Name and shame

[kung fu man]

http://www.hrnsw.com.au/assets/files/Notices/COBALT%20RESULTS%20Publication%2015072014.pdf

[aussiebreno]

http://www.hrnsw.com.au/assets/files/Notices/COBALT%20RESULTS%20Publication%2015072014.pdf
Was an interesting read.

With so many <5 we can assume the natural reading is pretty low?

I think I read one jurisdiction has a threshold of 100 so could assume anything over 100 was given a dose?

The odd ones are higher double figures. These horses have high natural levels? In the feed ala what Mick Hardy tried to use as an excuse? Given a low dose? Tested at a bad time and the reading went down?

[aussiebreno]

P.S you would think HRNSW release would get the name of the NSW Oaks winner Shes A Runa correct. Not Sheza Runner.

[jackthepunter]

Have a look at the couple of r nicksons over2000 its a wonder their still alive

[jackthepunter]

Going by the report 200mg seems way to generous could have it as low as 50mg

[djgood]

Had 2 swabs in that period but names not up there interesting ot worrying both were blood swabs taken as she wouldn't give urine sample , maybe cobalt levels can only be found in urine samples

[djgood]

There is a month of results missing from the 17/3 to 23/4

[Messenger]

I have been crazy enough to correlate those numbers. I wish I could have copied the table directly to Excel but I at least do not know how to so I have done it somewhat roughly by data entry. My time is too precious to worry about decimals so anything after a decimal point has been ignored (ie I have lowered down) and all the entries stated to be <5 have been tabulated to be 3. I figure this to be a good enough tabulation

The reason I did it is that I think this is a huge issue

Of the 566 entries/swabs
212 are under 5
384 are under 10 (ie nearly 68% or over 2/3rds)
486 are under 20
512 are under 30 (ie 90% of swabbed horses)
528 are under 50
540 are under 80

Even with 5 entries > 1000, the Average is still only 38.4

We want a clean sport, I would like to see instant suspension and disqualification remain at 100
BUT also investigation of any reading over 30 ie the stewards to monitor these horses feed etc.
and advise trainers how to lower their readings to below 30 and if this does not appear possible for an individual horse or two, then they are entered on a register.

[Messenger]

I am worried that 30 ug/l may even be too high. We really need to swab more horses - whole fields sometimes so that we have a guage as to how potent Cobalt is.

We do not know how many losers are going around with 30mg in their system

Have some of these winners with 25 or less in their system still got a big advantage over the ordinary horse who has under 10 (over 2/3 of horses it would seem)

Do we want to see all trainers needing to add cobalt or buy cobalt enriched feed to have a level playing field?

[aussiebreno]

I sent an email to admin@hrnsw.com.au asking for an excel file of the data. They said they had one but for security couldn't give it to me. Fair enough I guess. But from the time I sent the email to the admin address it had been forwarded to Reid Sanders who replied to me in quick time. Keeping in mind I'm not a licenced person and should be down the bottom of priorities for those at HRNSW, the response time from Reid yesterday, and the response time I've received from Adam Fairley in the past is top notch. Well done guys.

I think with such huge outliers from Rhys Nicholson etc, the average is misleading. If you used the median you would get a more accurate indication of normal levels. Using your numbers 566 entires makes median 283. There is 212 under 5 and 384 under 10 so the median would fall between 5 and 10. That's a significant difference to the average.

[Messenger]

Totally agree Brendan and that is why I went to the trouble of doing it.

[Toohard]

I sent an email to admin@hrnsw.com.au asking for an excel file of the data. They said they had one but for security couldn't give it to me.

If you open the file with Adobe Reader there's an option over on the right hand side to convert to excel.
BUT cost you $2 a month to do it. Think you can just cough up for 1 month.

[Messenger]

So how do we feel about Beautide winning the Len Smith and returning a reading of 43 ug/L. Perfectly legal of course but at least 4 times the Median of all those SWABs

[aussiebreno]

http://www.harness.org.au/news-article.cfm?news_id=24012

http://www.dailyadvertiser.com.au/story/2360522/colin-john-in-big-form-turnaround/

From the daily advertiser, Waggas local paper about a month ago.

Stockton says "He's flying Colin and he just seems to like it out at home," Stockton said."I don't know what the secret is with him."


Any takers on guessing what the secret is?

[aussiebreno]

So how do we feel about Beautide winning the Len Smith and returning a reading of 43 ug/L. Perfectly legal of course but at least 4 times the Median of all those SWABs
Would love some answers to the questions I posed earlier in this thread to be able to express an opinion or even know some fact about those seemingly higher readings. It seems nobody really knows too much about cobalt chloride yet.

[Messenger]

This is a great example you have brought up Brendan. Colin John had only ever won one race 2yrs ago before going to the Stockton stable and now running 3rd in the Country Final at Menangle a forthight ago, he rated about 1.54.5
Unfortunately he is probably one of those really high readings at the bottom of the table listed as Inquiry Pending.
What we really need to know is how much 100ug/L improves a horse as the use of this stuff could become a farce.

Does Cobalt Chloride have any significant nutritional value and if not I believe it should have a very low acceptable threshold. The second link below suggests not:
"Cobalt is a constituent of vitamin B-12, and as a result, there is no RDA for it - but we'd be talking microgram amounts if we were discussing how much you could expect to find in your diet"

http://www.ergo-log.com/cobaltchloride.html
http://www.vpxsports.com/article-detail/drugs/cobalt-chloride-for-increasing-epo

[kung fu man]

If you do a quick google search it just shows how this fight agaist the CHEATS will be ongoing for a very long while and will need a lot of capital poured into it to even keep up!
http://www.hhmi.org/news/researchers-identify-drugs-enhance-exercise-endurance

[kung fu man]

Early onset Alzheimers?maybe Brendan




]

[Messenger]

If you do a quick google search it just shows how this fight agaist the CHEATS will be ongoing for a very long while and will need a lot of capital poured into it to even keep up!
http://www.hhmi.org/news/researchers-identify-drugs-enhance-exercise-endurance
Warren, you have to like the fact that your scientist was concerned enough about the potential for abuse of his drugs, that he developed blood and urine tests to detect them

[trish]

What I read into this list is that some trainers are way behind the eight ball and with the threshold set at 200 it gives them the green light to load up the syringe and start pumpin' . lock and load boys . What a shame this once proud industry has come to this . Gotta ask ourselves . At the start of breeding season "what the hell are we doing
That service fee would get us a new motor for the boat" .

[trish]

[QUOTE=Messenger;34066]So how do we feel about Beautide winning the Len Smith and returning a reading of 43 ug/L. Perfectly legal of course but at least 4 times the Median of all those SWABs[/TE]


http://www.harness.org.au/news-article.cfm?news_id=23351

All horses running in the Len Smith Mile were in the retention Barn for 24 hrs.

[trish]

At what level does Cobalt become an act of cruelty?
From what I've read it can be quite dangerous.

[Messenger]

Interesting. I know we have had a Cobalt thread before and that some of you guys are well read on it. Does it seem strange that Beautide should have a well above median reading after being in the Detention barn - I thought Cobalt retained after 24hrs may have been minimal

[Lethal]

What I don't quite get, is in Harness Racing, if you infringe the rules relating to illegal administration of certain chemical substances then at the worst you might be labelled a cheat. If you were to do the same thing in the Financial Services industry you would be brought before a court and charged with fraud. Explain to me the difference. In my opinion it is fraud because you are depriving other participants from legally obtaining a benefit.
They are not cheats, they are committing an offence that should be pursued through the legal system not just HRNSW. Until this action is taken the those with the backing (Money) will always be one step ahead of the testing regime.

[teecee]

it's called a Retention barn, not a Detention barn

[Messenger]

it's called a Retention barn, not a Detention barn
Its Detention when you are in the dunce's corner ;)

[Lucky Camilla"s Lovechild]

I noticed Wez Hunter (trainer of Smokin Joey) got a $3500 fine for presenting a horse at the races with a prohibited substance. Wet lettuce justice?

[Messenger]

What I don't quite get, is in Harness Racing, if you infringe the rules relating to illegal administration of certain chemical substances then at the worst you might be labelled a cheat. If you were to do the same thing in the Financial Services industry you would be brought before a court and charged with fraud. Explain to me the difference. In my opinion it is fraud because you are depriving other participants from legally obtaining a benefit.
They are not cheats, they are committing an offence that should be pursued through the legal system not just HRNSW. Until this action is taken the those with the backing (Money) will always be one step ahead of the testing regime.

This may be the only way to clean up racing Lee

[teecee]

Whilst breaches of the prohibited substance rules in sport, and horse racing in particular, can be claimed to be similar to fraud in criminal law it is not regarded as a breach of the criminal law but rather a breach of the rules of the sport.
This is common to all doping cases across most sports and has a lower level of proof.

Criminal fraud requires prosecution proof beyond reasonable doubt. To this end stewards would have to produce undeniable proof of how, when and where the prohibited substance was ingested by the horse.
On the other hand sports doping proof (including current horse racing prohibited substance breaches requires prosecution proof to the civil standard of probability. (51% or more likely than not). To this end stewards need to show that the horse tested positive to a prohibited substance, in all probability it came from an act or omission by the trainer or his/ her staff and the trainer is liable under the strict liability provisions built into the prohibit substance rules.


Also fraud is classified as a criminal term and judgement of fraud can only be by a judge of the criminal courts not a sports tribunal nor panel of stewards.

[jackthepunter]

would be interesting to know the % of swabs that they actullay test. Its alright to say you swab all winners but how many really get all the way though to the end of beeing tested.

[Lethal]

Section 192 E Crimes Act 1900 NSW.
(2)......or obtains a financial advantage or causes financial disadvantage..........
"Cause" a financial disadvantage means: (a) cause financial disadvantage to another person.....
"Obtain" a financial advantage includes (a) obtain a financial advantage for oneself or another person....(c) keep a financial advantage that one has, whether the financial advantage is permanent or temporary.

What part of the above definitions do not apply to a person administering an illegal substance to a horse, to win a race and therefore obtaining a benefit (prizemoney) to the disadvantage of other persons?

[teecee]

Section 192 E Crimes Act 1900 NSW.
(2)......or obtains a financial advantage or causes financial disadvantage..........
"Cause" a financial disadvantage means: (a) cause financial disadvantage to another person.....
"Obtain" a financial advantage includes (a) obtain a financial advantage for oneself or another person....(c) keep a financial advantage that one has, whether the financial advantage is permanent or temporary.

What part of the above definitions do not apply to a person administering an illegal substance to a horse, to win a race and therefore obtaining a benefit (prizemoney) to the disadvantage of other persons?


All of the above do not apply to the administration of an illegal substance to a horse.. this is simply as I can, the substances are only classified as illegal under the rules of the horse racing or sporting bodies who created and enforce those rules.
The Crime (not) but illegal activity is administration of a prohibited substance. It is not any of the clauses that you quote above.
Again giving an animal a drug judged illegal by a sporting controlling body is the illegal activity only within the rules of the sporting body. Placing the opposition at a disadvantage by that illegal activity does not come into it. There are no rules in any sport that specify not disadvantaging the opposition.

The Crimes Act 1900 NSW and any other Crimes Act are enacted by the Crown by way of the legislature of the state or Country.
It covers crimes by individuals or organisations against the country and its citizens. Drugging a horse is not a crime against a country or its citizens. Accordingly no prosecution under the criminal laws is valid.

Acts against sporting bodies or horse racing authorities are not crimes against society and are not breaches of any Crimes Act of any Parliament.


Also ,let me repeat....
The standard of proof required for a conviction under the Act you quote, or any criminal Act of Australia, is not achieved by the lesser standard of proof used to determine a punishable breach of the sporting and horse racing drug laws.


Under the Crimes Act sections that you quote it would be necessary for the Police (not Stewards) to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, (not the balance of probabilities) that the trainer or person in charge of the horse or any other person to be charged with the offence, commit the offence with the sole purpose of ensuring getting the prize ahead of any other named/ specified party.


All such prosecutions would by determination in the country's criminal law courts with all the appeal options.
I thought most participants wanted quick resolutions...
If the industry has the funds to go down this path then it has the funds to better improve many other aspects of the industry and the lot of all its participants.

[Messenger]

It is a massive issue just the same TC. It is also a massive waste of industry funds having to keep up with the drug cheats.
If they don't put the resources into controlling Cobalt for example, racing becomes a farce as trainers who love their horses and are not prepared to use it would have very little chance against horses that are not going to tire

Thanks to the dregs of the population, wherever there is money we need policing. I think the way to make policing more thorough (ie not overstretched) is to reduce the number of known/repeat offenders that require special surveillance and therefore I would like to see 5 YR penalties.

The story has always gone that in Singapore the penalty for stealing a car can be death and you can count the number of cars stolen on your fingers - I think we need to apply this rationale to racing's drug cheats

[Richard prior]

It is a massive issue just the same TC. It is also a massive waste of industry funds having to keep up with the drug cheats.
If they don't put the resources into controlling Cobalt for example, racing becomes a farce as trainers who love their horses and are not prepared to use it would have very little chance against horses that are not going to tire

Thanks to the dregs of the population, wherever there is money we need policing. I think the way to make policing more thorough (ie not overstretched) is to reduce the number of known/repeat offenders that require special surveillance and therefore I would like to see 5 YR penalties.

The story has always gone that in Singapore the penalty for stealing a car can be death and you can count the number of cars stolen on your fingers - I think we need to apply this rationale to racing's drug cheats

Along the lines you mentioned Kev, Thief's have their hands chopped off in a particular middle eastern country.

[Lethal]

teecee,
The administration of certain drugs can be indictable under the 'Crimes Act', it depends upon their scheduling (S) rating.
This is not a discussion about 'rules in sport' but more about criminal liability under the Crimes Act.
The standard of proof required is not one judged by the sporting judiciary but by the Public Prosecutions Office.
Yes the DPP would prosecute the case at no cost to the relevant sporting body.
"Quick Resolutions' We have plenty of these and it doesn't seem to act as a deterrent, shown by the number of repeat offenders.
If the process started whereby offenders under the 'Crimes Act' previously outlined were prosecuted in the relevant State Courts, what might be the ensuing rate of violation of the regulations?
A significant drop of cases that required investigation by the relevant sporting bodies, I think would be an odds on bet.

[teecee]

teecee,
The administration of certain drugs can be indictable under the 'Crimes Act', it depends upon their scheduling (S) rating.
Simply put.. those drugs do not cover the majority of "drugs" within the prohibited substance regulations.
The Crimes Act does not cover the prohibited substance laws. Accordingly these cases do not go to the courts. They have no jurisdiction.
This is not a discussion about 'rules in sport' but more about criminal liability under the Crimes Act.
Simply put..This is solely about the rules of sport. That is what this forum and specifically this thread is about. There is no criminal liability because administering a prohibited substance to an animal is not a criminal act unless cruelty is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Even then prosecution under the Crimes Act is very unlikely as more appropriate statutes exist to deal with animal cruelty.
The standard of proof required is not one judged by the sporting judiciary but by the Public Prosecutions Office.
That is where we will always differ. As explained breaches of the prohibited substance rules are the domain of the sports judiciary or in racing terms the stewards. the standard of proof is definitely the civil standard. This has been tested infinitely. It has also been to the courts.
Yes the DPP would prosecute the case at no cost to the relevant sporting body.
I suspect you are wrong here also. If you are correct why have they not done so. Answer.. It is outside their jurisdiction. The courts in NZ and Australia have already decline jurisdiction in cases of this type. They have acknowledged the sports right to determine judgement.
."Quick Resolutions' We have plenty of these and it doesn't seem to act as a deterrent, shown by the number of repeat offenders.
Quick resolutions and the legal system are not well matched. In harness racing's case just look at the NSW corruption cases.!!
If the process started whereby offenders under the 'Crimes Act' previously outlined were prosecuted in the relevant State Courts, what might be the ensuing rate of violation of the regulations?

A significant drop of cases that required investigation by the relevant sporting bodies, I think would be an odds on bet.


If you think that is the case, let's just have a wee look at what is required at the moment....
Horse is swabbed.
Sample is sent for analysis.
Sample is tested and let's say returns a reading in excess of the threshold. Positive.
Connection advised of test result. Statement taken.
Evidence if any gathered. This is not necessary as analyst's finding is all that's need for the required level of proof for the charge.
Prepare indictment and hearing.
Hold hearing of charges.
Convict and penalise.
Prepare and hold any appeal.

You want to prosecute under the Crimes Act in a court of law...
Add to the above...
further testing of all samples at differing laboratories.
Further gathering of statements.
Horse metabolism testing to determine the individual horse's metabolic state and tolerance/ hold to the substance.
Gathering indisputable evidence of administration opportunity, motive etc.
Gathering material to refute any defence material.
Anything else to meet the much higher level of proof.

By the time they get through just one, there'll be another 10 to deal with. If those with a penchant for giving the stewards extra work or like to put one across their fellow competitors know how much more is needed to get them out of racing they and more like them will be more willing to give it a go..IMO

Ask any steward if your "odds on" bet is realistic.
If yes, you know the next question to ask......Why not????

[Mark Croatto]

teecee,
The administration of certain drugs can be indictable under the 'Crimes Act', it depends upon their scheduling (S) rating.
This is not a discussion about 'rules in sport' but more about criminal liability under the Crimes Act.
The standard of proof required is not one judged by the sporting judiciary but by the Public Prosecutions Office.
Yes the DPP would prosecute the case at no cost to the relevant sporting body.
"Quick Resolutions' We have plenty of these and it doesn't seem to act as a deterrent, shown by the number of repeat offenders.
If the process started whereby offenders under the 'Crimes Act' previously outlined were prosecuted in the relevant State Courts, what might be the ensuing rate of violation of the regulations?
A significant drop of cases that required investigation by the relevant sporting bodies, I think would be an odds on bet.

Lee, NSW Crimes Act 1900 has a specific part relating to cheating, see Part 4ACA Cheating at Gambling; sections 193H through to 193Q. There is no need to prove the type or schedule of drug and carries maximum penalty of 10 years.
The problem however rests with the need to prove intent something that would require considerable investigation given that it only becomes known following a positive test. I agree, prosecuting through the criminal courts would change the mindset of many who are currently prepared to engage in cheating.

Regards

Mark

[teecee]

Lee, NSW Crimes Act 1900 has a specific part relating to cheating, see Part 4ACA Cheating at Gambling; sections 193H through to 193Q. There is no need to prove the type or schedule of drug and carries maximum penalty of 10 years.
The problem however rests with the need to prove intent something that would require considerable investigation given that it only becomes known following a positive test. I agree, prosecuting through the criminal courts would change the mindset of many who are currently prepared to engage in cheating.

Regards

Mark
Are you able to supply a link to those sections of the Act you quote above.
My initial perusal of that act I am unable to locate those sections / clauses you quote.
Cheers

[Messenger]

If you look on the Vic Calendar page you will see an ad with these pics. Not a drug obviously but I surely prefer Then to Now.

[trish]

Lee, NSW Crimes Act 1900 has a specific part relating to cheating, see Part 4ACA Cheating at Gambling; sections 193H through to 193Q. There is no need to prove the type or schedule of drug and carries maximum penalty of 10 years.
The problem however rests with the need to prove intent something that would require considerable investigation given that it only becomes known following a positive test. I agree, prosecuting through the criminal courts would change the mindset of many who are currently prepared to engage in cheating.

Regards

Mark

Hi Mark . I understand what your saying about proving intent but what about those who have suffered a financial loss . Could a betting agency recoup money that they lost . No need to prove intent . The trainer is responsible and the agency has received a loss because of it . Or what about my dollar quinella . How bad has it got when harness racing is there to supply a betting medium and some betting agency's either won't take bets or restrict them

[Longroad]

This is certainly a hot topic but can anyone answer this question:


Why doesn't all of the states in both codes test for Cobalt?

[jackthepunter]

This is certainly a hot topic but can anyone answer this question:


Why doesn't all of the states in both codes test for Cobalt?
probably scared of what they will find,like the vic thoughbred stewards. said they had some high reading never released the trainers names. And now everythings all good problem never existed

[Mark Croatto]

Are you able to supply a link to those sections of the Act you quote above.
My initial perusal of that act I am unable to locate those sections / clauses you quote.
Cheers

Teecee, can't link directly to the sections but the following will take you to the on-line NSW legislation site. Scroll down the left hand side as the sections are in numerical order

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+40+1900+cd+0+N

Regards

Mark

[Mark Croatto]

Hi Mark . I understand what your saying about proving intent but what about those who have suffered a financial loss . Could a betting agency recoup money that they lost . No need to prove intent . The trainer is responsible and the agency has received a loss because of it . Or what about my dollar quinella . How bad has it got when harness racing is there to supply a betting medium and some betting agency's either won't take bets or restrict them

Hi Patricia, there are 4 offences listed in Section 2 of the Part; 193N (Engage in Conduct...), 193O (Facilitate conduct...), 193P (Concealing Conduct...) and 193Q (Use of corrupt conduct information...) and for each of them, as is the case for the more general Fraud Offences (192E etc.), the prosecution must prove the accused, at the time of their conduct (administering the drug in this case), administered the drug with the intention of gaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage. Criminal offences must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, which as I indicated earlier, will involve significant evidence to be proven, and since we generally only find out after a swab has been tested, that level of evidence is going to be very hard to get; it is impossible to prove simply because a swab is positive.

However, the level of evidence that is required could be gained through covert operations, no different to what police do when investigating drug supply. It's simply a matter of will; it would require a complete change in our current approach to dealing with drug cheats

Regards

Mark

[Messenger]

It still sounds easier for our own authorities to just ban cheats for 5yrs+

[kung fu man]

5 years sounds like the right lenght of time, first offence of course then 10!

[teecee]

Teecee, can't link directly to the sections but the following will take you to the on-line NSW legislation site. Scroll down the left hand side as the sections are in numerical order

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+40+1900+cd+0+N

Regards

Mark
Hi Mark...
thank you for your research. The link is very helpful. I was looking at the right Act (in pdf format of the original) but it appears not set out as well.
I couldn't find the parts you mentioned.
Now that I have read those parts quoted by you I have to agree with what you said earlier.
You are also right IMO the hardest task is to prove the intent in order to gain conviction.


Thanks again

[aussiebreno]

http://www.harness.org.au/news-article.cfm?news_id=23847

[Messenger]

In any industry there will be recreational drug users as it is so prevalent throughout the general population but Allan is talking about horses Brenno

[kung fu man]

By setting a threshold of 200 i believe it has become open slather, if you look at the way some horses are winning with amounts as low as 9 or so i believe until its zero its not worth racing a horse unless your trainer is prepared to use as well i just dont know if its worth racing a horse at the moment.

[Messenger]

http://www.understanding-horse-nutrition.com/cobalt.htm

Cobalt (Co), one of the microminerals, is important for blood cell formation.

The microbes in your horse's digestive system, particularly the cecum and large intestine, use the Co from your horse's diet to convert it to Vitamin B12. This vitamin is then used in conjunction with iron and copper in the formation and maintenance of blood cells.

The horse will usually consume enough Co through a typical diet.

All the common feedstuffs include at least 0.05 mg/kg dry matter, if not more (legumes usually contain around 0.6 mg/kg dry matter except in deficient areas).

The requirement has been set at 0.1 mg/kg dry matter, so this is easily reached through the typical diet.



This next link suggests horses are often cobalt deficient (not what many other articles suggest however)

http://depaoloequineconcepts.wordpress.com/2011/09/29/hha-findings-cobalt-deficiency-in-horses/



This last link talks about human requirements but while it tells us how much B12 we need it does not tell us how much Cobalt that is. It does however state that < 1.4mg (1400ug) of cobalt supplement will not harm one but I don't know how to relate that to 200ug/l

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vitamins-minerals/Pages/Other-vitamins-minerals.aspx

Cobalt is a trace element that forms part of the structure of vitamin B12, one of the B vitamins.
Good sources of cobalt
Cobalt is found widely in the environment. Good food sources of cobalt include:
fish
nuts
green leafy vegetables, such as broccoli and spinach
cereals, such as oats
How much cobalt do I need?
You should be able to get all the cobalt you need from your daily diet.
Cobalt is a major part of the structure of vitamin B12. Therefore, if you get enough vitamin B12, you will also get enough cobalt.
Adults need approximately 0.0015mg vitamin B12 a day.
What happens if I take too much cobalt?
Having high amounts of cobalt for long periods of time could affect the heart and might decrease fertility in men.
What does the Department of Health advise?
Having too much cobalt could be harmful. However, cobalt is currently not used in supplements in the UK and the amount we get from food is not harmful.
Having 1.4mg or less a day of cobalt supplements is unlikely to cause any harm.

Footnote: I looked this up after reading TeeCee's post about Cobalt occuring naturally but NOW his post has gone

[trish]

By setting a threshold of 200 i believe it has become open slather, if you look at the way some horses are winning with amounts as low as 9 or so i believe until its zero its not worth racing a horse unless your trainer is prepared to use as well i just dont know if its worth racing a horse at the moment.

Hi Warren . firstly , your earlier post was spot on . 5 years then just get rid of em . Some of them may even run out of relatives or partners to sign them over to . The penalty system is so blurred that no one really knows what the penalties are . One guy gets 6 months for multiple positive swabs , then zero time is added when yet another swab proves positive while he was out . At the same time another trainer with a 40 year clear record with regards to swabs gets 2 years for a high bi carb . One trainer gets 6 months reprieve for pleading guilty and another gets 6 months reprieve for pleading not guilty . This only breeds innuendo and accusations , with good reason .
With this last post , horses can be presented on race day with levels higher than 9 due entirely to a couple of shots of Vam {a blood booster} in the days leading up to the races . Cobalt is flushed from the horses body very quickly . It only has a detection period of around 4 hours . Its very difficult to catch people using it and the effects of it last a lot longer . That list certainly tells us a lot .The level of 200 is 4 times the standard deviation above the normal level . Very depressing . I do agree with the basis of your post . You are dead set spot on . It isn't worth racing because ,even if you have the best horse , you have absolutely no hope whatsoever with an honest trainer . They'll only ever clean this game up if they decide to get tough and treat everyone the same .

[Race For Fun]

This is a very sad time for harness racing. The problem of drugs in the sport is a cancer that is killing the game on more than the racing level, horses run times that anyone who has worked horses knows that you can not improve horses best mile rate by 4 or 5 seconds in 2 or 3 weeks, DOES NOT HAPPEN. People pay large sums of money for yearlings out of mares with these mile rates (or one foal out of this mare) and wonder why the foal they paid good money for doesn't have enough speed. The wrong mares get good names while mares that have raced "honest" and don't have the faster mile rates are passed over.

Very sad, very very wrong.

[teecee]

http://www.understanding-horse-nutrition.com/cobalt.htm

Cobalt (Co), one of the microminerals, is important for blood cell formation.

The microbes in your horse's digestive system, particularly the cecum and large intestine, use the Co from your horse's diet to convert it to Vitamin B12. This vitamin is then used in conjunction with iron and copper in the formation and maintenance of blood cells.

The horse will usually consume enough Co through a typical diet.

All the common feedstuffs include at least 0.05 mg/kg dry matter, if not more (legumes usually contain around 0.6 mg/kg dry matter except in deficient areas).

The requirement has been set at 0.1 mg/kg dry matter, so this is easily reached through the typical diet.



This next link suggests horses are often cobalt deficient (not what many other articles suggest however)

http://depaoloequineconcepts.wordpress.com/2011/09/29/hha-findings-cobalt-deficiency-in-horses/



This last link talks about human requirements but while it tells us how much B12 we need it does not tell us how much Cobalt that is. It does however state that < 1.4mg (1400ug) of cobalt supplement will not harm one but I don't know how to relate that to 200ug/l

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vitamins-minerals/Pages/Other-vitamins-minerals.aspx

Cobalt is a trace element that forms part of the structure of vitamin B12, one of the B vitamins.
Good sources of cobalt
Cobalt is found widely in the environment. Good food sources of cobalt include:
fish
nuts
green leafy vegetables, such as broccoli and spinach
cereals, such as oats
How much cobalt do I need?
You should be able to get all the cobalt you need from your daily diet.
Cobalt is a major part of the structure of vitamin B12. Therefore, if you get enough vitamin B12, you will also get enough cobalt.
Adults need approximately 0.0015mg vitamin B12 a day.
What happens if I take too much cobalt?
Having high amounts of cobalt for long periods of time could affect the heart and might decrease fertility in men.
What does the Department of Health advise?
Having too much cobalt could be harmful. However, cobalt is currently not used in supplements in the UK and the amount we get from food is not harmful.
Having 1.4mg or less a day of cobalt supplements is unlikely to cause any harm.

Footnote: I looked this up after reading TeeCee's post about Cobalt occuring naturally but NOW his post has gone


Hi Kev...
Thanks for that. Basically said what had intended.
Put some factual balance into the discussion. Without it it is difficult to see where the discussion can be further progressed past what has already been said here and in previous threads on drugs use.
thanks again.

[Messenger]

I am still hoping we will get more info about Cobalt Chloride.
I did not want to hijack the new 'Next People's Favourite Horse' thread but I want answers like why was Beautide's reading from the Len Smith five times more than the median on that test results list (once available from HRNSW). I know I am being a real stickler Ash but I am still waiting to find out if a horse can naturally have a Cobalt reading of 43ug/L. Sure it is well within in the limit but if the median is somewhere below 10 I want to know if even 43 is a help. If this is a reading that normal feed can produce and it is proven to be of no benefit to performance then I am happy to see a horse from this stable as the next people's horse. Like I said, I am being super tough but that test results list threw up more questions than answers in my mind. Apologies if this offends the Rattray's but I am only after the facts and I stress once again that 43 ug/L is well within the 200 limit set.

[teecee]

http://www.ethicalagents.co.nz/EA%20Newsletters/February-2014.pdf

[Messenger]

I had some reservations about resurrecting this thread but it was worth it for that excellent reply article - thanks Tony

ps Hey Tony, maybe you could put a link to that article in the Cobalt Chloride thread too

[Triple V]

Hi Warren . firstly , your earlier post was spot on . 5 years then just get rid of em . Some of them may even run out of relatives or partners to sign them over to . The penalty system is so blurred that no one really knows what the penalties are . One guy gets 6 months for multiple positive swabs , then zero time is added when yet another swab proves positive while he was out . At the same time another trainer with a 40 year clear record with regards to swabs gets 2 years for a high bi carb . One trainer gets 6 months reprieve for pleading guilty and another gets 6 months reprieve for pleading not guilty . This only breeds innuendo and accusations , with good reason .
With this last post , horses can be presented on race day with levels higher than 9 due entirely to a couple of shots of Vam {a blood booster} in the days leading up to the races . Cobalt is flushed from the horses body very quickly . It only has a detection period of around 4 hours . Its very difficult to catch people using it and the effects of it last a lot longer . That list certainly tells us a lot .The level of 200 is 4 times the standard deviation above the normal level . Very depressing . I do agree with the basis of your post . You are dead set spot on . It isn't worth racing because ,even if you have the best horse , you have absolutely no hope whatsoever with an honest trainer . They'll only ever clean this game up if they decide to get tough and treat everyone the same .

VVV-Trish...does that 'Hanging Judge' approach to punishment extend to Colin and Neil? I know both of them, good blokes, and I very much doubt either did anything wrong. The reason I ask is the 'shoot 'em all and let God sort it out' routine would see them as collateral damage.

[trish]

VVV-Trish...does that 'Hanging Judge' approach to punishment extend to Colin and Neil? I know both of them, good blokes, and I very much doubt either did anything wrong. The reason I ask is the 'shoot 'em all and let God sort it out' routine would see them as collateral damage.


OH MY GOD I DON'T THINK COLIN HAS A POSITIVE HAS HE JAIMIE?????????????
And I think that Neil's hasn't been heard yet HAS IT JAIMIE???????????
GEEZE I wouldn't be naming innocent people on this name & shame thread Jaimie.

[Richard prior]

Trish and Triple, Not taking sides but it's definitley innocent until proven otherwise, It's a real blight on the industry and anyone who has a case to answer should do just that and do their best to clear their name and if they are found guilty, Cop it on the chin.

[Messenger]

Jaimie, I am starting to think you have a problem with Trish when it takes you 2mths to quote her :confused:

[HISGEN65]

I would imagine right at the moment one of the biggest challenges for the integrity of the sport is that Cobalt is somewhat "old news" so I am guesing those who choose this path are already using the "next thing"..or even the next thing after that...or something thats already flying under the radar...not an envious task for the authoritys when you think about it

[Messenger]

Probably right James. I think the authorities are 'too fair' - instead of setting levels, lets keep the rules general ie You can be suspended for any swab abnormality that the authorities deem suspicious

[aussiebreno]

Probably right James. I think the authorities are 'too fair' - instead of setting levels, lets keep the rules general ie You can be suspended for any swab abnormality that the authorities deem suspicious
I'd love that but which leg do the stewards/authority stand on in a court?

[Messenger]

The same one that ASADA uses for athletes - the 'if it is not on the approved list' you cannot use it

[aussiebreno]

The same one that ASADA uses for athletes - the 'if it is not on the approved list' you cannot use it
WADA and ASADA use a prohibited list just like our sport.

[Messenger]

WADA and ASADA use a prohibited list just like our sport.
But in the Essendon fiasco they kept on talking about a rule they had for anything that was not on either list

[aussiebreno]

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-20/asada-told-afl-in-february-aod-9604-not-banned/4900852

[Danno]

The "legal world" has a vested interest in these matters, just as they do in many other jurisdictions. Personnaly, I think it's a shame so much energy/resources are thrown at simple things like "did you cheat?" when everyone knows the answer anyway......just don't spoon feed the parasites any more than need be.

Geez I hate the way I over simplisize things.............

[Messenger]

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-20/asada-told-afl-in-february-aod-9604-not-banned/4900852
Thanks Brendan
What I was referring to was the S0 category for
'a substance still under pre-clinical and clinical development and has not been approved for therapeutic use by any government health authority in the world'
I was thinking that some of the "next things" that James was referring too may fit into that category