.
Horse A's test was negative. Horse B's test showed .31 nanograms of bute. Horse C's test showed .07 nanograms of bute. Horse B's case was dropped on a technicality (no secure stabling), Horse C's owner served 30 days suspension. (Horse C's owner chose not to fight it.) About three months later, an American vet - who was a member of the FEI veterinary committee and also privy to the above mentioned scenario - was in Switzerland at an FEI meeting. He asked to see the paperwork on file regarding Horse B and C. The paperwork was "unavailable."

Draw your own conclusions.

These elite riders/grooms/managers/vets know you can't use a product as benign as Vetrolin! If they choose to use a therapy, ulcer med, whatever, someone on their team has approved it.

As I said in a previous post, both the FEI and USEF have backed themselves into a corner with their drug rules. (Personally I think USEF is far to easy regarding one but that's for another discussion.)

At any rate, what could the FEI do that is worse than what the IOC has in denying Ludgar and Cian their gold medals, the Norwegians their bronze and the others a chance to compete for an individual medal?

Janet
Aug. 25, 2008, 02:18 PM
I think you are thinking of Rusty and Ulla Salzgeber. Wasn't that their problem?
You are probably right.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 02:35 PM
In the case of all of these positive A samples, from Athens, to HK and everything in between these riders admitted (often before the results of the B sample have been made public) they Did have their hand in the cookie jar.

Why if these riders were innocent did they admit the use of an ointment, linament or anything?

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe to date the only rider (of the 4 whose horses tested positive at this Olympics) who has provided a statement is Lynch, and he admitted using Equi-block. Have any of the other riders admitted (or denied) anything yet?

flshgordon
Aug. 25, 2008, 03:07 PM
I'm afraid there is a bit of naivity here. Most of the Olympic athletes and their connections, Jamican sprinters, Chinese gymnists, Russian weight lifters and yes, equestrians push the envelope in some fashion. Maybe it's a new fabric for swim suits, maybe it's a thinner tire for the bicycle racers, maybe it's a better designed running shoe or just maybe it's injecting a horse's joints as close up to the competition as possible. Team vets are invaluable at Championships like the Olympics. You can bet one of their jobs is to be up to date as to the outer limits of said envelope.

In the case of all of these positive A samples, from Athens, to HK and everything in between these riders admitted (often before the results of the B sample have been made public) they Did have their hand in the cookie jar.

Why if these riders were innocent did they admit the use of an ointment, linament or anything? (As far as Cian goes, if my memory serves me, somehow his B sample mysteriously disappeared. And I'd be curious to know why his vet chose those sedatives, instead of something more commonly used for the purpose stated. Especially when one of those more commonly used sedatives is undetectable in a relatively short period of time.)

Several years ago three horses were tested at the FEI jog before a WC event in the US.
Horse A's test was negative. Horse B's test showed .31 nanograms of bute. Horse C's test showed .07 nanograms of bute. Horse B's case was dropped on a technicality (no secure stabling), Horse C's owner served 30 days suspension. (Horse C's owner chose not to fight it.) About three months later, an American vet - who was a member of the FEI veterinary committee and also privy to the above mentioned scenario - was in Switzerland at an FEI meeting. He asked to see the paperwork on file regarding Horse B and C. The paperwork was "unavailable."

Draw your own conclusions.

These elite riders/grooms/managers/vets know you can't use a product as benign as Vetrolin! If they choose to use a therapy, ulcer med, whatever, someone on their team has approved it.

As I said in a previous post, both the FEI and USEF have backed themselves into a corner with their drug rules. (Personally I think USEF is far to easy regarding one but that's for another discussion.)

At any rate, what could the FEI do that is worse than what the IOC has in denying Ludgar and Cian their gold medals, the Norwegians their bronze and the others a chance to compete for an individual medal?


I still say that it makes absolutely no sense for 4 completely unrelated riders to test positive for the same obscure substance. That to me smacks of contamination in the lab.

I don't agree that every pro equestrian athlete is pushing the limit as close as they can to *almost* violating the drug rules. I find that theory absurd. And if someone has been using an ointment/liniment/etc all year, been drug tested and been found to be in compliance with FEI rules, then how can people say "they had it coming" and broke the rules intentionally? If I'm using something that has .02% of something in it then I would consider that to be a pretty innocuous ingredient. And if I've been tested while using it and it's negative, I'm going to assume there is no problem. And as for someone on the team approving it--I'm assuming someone did or he wouldn't have used it!

CBoylen
Aug. 25, 2008, 03:22 PM
And if I've been tested while using it and it's negative, I'm going to assume there is no problem.
The thing about tests is that you can never assume that the tests used in the past are the same tests that are going to be used tomorrow. They don't test for the same substances in every test. The tests themselves are always changing according to new technology and new trends, and there have been so many cases of people using "untestable" products that the USEF/FEI gets wind of and develops a test for, and suddenly large groups of people get caught for the same thing. If the substance is listed as forbidden, and rumor has a number of people are using it, then you can bet there is a test being developed for it.
The news reports even say that it was a new test being used in these particular cases:
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/sport/olympics2008/news/article_1425938.php/Four_riders_caught_out_by_new_test_for_&quotequestrian_EPO%22_Monday__Roundup_

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/olympics/article4598345.ece

flshgordon
Aug. 25, 2008, 03:27 PM
The thing about tests is that you can never assume that the tests used in the past are the same tests that are going to be used tomorrow. They don't test for the same substances in every test. The tests themselves are always changing according to new technology and new trends, and there have been so many cases of people using "untestable" products that the USEF/FEI gets wind of and develops a test for, and suddenly large groups of people get caught for the same thing. If the substance is listed as forbidden, and rumor has a number of people are using it, then you can bet there is a test being developed for it.
The news reports even say that it was a new test being used in these particular cases:
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/sport/olympics2008/news/article_1425938.php/Four_riders_caught_out_by_new_test_for_&quotequestrian_EPO%22_Monday__Roundup_

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/olympics/article4598345.ece

Wasn't it published somewhere that Lynch participated in the voluntary testing before the games started? If so, I would think he had every right to conclude that anything in his normal reginem that was acceptable then would be acceptable during the games. If not, talk about your bait & switch.....

CBoylen
Aug. 25, 2008, 03:30 PM
The second article specifically says that capsaicin was not tested for in the voluntary testing. I'm assuming the reporter did their homework, which may not be a valid assumption. But I doubt the voluntary testing came with a guarantee that the process was going to be exactly the same for in-competition testing.

CBoylen
Aug. 25, 2008, 03:36 PM
Upon searching, it seems the voluntary tests came with a very specific indication of what exactly was being tested:
http://www.fei.org/Media/News_Centre/News/Pages/news-PAET-25July08.aspx

Edgar
Aug. 25, 2008, 03:39 PM
I didn't cheat, why would I cheat?

If the news for Denis Lynch in Hong Kong on Thursday was shattering, it wasn't much better back in his native Tipperary on Friday.

The newspaper headlines were rough, reporters were besieging the family home and his parents had had a sleepless night.

His horse, Lantinus -- ranked number one in the world -- had tested positive for a banned substance, he'd been suspended from the Olympics just hours before the showjumping final and his reputation as an honest sportsman had been tarnished.

Aggrieved by the media coverage and distressed for his family, Lynch, in the early hours of Saturday morning Hong Kong time, spoke by phone from his hotel bedroom to the Sunday Independent in a bid to set the record straight.

"I didn't cheat," he said, "and I've no reason to cheat. I'm on the best horse in the world, why would I cheat? I've won four five-star Grands Prix (this year), I'm in the top 20 in the world, I know what I've done all year and I did nothing different (for the Olympics)."

Lantinus has been tested 12 times this year and Lynch voluntarily submitted the horse again for testing after the 10-year-old gelding arrived in Hong Kong for the Games, "to make sure the horse was clean".

This was his 11th test, the result was negative. The 12th was taken after the second round of jumping last Sunday. At about 2.15pm on Thursday Lynch was informed by the showjumping team manager Robert Splaine that this test had produced a positive result.

They met with officials and veterinarians from the international equestrian federation, the FEI, who told them that traces of a substance called capsaicin had been found in the animal's sample. It had been found in three other horses which were also banned from competing in the final.

At a subsequent press conference senior FEI officials said capsaicin was a prohibited substance because its pain-relieving properties were potentially performance-enhancing. It also had "hypersensitisation" properties: if applied to a horse's shins it could inflame them, thereby inducing the animal to jump higher to avoid painful contact with a fence -- a practice known as 'chemical rapping'.

Paul Farrington, a vet with the FEI, said capsaicin had always been banned but only recently had a test been developed to detect it.

But Lynch claims that "the FEI moved the goalposts" for the Beijing Games. "How can a horse test negative all year and then test positive when I've changed nothing? That's the question. I didn't change anything, I did nothing different (for the Games), why change anything when I was doing the same thing all year and winning?"

The substance is contained in an ointment sold commercially as Equi-Block. "I've been using this product for eight years," said Lynch. "And a lot of international riders have been using the product for the last eight years, over half of them I would say. You can buy it from every vet, in every tack shop, at shows all over the world. It does not make a lame horse sound, it does not make a horse jump higher. It's a cream that we rub on a horse's back to warm him up and make him loose."

Lynch said he was the only one of the four suspended riders who spoke to the media after the story broke. During his press conference he produced a tub of Equi-Block. The label on the product has a specially highlighted piece of information: 'Contains CAPSAICIN. Will not test positive'. Did this not trigger alarm bells for Lynch?

"But everyone's been using it! Fifteen horses were tested and four were positive. If 40 horses were tested then 14 would have tested positive and what would have happened then? If you use it (Equi-Block) over eight years and I've been tested and tested and tested, why would you think it was a doping product? It's not about cheating, it's got nothing to do with cheating."

But shouldn't he have checked out what sort of substance capsaicin was, given that it was linked with the words 'positive' and 'test' on the label of the product? "Do you know how much (capsaicin) is in the cream? Well I don't either. And yesterday (Thursday) the FEI couldn't tell me how much of the substance was in the sample. They couldn't say how long he (Lantinus) was positive: was it two days in his system, was it two hours in his system? They couldn't tell me anything."

He also rejected any suggestion that he was engaged in chemical rapping. "Jesus I don't have a clue about it. I've used it on horses' backs, that's it. There's no ifs and buts anymore. That's all. I've got nothing to do with it, I know nothing about it, I never want to have anything to do with it."

On Thursday evening while the final was underway, Lynch returned to his hotel and "closed the door". He didn't watch the final on television, he was in a state of shock. On Friday morning he woke up to headlines that humiliated him and news from home that upset him further.

"My mum called me and said reporters were there tormenting them. She hasn't slept, my father hasn't slept. They're getting hammered by the media. It's sickening. Sickening. I've got fantastic support from my family, my friends, my sponsors, people in Tipperary and from all around the country. And then to be slaughtered like that -- it's wrong."

Lynch, 32, and his horse jumped three rounds in Beijing. The first two were clear bar time penalties and in the third he faulted only at the water jump. The combination was in superb form and on course for a high finish in the final.

"I belonged in the ring that day. That was my dream. I worked 15 years to get there. I didn't go to the Olympics hoping to come 17th or 24th or whatever. I went there with a realistic chance of a medal. And then to be shot down like this . . ."

He knows he will be suspended from competition for a period of time. "But whatever (sanction) they give me will be nothing compared to this. To have everything taken away from you -- the biggest thing you could ever do in this sport is to represent your country at the Olympics and to have it taken away from you like that is a total shock."

Yesterday morning Lynch left Hong Kong for Germany where he lives with his partner Simona and their four-year-old daughter. He will return to Tipperary town "to thank the people for their support before the Olympics and especially for their support now. And afterwards life has got to move on."

But he left Hong Kong behind him with a world of regrets. He admits to being stunned and incredibly disappointed. "I went out there on a mission: to win a gold medal, or a medal of some sort, and that was it. Nothing else.

"And up to a quarter past two yesterday, everything was perfect."

- TOMMY CONLON

Quelle : www.independant.ie

poltroon
Aug. 25, 2008, 03:45 PM
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/olympics/article4598345.ece

Interesting article:


Yet the FEI clearly targeted this substance for these Games and were extremely careful not to flag their intention. Four years ago they trained their sights on certain substances but they issued warnings. In 2004 their intelligence was that riders were using human psychotic drugs, unlicensed for use in horses, to calm what are known as “hot” horses. They quietly began testing for these substances in April 2004 and sent emails to all of the national federations alerting them to their concerns. Before the Athens Games started they issued a clear warning on the doping control pages of their website. In their trawl Waterford Crystal and Cian O’Connor were caught in the nets and stripped of the gold medal.

This time there were no warnings. Nobody was tipped off with a word in the ear. When the riders arrived in Hong Kong they were offered what is termed a postarrival elective test for their horses. No obligation. Lynch decided that Lantinus should have the test. The urine sample had to be submitted within 12 hours of the horse landing in Hong Kong and the team vet, Marcus Swail, waited seven hours before Lantinus issued a sample. The samples were screened for more than 60 substances but not capsaicin.

Evidently the FEI’s reasoning was twofold. They wanted to catch horses in competition and weren’t prepared to send up a flare with the postarrival elective test. They also believed that capsaicin was primarily being used on the circuit as a hypersensitising agent and not as a pain reliever. Their best chance of catching offenders was in competition on the day when, they believed, it would be applied to the horse’s shins. Only 20 showjumping horses were tested at these Olympics and four tested positive for this substance and this substance alone. By any criteria it is an extraordinary strike rate.

This issue has dogged showjumping for a long time. Hypersensitising is a formal term for what is known in Ireland and elsewhere in the equestrian world as “rapping”.

This refers to an illegal training practice where the horse’s shins are brought into contact with a pole or a stick as he’s jumping, to make him jump higher.

However, horses in competition are regularly checked for evidence of this. The shins of sport horses are a constant focus of scrutiny for possible wrongdoing. For years skin swabs used to be taken and that gave way to thermal photography which, for some reason, was absent from these Olympics.

More commonly riders are asked to submit their horse to a “boot check” after they leave the arena. The leather or plastic boots that protect their lower legs are removed by the horse’s groom and the steward examines the shins for any abnormalities or discolouration. He will also smell the boot for any chemical odour. After both of Lantinus’s qualifying rounds in Hong Kong he was subjected to a boot check and was passed by the steward.

poltroon
Aug. 25, 2008, 03:47 PM
Upon searching, it seems the voluntary tests came with a very specific indication of what exactly was being tested:
http://www.fei.org/Media/News_Centre/News/Pages/news-PAET-25July08.aspx

Interesting; it also comes with the line:


These tests will not cover doping agents and any medications not on the scope of FEI Elective Testing.

and the FEI has classified capsaicin as a doping agent.

CBoylen
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:02 PM
and the FEI has classified capsaicin as a doping agent
The FEI classifieds their forbidden substances by both substance type and purpose:
http://www.fei.org/Rules/Veterinary/Documents/AnnexIII-EquineProhibitedList.pdf

To be fair, the USEF lists capsaicin by name in their medication documents, and has for some time, which is why many of us are aware of it. However, I can't find it by name in the FEI rules, just the lump classification of "hypersensitising agents" as doping in their prohibited list. It's possible that someone who wasn't familiar with USEF rules, and didn't look to closely into other applications for the ingredients in his products, could have been unaware it was illegal.

flshgordon
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:11 PM
Upon searching, it seems the voluntary tests came with a very specific indication of what exactly was being tested:
http://www.fei.org/Media/News_Centre/News/Pages/news-PAET-25July08.aspx

The specific statement on that I don't understand is: "These tests will not cover doping agents"

ok so what are the other medications on the list...Ace, Bute, Codeine, Ketaprofen, etc for if they aren't "doping" agents? :confused: :confused: :confused:

Sure I could make anything on that list (and many that aren't) out to have non-doping qualities if I wanted to but a horse with a large amount of Codeine? I think we could guess what that's for

bluemoonfarms
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:12 PM
The FEI classifieds their forbidden substances by both substance type and purpose:
http://www.fei.org/Rules/Veterinary/Documents/AnnexIII-EquineProhibitedList.pdf

To be fair, the USEF lists capsaicin by name in their medication documents, and has for some time, which is why many of us are aware of it. However, I can't find it by name in the FEI rules, just the lump classification of "hypersensitising agents" as doping in their prohibited list. It's possible that someone who wasn't familiar with USEF rules, and didn't look to closely into other applications for the ingredients in his products, could have been unaware it was illegal.

I can only speak for myself personally. If I read a label that said "Will not test" a lot of bells and whistles, horns and fireworks would go off in my head warning me that there was most likely something in that product that I shouldn't be using.

poltroon
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:14 PM
The FEI classifieds their forbidden substances by both substance type and purpose:
http://www.fei.org/Rules/Veterinary/Documents/AnnexIII-EquineProhibitedList.pdf

To be fair, the USEF lists capsaicin by name in their medication documents, and has for some time, which is why many of us are aware of it. However, I can't find it by name in the FEI rules, just the lump classification of "hypersensitising agents" as doping in their prohibited list. It's possible that someone who wasn't familiar with USEF rules, and didn't look to closely into other applications for the ingredients in his products, could have been unaware it was illegal.

That's very interesting, CBoylen, especially in conjunction with the other article which suggests that the FEI did not want to tip anyone off that they were looking for capsaicin. I never would have thought of it (or the camphor in vetrolin etc) as problematic if it had not been explicitly listed by USEF - after all, capsaicin is food for humans, if not horses. When you read that document, if that was all you knew, I can see why "does not test" on a label might not make you think much harder about it.

But still, I'm left trying to understand Germany getting caught in the web, again. Ireland, Norway, Brazil do not have the resources of the USEF at hand. But Germany most certainly does, and was highly motivated to have a full slate of clean tests.

poltroon
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:18 PM
The specific statement on that I don't understand is: "These tests will not cover doping agents"

ok so what are the other medications on the list...Ace, Bute, Codeine, Ketaprofen, etc for if they aren't "doping" agents? :confused: :confused: :confused:

Sure I could make anything on that list (and many that aren't) out to have non-doping qualities if I wanted to but a horse with a large amount of Codeine? I think we could guess what that's for

I think their distinction is meant to be 'substances that have no theraputic benefit and could be harmful to the horse' versus 'substances that we can understand might be in your horse due to earlier beneficial/sensible administration.'

But the codeine caught me as well. I wasn't aware people used codeine theraputically in horses.

CBoylen
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:20 PM
If I read a label that said "Will not test" a lot of bells and whistles, horns and fireworks would go off in my head warning me that there was most likely something in that product that I shouldn't be using.
Well, me too. I also tend to avoid anything with the word "block" or "freeze" in the brand name, but maybe not everyone thinks that way.

ok so what are the other medications on the list...Ace, Bute, Codeine, Ketaprofen, etc for if they aren't "doping" agents? :confused: :confused: :confused:

It doesn't make sense logically, but the prohibited list does rank what is doping and what is medication. The classification makes a big difference in the punishment too.

flshgordon
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:21 PM
Interesting article:


That article actually makes me sick to my stomach that this is the way they go about testing. To me it seems like they purposely set out to trap people for certain substances they thought might be used....even though they could be used in innocuous ways. I don't know....how about we make a statement and say "we feel like this is becoming a big problem and that Xyz agent could be used for chemical rapping so we're coming after everyone big time". It just seems so bizarre to say we're giving you the free testing up front but "oh wait....we're testing for completely different crap during the actual competition so too bad for you". I've never heard of capsaicin being something that would test. Now I have to go see if anything I use (liniments/creams) have it as an ingredient.

flshgordon
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:34 PM
Since I am now SO curious to the diff between the above tested substances & doping, I toured the website and low and behold....talk about your contradictions....

From the "Prohibited Substances (DOPING)" section Annex III:

I can't vouch for every single one, but nearly ALL of the substances listed in the article above fall under the section heading "Prohibited Substances (DOPING)"....there is no distinction between the two. Anti-epileptic drugs, narcotics, steroids, tranquilizers, they're all on there. I did not find a direct listing of Capsaicin though....perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place?

They say they don't test for doping agents but all the above are found under the FEI's heading with DOPING in the title....:confused:

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:42 PM
To be fair, the USEF lists capsaicin by name in their medication documents, and has for some time, which is why many of us are aware of it. However, I can't find it by name in the FEI rules, just the lump classification of "hypersensitising agents" as doping in their prohibited list. It's possible that someone who wasn't familiar with USEF rules, and didn't look to closely into other applications for the ingredients in his products, could have been unaware it was illegal.

CBoylen, do you mean that the FEI does not specifically list capsaicin by name as a prohibited substance, but rather merely states that "hypersensitizing agents" are not allowed? And, if that is correct, it was because capsaicin (along with probably just about any other substance I might find under my kitchen sink) --merely *might* be used for chemical rapping (as well as a number of benign purposes) -- that a positive result for that substance was deemed a violation of the anti-doping rules? If so, I would say the FEI might have a problem on their hands.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:44 PM
I can only speak for myself personally. If I read a label that said "Will not test" a lot of bells and whistles, horns and fireworks would go off in my head warning me that there was most likely something in that product that I shouldn't be using.

I don't disagree, but that applies to Lynch. What about the other 3 riders' horses? Do we have any statements from their riders?

Auventera Two
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:48 PM
No. It's not tragic. It's stupidity.

I'm sorry, but this is the Olympics. If you were a rider/groom/trainer/team manager for an Olympic competitor, would you not make damn sure--SCREAMINGLY damn sure that everything that was used on that horse, fed to that horse, came within the breathing space of that horse, was absolutely Kosher?

I just can't fathom that people would be that careless in this day and age. Really.

I agree. If you're going to compete on that level, know the damned rules or stay home. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure it out. :rolleyes:

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 04:48 PM
But still, I'm left trying to understand Germany getting caught in the web, again. Ireland, Norway, Brazil do not have the resources of the USEF at hand. But Germany most certainly does, and was highly motivated to have a full slate of clean tests.

Germany puzzles me because of their past issues. But I don't see why any non-US country should have to look at USEF rules, which do not apply, to understand FEI rules, which do.

poltroon
Aug. 25, 2008, 05:08 PM
Germany puzzles me because of their past issues. But I don't see why any non-US country should have to look at USEF rules, which do not apply, to understand FEI rules, which do.

What I mean by that is that USEF is a large national federation, with a great deal of $$ and its own state of the art drug testing labs. Thus, people within USEF are naturally well acquainted with drug testing issues and they've had the money to make a list of explicitly prohibited substances (but they are quick to say that substances not on the list but with forbidden qualities are also verboten). They have a hotline with staff that takes member questions about what is permitted and not, and thus they have developed quite a bit of experience and expertise about (a) what tests (b) what horse owners might not guess that will test.

I doubt Ireland, Norway, or Brazil have a hotline that you can call for information on forbidden substances, or that they would have occasion to look at USEF's list. And since capsaicin is a food ingredient, I don't think it's directly obvious that it would be Forbidden.

I agree, "Does Not Test" is like waving a red flag in front of a bull for me. But I can see how, absent the explicit list by USEF, that I would read that, note that the ingredient was capsaicin, noting that I was applying it to the skin only, and think it was still OK. I can also see that if you had been using a tube like that for years and years and years (as I have used Vetrolin for years) that you might not think that much of it.

Ruby G. Weber
Aug. 25, 2008, 05:24 PM
FORBIDDEN SUBSTANCES (examples) is the heading the USEF uses for it rather lengthly list of banned substances. "Examples" parenthetically is the apparent loop hole as it clearly leaves room for the additions.

Historically someone tips off the FEI/USEF regarding the use of a new substance, they develop a test for it, and voila a number of folks take a vacation. Or forfeit an Olympic medal. No it doesn't seem fair but it's not new.

Interestingly, the then AHSA got a head start over FEI in the drug testing department. I remember there was a considerble lag between the onset of testing by AHSA and testing by FEI.

tartanfarm
Aug. 25, 2008, 05:36 PM
Every team travels with vets, therapists, team managers and others. I don't understand why each and every item that touches a horse, including obscure items like saddle pad detergent, are not individually checked, double checked and approved before use ,by one of these professionals. To me that is part of the team management.

CBoylen
Aug. 25, 2008, 05:38 PM
CBoylen, do you mean that the FEI does not specifically list capsaicin by name as a prohibited substance
If they do I can't find it in their rules. I'd be thrilled if someone could find it for me.


I can't vouch for every single one, but nearly ALL of the substances listed in the article above fall under the section heading "Prohibited Substances (DOPING)"....there is no distinction between the two. Anti-epileptic drugs, narcotics, steroids, tranquilizers, they're all on there.
As far as I can tell the substances tested for in the voluntary testing don't fall under doping. To be doping the tranquilizers have to be non-equine, for example. I'm not familiar with some of the medications tested for in the voluntary testing list, but as far as I can tell they all fall under the "medication" heading of the prohibited substances list, as it says they do in the explanation of the voluntary testing. They are horse medications. Notice how reserpine and fluphenazine, two of the biggest doping agents, aren't on the list for voluntary testing.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 07:06 PM
What I mean by that is that USEF is a large national federation, with a great deal of $$ and its own state of the art drug testing labs. Thus, people within USEF are naturally well acquainted with drug testing issues and they've had the money to make a list of explicitly prohibited substances (but they are quick to say that substances not on the list but with forbidden qualities are also verboten). They have a hotline with staff that takes member questions about what is permitted and not, and thus they have developed quite a bit of experience and expertise about (a) what tests (b) what horse owners might not guess that will test.

I doubt Ireland, Norway, or Brazil have a hotline that you can call for information on forbidden substances, or that they would have occasion to look at USEF's list. And since capsaicin is a food ingredient, I don't think it's directly obvious that it would be Forbidden.


Right, but what I am saying is the USEF's list of prohibited substances is not necessarily (and in fact is not) the same as the FEI's. Just because it is banned by USEF does not mean is banned under FEI Rules, and vice versa. It might be educational to look at lists from various governing bodies, but the only one relevant (here, anyway) is the FEI list. And if the FEI list does not explicitly list a substance as banned, when that substance is used for both benign and allegedly nefarious purposes (e.g., liniment vs. chemical rapping), I have a real problem with the organization declaring that use of the previously-unnamed substance is violative of the rules, for the simple reason that it has not given anything resembling adequate notice that that product is banned. Coupled with the fact it appears that the FEI did its best to trap competitors with its testing protocol (as described in the article above), their regulations have provided zero guidance for well-intentioned competitors and no deterrence for ones arguably less well-intentioned. Does anyone have any idea how many commonly used products might arguably be used for "chemical rapping"? I bet if I clipped my horse and left Redken shampoo on a close-clipped leg it would be irritating.

And what REALLY makes me mad is that apparently somehow the FEI thought it preferable to lure competitors into a false sense of complacency through their voluntary testing protocol so that maybe -- hopefully -- someone would cheat and burn their horse's legs in competition? Why would the FEI not want to do everything it could to prevent any and all instances of mistreatment of the animals. Of course, if it were really interested in protecting the horses and regulating true instances of chemical rapping, it could have actually used the thermography technology that was available to it.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 07:10 PM
Every team travels with vets, therapists, team managers and others. I don't understand why each and every item that touches a horse, including obscure items like saddle pad detergent, are not individually checked, double checked and approved before use ,by one of these professionals. To me that is part of the team management.

I have no problem with the idea of everything being checked and approved in advance; to do so would be prudent. But it appears that would not have prevented the use of Equi-block in this case, and in addition, absent a list from the FEI that explicitly bans certain products (as opposed to broad and vague types and categories of products), there is not sufficient guidance available for people to say, with a level of certainty that should be expected, whether a product is permissible or not.

bluemoonfarms
Aug. 25, 2008, 07:26 PM
I have an absolutely absurd question that I am almost afraid to ask. Lynch has admitted to using Equi-Blok all year and has won a lot throughout the year. Is he in danger of having those previous placings taken away from him and any monies won returned?

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 07:36 PM
I have an absolutely absurd question that I am almost afraid to ask. Lynch has admitted to using Equi-Blok all year and has won a lot throughout the year. Is he in danger of having those previous placings taken away from him and any monies won returned?

I don't think that is an absurd question at all. If there ultimately is an FEI ruling that the use of Equi-block is a violation of the regulations (we only have test results and an admission right now; the hearing process still has to run its course) then I would think his previous placements might be in jeopardy. But if the rules are as poorly drafted as it appears they may have been (i.e., explicitly prohibiting "hypersensitizing" agents but not defining this term or listing capsaicin), I think notwithstanding his admission he may have some pretty good arguments available to him. Given that the rules impose a type of strict liability and do not take into account any kind of intent, it is especially important that they give adequate notice of what products constitute prohibited ones. I had never heard of capsaicin being used as a chemical rapping agent until this incident at the Olympics; I did know some people use it to enhance coats, and that the USEF prohibits its use (which I thought was due to its supposed pain-relieving properties). But if I were looking at a rule that said "no hypersensitization agents," capsaicin would not have entered my mind as a possibility (the issue of the labeling on the Equi-block is separate -- that *would* have raised a red flag to me, but we do not yet know if all 4 competitors were using that or a similarly-labeled product).

poltroon
Aug. 25, 2008, 07:48 PM
YankeeLawyer, I think you and I are in complete agreement, except I'd be surprised to hear that there is a substance banned by USEF rules that is okey-dokey with the FEI.

I am confused as to how you can use capsaicin to sensitize a jumper's legs in a way that would not be detected during the boot/leg check, where they can evaluate the horse's reaction to being touched. That seems to me to be more definitive than a blood scan for the effect we're discussing.

canyonoak
Aug. 25, 2008, 08:23 PM
I am incredibly disheartened by FEI nearly all of the time, this current situation being an excellent example of WHY and HOW I get disheartened.

You offer a pre-event test...and it turns out the test is to lull the riders into believeing their horse management is fine, but AHA! the real idea is to then do further drug tests for completely other substances...thus making the original drug test a total sham.

You announce that there WILL be thermography used to catch those who try to hypersensitize or in any other way monkey with their horses' legs...a fine tool which has a highly legitimate purpose..but then, if the above posts are correct--you do NOT use the tool.
In fact, you do not use the best tool to evaluate who has and who has not tried to do anything to their horses' legs; instead, you use a 'secret' unannounced drug panel/scan/test. Which, as everyone knows,looks at metabolites rather than substances.

In addition, you scan for metabolites of a substance that is basically used to jangle and then deaden nerve endings..and you announce that it has been used to hyper-sensitize.
And then you find that a rather alarmingly large percentage of horses all have the same substance/metabolites in their system!

No wonder Princess Haya is returning to competition and turning the mother ship over to the other...well, they are not human, although I guess they are beings.

WADA has trashed so many lives, so many reputations...I simply do not see how any of this new totally self-created drug scandal engineered by FEI will turn out to be good for the sport.

It is as though FEI decided it needed to have a drug scandal in order to show their support of WADA!!!

JET11
Aug. 25, 2008, 09:00 PM
they all used the equi-block for the same reason. to burn the legs. it doesn't matter that they are all from different countries. at that level they all know the same tricks.

Ruby G. Weber
Aug. 25, 2008, 09:19 PM
If you follow the FEI's rules of competition to the letter you may only give your horse hay, grain and water and, believe it or not, GastroGard. I don't know of anything, including EquiBlock, whether used on the back or smeared on the legs, that falls neatly in between hay, grain, water and GastroGard.

The FEI's stance? Nothing is acceptable. Named or not, previously tested for or not. Fair? No. I stand on the same side of the fence as do YankeeLawyer and Poltroon and others on that score. But as I mentioned earlier, none of this is new. Will it ever change? I leave the monumental task of reform to the younger generation.

Supposedly, after Athens, the FEI took a hard look at their anti-doping rules in light of the events there. Possibly they have quietly accepted trace amounts of certain substances. For all we know the HK test may have been screaming Capsaicin.

canyonoak
Aug. 25, 2008, 09:29 PM
<< they all used the equi-block for the same reason. to burn the legs.>>

Of course! That makes perfect sense!

Ludger Beerbaum lost Germany the gold medal in 2004 because he used a steroid ointment on his horses front leg boot rub. Even the FEI stated that the ointment was in no way used for performance enhancement, was in fact used to promote good welfare of the horse, and had been checked with the vet -- but nevertheless, they stripped the medal.

Now, 4 years later--why OF COURSE another German team member decides to use a performance-enhancing ointment on his horse's legs. Not only that, he picks something that actually--after it jangles the nerve endings-- DEADENS the same nerve endings.
Why yes, I can see them in their team meetings now, with Ludger Beerbaum giving a wink and a nudge, saying, Now guys, remember, we dont want to lose any medals over drug tests THIS time!

Even though any one with a brain and a set of clippers can produce "razor burn", or use countless other techniques if they want to monkey with their horse's legs, why of course--all these different riders used a crappy, cheap OTC ointment because it was all they could think to do.

Oh, I see now. Even though the FEI has announced it will be LOOKING FOR evidence of burning the horse's legs, why yes, concentrate on finding something...that burns the horse's legs! Because you just cannot trust these Olympic horses to want to jump!

And yet..the FEI apparently did not use the thermography tools to actually check to see if indeed any of the horses' legs were affected.

Now, that's a pity.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 09:31 PM
they all used the equi-block for the same reason. to burn the legs. it doesn't matter that they are all from different countries. at that level they all know the same tricks.

Lemorro, you are entitled to your opinion. But to my knowledge, to date, only one of four of the riders implicated in this mess has come forward and provided a statement that he used a product that contains capsaicin (in his case, Equi-block). He denies having used it for any other purpose; the FEI has neither alleged nor has it indicated that it has any evidence that it has been used for any other purpose. The results from the B samples have not yet been released; neither the investigation nor the hearing process has been concluded. And, as indicated above, it appears that it is arguable whether the FEI Rules actually prohibit capsaicin at all. They do prohibit "hypersensitizing" agents, whatever those are.

Moreover, there is still the possibility that the test results were a product of lab or sample contamination. And without any statement from 3 of the riders, if it turns out that the testing process was faulty, it appears they would have a high likelihood of being exonerated (whereas the one who admitted using Equi-block will be left arguing, for example, whether the rules as written suffice to prohibit that specific substance).

In any event, it is premature to declare anyone's culpability, and certainly no one (not here, at least) has any idea why the one rider used capsaicin or whether the others in fact did at all.

canyonoak
Aug. 25, 2008, 10:23 PM
http://www.sms-pferdenews.de/

(babelfish translation)

Basically--he says he has used Equi-block on Coster's back since Cannes CSI.
He points out he would do nothing to jeopardize his team, let alone his own reputation.

I think he says that because the horse has always tested negative, he assumed the stuff was OK to use.


<
Christian Ahlmann goes to the Doping disaster from Hong Kong into the offensive: The world-wide closed jumping rider grants possible errors, but against Doping reproaches he sits down to the resistance. He massed its embankment oh Cöster after a witch shot only the back - however with an ointment, the one forbidden substance (Capsaicin) contains. `Case I made an error, do to me that sincerely leid´, said the 33-Jährige on Sunday at a press conference in its place of residence Marl. Ahlmann fights for its call. The events in Hong Kong not only it, but the horse haven altogether would harm and concomitantly its crew comrade. It does not want to accept all this, and therefore it pulls before the international one Sport Court of Justice (CAS). Ahlmann wants against of Rider world union PROTECT with immediate effect imposed world-wide barrier proceed. It judges it as unfair and law adverse to close a professional rider world-wide as long as the procedure is not yet final and many open questions would be located unanswered in the area. `I become therefore the protecting decision with the CAS anfechten´, said the 33-Jährige. Ahlmanns of 15 years old embankment oh Cöster had been positively tested in Hong Kong just like three other horses in a-sample on the forbidden means Capsaicin. The rider was excluded on it from the plays and flew back immediately to Germany. `I am from all clouds please and was first times speechless. I was total and could no clear thoughts fassen´, meant he to the escape with night and fog. On Friday in Hong Kong also the B-sample had been opened. The result is loud PROTECTS within the next seven days to be present. Ahlmann has however only little hope: `I assume the result of the B-sample is not equal loud wird.´ he failure consciously, protests Ahlmann: `I was in good faith the opinion that the use of the ointment did not have a bad medication darstellt.´ nevertheless that World union a barrier against it, working world-wide, imposes. How long it is to last, is not well-known it. Ahlmann: `PROTECT only communicated that it at least up to the conclusion of the Procedure into force remains, but when the procedure is locked, is completely open. I regret the developed eddy zutiefst.´ The reason for the use of the ointment was a witch shot with Cöster, which suffered embankment oh with the tournament in Cannes. It had to be treated therefore veterinary and be inserted a longer match break, reports Ahlmann: `Since this incident we have Cöster daily the backs with the ointment Equiblock massiert.´ This ointment contains the plant active substance Capsaicin, which was Ahlmann communicated by experts also. Since it is freely available in the trade, it assumed it is a preservative agent and no medicine, whose application one must announce means the jumping rider: `The further procedure will show whether my estimate correctly or wrongly war.´ The mentioned ointment promotes the blood circulation and works approximately Muscle spannings and - hardening. If it is laid on however above the hooves, in order to make the legs of the horses pain sensitive, so that they pull up it over the obstacles, it concerns Doping and no more around medication. Knows Ahlmann, which insures: `I can only say that we the legs of Cöster never with the ointment masses, but them only for the relaxation of the back musculature used haben.´ up to clarifying the special and legal situation he will not however any longer use the ointment. It used it already before, and there the sample was negative. Ahlmann: `Therefore I had also no doubts or the thought, that as Mediaktion anzugeben.´ beside Ahlmann was three further riders in Hong Kong suspended, after with their horses likewise in each case in a-sample of arrears of the forbidden active substance Capsaicin determined were. It concerned the Brazilian Bernardo Alves with its horse Chupa Chup, Denis lynches (Ireland) with Latinus and Tony Andre Hansen (Norway) with Camiro. >>

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 25, 2008, 10:45 PM
Germany apparently is making Ahlmann repay his costs for travel and accommodation at the Olympics. Why even bother having an A/B sample process, investigation, hearing and appeal if people are going to come to a definitive conclusion as soon as A sample results are released?

BEIJING (Reuters) - Germany will send a bill to show jumper Christian Ahlmann for his travel and accommodation costs at the Games after his horse failed a dope test, International Olympic Committee (IOC) vice president Thomas Bach told Reuters.

Bach, head of Germany's National Olympic Committee, said on Saturday Ahlmann would be the first German asked to refund the costs of his participation due to a failed doping test.

"This is a new element of our anti-doping campaign and I'm optimistic that it will have a deterrent effect," Bach said in an interview with Reuters.

"We required every athlete on the Olympic team to sign an agreement obliging them to reimburse all their travel and accommodations costs if they are have a positive doping test."

Bach said the total bill for Ahlmann had yet to be calculated, but added: "It's not going to be cheap."

Ahlmann, who will have to pay all the transport and stall costs for his horse as well, was one of four show jumpers suspended after their horses tested positive for capsaicin.

Capsaicin, an active ingredient in chilli peppers, is sometimes applied as a paste or lotion to a horse's forelegs so that they try harder to lift their smarting shins over fences.

Ahlmann was also suspended from the German Olympic team pending the results of the B-sample, due within the next four days, and will be ejected if it is positive.

Bach, who is also head of the IOC's disciplinary commission, had vowed that the Beijing Olympics would have more doping controls than ever before.

Bach, who won a fencing gold medal for West Germany, said he did not know of any countries with similar financial deterrents to doping but added he hoped others would follow.

"We believe it is a useful tool against doping and would warmly welcome other countries adopting this or other measures that contribute to the anti-doping battle," he said.

Michael Vesper, Germany's chef de mission, said he was stunned that Ahlmann had apparently ignored the warnings about doping.

"He is going to have to pay for all his costs and he will be thrown off the team if the results are confirmed," Vesper told Reuters.

"We are not going to finance a trip to China for cheats. We cannot pay for anyone who breaks the rules."

harvestmoon
Aug. 25, 2008, 11:32 PM
they all used the equi-block for the same reason. to burn the legs. it doesn't matter that they are all from different countries. at that level they all know the same tricks.

You know this for a fact? Have any proof?

gottagrey
Aug. 26, 2008, 12:41 AM
Lemorro, I think that is a pretty harsh statement. Equi-Block has 0.025% Capsaicin. I am not saying that there are not cheats out there, but to make a blanket statement like that IMO is without merit.

Some have said that Lynch should have known better because the Manufacturer lists Capsaicin as an ingredient and says it does not test. the Manufacturer's Labeling - "does not test" could be because there is only 0.025% Capsaicin- meaning this would be below the threshold for a positive test. Hence, Lynch's previous negative tests. The reporter who blasted Lynch should have done some homework on Equi-Block before stating he is a "doper".

Now this is really reaching and far fetched but being that this is in China - a land known for some spicey (read peppers, hot chili oil etc) could it be that perhaps one lab or 2 lab technicians happened to be enjoying a nice spicy lunch or dinner while performing their lab tests? Could it be that maybe the samples may have gotten contaminated?

I would like to believe that most of these top level professionals have their horses best interest at heart- they were trying to do right by their horse partners. Unfortunately those unscrupulous types have made it very very difficult for those who do want to do right by their equine partners and for the sport.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 26, 2008, 06:29 AM
Now this is really reaching and far fetched but being that this is in China - a land known for some spicey (read peppers, hot chili oil etc) could it be that perhaps one lab or 2 lab technicians happened to be enjoying a nice spicy lunch or dinner while performing their lab tests? Could it be that maybe the samples may have gotten contaminated?


Yes; it is possible that there was lab or sample contamination, or that the results were otherwise false positives. But, first Lynch, and now apparently Ahlmann, have come forward and admitted using Equi-block, which does contain trace amounts of Capsaicin. Ironically, if it were to turn out that the tests were flawed / false positives, it would not matter, because these riders admitted using the substance. That is, assuming that the FEI rules, as written, actually suffice to prohibit capsaicin. Assuming it is correct that the rules prohibit "hypersensitizing agents" but do not SPECIFICALLY ban capsaicin, I really do think the FEI has a problem on their hands, as I said before, particularly since capsaicin has recognized benign uses and in fact is fairly common even in innocuous things like a Dorito (okay, well Doritos may have their own issues ; )). Theoretically, just about ANYTHING could conceivably be used as a hypersensitizing agent, including pure water (if one were for example to scald a horse with it).

HAY, FEED, WATER (+ Gastroguard) only?


No actually, these are not even explicitly permitted by the FEI. Feed? You have got to be kidding me. Any idea of how many possible formulations of feed there are out there, and how many possible ingredients might be deemed a "problem" under the FEI's broad categorizations of prohibited TYPES of substances? I am sure a survey of feeds out there might reveal some interesting observations. Take magnesium, for example. I don't have a feed label handy at the moment, but I bet most feeds, including mine, probably contain some amount of magnesium. Uh oh. Magnesium is KNOWN to have calming properties, particularly in horses that would otherwise be deficient in the mineral (e.g., due to the soil conditions where they ordinarily graze). What if the FEI decides without telling anyone, and without expressly banning magnesium, that all of a sudden they are going to target that (maybe because they heard Quiessence, a magnesium product, is suddenly being abused). See the problem? Not to mention the fact that feed contamination is not unheard of (see e.g., pet food scandals earlier this year -- oh yeah, didn't those feeds come from CHINA? -- and Purina recall of horse feeds, for contamination).

Hay? You mean you would risk feeding HAY to your competition horses? I am not an expert on weeds by any means, but I am sure someone here could think of some noxious weed that could fall afoul of the FEI's ban on categorizations of substances. I would have to give that one some more thought to come up with examples, but I am fairly certain that with a little research I could.

Water? As I said, could be used to hypersensitize (scalding) and relieve pain (freezing). Don't even go there!

I do understand that the governing bodies could not be expected to explicitly list every substance under the sun that is prohibited; that would not be possible (hence the USEF's list of banned substances as "Examples"). But, as to certain substances, including capsaicin, the FEI is fully aware of their existence, apparently is fully aware of the potential for abuse, and in fact has a test specifically designed to identify that substance. So why not clue in competitors that it is specifically banned, because among the many innocuous uses for it, some characters out there use it to torture their horses? As I said before, imo, the FEI rules appear to neither provide sufficient guidance for those who are well-intentioned or sufficient deterrence for those arguably not well-intentioned.

And the bigger question is -- are these rules really catching the cheaters, or just trapping people who make (albeit frequently dumb) mistakes related to therapeutic uses of subsrances? And are they the best we can do for the horses, some of whom might really appreciate the equivalent of an Advil in the middle of a week's worth of Olympic jumping?

(Do note that some of the above is written with a healthy dose of sarcasm, but I am just illustrating how vague and overbroad the rules are).

p.s. Why on earth is Gastroguard permitted, anyway? Don't get me wrong; I think is a great product, especially for horses under any kind of stress, like competition horses. But why Gastroguard and not other products that have similar properties?

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 26, 2008, 06:40 AM
Another thing -- I think it is outrageous that only 15 showjumpers were drugtested prior to the individual competition, particularly since the FEI took the stance that any A sample positive sufficed to bar the rider and horse from competing. If later exonerated, there is nothing anyone can ever do to give that opportunity back to that pair. The FEI/IOC's position is that they are zero tolerance, and these measures are necessary to crack down on doping. If so, then TEST ALL COMPETITORS. The MAJORITY of competitors were not tested before competing, yet, if they ultimately end up having an A sample positive, they are in the position of being able to wait for the B samples and go through the full hearing process, and ultimately challenge any positive results and perhaps be exonerated -- all while having ridden in the Games and maybe even medalled. But the 4 riders among the unlucky 15 who were targeted will never be in that position. The best they can hope for is to be exonerated at some point. And given what a scandal that would be (i.e., being wrongfully denied the opportunity to compete) I question whether there is any possibility that the FEI would ever exonerate them (though perhaps the CAS is more objective).

canyonoak
Aug. 26, 2008, 10:49 AM
Let me see.

A few weeks before the equestrian portion of the Olympics starts, FEI fires its head vet and replaces him with another FEI vet.

FEI announces it will use thermography. Apparently it decides not to.

FEI does 15 drug tests, finds that nearly 25% test positive, but does not test the rest of the competitors.
FEI does not use thermography on any of the positives in order to ascertain if indeed any legs show signs of anything, let alone hypersensitization.

FEI suggests everyone do the pre-event drug test, finds all negative, but then performs a completely different drug tests to find the positives.

I cannot imagine any sport finding 25% positives and not testing all other competitiors.

WHat if they had done so and found over 50% using capsaicin? 75%?

This is WADA techniques--make a big stink, find someone(s) positive and applaud yourself while destroying human beings, sport, careers, reputations, federations, etc.

chraming. ANd sd good to know that FEI and NF's will just bend over.

gottagrey
Aug. 26, 2008, 10:58 AM
Yankee Lawyer you make some very valid points - the thing is the FEI has 0 tolerance rule -so Equi-Block contains trace amounts of Capsaicin - it doesn't matter how much or little the test shows - only that the test was positive! It is unfortunate for these riders that the results reports given to the media do not include the level or amount in which the horse tested positive. To read some of the articles you would think these horses were high on METH. Again, I am not saying there are not cheats and scoundrels out there but I think it is wrong to assume that every rider/person who has a positve test is as Lemorro stated. I know of a trainer who had a positive drug test on a horse - she had no idea how the horse tested positive as it was for something she did not ever use or administer - turns out the horse was a cribber and cribbed on his neighbor's stall - where that particular barn had used something on the stall to disinfect/clean.

I remember when human drug testing for employment first became popular -you were warned not to eat something as benign as a poppy seed muffin or bage or you could test postive for opiates. Ditto for some OTC sinus/cold meds - could test you positive for marijuana.

Lavendar is on the USEF list of forbidden substances - why is something so seemingly benign on the list? Never having been a druggy or a cheat or a scoundrel it would never ever occur to me - I guess that it why I want to assume the best of these riders and not the worst.

Mozart
Aug. 26, 2008, 11:03 AM
Let me see.

A few weeks before the equestrian portion of the Olympics starts, FEI fires its head vet and replaces him with another FEI vet.

FEI announces it will use thermography. Apparently it decides not to.

FEI does 15 drug tests, finds that nearly 25% test positive, but does not test the rest of the competitors.
FEI does not use thermography on any of the positives in order to ascertain if indeed any legs show signs of anything, let alone hypersensitization.

FEI suggests everyone do the pre-event drug test, finds all negative, but then performs a completely different drug tests to find the positives.

I cannot imagine any sport finding 25% positives and not testing all other competitiors.

WHat if they had done so and found over 50% using capsaicin? 75%?

This is WADA techniques--make a big stink, find someone(s) positive and applaud yourself while destroying human beings, sport, careers, reputations, federations, etc.

chraming. ANd sd good to know that FEI and NF's will just bend over.

I think that about covers it. However, I am still a bit gobsmacked that two teams who have had, shall we say, their "issues" with drug tests would not put everything they put on, in or around their horses under a figurative microscope. Either they were being surprisingly...relaxed..or those riders thought they were getting away with something. However, if being used for the latter...would that not somehow show up in a boot check? Aside from looking and sniffing...do the stewards also run their hand along the horse's shin?

Which of course brings us back to thermography test. Yes, make a big announcement about it and then don't use it.

Ruby G. Weber
Aug. 26, 2008, 02:52 PM
GastroGard is approved because the head of Merck sits on the FEI Board?

Two down, two to go. Wanna bet those rider's B sample results are positive too?

As I have said before, using the element of surprise is the way USEF and FEI operate in the drug testing theater. (Back in the 70's USEF didn't bother to mention it had come up with a test for reserpine - nor include it in the list of "examples" and oh my the positives looked like a list of who's who in horse showing.)

Yankee, I know you think because FEI does not specifically list capsaicin as a banned substance they are going to "have their hands full." Unfortunately for the innocent riders I don't agree. The FEI has covered it's tush with "Zero Tolerance."

One more thing. I suspect if the FEI thought EquiBlock was being used for the purpose stated by Allman and Lynch they may well have left the whole capsaicin thing alone.

poltroon
Aug. 26, 2008, 03:27 PM
GastroGard is approved because the head of Merck sits on the FEI Board?

Whimper.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 26, 2008, 04:26 PM
Yankee, I know you think because FEI does not specifically list capsaicin as a banned substance they are going to "have their hands full." Unfortunately for the innocent riders I don't agree. The FEI has covered it's tush with "Zero Tolerance."


I have not looked at all their regs closely but I disagree that a prohibition on "hypersensitization" agents suffices to prohibit capsaicin (given some of the factors I already mentioned) and, imo, "zero tolerance" does not CYA adequately -- hence my examples of hay, water, and feed being arguably prohibited substances. Absurd? Maybe, but the point was to illustrate how plainly absurd their rules are. I really hope someone gets these riders a lawyer (and imo they could have used one from the get go, but that is a different story).

And again, is the FEI actually catching the cheaters, the most egregious cases of cheating, the ones the rules were supposedly designed to catch, or are the rules, as I suspect, both overly broad and underinclusive? (Overly broad in the sense they are catching innocent and "quasi" innocent conduct and underinclusive because they appear not to be unmasking the worst cheats).

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 26, 2008, 04:31 PM
One more thing. I suspect if the FEI thought EquiBlock was being used for the purpose stated by Allman and Lynch they may well have left the whole capsaicin thing alone.

If the FEI wanted to know the truth, they would have used thermography.

And, does anyone happen to know if they had video cameras in the aisles of the stabling area there? Perhaps time-stamped tapes of everything done to a horse (in the barn, at least) while on the grounds at the Games? Presumably such tapes would exist for security reasons, no?

summerhorse
Aug. 26, 2008, 04:38 PM
I don't know anything about the circumstances surrounding that but I will say if my horse ever was in need of medical treatment he would get it and screw the medal; I would withdraw from the competition. No medal is worth risking your horse's life by denying needed medical attention. That is absurd.

I agree. I am kind of shocked that anyone would let a horse COLIC without treatment for a chance at a medal (was that her first or something?) but I forget for some people it is the winning that counts not the animal.

Geneva
Aug. 26, 2008, 05:00 PM
GastroGard is approved because the head of Merck sits on the FEI Board?And who might this be? And what were those person's titles as of the time this decision was made? And can you tell us the date that decision was made? And is it Merck, or the offshoot Merial, that owns the patent on Gastrogard? And does Merck own a patent on cimetidine? Ranitidine? Because as I recall these were expressly approved by the FEI at the same time as omeprazole (a/k/a Gastrogard).



The competitor's guide to med control, which all NFs know they should be distributing to all their international riders upon registering them, actually summarizes things quite clearly in simple layman's terms.

http://www.fei.org/Rules/Veterinary/Documents/Anglais.pdf


Is any medication allowed ?
Yes. Certain medications are permitted under FEI Rules. These currently
include rehydration fluids, antibiotics with the exception of
procaine penicillin and anti-parasite drugs (dewormers) with the
exception of levamisole. In addition, some drugs to treat or prevent
gastric ulcers may be given (i.e. ranitidine, cimetidine and omeprazole).
The use of altrenogest (Regumate) is currently permitted for
mares with oestrus-related behavioural problems. Only saline is
permitted as an inhalation therapy in a competition horse.


Can I treat my horse during or prior to a competition ?
...With the exception of the permitted medications described above, your horse must be "clean" at the time of competition.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 26, 2008, 05:14 PM
[From the FEI Pamphlet]
Please keep in mind the possible contamination of feed by prohibited substances and discuss this with your feed supplier. Food for competition horses should be certified free of prohibited substances. Avoid buying products in retail outlets for which specifications are unclear or from retailers you do not know very well. This warning also applies to certain herbal products and feed additives.

What is the likelihood of a feed supplier being willing to certify his/her products are free of prohibited substances?

Ruby G. Weber
Aug. 26, 2008, 06:14 PM
Sorry guys. The Merck comment was meant to be tongue in cheek.

If you believe USEF is a good ol' boys club well then you now have a better understanding of the FEI.

I admire you YL for your desire to go to the defense of these four riders. And I totally agree with your sentiment regarding the absurdity of some of the rules although the one about checking your feed is simple for me to understand. FEI wants to make sure no one tries to blame the feed mill for a positive test. Or the farmer who made the hay. Heaven forbid a chamomile flower gets baled with the Timothy!

The fact remains these riders got caught using a linament containing a banned substance.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 26, 2008, 06:35 PM
FEI wants to make sure no one tries to blame the feed mill for a positive test. Or the farmer who made the hay. Heaven forbid a chamomile flower gets baled with the Timothy!

The fact remains these riders got caught using a linament containing a banned substance.

The certification suggestion really doesn't make a lot of sense. Sure, the FEI is saying be careful. But all a certification will do for anyone (IF you could obtain it) is give the competitor recourse against the mill if despite the certification, the feed turns out to be contaminated. The FEI won't accept as a defense the fact the feed was certified free of banned substances. Advising that competitors obtain such certifications, however, implies that they might be entitled to rely on such guarantees.

Re the riders getting caught using a liniment with a "banned substance": (1) to my knowledge, only 2 of the 4 riders have provided any statement, and both said they used Equi-block; and (2) I still maintain that arguably the FEI regs do not contain language banning capsaicin.

Dixon
Aug. 26, 2008, 07:20 PM
If I asked any feed supplier, whether of horse feed, dog feed or human feed, to certify that the food was free of prohibited substances and that feed supplier refused, I'd publicize the hell out of it and find another supplier. After what recently happened with dogfood from China (yes, the same China that hosted these Olympics), feed suppliers should be so liability-averse that they've combed and cleaned their sources and processing plants well enough to certify with confidence that their product is not tainted with prohibited substances.

bluemoonfarms
Aug. 26, 2008, 07:34 PM
This is from the FEI.org site

Annex III Equine Prohibited List
SUBSTANCES AND METHODS PROHIBITED IN-COMPETITION
PROHIBITED SUBSTANCES (DOPING)


Agents, cocktails or mixtures of substances that may affect the performance of a horse;
masking agents; substances with no generally accepted medical use in competition
horses; substances which are usually products prescribed for use in humans or other
species; agents used to hypersensitise or desensitise the limbs or body parts, including
but not limited to:

• two or more anti-inflammatory drugs (steroidal and/or non-steroidal) or other
combinations of anti-inflammatory substances with similar or distinct
pharmacological actions;
• antipsychotic, anti-epileptic and antihypertensive substances including reserpine,
gabapentin, fluphenazine, and guanabenz;
• antidepressants such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs),
monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs);
• tranquilizers, sedatives (including sedating antihistaminics) commonly used in
humans and/or non-equine species, including benzodiazepines, barbiturates and
azaperone ;
• narcotics and opioid analgesics; endorphins;
• amphetamines and other central nervous system (CNS) stimulants including
cocaine and related psychotic drugs;
• beta-blockers including propranolol, atenolol, and timolol;
• diuretics and other masking agents;
• anabolic steroids (including testosterone in mares and geldings) and growth
promoters;
• peptides and genetically recombinant substances such as erythropoietin, insulin
growth factor and growth hormone;
• hormonal products (natural or synthesized) including adrenocorticotropic hormone
(ACTH) and cortisol (above the threshold);
• substances designed and marketed primarily for human use or use in other species
and for which alternative and generally accepted products are available for use in
horses;
• hypersensitizing or sensitizing agents (organic or inorganic or other substances
likely to have been applied to body parts or to tack to influence performance);
• oxygen carriers;

and other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological
effect(s).

2


PROHIBITED SUBSTANCES (MEDICATION CLASS A)

Agents which could influence performance by relieving pain, sedating, stimulating or
producing/modifying other physiological or behavioural effects, including:

• local anaesthetics;
• sympathomimetic cardiac stimulants;
• central and respiratory stimulants;
• clenbuterol and other bronchodilators and products used for the treatment of
recurrent airway disease (RAD);
• a single non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug ± metabolite(s);
• a single corticosteroid;
• sedatives or tranquillisers indicated for equine use including antihistamines;
thiamine; valerian and other herbal products other than those listed as Prohibited
Substances (Doping);
• muscle relaxants including methocarbamol and propantheline;
• anti-coagulants including heparin or warfarin;
and other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological
effect(s).

Doesn't the FEI cover themselves by stating:

"agents used to hypersensitise or desensitise the limbs or body parts, including
but not limited to:"

and

"and other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological
effect(s). "

As far as feed goes I had a major problem with my broodmares a while back and had everything at my barn tested. The problem was in the feed and the manufacturer was a major feed company. Very scary.

All of the barns I have visited in Europe have mixed their own feed on site. They could still have a problem with the ingredients they purchase to mix but would be less likely to incur any problems.

nycjumper
Aug. 26, 2008, 07:52 PM
Re: the supposedly untreated colic - can someone verify this is in fact true? I have never heard about it before someone posted on this thread about it.

Peggy
Aug. 26, 2008, 08:33 PM
Dang! Endorphins are on the list posted by bluemoonfarms. There goes that scheme to retire early;).

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 26, 2008, 09:01 PM
If I asked any feed supplier, whether of horse feed, dog feed or human feed, to certify that the food was free of prohibited substances and that feed supplier refused, I'd publicize the hell out of it and find another supplier. After what recently happened with dogfood from China (yes, the same China that hosted these Olympics), feed suppliers should be so liability-averse that they've combed and cleaned their sources and processing plants well enough to certify with confidence that their product is not tainted with prohibited substances.

Good luck with that. It is precisely because of the recent scandals that no supplier with a brain in their head would attempt to guarantee the products are free of prohibited substances.

By the way, with such poorly -- YES POORLY-- drafted "prohibitions" by the FEI, how on Earth is any supplier supposed to make such a certification? It would be unbelievably irresponsible, in my opinion, for a supplier to do such a thing. Do suppliers know, for example, the identity of every conceivable substance that might, one day, be declared a "hypersensitizing agent"? That would be a pretty tough call to make, especially given the FEI's apparent penchant for declaring specific substances taboo after the fact.

Ghazzu
Aug. 26, 2008, 09:20 PM
Lemorro, I think that is a pretty harsh statement. Equi-Block has 0.025% Capsaicin. I am not saying that there are not cheats out there, but to make a blanket statement like that IMO is without merit.

Some have said that Lynch should have known better because the Manufacturer lists Capsaicin as an ingredient and says it does not test. the Manufacturer's Labeling - "does not test" could be because there is only 0.025% Capsaicin- meaning this would be below the threshold for a positive test.



I am willing to believe that the people who used the stuff during the Games did it to make their horse more comfortable, and not to sensitize their legs.

However, saying that it "contains *only 0.025%* capsacin" is meaningless, in and of itself.

Unless you are familiar with the chemical properties of the substance, you'd have no way of determining whether that was a lot or a little.

And either way, it was just plain dumb to take a chance on using anything you weren't certain was ok.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 26, 2008, 09:38 PM
And either way, it was just plain dumb to take a chance on using anything you weren't certain was ok.

I agree, but the problem here is that the riders apparently were certain it was okay; indeed they had been tested (or so they believed) all year and never had a positive result while using. Now whether it was dumb to be certain it was okay... different issue ; ). The thing is, there are precious few, if any, products that you can be certain are okay given the wording of the rules.

With respect to the regs posted above, I can still see a defense argument there. I have dealt with a lot more difficult cases than that.

Re feeds - BlueMoon, that is interesting re your experience. I hope everything turned out okay! I was actually thinking it might be prudent for competitors to retain samples of feed they give just before and during competitions. If something goes wrong with the feed, having a sample might not help with the FEI (though perhaps the evidence could be used to argue for less severe sanctions) but might provide some evidence of the source of the problem.

Ghazzu
Aug. 26, 2008, 10:30 PM
Regarding feed contamination--I don't recall the details, but wasn't there a US carriage driving competitor (maybe Bill Long?) who got DQ'ed for theobromine some years back, and it turned out that the hay he'd brought to ensure there were no changes to the horses' diets was shipped in a boxcar that had just prior to that been used to transport cocoa beans?

Mozart
Aug. 27, 2008, 11:37 AM
From a regulatory point of view, I completely understand why you would not specifically list all potential hypersensitization agents and simply ban that "class" of products. The regulator cannot possibly list every product that might be used for hypersensitization. However you run the risk, as they may have in this case, of capturing in your net those that did not use it for that purpose. If you as a Federation are prepared to take that risk so be it.

What this tells me is that riders and teams competing under FEI rules really have to learn to read the fine print and truly understand what voluntary testing is going to accomplish and broaden their understanding of what those "classes" of products entail then go back and re-visit every single product in their tack box .

However, with respect to capsaicin, would they not also be caught as having a class A "agent which could improve performance by relieving pain"

It seems to me that they have breached two classes of prohibited substances.

msrobin
Aug. 27, 2008, 12:00 PM
I don't get why you think it's "off topic". The whole point of any doping is to increase performance - and this is a discussion of possible performance changing substances being given to horses in a clear "no drug" alley. As for your point that if horses get sore - they shouldn't be asked to perform.....well - athletes of any kind get sore. I'm sure anyone with high performance horses can tell you - the ones that make it to that level are freaks. The ones that can jump like that with nothing and stay sound are the "michael phelps" of the horse world.

The point is that these guys (riders AND their grooms/trainers and support people) are supposed to know and follow FEI rules. If they don't - then they are either stupid - or purposefully trying to push the rules. The rules of FEI competition are clear - NO DRUGS or performance enhancing substances of any kind. Remember the fear of Beezie Madden when Authentic colicked during the Athens games? They were allowed to give him NOTHING for days. I'm sure it was torture - but if he was going to stay in contention for medal - no drugs. The facts of this case obviously aren't out and it's possible there was a screening error - or that something else happened - but at first glance, it makes these people (or their support staffs) look like fools. Don't pick the largest athletic games in the world to mess with questionable substances.

I am at a loss of words....

Riding Fool
Aug. 27, 2008, 01:25 PM
I agree, but the problem here is that the riders apparently were certain it was okay; indeed they had been tested (or so they believed) all year and never had a positive result while using. Now whether it was dumb to be certain it was okay... different issue ; ). The thing is, there are precious few, if any, products that you can be certain are okay given the wording of the rules.

I'm struggling why this is causing such debate - it's VERY common knowledge on the A Circuit (at least in here the USA) to NOT use Equi-Block or other products containing Capsaicin on FEI horses. I posted earlier in this thread about a prominent vet, who often treats top FEI horses, even warning me about Magic Cushion because of the ingredients - he told me about in July 2007. It has NEVER been a secret that Capsaicin is a no-no. I just don't think grooms and trainers at this level didn't know to NOT use the product.

Why not just cold hose their legs and wrap? Or water/thermal therapeutic boots? Magnetic therapy wraps and/or blankets?

There are definitely ways to ease the normal aches and pains of competition without using a liniment or substance that has been routinely tested for the past year.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 27, 2008, 01:45 PM
I'm struggling why this is causing such debate - it's VERY common knowledge on the A Circuit (at least in here the USA) to NOT use Equi-Block or other products containing Capsaicin on FEI horses. I posted earlier in this thread about a prominent vet, who often treats top FEI horses, even warning me about Magic Cushion because of the ingredients - he told me about in July 2007. It has NEVER been a secret that Capsaicin is a no-no. I just don't think grooms and trainers at this level didn't know to NOT use the product.

Why not just cold hose their legs and wrap? Or water/thermal therapeutic boots? Magnetic therapy wraps and/or blankets?


Are you sure it wasn't just common knowledge that it was banned under the USEF rules? Because I have known that, for quite some time, as I said before. But looking at the current FEI rules, there is not a single one that explicitly prohibits it, and the one category it arguably might fall within - hypersensitization agents -- could be construed to include almost anything under the sun, including water and the sun itself.

Also, the Equi-block was used on their backs, supposedly, not the legs., fwiw.

gottagrey
Aug. 27, 2008, 02:06 PM
I think I read somewhere that until recently there was no testing technique for Capsaicin. In the case of Denis Lynch - he stated he used the Equiblock on his horse's back prior to working out - so cold hosing wouldn' be an option, magnetic therapy however would have been - and for all we know he, and the others may do that as well. At any rate it would be interesting to know what the test(s) actually show vs. just a positive reading - from a media standpoint.

poltroon
Aug. 27, 2008, 03:53 PM
So why is lavender a forbidden substance?

Thank god mint isn't on that list. I can't seem to eradicate it from my pasture.

Ghazzu
Aug. 27, 2008, 04:59 PM
So why is lavender a forbidden substance?

Thank god mint isn't on that list. I can't seem to eradicate it from my pasture.

It can have CNS effects.

JER
Aug. 27, 2008, 05:09 PM
Thank god mint isn't on that list. I can't seem to eradicate it from my pasture.

Well, even if mint was on the list, I suspect your horses wouldn't test for it -- if you can't eradicate it from the pasture, perhaps it's because they won't eat it. :)

(My lawn has a problem with dandelions. Dandelions don't stand a chance in my pasture.)

poltroon
Aug. 27, 2008, 05:53 PM
So do we know for sure that there aren't any more samples working their way through the labs? Did they test more horses during the individual jumping?

poltroon
Aug. 27, 2008, 05:53 PM
It can have CNS effects.

Swell. They prefer not to eat it; do I need to ensure that they don't?

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 27, 2008, 06:00 PM
So why is lavender a forbidden substance?

Thank god mint isn't on that list. I can't seem to eradicate it from my pasture.

I believe menthol is as prohibited as capsaicin. I posted an article on the CKD thread re capsaicin and felbinac, and it mentioned menthol as a pain reliever:

Pain Relief With Counterirritants
These pain relief preparations (which include Flexall 454 Maximum Strength Gel and Therapeutic Mineral Ice) contain such ingredients as menthol, camphor, eucalyptus oil, and turpentine oil. When applied to the skin over an affected joint, they mask pain by producing a warm or cool sensation. Counterirritants can be applied to the skin three or four times a day. A frequent side effect is reddening of the skin, which is harmless and temporary.

http://www.johnshopkinshealthalerts.com/reports/arthritis/128-1.html

Ruby G. Weber
Aug. 27, 2008, 06:42 PM
Once again - those PR's with + tests ALL USED A PRODUCT, BE IT OINTMENT/LINAMENT - that contained a banned substance. They were all attempting to gain an advantage by making their horse more comfortable. (For what it's worth, I think one should be permitted - within reason - to help the horse.)

Whether you think the FEI's policies are to strict, not clear, the testing too sensitive and are ready to take on the giant killer, they are the current rules and every PR and their connections should have been prepared to abide by them.

The only good that could come out of this fiasco is maybe, in light of these positives, as was the case after Athens, the FEI will further reform their policies.

Peace Out.

DMK
Aug. 27, 2008, 08:43 PM
The only good that could come out of this fiasco is maybe, in light of these positives, as was the case after Athens, the FEI will further reform their policies.

Peace Out.

Ruby...

[cue music]

To dream ... the impossible dream ...
To fight ... the unbeatable foe ...
To bear ... with unbearable sorrow ...
To run ... where the brave dare not go ...
To right ... the unrightable wrong ...
To love ... pure and chaste from afar ...
To try ... when your arms are too weary ...
To reach ... the unreachable star ...

[/cue music]

Look! Do I see Don Quixote on Rocinante heading for the combination, er, I mean the windmill?

:D :D :D

gottagrey
Aug. 27, 2008, 11:49 PM
Apparently now there is a US Dressage horse that came back w/ a positive test for a drug that the rider and US vet never even heard of... Evidently the horse was treated in Hong Kong after arriving because of the stress of the trip... and so it goes.

DancingQueen
Aug. 28, 2008, 12:08 AM
Just got word that the capcaisin in the case of at least the Norwegian horse was found in a bottle of what we call "pickspray" meant to keep the horse from chewing his sheets, stablewraps etc.

I would have to say that as far as deliberate doping goes, there's at least for me reasonable doubt here. Specially since the stuff seems to be pretty much everywhere.

YankeeLawyer
Aug. 28, 2008, 12:36 AM
Just got word that the capcaisin in the case of at least the Norwegian horse was found in a bottle of what we call "pickspray" meant to keep the horse from chewing his sheets, stablewraps etc.
.

Oh no. :(

Ghazzu
Aug. 28, 2008, 07:31 AM
Swell. They prefer not to eat it; do I need to ensure that they don't?

Just clarifying--I was referring to the lavender.

Words of Wisdom
Aug. 28, 2008, 08:22 AM
If you'd been using Equi-block at the recommendation of your vet consistently for the past few years, as is likely the case of Lynch and Ahlman, and you'd won a lot of big classes and been drug tested multiple times with no positive tests, you probably wouldn't even think twice about continuing to use it at the games. Until last week, the top vets in Europe were recommending Equi-block.

Mozart
Aug. 28, 2008, 11:04 AM
If you'd been using Equi-block at the recommendation of your vet consistently for the past few years, as is likely the case of Lynch and Ahlman, and you'd won a lot of big classes and been drug tested multiple times with no positive tests, you probably wouldn't even think twice about continuing to use it at the games. Until last week, the top vets in Europe were recommending Equi-block.

Well, hopefully not to their clients showing under FEI rules since it contains capsaicin which is a known pain-killer and therefore a banned Class A medication.

poltroon
Aug. 28, 2008, 12:30 PM
Just got word that the capcaisin in the case of at least the Norwegian horse was found in a bottle of what we call "pickspray" meant to keep the horse from chewing his sheets, stablewraps etc.

Gah. Yes, I'd wondered about that as a possible, too.

The horse would be so much better off with one of those nasty neck cradles than with pepper spray on the wraps. :(

gottagrey
Aug. 28, 2008, 02:01 PM
Originally Posted by DancingQueen
Just got word that the capcaisin in the case of at least the Norwegian horse was found in a bottle of what we call "pickspray" meant to keep the horse from chewing his sheets, stablewraps etc.

See that's the point that some of us have been trying to make about the FEI 0 Tolerance and the sensitivity of the drug testing. It comes out in the media that these are positive DOPING results. DOPING to me has the connotation of some Dick Francis Mystery novel - dark seedy etc. Whereas here you have a rider who's infraction was that either he, his groom put some nasty tasting liquid stuff on a blanket to prevent horse from destroying it. Again, I am not saying there are seedy, shiffless characters out there, however, it saddens me to see that some riders reputations will be wrecked because they are accused of DOPING. The media sensationalizes these reports to make for good stories when the truth might be much less sensational.

DancingQueen - where did you hear that story from -

Riding Fool
Aug. 28, 2008, 02:19 PM
Until last week, the top vets in Europe were recommending Equi-block.

Really? Seriously?? That is very surprising. The FEI rules are simple - ZERO TOLERANCE, so why would a top vet recommend a liniment that has an ingredient that is well-known to be a no-no?

To say that the international scene wasn't "aware" of Capsaicin is ridiculous, especially since a lot of the riders spend their winters in Wellington. Just because they used it "before" and it never tested doesn't mean it wouldn't test the next time. If I was warned to not use Equi-Block on my ammie jumper at regular A-rated shows, why would it be okay to use on an Olympic horse?

These riders knew that they would be highly scrutinized and tested for everything and anything, especially after Athens. Hong Kong widely promoted their drug facilities as some of the best in the world.

I am not saying the riders meant to "dope" their horses, my indignation is that at that level they know better, they know it's zero tolerance, they know what's on the list - they know that if it's NOT on the list to ask a cadre of vets if the ingredient is suspect. Don't know the answer, call the USEF vet or call the FEI and ask. (USEF can tell you if something is against FEI rules too, their staff is great about answering drug concerns and questions)

There are plenty of other ways to relieve sore, tired muscles beyond a liniment. If Denis Lynch wanted something for his horse's back - why not put a magnetic blanket on it? Why not have an acupuncturist work on the horse?

Every Olympic rider or trainer I've worked with would never take a risk on a product or ingredient they weren't 150% sure of and would not use a suspect ingredient 30 days prior to a competition like the Olympics. Always err on the side of caution!

We have two FEI horses in our barn - they are taken care of and fed by ONE person. They have their own scoop. Nothing is mixed in with the other horses. Even fly spray ingredients are looked at. At shows, again only ONE person is allowed to work with them. Buckets, feed tubs, blankets, brushes – everything is separate from the regular show horses.

You want to play at this level, you gotta know and follow the rules.

gottagrey
Aug. 28, 2008, 03:31 PM
Really? Seriously?? That is very surprising. The FEI rules are simple - ZERO TOLERANCE, so why would a top vet recommend a liniment that has an ingredient that is well-known to be a no-no?

To say that the international scene wasn't "aware" of Capsaicin is ridiculous, especially since a lot of the riders spend their winters in Wellington. Just because they used it "before" and it never tested doesn't mean it wouldn't test the next time. If I was warned to not use Equi-Block on my ammie jumper at regular A-rated shows, why would it be okay to use on an Olympic horse?

These riders knew that they would be highly scrutinized and tested for everything and anything, especially after Athens. Hong Kong widely promoted their drug facilities as some of the best in the world.

I am not saying the riders meant to "dope" their horses, my indignation is that at that level they know better, they know it's zero tolerance, they know what's on the list - they know that if it's NOT on the list to ask a cadre of vets if the ingredient is suspect. Don't know the answer, call the USEF vet or call the FEI and ask. (USEF can tell you if something is against FEI rules too, their staff is great about answering drug concerns and questions)

There are plenty of other ways to relieve sore, tired muscles beyond a liniment. If Denis Lynch wanted something for his horse's back - why not put a magnetic blanket on it? Why not have an acupuncturist work on the horse?

Every Olympic rider or trainer I've worked with would never take a risk on a product or ingredient they weren't 150% sure of and would not use a suspect ingredient 30 days prior to a competition like the Olympics. Always err on the side of caution!

We have two FEI horses in our barn - they are taken care of and fed by ONE person. They have their own scoop. Nothing is mixed in with the other horses. Even fly spray ingredients are looked at. At shows, again only ONE person is allowed to work with them. Buckets, feed tubs, blankets, brushes – everything is separate from the regular show horses.

You want to play at this level, you gotta know and follow the rules.

Maybe the top vets in Europe didn't get the memo about the new testing technique for Capsaicin... according to the FEI - until recently they hadn't developed a testing technique for Capsaicin. But then again, one might have to also be a chemist of sorts. If a bottle says contains "Capsaicin" is one thing but if it says "Contains PEPPER" is one really supposed to know that that means Capsaicin. When the FDA banned Ephedra from the market OTC diet drugs suddenly started marketing the wonders of the herb Ma Huang.

I guess now if you are going to be an FEI level rider part of your team is going to have to include a pharmacologist...

DancingQueen
Aug. 28, 2008, 03:38 PM
I red it in a swedish online horse magazine. We are a little invested in the Norweigan horse since a swedish guy is their chef d'equipe so it made it to the papers there.
As far as I understood it Sylve (their chef d'equipe) was both outraged and perplexed and could not figure out where the capsaicin came from. After testing all the products used around the horse it was found in the pickspray.



Originally Posted by DancingQueen
Just got word that the capcaisin in the case of at least the Norwegian horse was found in a bottle of what we call "pickspray" meant to keep the horse from chewing his sheets, stablewraps etc.

See that's the point that some of us have been trying to make about the FEI 0 Tolerance and the sensitivity of the drug testing. It comes out in the media that these are positive DOPING results. DOPING to me has the connotation of some Dick Francis Mystery novel - dark seedy etc. Whereas here you have a rider who's infraction was that either he, his groom put some nasty tasting liquid stuff on a blanket to prevent horse from destroying it. Again, I am not saying there are seedy, shiffless characters out there, however, it saddens me to see that some riders reputations will be wrecked because they are accused of DOPING. The media sensationalizes these reports to make for good stories when the truth might be much less sensational.

DancingQueen - where did you hear that story from -

ceffyl
Sep. 1, 2008, 09:31 AM
Well another one for the hearing:-

http://www.fei.org/Media/News_Centre/News/Pages/summ.aspx?newsName=updatedoping_medication_1septem ber.aspx

Of all people.