cobalt

They are timing their verdicts until after the carnival finishes so maybe there is some hope that penalties are in the offing

I should have linked this one yesterday but just in case anyone missed it

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/horse...16-gl0mvu.html

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/horse...17-gl11e5.html

I think Racing got serious but I suspect we could have lengthy appeals ahead especially when/if the others are found guilty

In the first article from The Age, And their 10% share of prizemoney, Totalling $50,000 which was held in trust from Group and Listed races, Will be returned to the Hopes.
??????????????????????????

It does sound strange Rich and at first I thought it must have been a typo but then I remembered that they were one of the training teams under investigation who did not quibble about having all their % withheld (some of the others objected and in the end only had their Gp race %'s withheld).
I am assuming that the withholding was a case of 'looking to be doing something' by the authorities and was supposedly for in the event that any of their future winners tested positive or maybe in the event that they received large fines as their penalty. Without fines in the penalty I cannot imagine that you could convince any court that you can allow someone to work but withhold part of their wages indefinitely.

http://www.harnesslink.com/USA/Phase...y-now-Complete

We will have to follow that study Tony, thanks for the link

Noticed in the gallops world that the Hope's appeal is not being heard until Feb so they effectively get 3mths of training since being found guilty

Kev,
I do not condone cheating in any way. However we do need to allow those involved to exhaust avenues of appeal. A large number of people are involved. Staff, owners and a whole lot of others. I don't think it would be fair on all involved if this was not allowed.

I agree Dean and it would be purgatory to have it hanging over your head - it would seem better for all if appeals could be heard in a month or so

Dean, I read in the paper today that the stewards opposed the granting of the stay so they obviously do not think they should get any benefit from appealing

If you get a positive for drink driving or drug driving , you are suspended straight away even if take case to court and if you lose but appeal would not be allowed to drive until appeal heard.This could also mean lack of income if you are a proffesinal driver. Why the differnce they have proven positives had there day in court and lost yet can still train and win races nothing changed.

Rights to appeal

Unfortunately those who have positives will utilise all avenues to appeal as the various laws govern what to allow and what not to but certain trainers who have higher earning capacity will have appeals heard 6-12 months from time of offence and I think you can apply for extra time due to health concerns etc so add on another 6 months and inevitably they still earn, buy horses, punt & in the meantime persons like myself who own horses in both codes suffer.
What I mean by that is I punt my horses to pay for there monthly bills, makes up about 50% so it eases the pressure of having 10 in work but I only use country trainers that in both codes have good and local ethics, proven over time (History).
I would not give my horse to the ones who have had previous charges laid as you know the old saying that those that mix in certain circles usually know what is going on.
Refer back to The Sam Kavanagh case with certain Harness identities who there characters preceeded them.

Good points you make Brian and Michael and are probably the logic behind the stewards opposing a stay.
It would be interesting to have a db of Trainers records to assist those who prioritize ethics when seeking a trainer. No doubt word of mouth is invaluable but if in doubt, I imagine googling someone nowadays is generally going to find any offences they have been found guilty of.

Michael,
all great points. Only thing is, the case going on at the moment doesn't fit in those categories,
And with your pre-requisites could have been a trainer for you.
I Struggle to see why the Hopes would risk a 50 year clear history to use a substance for gain in lowly races and not have a bet. It certainly wasn't for prize money. And to top it off the horses ran badly, and didn't ever look wining chances. I'll wait and see how this plays out.

Forget motives, records etc Dean - explain those high readings

1 Attachment(s)

I certainly agree with PB about this

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/horse...29-glarv9.html

I am not so sure that Danny O'Brien would still be looking forward to the case (see attached Snip - best I could do as although I read The Sun today, I am not a subsciber) after this development

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/horse...30-glbtzu.html

Just wondering what people think of the opinion of one of the leading vets in Australia on Cobalt are??

https://audioboom.com/boos/3904249-n...gieter-4-12-15

There appears to be some serious questions at least whether Cobalt is a Class 1. According to Dr Nick Kannegieter, definitely not.

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/horse...07-glh9mu.html

It would seem that Mr Gleeson thinks Danny O'Brien is a bit shifty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boydy

Just wondering what people think of the opinion of one of the leading vets in Australia on Cobalt are??

https://audioboom.com/boos/3904249-n...gieter-4-12-15

There appears to be some serious questions at least whether Cobalt is a Class 1. According to Dr Nick Kannegieter, definitely not.

Adam, No one can question Doctor Nicks knowledge and understanding of our great equine breed. This very forthright opinion he has expressed must raise several questions about Cobalt once again. The one point that nobody disagrees with is the point about large massive readings are extremely dangerous to the horse and should be dealt with as being totally harmful to the horse in question. Having said that I am still trying to understand all the factual details around Cobalt being a proven performance enhancer. We know it is extremely toxic in large quantities but I must admit I am yet to find any form of factual detail that can but to rest once and for all that Cobalt is a performance enhancer in the equine breed. I think we that have tried to stay fully educated on what has been put out there on Cobalt are all waiting to see the findings / research / studies presently being undertaken around the World on this very subject. One thing I do know is over the next 12 - 18 months we should all have the findings on this issue finally expressed in a way we can all agree on,one and for all.
All the best and keep up the research on it all.

Rob Nalder

Rob,

Thanks for the comments, normally information that differs from the "Lynch Mob" mentality don't get any type of response. I agree with you that anyone that is using non approved supplements to treat horses deserve everything they get. If participants are using concoctions brewed up by some wood-be chemist give them life. Its that simple and I have no sympathy for those people.

The issues with cobalt are, no testing has every been done on long term use, with all due respect 3 days is not long term. No testing has ever been done what the retention periods are if you received a horse that has been given high levels of cobalt particularly by another party, although HRNSW has done testing on a horse from a cobalt disqualified trainer however never chose to seize the horse. I often wonder why they seize horses with TCO2 but never seize the horse in question with regards cobalt. The cynic in me tells me it might prove something they do not want to prove. No testing or research has ever been done as to what are the performance enhancing traits of Cobalt or if there actually are any. Finally, under HRNSW own guidelines a Class 1 substance is a substance that should not be used for horses. Clearly approved substances contain Cobalt and even HRNSW trials that a horse can get over the level with approved supplements.

My feelings are that the majority of people convicted of Cobalt Offences are guilty and the industry feeling is, oh well to bad if the innocent minority have to pay the price. Guilty or not guilty I do not think that Cobalt in anyway can be shown as a Class 1 substance and maybe some time in the future this comment will be shown incorrect. If you follow Dr Nick logic any trainer should be injecting their horses with Cobalt containing supplements weeks before they race to get the supposed unproven EPO effect.

Like I said previously any trainer injecting or treating their horse with an unapproved substance should get life.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boydy

Rob,

Thanks for the comments, normally information that differs from the "Lynch Mob" mentality don't get any type of response. I agree with you that anyone that is using non approved supplements to treat horses deserve everything they get. If participants are using concoctions brewed up by some wood-be chemist give them life. Its that simple and I have no sympathy for those people.

The issues with cobalt are, no testing has every been done on long term use, with all due respect 3 days is not long term. No testing has ever been done what the retention periods are if you received a horse that has been given high levels of cobalt particularly by another party, although HRNSW has done testing on a horse from a cobalt disqualified trainer however never chose to seize the horse. I often wonder why they seize horses with TCO2 but never seize the horse in question with regards cobalt. The cynic in me tells me it might prove something they do not want to prove. No testing or research has ever been done as to what are the performance enhancing traits of Cobalt or if there actually are any. Finally, under HRNSW own guidelines a Class 1 substance is a substance that should not be used for horses. Clearly approved substances contain Cobalt and even HRNSW trials that a horse can get over the level with approved supplements.

My feelings are that the majority of people convicted of Cobalt Offences are guilty and the industry feeling is, oh well to bad if the innocent minority have to pay the price. Guilty or not guilty I do not think that Cobalt in anyway can be shown as a Class 1 substance and maybe some time in the future this comment will be shown incorrect. If you follow Dr Nick logic any trainer should be injecting their horses with Cobalt containing supplements weeks before they race to get the supposed unproven EPO effect.

Like I said previously any trainer injecting or treating their horse with an unapproved substance should get life.

So that I know what to look out for in the future - are you saying that horses using approved supplements only can register a 200+ positive - How can anybody be found guilty, these gallops trainers have nothing to worry about

Kevin, no I am not saying that.

However in my opinion and more importantly a world renowned vet like Nick Kannegieter has said that there is insufficient research to prove what the effects of cobalt are on horses in different situations and whether they are performance enhancing. The reality is the stewards cannot determine the difference between a positive swab from an approved supplement or a unapproved concoction. Unless like one trainer in NSW they found the concoction in his stables.

I believe that ever case should be access on its merits but with regards Cobalt I do not think this has happened.

With regards Peter Moody considering he seems to have no connection with disgraced vets, disqualified persons or colourful racing identities I think he it maybe be advantageous in him fighting his case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boydy

Kevin, no I am not saying that.

However in my opinion and more importantly a world renowned vet like Nick Kannegieter has said that there is insufficient research to prove what the effects of cobalt are on horses in different situations and whether they are performance enhancing. The reality is the stewards cannot determine the difference between a positive swab from an approved supplement or a unapproved concoction. Unless like one trainer in NSW they found the concoction in his stables.

I believe that ever case should be access on its merits but with regards Cobalt I do not think this has happened.

With regards Peter Moody considering he seems to have no connection with disgraced vets, disqualified persons or colourful racing identities I think he it maybe be advantageous in him fighting his case.

Adam, if you are not saying that then this statement seems highly ambiguous

"Clearly approved substances contain Cobalt and even HRNSW trials that a horse can get over the level with approved supplements."

Kevin,

I am not sure why you consider this ambiguous.

Approved supplements such as Hemoplex, Hemo-15 and VAM all contain cobalt.

HRNSW trials used 10ml of Hemo-15 for 3 consecutive days and recorded levels well in excess 200ug/L.

There is one disqualified trainer that received a horse from another trainer and the original trainer has testified that they treated the horse with 600ml (Combined 200ml of each) of Hemo-15, Hemoplex and VAM in 22 days and apparently the testing HRNSW has conducted is consistent with this regime.

Kevin, you are an educated man, would you be comfortable with the HRNSW trial being used as a comparison against yourself. The only other trial was completed in the US where a massive dose of Cobalt was given in one administration. However, even HRNSW testing shows the levels rise if you treat horse with smaller doses over a longer period.

hi adam and kevin,i have just read post 739 from you adam and i think that the legal limit of cobalt allowed in a swab is 200mg/L of urine and not 200ug/L of urine...as hemo-15 contains 0.7 mg cobalt per 1 ml of hemo-15 and the recommended dose is 10ml per 100 kg of horse per treatment it only stands to reason that the horse will have a high ug/L reading.... just to refresh every ones minds 1 mg/L =1000 ug/L....i will stand corrected on this but i think that i am right.

I have to correct you Allan it is 200ug/L

I will provide the link to the records.

http://www.harnessmediacentre.com.au...2027082014.pdf

I am really confused now Adam
I asked you
"are you saying that horses using approved supplements only can register a 200+ positive"
and you replied
"Kevin, no I am not saying that"
but then you told me
"Approved supplements such as Hemoplex, Hemo-15 and VAM all contain cobalt.
HRNSW trials used 10ml of Hemo-15 for 3 consecutive days and recorded levels well in excess 200ug/L."
So the answer is Yes?

adam,adam,adam, please check this out....1ug/ml=1000ug/L or 1ug/L=0.001 ug/ml.... and as for your link,i have read that,and you will notice that 95% of the horses tested were way ,way below the legal limit.adam check out the the horses that went over the limit and you find that the trainers concerned have been rubbed out...

Quote:

Originally Posted by allanjg

hi adam and kevin,i have just read post 739 from you adam and i think that the legal limit of cobalt allowed in a swab is 200mg/L of urine and not 200ug/L of urine...as hemo-15 contains 0.7 mg cobalt per 1 ml of hemo-15 and the recommended dose is 10ml per 100 kg of horse per treatment it only stands to reason that the horse will have a high ug/L reading.... just to refresh every ones minds 1 mg/L =1000 ug/L....i will stand corrected on this but i think that i am right.

It is 200ug/L Allan

http://www.harnesslink.com/Australia...-cobalt-dramas

"Courtesy of last week’s dramatic cobalt hearing in Australia before the Racing Appeals and Disciplinary Board, a grotesque portrait now exists of handsome young horse vet Adam Matthews."
..............................

Havent posted here for awhile but the simple fact of all this Cobalt is a banned product over a certain limit and if you present a horse to race over that limit no matter who is to blame the buck stops with the trainer and he is Guilty and must pay the price.

Quote:

Originally Posted by barney

Havent posted here for awhile but the simple fact of all this Cobalt is a banned product over a certain limit and if you present a horse to race over that limit no matter who is to blame the buck stops with the trainer and he is Guilty and must pay the price.

+1

Quote:

Originally Posted by barney

Havent posted here for awhile but the simple fact of all this Cobalt is a banned product over a certain limit and if you present a horse to race over that limit no matter who is to blame the buck stops with the trainer and he is Guilty and must pay the price.

Yes, yes, yes end of section.

Quote:

Originally Posted by barney

Havent posted here for awhile but the simple fact of all this Cobalt is a banned product over a certain limit and if you present a horse to race over that limit no matter who is to blame the buck stops with the trainer and he is Guilty and must pay the price.

Have to agree with you 100% Brian...that is the bottom line & I have been wondering for a while now how this fact has been somewhat lost in all this.

Because to many people want to excuse the wrong doers or even protect them for what reason i dont know.

God forbid the penalty fitting the crime.

As per trainers accidently feeding horses contaminated feed (and getting zero penalty), all factors should be accessed when delivering a penalty. Simply if you do not know the facts with regards retention periods and dosage rates how can you accurately assess a penalty. It is simple you cannot.

Not sure how anybody can say cobalt was accidentally feed in contaminated food maybe a supplement was contaminated but by who and was it an accident or planned, methinks planned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boydy

God forbid the penalty fitting the crime.

As per trainers accidently feeding horses contaminated feed (and getting zero penalty), all factors should be accessed when delivering a penalty. Simply if you do not know the facts with regards retention periods and dosage rates how can you accurately assess a penalty. It is simple you cannot.

Adam I really was hoping that you were going to tell me if a triple dose of an approved treatment could produce a positive.
Not that it would get you off all charges but saying someone stuffed up and 3x happened - would surely be a good defense to go with (if a triple really could cause it )

What they are admitting to supposedly doing to defend Moody in his cobalt case is unbelievably damning

Headline: Cobalt Inquiry Horses Given Unknown Injections

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/horse...21-glsuc0.html

Kavanagh and Obrien find out there fate tomorrow Wednesday.

and

The end of The Age article is reporting that Moody is incensed at the adjournment till Feb 18 because there are Sales next month - don't worry about the Sales would be my suggestion.