Stu, I totally disagree that it is of any concern. There are totally legitimate, totally legal supplements that will give an elevated Cobalt level. HRNSW's own testing that they have produced in court says as much. The question is the withholding period and if you regularly inject your horses with a product like Vam (that is totally legal) you can get elevated results above the 200. HRNSW only did this for 5 days on 5 horses and were able to get above the 200. As I stated in a deleted post as I layed it on a bit thick about the Chief Steward, the HKJC recommend a non race day limit of 2000 so the toxicity of the cobalt is quite frankly just trying to vilify Cobalt and justify the tough stance.
Therefore there is no doubt that it is difficult to get over the 200 level if you treat the horse outside the 24 hour window, however the testing done by HRNSW has only been done for a small sample for a small period of time who really knows what the truth is.
Originally Posted by Pena
Lots of treatments are legal it is a matter of when they are given and if recommended dose rates are exceeded, this is where the problem lies. If cobalt does not give a horse a "boost" I am pretty sure people wouldn't be giving horses excess amounts. Hard to say some people are not using more cobalt than other people when many horses levels are <5 compared to others over 20 or 30 and some over 100.
I'm with you Stu.
I heard somewhere that people have experimented to see if they can get a reading of 35+ using just feed and have not been able to
per un PUGNO di DOLLARI
It must be the only Class 1 drug that can do that!
Hey Jack, You seem to know a lot about it??? Pretty sure that the trial only included horse feeds that included Cobalt and the horses were given more food than they would normally receive and the highest level recorded was 35.
RE: Post #301. Jack, your point of view seems to stem from thoughts of a possible "hidden agenda". Any thoughts on what that might be?
HRNSW, Reid Sanders, weren't the first racing jurisdiction in the world to implement a Cobalt rule. The jurisdictions within Australia and New Zealand that followed were all influenced by Reid alone?
World wide, most trainers are represented by an Association if they choose. Harness trainers in NSW made representation to HRNSW to allay their fears of Cobalt containing supplements used under manufacturer's guidelines, and within prescribed withholding periods, would see them breach the Cobalt rule. Just picking trainers out of the blue, I haven't heard of the McCarthy or Tritton stables having concerns since the Trainer's representation. Similarly in Victoria, I haven't heard of the likes of Darren Weir or Peter Moody seeking their Association to have the Cobalt rules changed.
Gallops find in today's papers
http://www.theage.com.au/sport/horse...04-120dwm.html
per un PUGNO di DOLLARI
Richard, you are right I am intrigued by this issue. I have been following the Supreme Court action and to be honest my initial reaction was HRNSW have the right to impose whatever rules it wants and if a substance is genuinely harmful dangerous to a horse then I agree with a ban. Then I started to do some research myself on the testing and effects of Cobalt and to be honest I could not find a lot of information available and I started to think if HRNSW has all this research why have they not disclosed it all of it to participants. It seemed to me there is a hidden agenda.
When I started reading research lately and I am seeing that acceptable levels for horses out of works is 2000 micrograms I start to wonder is Cobalt all it has been detailed to be to the HRNSW stewards.
Of the information available and the penalty rules of HRNSW I can in no way see that Cobalt is a Class 1 substance. If trainers are treating horses the substance as detailed in an appeal hearing of "Water for Injection" should get hefty penalties as this is not a legitimate treatment for horses as I don't believe any non standard supplements should be used. This does not mean however that there is any definitive proof that you cannot get a positive to cobalt by using a approved product and secondly and most importantly there have been no studies to determine if you receive a horse from another trainer and they have treated a horse with an illegal product what the withholding period of the substance. I have heard a rumour that there was a trainer that received a horse from a trainer that was stood down and the horse was still border line to the 200 micrograms 10 days after they received the horse. Why is this information not provided to participants so they can protect themselves.
The story above does not seem totally correct. From my understanding the 2 trainers stood down from the Meadowlands were barred from Jeff Dural tracks not disqualified or suspended. Funnily enough earlier in the year I believe the same owner of the race courses would not let Brian Sears drive at his tracks because he would not commit solely to his tracks, so hardly disqualified.
Wayne, the truth is I think generally the penalties are disproportionate as opposed to penalties such as having your horse full of pain killer and only being eligible for 2 years. I think the stewards who pioneered the outlawing cobalt and keeping in the news would look good on your CV.
On the story from the Age it does not appear that Bob Baffert has been stood down??
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote