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?
Printable View
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 existedQuote:
Originally Posted by Longroad
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 orderQuote:
Originally Posted by teecee
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/ma...40+1900+cd+0+N
Regards
Mark
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
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
It still sounds easier for our own authorities to just ban cheats for 5yrs+
5 years sounds like the right lenght of time, first offence of course then 10!
Hi Mark...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Croatto
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
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
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.
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.wordpre...ncy-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/vitamin...-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 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 .Quote:
Originally Posted by kung fu man
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 .
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
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.
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.
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple V
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.
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.
Jaimie, I am starting to think you have a problem with Trish when it takes you 2mths to quote her :confused:
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
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
But in the Essendon fiasco they kept on talking about a rule they had for anything that was not on either listQuote:
Originally Posted by aussiebreno
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.............
Thanks BrendanQuote:
Originally Posted by aussiebreno
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