Can Drug Testing alone catch or stop DRUG cheats? - Richard Freedman on TripleM Radio

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thevoiceofreason

Dot and Trish

Are you two cracking jokes the reason the stewards can not do anything is because the trainer is not in breach of the rules.

They can not say under rule 500B you are charged with using steroids and because Dot and Trish and Mark do not like it you are disqualified for 12 months.

This thread has become so stupid I will not be coerced into commenting again.

The rules are the rules, are the rules, you do not have to like them but if you play in the game you play by the rules.

If you seriously think steroid use should be barred totally .... get off this thread and do some lobbying of the vets who will ultimately make the decision... seeing it took years after the thoroughbreds did it to get ulcer treatments passed I wish you luck.

Bill is that a "flounce"? Actually I wasn't craking a joke at all. Trish wrote that she asked the stewards if they would do "anything" if a horse returned a positive result to an anabolic steroid in an out of competition test to which she advised that they replied "no". And that to me is appaling. I'm not saying that anyone should be charged with a made up rule because I don't like steroids but as a matter of course stewards should police the rules that they have to ensure that they are doing the best job possible for the integrity of the industry. If stewards are not going to bother to even check a trainers records to ensure that a type of drug, that is an anabolic steroid, that is well known in sport for its performance enhancing capabilities and is illegal to have without a prescription, was obtained and administered in accordance with the law/rules when it has been detected in a swab, albeit legally, then when are stewards going to check a trainers records?

Let me put it this way Bill when I'm pulled over for a random breath test the police DO NOT only start checking my bona fides after I blow a positive result. They check my identity, the validity of my licence, any out standing warrants for my arrest, the registration of my vehicle, if it has been reported stolen, if it has been used in the commision of a crime, if it is roadworthy all as a matter of course. And yes if they note the lucerne leaf that is frequently on my passenger seat then they may well ask me to step out of the vehicle and search it for evidence of drugs as well, and when they find the needle and syringe in the console that I've forgotten I guess I could well find myself going down to the station to answer some questions. And guess what Bill I haven't actually committed an offence of any kind.

And yet our stewards, who I believe are paid substantially more then our police, advised an owner upon request that they would do nothing if an out of competition test revealed the presence of an anabolic steroid!

The bottom line Bill is harness racing no longer has years left to get it right, the clock is ticking and it is getting louder all the time. You may believe that post race testing is the ultimate deterrent but my understanding is that that is no longer the case. I don't expect the authorities to use either your or my opinion but to consult the experts in the field and determine the most effective strategy which would I would think would most likely include varying propportions of post and out of competion testing and perhaps a good deal more "leg work" with more stewards in the stables checking the bona fides of the products being administered to our horses.

Hi Dot

I'm lost here so you might be able to help me out, which rule states that you can't have a horse in work on anabolic steriods. I was under the belief that you could have a horse in work on a steriod as long as a vet has prescribed it but it must not be presented at the race's untill the anabolic steriod has cleared it's system.

VVV if such a list was published then does a trainer get off or penalised for a positive swab to a substance not included on the list? Given that harness racing in six years hasn't been able to update it's rules to reflect that using a naso gastro tube, in the manner it was made for -that is sticking it up a horses nose, in the state of NSW is a restricted act of veterinary science which means that it is only legal for a vet to do it how on earth do you think they could possibly keep a list of therapeutic thresholds up to date with the evolotion of both drugs and testing methods?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mango

Hi Dot

I'm lost here so you might be able to help me out, which rule states that you can't have a horse in work on anabolic steriods. I was under the belief that you could have a horse in work on a steriod as long as a vet has prescribed it but it must not be presented at the race's untill the anabolic steriod has cleared it's system.

Mango there is no rule that says you cant have a horse in work on anabolic steroids and you are correct the drug must have cleared the system race day. The devil is in the detail in that an anabolic steroid must by law be prescribed by a vet and all administrations by harness racing rules must be recorded in a trainers medication journal including when and who administered it. If no one is going to check these then of course no one is going to be caught using illegal steroids during training.

Unlike VVV who believes boldonone is in common usage for post race recovery I think if you survey vets they will indicate that they are prescribing anabolic steroids with far less frequency then at any time in the past. I know mine is.

Why worry so much about what people are using in training wouldn't it be better to concentrate more so on race day and post race swabs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dizzy

vvv if such a list was published then does a trainer get off or penalised for a positive swab to a substance not included on the list?
[vvv] if a list of accepted equine therapeutic substances were to be compiled, there were published thresholds for same (ala tco2's etc) & this was combined with quantitative testing then as sure night follows day, so would a penalty for a substance being found that was not on the list.

for the sake of the exercise dot, i was wondering can you...or for that matter can anyone else here....come up with a list of drugs/substances that clearly have quite legitimate equine therapeutic use.
from there can you or can anyone else then make specific note of all those that they believe could, if the testing regime was fully quantitative as opposed to that which we have at present, be included on a therapeutics with thresholds list...for the purposes of harness racing ?
further to that, if possible...can you also note the reason/s why did selected those substances?

given that harness racing in six years hasn't been able to update it's rules to reflect that using a naso gastro tube, in the manner it was made for -that is sticking it up a horses nose, in the state of nsw is a restricted act of veterinary science which means that it is only legal for a vet to do it [vvv] fair point but as we all know, that's a bit of a silly rule as it pertains to race horses & especially so as it pertains to all those people out there who only have the very best of intentions & have done so as an animal welfare measure as opposed to less noble reasons.
it also means i'm technically in trouble because a little bit over a year ago i admit to having milked out a mare then tubed her foal with said milk as it was quickly going down hill, dehydrated & struggling a day or two after it was born.
for mine, invoking that rule is able to be justified only when nefaious intent has already been established, which i'm sure is the way it is always used anyway.
that rule is for mine just as silly a rule as that which governs the testing of bute, despite the fact it stops working appreciably if at all after 12 hrs & is gone for all money as a pain relief agent inside of 24hrs...here in australia you can still score yourself a positive for it as far out as 96hrs+. That, imo, is just plain absurd.

how on earth do you think they could possibly keep a list of therapeutic thresholds up to date with the evolotion of both drugs and testing methods?
[vvv] easy. You're going to have to ask me harder questions dot.
again, i would have thought that was obvious. If it isn't on the published list of accepted substances for the purposes of harness racing...then it doesn't have a threshold and if it doesn't have a threshold...then it is a penalty.
relatively speaking this list situation is in fact not all that far away incidentally.
various international racing bodies/conferences etc have covered this subject at length in recent years. Just as soon as we cease to test for the metabolites of drugs in urine & start to across the board test for the presence of the parent drugs in whole blood, what i've been banging away at all these years will only be a heart beat away. You might see that as a backward step. I see it as a great leap forward.

vvv

Quote:

Originally Posted by mango

Why worry so much about what people are using in training wouldn't it be better to concentrate more so on race day and post race swabs.

[VVV] The Member for Young has the floor! Well said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dizzy

Unlike VVV who believes boldonone is in common usage for post race recovery I think if you survey vets they will indicate that they are prescribing anabolic steroids with far less frequency then at any time in the past. I know mine is.

[VVV] Dot, post my being completely wrong with my line of thinking that Boldenone & Testosterone were basically one and the same, grave concern over the prospect of my Jatz & I parting company caused me to do a fair bit of reading on the subject. You might like to read up on precursors/prohormones. I found it very interesting as I wasn't aware that such things existed. A cat amongst the pigeons maybe?

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Triple V

Mark...
I have been banging away at this subject for longer than anyone including myself would really care to remember.
I have been pushing & pushing the case for an entire list of therapeutic thresholds to be put in place and also for quantitative testing to be instituted, neither of which we currently have.
This is because of my continuing belief that Trainers have, do and unless something is done will continue to get jammed up with positives for minute traces of accepted equine thereapeutic drugs which are quite clearly no longer present in pharmacologically active amounts. I am stunned that you cannot get your head around this.
Further to that, I am repeatedly on record as having done so over the years and across a number of Racing forums, both still active & subsequently defunct.
Ask around for confirmation. Ask the NSW Stewards both past and present. My stance on this subject goes back prior to the advent of the GHRRA, it goes back 3 name changes and beyond Tony Collins being the boss at the then NSW Harness Racing Authority.
It goes back beyond Luke McCarthy's High School years. It is by no means a recent thing in response to recent happenings, despite what you might so erronesously care to infer Mark.
Now if you've got the stones then swing them in the wind. Come right out and say so. Call me a Shill for the bad guys, call me a shonk and pony up your evidence of same. I dare you.
Otherwise, shut your pie hole. I resent the inference.
If you had instead been around for long enough or if otherwise you had done your homework thoroughly enough and bothered to ask around then you would already know this to have been the case.
Aim up on the rights and the wrongs of the subject by all means but please...don't run that Mother Duck crap at me...because mate, you are just plain wrong.

Hi Jaimie . Its hard to put up a good argument when those who control this forum are those who have the strongest opinions . Those who delete others posts when the ballance of opinion turns against them . You say you resent the inference . Well , no one knows what that means now , but if thats the case don't put yourself in a position where the bulk of your arguments would point to the assumption that urks you .
If you want to be fair dinkum and honest , no trainers use steroids for therapeutic reasons . Its all about performance . The quick buck . You don't need steroids to race with . The rest of the world has proved that . In racing and every other sport . Australian trainers keep making the therapeutic argument because its so much easier and quicker . Like I've stated before , any horse that is genuinely in need of steroids is not a racing proposition for quite some time . Quack quack

Mark, some people love to confuse the debate about steroid use with other drugs, whether they are therapeutic or not. It is this line of defence that results in the blurring of of the argument against drug cheats. If a horse is in such bad condition that it needs steroids to obtain maximum fitness then surely it should not be considered a current racing proposition. But apart from all this talk 'horses don't inject themselves', which on its own places absolute responsibility on the trainer. Until out of competition drug rules and testing becomes the norm then money will win out. Cycling has done it , so can Harness Racing with the right willpower