Positive swabs

I meant to add, the only slight drawback...if there is one...is that once one of the 250 etc. test cartridges is inserted and so activated you can't then turn the machine off, pick it up, take it somewhere else and then turn it back on again because if you do that then you have to put in a new cartridge.
It is relative small and easily moved but it is not designed to be overtly portable. You can however leave the machine in place and in a 'stand-by' mode until such time as it is needed again eg. Mondays, Tuesdays & Saturdays out at Menangle for example. I think it would send a BIG message.

There are some interesting points made in this thread. A quick check of the rules of harness racing will reveal that there are two machines approved for the testing of TCO2. The Beckman Elise and Beckman DXC 600 (I think it is). For testing to be valid the samples need to be tested on one of these machines. Obviously it is not so difficult to have one of these machines approved for use (usually a few months for the rule change to be approved). These machines also mut be calibrated correctly for use. Outside of a certain margin the results have more margin for error.

Secondly testing on the night/day has been conducted in the past. This happened in WA a while ago. It caused a lot of problems during an interdominion and was scrapped after that. Multiple tests were run on this horse on the night as the first test was over the limit, which was 35mmol then. This horse was favourite for the series. It would not have been good had it been not allowed to start. But then how could it be allowed to start when it was over the limit?? A tricky situation to say the least.

There's another great thing Kristy.
Once paramters are set, be they human or equine, these Siemens analysers are not only self calibrating but they also self QC. They're in effect a closed system. No need for operators to fiddle about getting them to bowl onto a length. Got to love that. I understand that resting TC02 levels for horses & for humans are in fact very close & so calibration would be a snap.
Also, as the top end level is now, I'm of the view that 37mmol cannot be exceed naturally.
If by chance a one in a 100,000 or a 1 in 1mil. horses comes along, one that naturally has a resting TC02 which exceeds the upper limit...then the simple answer as far as proving this to be the case is to sequester it for further testing.
Freaks of nature do exist I'm sure, you may well have encountered one or more of them in your time. In all the years I've been around Harness Racing however, I've never seen nor heard of any proven beyond doubt, confirmed cases of naturally occurring 37+mmol TC02's. Quick turn around on-course testing with modern, cutting edge analysers should be the way of the future, IMO. As initially noted by Flashing and as I said before, Pa. can do it, so can we.

Also a significant variance in a horse's TC02 could be announced post race if it was deemed significant. Similar to a weight variance in a greyhound.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Saying

Also a significant variance in a horse's TC02 could be announced post race if it was deemed significant. Similar to a weight variance in a greyhound.

[VVV] At this juncture I'd like it noted by both admin. & casual observers alike that I have fought against & for the time-being at least have won a battle with an almost overwhelming urge to post the rather unkind suggestion that...given their extensive experience in such areas...perhaps messrs. O'Toole & Bentley should be consulted during any development process which might lead to such a system coming to pass. To have made such a comment here in this most happy of places where all the world is a carpet rose petals scattered before us as we walk, would have been very imprudent of me indeed. Perish the thought.

[QUOTE=triplev123;11871][VVV] At this juncture I'd like it noted by both admin. & casual observers alike that I have fought against & for the time-being at least have won a battle with an almost overwhelming urge to post the rather unkind suggestion that...etc.etc.
I have just had a look over the shoulders of the powers that be
and can pass on the news that they are in agreement with VVV's suggestion that they move onto using up-to-date and accurate means of testing for Tco2 except that,
1) the cost is not justified.
2) we don't have the expertise to operate the Gizmo.
3) the cost cannot be justified.
4) the Gizmo has not been shown to be accurate (enough).
5) we are trying to justify the cost.
6) self calibration is not healthy.
7) we tried, but cannot justify the cost.
8) we find that getting a positive from a pre-race favourite is not in the best interest of racing.
9) to cover our backside we have formed a committee to investigate,in depth,the Gizmo.
10) the committee has reported that it would probably be O.K. to have an inquiry into the cost of the use of the Gizmo,and that it should report as soon as possible as to whether the cost was too great.
11) the committee has warned that as they only have crayon and slates all of the above may be too hard,and anyway the cost is too great.
No, it's all too bloody hard and we wouldn't want to upset anybody.Another Scotch anyone?

Howard Cosell, you ain't nothin but an instigator.:rolleyes: