[MHM]

Considering past presidents of the USHJA were both offenders one for doping and another for behavior how can you expect them to stand up to any rules?

There are no "past" presidents of the USHJA.

There has only been one president since the organization started, and he's still there, so he is the current president.

[englishivy]

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe the USHJA has any D&M rules, nor do they test horses or punish D&M rule breakers, that is all done by the USEF.

I have even LESS faith in the USHJA than I do in the USEF! And that's not very much.

To clairfy, I believe the panel of folks was made from different areas of the sport to address drugging concerns. Max's influence was for the issues as they pertain to H/J. I *think* the point of this panel was to help advise USEF on better protocol, not necessarily to create, enforce, or modify D&M rules themselves (or via USHJA).

My point was that I made it very clear to a "higher up" what the majority of the "minons" were feeling. If my questions were not even considered for discussed then I plan on asking why.

On a side bar:
What sport governed by USEF is the biggest/has the greatest influence? Not to sound rude, but sometimes I forget that USEF has other disciplines to govern over as well as our sport. Do those disciplines have as many concerns and issues with USEF as H/J?

[findeight]

The FEI requires each horse to have a medication passport with it at all times. Controlled Medications can only be given in genuine emergencies at competitions by vets; and declarations must be filed and reviewed by the Competition Vet.

How convenient. That way you can pick up the latest concoction guaranteed not to test from the local supplier- the show vet.

There are many layers of muck nobody dares speak against.

[CBoylen]

Personally speaking-- a couple years ago, I was in the position of being the owner of a horse who had a reaction to the shavings and broke out in hives.
I was also the show vet.

I scratched my horse (and the trainer scratched another of the horses in his string who also had a reaction.)

I administered dexamethasone, and I filled out a D&M report.

A horse suffering from a reaction serious enough to merit medication on tat level does not need to be additionally stressed by being expected to perform, and is unlikely to perform at his best.

Why did you file a med report?

[Ghazzu]

Out of concern that the horse(s) in question had received more than the allowable dose of dexamethasone.
I always like to err on the side of caution.
There was a possibility that the other horse involved might be competing (hives incident was on the eve of a multiday show.)

It would be a bureaucratic nightmare, most likely, but I'd love to see a mandate that any medication administered on show grounds required the filing of a D&M report.

It would be like seeing the photo of Amberhell's medication list for some folks, methinks.
And it just might get some people to pull their heads out of the sand wrt all the crap that gets injected into showhorses under the guise of "good management".

[wishfulthinking711]

It's analyzed in blood tests, but I don't know enough about it to even start to figure out if it would be useful. If a given horse's normal range is greater than the range between horses and/or injecting it doesn't raise the Mg level much or for very long, then it would be difficult to use it. You'd have to do what they do with elite athletes in some sports and have a profile on file for each horse, as someone mentioned (I think) on this thread.

Is the judging issue (rewarding the dopey look and being concerned about not getting hired if you don't) as bad at county-level shows, or the equivalent in other parts of the country? I don't think it is? For one thing, I don't think a slight bit of expression on the horse's part is penalized as much in hunters or eq. Also, there are more individual show managers so it's harder to convince someone that they'll "never work in this town again." If so, maybe a change in judging standards could start at that level, with the (ahem) "rubber boot and plastic helmet crowd." (reference - USHJA meeting on EAP)

Finally, someone on the thread commented that parents don't generally drug their kids for little league games. Not sure about that, but a few years ago brothers who played a marquee sport at a local university took my winter class. The rumor was that they had been recruited to raise the average GPA of the team. Really nice kids. Smart. Worked hard. A year or so later there was a mild scandal when one of them tested positive for something and was thrown off the team. It turned out that one of their parents was a supplier for one of the BN pro athletes. It was with great sadness that I realized that the parents could have been supplying the kids with steroids when they played in HS.

I do the local circuits mainly because I cannot afford the rateds but to answer your question yes the judging is as bad in the lower circuits. At my medal final this year the judge told me that when my horse shook her head in excitement after an oxer that she penalized me heavily. Still won thank goodness but I was like really??? She was having fun!

[wishfulthinking711]

Also there is no chance the local levels will change first. If anything it is worse in the local levels for doping because there are no drug tests to catch anyone. The judges are less informed and YES they do pin the doped out horses. It can be pretty bad on the local level but I try to stick the association that is the least biased and has the least amount of cheaters :/

[leyla25]

There are no "past" presidents of the USHJA.

There has only been one president since the organization started, and he's still there, so he is the current president.

I meant the past president and founders of the AHJF which merged with the USHJA.

[Peggy]

Also there is no chance the local levels will change first. If anything it is worse in the local levels for doping because there are no drug tests to catch anyone. The judges are less informed and YES they do pin the doped out horses. It can be pretty bad on the local level but I try to stick the association that is the least biased and has the least amount of cheaters :/

There is drug testing done by the state here in California. So maybe that helps a bit. The rules are nearly the same as USEF so people may use dex, Mg etc. I won a medal final, albeit a minor one, with a scoot after the last fence. I would hope that at least one of the two judges noticed it.

[CBoylen]

Out of concern that the horse(s) in question had received more than the allowable dose of dexamethasone.
I always like to err on the side of caution.
There was a possibility that the other horse involved might be competing (hives incident was on the eve of a multiday show.

I don't believe you can use a med report for that purpose. For administration of a forbidden substance under therapeudic circumstances, you can. But for an allowed therapeutic substance I think you have to refrain from competing until the likelihood it will test over the limit has passed. As in that med report would do you no good should the horse test for too much dex. At least that is how I've always understood it.

[vxf111]

I don't believe you can use a med report for that purpose. For administration of a forbidden substance under therapeudic circumstances, you can. But for an allowed therapeutic substance I think you have to refrain from competing until the likelihood it will test over the limit has passed. As in that med report would do you no good should the horse test for too much dex. At least that is how I've always understood it.

I always thought so too. You can't give more than the permitted levels of, say, bute, and then do a med report and be safe. The levels are what the levels are and disclosing that you gave more than the permitted levels it is protection if they test the horse and discover the levels are too high. But I could have been misinterpreting the rules all this time.

[Ghazzu]

I don't believe you can use a med report for that purpose. For administration of a forbidden substance under therapeudic circumstances, you can. But for an allowed therapeutic substance I think you have to refrain from competing until the likelihood it will test over the limit has passed. As in that med report would do you no good should the horse test for too much dex. At least that is how I've always understood it.

Yes, but if the horse has been withdrawn from competition for a time period which should result in his being within limits and ends up being over, it is documentation.
Not using it as an excuse to give more than allowed levels and then go ahead and show.

[poltroon]

It would be a bureaucratic nightmare, most likely, but I'd love to see a mandate that any medication administered on show grounds required the filing of a D&M report.

I think in California we're obligated to file more D&M reports than the rest of y'all due to the state doping laws (which apply to any show with classes that cost more than $4).

Hmm, seems so... and now I know why I never heard of robaxin before I joined COTH: in California, it requires a 24 hour withdrawal, as does dex.

http://www.doctorramey.com/breaking-...f-rules-11513/

[poltroon]

Why did you file a med report?

I have always understood that if you were on the show grounds, administered a forbidden (or any) substance as part of an injury or illness, and scratched, that you still were to file a D&M report. Scratching does not technically relieve you from drug testing, but obviously a veterinarian treating an injury is appropriate and you just document the whole thing.

[poltroon]

On a side bar:
What sport governed by USEF is the biggest/has the greatest influence? Not to sound rude, but sometimes I forget that USEF has other disciplines to govern over as well as our sport. Do those disciplines have as many concerns and issues with USEF as H/J?

H/J is the largest group.

Most of the other disciplines have strong affiliates that handle more of their issues. H/J didn't have any affiliate for a long time and so it was the soul of AHSA/USEF in many ways for some time.

Having experienced several, I think perhaps the best and most effective of these affiliates is USEA (Eventing).

[CBoylen]

I have always understood that if you were on the show grounds, administered a forbidden (or any) substance as part of an injury or illness, and scratched, that you still were to file a D&M report. Scratching does not technically relieve you from drug testing, but obviously a veterinarian treating an injury is appropriate and you just document the whole thing.

Forbidden substance, yes. Legal substance, no. Documentation in that case will if anything be detrimental if it would come to a hearing. It implies you had concern the horse would test over, and unlike in the case of a forbidden substance, does nothing to absolve you of guilt.

[justathought]

Forbidden substance, yes. Legal substance, no. Documentation in that case will if anything be detrimental if it would come to a hearing. It implies you had concern the horse would test over, and unlike in the case of a forbidden substance, does nothing to absolve you of guilt.

Don't understand this.... The horse is scratched and a report is filed that a legal medication was used, perhaps in an amount exceeding the limit for showing, for medical reasons by a vet. Later, I am assuming after the horse has recovered and after the drug, or at least the excess amount should have cleared the horse's system, the horse shows, is tested, and is found to be over the limit.

You say the report has negative implications because it demonstrates a concern that the horse will be over the limit. You also say that it does nothing to absolve you of guilt.

I disagree with your analysis for a number of reasons. First, because unless we are all going to blood test our horses once we have medicated for medical reasons there is no absolutely certain way to know when a particular horse has fully metabolized a drug. I don't think we are all going to blood test. And yes I do realize you could wait extra time to return to showing.... Second, the report already indicates responsibility. There is no question as to what was done or when or why. It serves as explanation. A system thatndiscurages reporting is counter-productive. Finally, it does NOT imply a suspicion that the horse is over the limit. It reports an event and documents a medical condition for a scratched horse and creates a paper trail.

I may not understand the rules perfectly, but objectively if what cboylen says is true it strikes me that it is a poorly drafted rule. Ultimately, if the horse later shows and tests over the limit, there would be responsibility but it seems to me that the report would provide evidence that might impact what type of penalty were imposed - a lesser one would be in order given the paper trail and the medical condition than in a case where the drug was used for non-medical reasons.

[CBoylen]

There is no provision under the rules that I am aware of for using the med report in that manner. For legal medications the limit is the limit regardless of explanation. Otherwise there is an incentive to abuse the med report process.

[justathought]

There is no provision under the rules that I am aware of for using the med report in that manner. For legal medications the limit is the limit regardless of explanation. Otherwise there is an incentive to abuse the med report process.

Don't think you have addressed the situation I raised. The horse is scratched, medication given under vet advice, report filed. Time allowed for horse to recover and meds to clear. Horse returns to showing and is tested and is over limit....

Yes it's possible that it was medicated again for non-medical issues.... And it that case using the med report would be "an incentive" to abuse the report....

BUT why is having good information and control ever a bad idea. I did not say that the rules were not what you express but that the rule was poorly drafted

I would much rather have a track record through which one could prove abuse than no track record at all - and that it seems is what you are suggesting in the case a legal medications. In fact, technology is quickly approaching the point where requiring the reporting and tracking of all medications could be done easily.

[Ghazzu]

Forbidden substance, yes. Legal substance, no. Documentation in that case will if anything be detrimental if it would come to a hearing. It implies you had concern the horse would test over, and unlike in the case of a forbidden substance, does nothing to absolve you of guilt.

I wouldn't assume that your interpretation of this situation is necessarily the one that USEF would use.