• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

New York Times article - USEF and Humble

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by CBoylen View Post
    Many people give Legend 2-4 hours out because they feel that's when it is at its peak in the bloodstream. It's not uncommon. Especially for a big show where the extra expense would be warrented.
    Interesting rationale BUT while I cannot find the research -- was told by a vet that it takes between 24 and 48 hours for Legend to reach maximum impact.... Where is the documentation of when Legend has its peak impact?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sticky Situation View Post
      I'm not saying that any horse that needs a little bit of maintenance should be turned out to roam the green pastures with Black Beauty, but we also shouldn't be pushing unsound horses beyond what they can comfortably do.
      The tough part is where to draw that line.

      I can get through a long show day without taking two Advil, but I will be more comfortable if I take them. If I think it's reasonable to take two Advil myself, why wouldn't it be reasonable to give a horse two grams of Bute?

      The problem is when somebody personally takes a scary number or combination of painkillers or other medications, or uses a scary number of painkillers or other medications on a horse.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by JER View Post


        Never mind that Bayer's package inserts say 'Horses should be given stall rest after treatment before gradually resuming normal activity.'

        '.
        That refers to when it is used IA not IV.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by CBoylen View Post
          That refers to when it is used IA not IV.
          Good point -- but cannnot find a thing that suggests it is most effective 2 to 4 hours after administration.... still believe vet suggested peak effect was 24 to 48 hours after IV administration.... would be nice to have actual research on this

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Horseymama View Post
            The reason they can't enforce them is because the penalty is a slap on the wrist! They need penalties that matter, at LEAST a year suspension and $15K for the owner and the trainer, for each infraction!

            And grooms, barn managers or other employees of the trainer should not be able to sign as "trainer!" Why does the USEF stand aside and let this happen?

            What does the USEF do for it's members when it can't even police real attempts at cheating? Or impose penalties that ares serious enough to discourage it? I mean really, what do they do?
            I don't think that USEF really goes only by the name on the entry blank. There have been plenty of instances where during the course of the investigation USEF has determined that a different person was really the person responsible for the infraction. In most cases where the person on the entry blank wasn't the person at the show. But I would think the same logic could be applied to assistant trainers.

            As has been stated by others, the USEF is doing a good job with testing and trying to stay ahead of the game. There will ALWAYS be cheaters. You will NEVER stop that. USEF is working on testing for drugs that have come to play with new uses.

            I really wish more people could see the presentation that was done at the convention. It would change many of your perceptions on what USEF does and the true impact of positive drug testing.

            One of the scariest things to me, was the realization that many in the room did not know the "brand name" was really X drug.

            USEF did a big thing with getting the test for GABA. They are constantly working on others.

            Random testing is really the best option, for various reasons. I do agree that at certain level events testing the top 3 would be good as well, but not a rule. Random implies that anyone at anytime can be tested. That impacts every horse at the show, not just the winners.

            Comment


            • Sticky and findeight, I do agree with you. We all want to take care of our animals with compassion and reason. The problem is how to write enforceable rules that address the real problems in the industry.

              There are horses who get Dex for allergies and those who get it for quieting. Same thing with Robaxin and a number of other legitimate meds.

              But if the language is too broad, then it knocks out the legitimate uses along with the sketchy ones, because you can't legislate intent.

              The real problem is those injectables that do not have legitimate purposes and are untestable. Because injecting magnesium and calcium into the vein just before showing has what medical benefit???
              "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu, The Art of War
              Rainy
              Stash

              Comment


              • Originally posted by juststartingout View Post
                Good point -- but cannnot find a thing that suggests it is most effective 2 to 4 hours after administration.... still believe vet suggested peak effect was 24 to 48 hours after IV administration.... would be nice to have actual research on this
                Agree w/ the vet... I am wondering if peopel got the "2 hrs" from T max or C max references.
                Should be easily found in the insert (which I don't have). Often referred to as Cmax (maximum concentration of drug in the blood) or Tmax (the time after a drug is administered to reach maximum concentration in blood). But remember, just because it reaches Cmax, does not mean that is when it is most effective. It still has to GET to the joints, synovial fluid etc. Which is not immediate (when administering it IV).I do not know enough about the mechanism of action but I would love to stand corrected on I doubt it reaches peak effect in 2 hrs when given IV.Just musing and agreeing with you.... I call BS on EM.
                Come to the dark side, we have cookies

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Molly99 View Post
                  Random testing is really the best option, for various reasons. I do agree that at certain level events testing the top 3 would be good as well, but not a rule. Random implies that anyone at anytime can be tested. That impacts every horse at the show, not just the winners.
                  Exactly. All the horses deserve that protection, not just the winners.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by 2bayboys View Post
                    Sticky and findeight, I do agree with you. We all want to take care of our animals with compassion and reason. The problem is how to write enforceable rules that address the real problems in the industry.

                    There are horses who get Dex for allergies and those who get it for quieting. Same thing with Robaxin and a number of other legitimate meds.

                    But if the language is too broad, then it knocks out the legitimate uses along with the sketchy ones, because you can't legislate intent.

                    The real problem is those injectables that do not have legitimate purposes and are untestable. Because injecting magnesium and calcium into the vein just before showing has what medical benefit???
                    All good points -- however if you restrict administration of the most problematic to vets and require that the vets file a med report with the show office and USEF there is going to be a certain amount of resistance to developing a record showing that certain vets and certain horses are receiving certain meds at every show. While this places a burden on show vets (and an extra expense on owners) its an expense that owners/riders/trainers ought to be willing to incur if the med is truly needed for the health of the animal.

                    Wuth today's computer systems and databases, tracking this kind of information is not very difficult and pulling reports once the system is designed is easy - whether by vet, trainer, rider, groom, or horse.

                    If we are serious about protecting our animals and changing the sport, then we ought to be willing to create, support, and pay for the systems necessary to make sure it happen

                    Comment


                    • And what evidence exists that would suggest that a joint is positively affected at the peak of the drug in the BLOOD?

                      Originally posted by juststartingout View Post
                      Good point -- but cannnot find a thing that suggests it is most effective 2 to 4 hours after administration.... still believe vet suggested peak effect was 24 to 48 hours after IV administration.... would be nice to have actual research on this

                      Comment


                      • I must agree with CB regarding Legend. I have administered Legend four hours out from a competition - to older, sore footed horses - on the advice of my vet. I would not classify this practice as off label.

                        Admittedly I routinely use Legend (and Adequan) prophylactically as well.

                        There is an enormous difference between the judicious use of theraputic pharmacueticals and doping. I hope, for the sake of the horse, USEF will continue the precedent it has set in regards to restricted use of a single NSAID, etc.

                        The FEI protocol is far from the solution. They have their own problems with black market drugs.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JER View Post
                          I'd love -- love -- to see a placebo injection study done on show hunters. You tell one trainer that Horse/Pony A is winning due to Placebo X, then everyone will want it and tout its magic effects. No one will bother to test the substance to find out that it's only saline solution. Heck, you could probably label the vial 'Placebo' and no one would stop to think about what that word means, only that it means 'ribbons'.
                          I would love to see this "study" done with dexamethasone vs. saline. I've asked multiple vets, looked in pharm books, and done several literature searches to find out if there is, in fact, a documented "quieting" effect of dex. I get the theory, I think...But if it really worked, don't you think there would be some reference in the literature? Can't find any reference to it.

                          So, instead, trainers are administering already over-conditioned show hunters with a drug suspected to cause laminitis (which, oddly enough, IS a side effect mentioned in the literature!) and known to suppress the immune system (again, in horses exposed to strange new barn-mates every week) several times per weekend.

                          Comment


                          • I'd love to discuss more Julie's point of view- change the incentives and the behavior will change accordingly.

                            Change the judging and many problems will be solved (though how to change judging is also a great discussion topic). If horses are not rewarded, as they are currently, for robotic appearances than in turn less horses will be drugged to win in the ring (and less lunging/riding/schooling may also lead to less need for soundness type drugs as well?).

                            Also, I have heard and agree with talk of changing courses. The current simple courses (single, side, diagonal, side) promote robotic, metronome performances. Less related distances, more singles, less groundlines will, perhaps, reward pace and more "spark" in the hunter ring. Why can't the hunter ring move more towards the derby ideal?

                            Any other ideas on how to change the game, so to speak. Every poster on this forum has brought up the difficulties of focusing only on the drug rules/enforcement. The cost of vet only administered injections and problems with FEI type stabling, the difficulty of testing for "naturally occuring" drugs such as Mg, how to decipher between performance enhancing and legitimate comfort.

                            .... so what else can we do to eliminate the incentives for abuse?
                            www.threewishesfarm.com
                            https://www.facebook.com/ThreeWishesFarm
                            Expecting 2017 foals by Vagabond de la Pomme, Cornet Obolensky, Zirocco Blue, Catoki and Christian.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Molly99 View Post
                              I don't think that USEF really goes only by the name on the entry blank. There have been plenty of instances where during the course of the investigation USEF has determined that a different person was really the person responsible for the infraction. In most cases where the person on the entry blank wasn't the person at the show. But I would think the same logic could be applied to assistant trainers.

                              As has been stated by others, the USEF is doing a good job with testing and trying to stay ahead of the game. There will ALWAYS be cheaters. You will NEVER stop that. USEF is working on testing for drugs that have come to play with new uses.

                              I really wish more people could see the presentation that was done at the convention. It would change many of your perceptions on what USEF does and the true impact of positive drug testing.

                              One of the scariest things to me, was the realization that many in the room did not know the "brand name" was really X drug.

                              USEF did a big thing with getting the test for GABA. They are constantly working on others.

                              Random testing is really the best option, for various reasons. I do agree that at certain level events testing the top 3 would be good as well, but not a rule. Random implies that anyone at anytime can be tested. That impacts every horse at the show, not just the winners.
                              I'm not saying they are not doing a good job at testing. I have seen testers at most shows I've been to, dressage and H/J. And my horses usually get tested once or twice/year.

                              What I'm saying is that the penalties are not nearly harsh enough for testing positive. Not even close!

                              Yes the testers are present. Yes, I'm sure the USEF is working to develop new tests for previously undetectable drugs.

                              But what is the point if it's a slap on the wrist?
                              ******
                              "A good horse and a good rider are only so in mutual trust."
                              -H.M.E.

                              Comment


                              • Not being snarky, actually, the insert does not specify whether to stall rest the horse after IV or IA:
                                DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION:
                                Legend Multi Dose (20 mL) and Legend 4 mL (40 mg) injected intravenously only. Legend 2 mL (20 mg) injected intravenously or intra-articularly in the carpus or fetlock.

                                Treatment may be repeated at weekly intervals for a total of three treatments.

                                Legend Injectable Solution 2 mL: Strict aseptic technique should be observed when administering by intra-articular injection. As with any intra-articular procedure, proper injection site disinfection and animal restraint are important. Excess joint fluid should be aseptically removed prior to injection. Care should be taken to avoid scratching the cartilage surface with the tip of the injection needle. Diffuse swelling lasting 24 to 48 hours may result from movement of the needle while in the joint space.

                                For intravenous administration, use aseptic technique and inject slowly into the jugular vein.

                                Horses should be given stall rest after treatment before gradually resuming normal activity.
                                Come to the dark side, we have cookies

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by juststartingout View Post
                                  All good points -- however if you restrict administration of the most problematic to vets and require that the vets file a med report with the show office and USEF there is going to be a certain amount of resistance to developing a record showing that certain vets and certain horses are receiving certain meds at every show. While this places a burden on show vets (and an extra expense on owners) its an expense that owners/riders/trainers ought to be willing to incur if the med is truly needed for the health of the animal.

                                  Wuth today's computer systems and databases, tracking this kind of information is not very difficult and pulling reports once the system is designed is easy - whether by vet, trainer, rider, groom, or horse.

                                  If we are serious about protecting our animals and changing the sport, then we ought to be willing to create, support, and pay for the systems necessary to make sure it happen
                                  Ahhhhh, making sure that med record is not available to anybody come sale and PPE time might be an issue with some.

                                  Honestly, I see alot of new trainers jumping on the multiple meds bandwagon because it's "always been done" and newbie owners blindly accepting all charges on the bill without question because "it's the way everybody does it".

                                  Thats sad and is really starting to bother me after seeing what happens to some nice horses pushed too far for too long in their hands.

                                  Also makes me embarassed for the sport.
                                  When opportunity knocks it's wearing overalls and looks like work.

                                  The horse world. Two people. Three opinions.

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by CBoylen View Post
                                    That refers to when it is used IA not IV.
                                    No, it does not. That comes from the NIH site here. You'll notice at the top of the page, it says:

                                    For Intravenous Use in Horses Only

                                    Not for Intra-Articular Use

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by findeight View Post
                                      Ahhhhh, making sure that med record is not available to anybody come sale and PPE time might be an issue with some.

                                      Honestly, I see alot of new trainers jumping on the multiple meds bandwagon because it's "always been done" and newbie owners blindly accepting all charges on the bill without question because "it's the way everybody does it".

                                      Thats sad and is really starting to bother me after seeing what happens to some nice horses pushed too far for too long in their hands.

                                      Also makes me embarassed for the sport.
                                      Actually making it available for sale and PPE would be a great idea. Why not -- if you are selling a horse based on its record - why shouldn't the buyer know what medications were necessary to produce that record. I am not naive -- it will be an issue, but if we want to be treated as a professional and honest sport with integrity why not.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by Horseymama View Post
                                        I'm not saying they are not doing a good job at testing. I have seen testers at most shows I've been to, dressage and H/J. And my horses usually get tested once or twice/year.

                                        What I'm saying is that the penalties are not nearly harsh enough for testing positive. Not even close!

                                        Yes the testers are present. Yes, I'm sure the USEF is working to develop new tests for previously undetectable drugs.

                                        But what is the point if it's a slap on the wrist?
                                        Exactly.

                                        I've been horseshowing in one form or another for over 50 years. Illegal medication use has ALWAYS been an issue. People can posture and complain all the want about judging, types of horses, training, etc. But bottom line, until a penalty with TEETH affects a trainer's business negatively, things will not change.

                                        The USEF playing catch up with testing for new medications or substances will not affect drug use. It never has. Setting down a trainer and/or an owner for a year, or permanently, will.

                                        Comment


                                        • According to this web site the peak effect of IV hyaluronate sodium (Legend) is approximately 48 hours ...

                                          I got an error message when I tried to pull up the package insert on Bayer's website.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X