Read that he has had another positive not sure what norktamine does to help a horse perform.Surely some of you guys will have read the same thing.
Printable View
Read that he has had another positive not sure what norktamine does to help a horse perform.Surely some of you guys will have read the same thing.
Have used Ketamine on an injured horse that was a very bad kicker and he could not be tended to unless he was stoned out of its head.
Often it's mixed with a bit of Valium and Bob's your Uncle, so to speak. Maybe the old horse had to be sedated for some reason and they raced him too early? Ketamine shows up even in the most mintute of minute amounts as the test for it is basically an Equine adapted Human Drugs Of Abuse platform & as such it is similarly extremely sensitive.
Apparently you shouldn't allow your horse to graze the grass where another has been gelded.
That's very good Diz.Quote:
Originally Posted by dizzy
I am having great difficulty reconciling how Barry Lews latest prohibited substance infringement only drew a disqualification of twelve months. What am I missing here? In July 2012 the tribunal handed down its decision on the boldenone case against Karloo Kix, the charges were the same under Rule 190 (1), (2) and (4). The original decision was upheld (although varied) and Barry was disqualified for six months. (Tribunal link) http://www.hrnsw.com.au/assets/files...%20B%20Lew.pdf
New penalties were released by HRNSW in June 2012, much tougher line being taken with prohibited substances. http://hrnsw.com.au/hrnsw-media-release481.html We all know the story of Barrys impeccable judiciary record, his high standing with the sport, a cleanskin up until this blight occurred. That has seriously been put to the test in recent times following the revelation that Karloo Mick had norketamine in its system when it won a race at Menangle on 13 October, 2012. It also puts a huge cloud over the true ability of the old warhorse to race on so competitively at such a grand age (still in Interdom contention no less and over the marathon, well who knows). Its leaving a crap taste in my mouth knowing an old favourite of mine has had some assistance. Thats not the whinge, thats just personal disappointment.
This time Barry Lew is disqualified for 12 months http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=103615
Even if its a Class 3 category charge a second offence is a mandatory two year DQ. I think it should go in to the Class 2 category myself.
So has HRNSW gone soft on their big strong stance on the use of prohibited substances almost at the first hurdle, or have they decided the first charge should not be used retrospectively because the penalties have changed since then and everyone gets a free shot at cheating under the NEW guidelines? Or is it Barry is a good bloke and deserves special treatment? I subscribe to none of those theories. He should have been given a minimum two year ban.:mad:
You got it right in the part about being an old war horse and i don't believe it put's a cloud over his true ability he is a good horse.
[VVV] G'day Brad, just one point. NOBODY that's looking to assist a horse to win a race is EVER going to give it Ketamine. It's a sedative, it stops them, it doesn't kick them along. That's what makes this positive so strange. Furthermore, every man and their dog knows that it sticks around in a horse's system for some time and testing wise it would show up like an elephant hiding under a tea towel. None of it makes any sense to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncobrad
Also used for Depression,Asthsma and many other ailments.
1 Nannogram was the amount the horse had in him which is about 1/100000 of a bees dick in amount and i have measured a bee.
"So has HRNSW gone soft on their big strong stance on the use of prohibited substances almost at the first hurdle, or have they decided the first charge should not be used retrospectively because the penalties have changed since then and everyone gets a free shot at cheating under the NEW guidelines? Or is it Barry is a good bloke and deserves special treatment? I subscribe to none of those theories. He should have been given a minimum two year ban.:mad:"
They don't appear to go soft when someone sticks it up them.
news room
Kevin Pizzuto suspended
23 January 2013
http://www.harness.org.au/news/images/logos/HRNSW-2.gif
Harness Racing New South Wales (HRNSW) Stewards today continued an inquiry that was opened at Tabcorp Park Menangle on Saturday 15 December 2012 into the conduct of Trainer/Driver Mr Kevin Pizzuto both in the Stewards room and the stabling area.
Mr Kevin Pizzuto pleaded guilty to a charge pursuant to Rule 231(2) in that at the Tabcorp Park Menangle Meeting on Saturday, 15 December 2012 following race 2, he did misconduct himself both in the Stewards room and in the stable area by using loud, foul and abusive language.
Mr K Pizzuto’s licences (Driver and Trainer) were suspended for a period of 12 months back dated to 19 December 2012, the date on which he was stood down under the provisions of Rule 183 (3). Further the Stewards ordered that Mr Pizzuto be excluded from all NSW harness meetings under Rule 256 (1)(e), until he complies with certain conditions as required by HRNSW.
[VVV] Yeh? That's 1 billionth of 1 gram.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
Perhaps another good example of the ongoing & desperate need for thresholds to be put in place for a range of substances, levels above which are deemed pharmacologically active & below which are simply ignored. Incidentally, by way of some sort of a yardstick, a human drugs of abuse test (for Ketamine use) is deemed to be positive if the tested level comes back at 1000ng/ml or higher.
Thanks for the info Greg about the one nannogram found in the swab, can you let me know where that info is? I have been looking everywhere to no avail to find the levels detected as the levels have a bit to do with the effects of this drug, I know Jamie is saying it's a sedative but my information is that in particular dosing/levels rather than acting as a sedative it can act as a bronchodialator, freeing up the airways as such, which, obviously will have a positive effect on the horses performance rather than putting him to sleep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
So greg if you can help us out there that'd be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Dan
Hi Jaimie
It also has some dissassociative qualities that idiots who like to dope themselves up on ketamine try this other gear to space themselves out with. Psychotrophic.
(Why people need to do this to themselves is beyond me, but I can see [assuming some people think horses think like us] why this may be used on a horse feeling his joints. But the thought processes of why people do stuff like this isn't what I'm on about here).
My point simply is should Barry have copped two years under the new guidlines? If so, have the stewards used their discretionary powers (and they are extremely powerful) and exercised the get out jail free clauses for admitting guilt, or taking every precaution possible to ensure nothing was administered etc.:confused:
Bailey
Kevin was given a squillion chances to clean up his act but he continually flouted authority, threatened both stewards and his on-track rivals and his behaviour had gone past the pale. On this DQ most would have no qualms or little sympathy. If only he had taken some Nork and chilled out a bit, well he might be still competing.
Straight from the owner's mouth Dan is from where it came in an interview with WIN news tonight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno
Gee fancy that! one puny little nannogram hey? I'm beginning to think this poor bloke is one of the unluckiest trainers going around! First he and McCarthy get done for Boldenone on the same night at Newcastle, which you'd have to say is some sort of coincidence, then McCarthy gets off because his sample does some really wierd things whilst in storage, but poor Barry's sample just behaves as per normal, (like every other sample has in storage since they started storing them years ago) and he gets nabbed for that too!Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
poor bloke must have done something to wreck his luck hey?
Thanks Greg Tried to source that interview on WIN but their website is a friendly as a box of rattlesnakes. Found this though Danno where Barry thinks the source may have come from and I think Dizzy had already alluded to it (careful where you stand in gelding areas). http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/su...-1226576561441 so there is your answer.
Still I am a little confused as to this report from Dubbo's Daily Liberal that states that the first case was quashed due to the sample being contaminated. http://www.dailyliberal.com.au/story...cation/?cs=112
I know one case was quashed but that was Mach Wipers. I thought the other case (Barry Lews) original charge stood. Boy, what do you believe and who do you believe. The good people of Dubbo are not being told the truth...and lets face it, image is everything.
No reports from some country papers surprise me a lot of stories are quite often wrong.
Norketamine: Appears to have similar properties to Etorphine. Norketamine does have a greater analgesic effect than Ketamine but with a much less psychedelic influence. It may be possible, in correct dosage,
(like Etorphine), to act as an athletic stimulator. More studies need to be done.
While I sympathize with those who say the traces were minute and didn't make a difference to the horses performance, that is a seperate topic. That topic being the rules need changing. It is no defence for Barry Lew as to why he received a positive. I'm in agreeance with Brad as to the severity, or lack there-of, of this penalty.
The sad thing is yes the penalties should be harsher but if you run second to the drug cheats and you back your horse there is no reprieve, with proof could itbe that you launch a civil case against the guilty.
It is like the TAB and betting agencies committing fraud....think about it. in essence the bet has been accepted at the time everything is declared, down the track a positive and everyone wins bar the owner who backed his horse to win.:p
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mighty Atom
[VVV] Interesting. Where did you get your information from MA?
I can't see how it's possible that the metabolite (in this case, norketamine) has a greater analgesic effect than its own parent drug (in this case, ketamine). :confused::confused::confused:
Fellas, if the level that Greg has reported is correct then IMO the testing regime & subsequent regulatory enforcement of same has gone right off the %$#!ing deep end whilst screaming & claiming to be a tea-pot. How could anyone in their right mind keep a straight face and suggest that 1 billionth of 1 gram of norketamine is having any pharmacologically active effect whatsoever in a 350-400kg horse????????? and further to that, how could such an infinitesimally small amount earn a Trainer 12 months on the sidelines? Insanity, absolute insanity.
Reported today on WIN tv that The Trainers Association had a meeting with HRNSW today and i think from reports asked the same question. Not sure of outcome as interview with WIN TV with HRNSW wasn't forthcoming.
I have to say I'm inclined to agree Jamie, that is IF the level in the horses system was in fact "one nannogram", however that is excactly what I'm struggling to understand, how would they be able to accurately detect that quantity?Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple V
I honestly don't know what the permissable level is for this substance, if it's zero, then it comes into the group of "bad shit" doesn't it?, if the level permited is something other than zero, then why has Barry been disqualified if the the horse had only one nannogram in his system? or was it one microgram above the threshold/limit??
I honestly have no idea, but if as Barry claims the substance came from the stable he was using then everyone better be extra vigilant when they travel with their hiorses and for that matter when accommodating travelling horses at their own establishments.
cheers,
Dan
Haven't we been down this road before? http://hl-app1.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=88749
By hook or by crook a substance that shouldn't have been in the horses system was found.
Just to what level of scrutiny is required by trainers that would satisfy stewards, I just don't know. But let us assume that even if Barry is not complicit in the least he still has to prove his case of innocence. Under the rules as they stand he doesn't have much room to move.
Thats the point I tried to make in other threads here, under the ABSOLUTE rule, trainers are not able to defend themselves. Lab report is final and they don't care how it happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncobrad
Except in NZ where the RIU "shit themselves" with the arsonic findings at the Hong Kong lab. They dropped all charges against the trainers but horses still lost the race. Arsonic was in a commonly used product and had been for years.
Effects of N-ethyl-nor-ketamine
The effects are reported to be less trippy, less psychedelic and with less dissociation than Ketamine, however with greater euphoria, relaxation and analgesia.
Euphoria
Relaxation
Moderate dissociation
Moderate hallucinations
Time dilation
Mild body load
Mild mobility inhibition
Read more: http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/sho...#ixzz2Kp1I49v8
Hi VVV, could have mistaken N-ethyl-nor-ketamine for norketamine thinking they are one of the same.
Apparently Ketamine is the most abused drug in Hong Kong and is spreading through East Asia, Europe,Australia and North America.
The relative ease at which drugs can be detected does not seem to be a deterrent ; I would suggest it's a case of miscalculation of
administration rather than the fear of being caught. Only last week, over here in W.A., a recent G.P. winner has returned a positive to
caffeine of all things. I remember a case many years ago,back in the 70's, where a horse returned a caffeine positive and the trainer's
explanation was ''I employ tea leaves in my feeding program''. Maybe this time it was too much cocoa powder. I'm afraid these days
when a horse wins a race, particularly the high profile performers, I wait with bated breath until the swab is returned negative and
even then I'm not totally convinced.
Rod there was no miscalculation of administration as the horse wasn't given anything.
[VVV] That's the problem right there Brad. In a nutshell. The implications of the rules as they stand are absolutely absurd.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncobrad
These are high performance horses that from time to time will need to be treated with a very wide range of therapeutic substances, substances which for the most part there are currently no thresholds in place.
Furthermore said rules remain in place not because it is a best practice style approach but rather because of the severe shortcomings in the current testing regime.
The fact that we as an Industry continue to test for & hang Trainers on the basis of minute non pharmacologically active levels of the metabolites of parent drugs in urine samples instead of testing for the actual presence of & getting a definitive level on parent drugs themselves in blood samples (thereby being in an infinitely more informed position insofar as determining an either pharmacologically active or inactive presence) serves to underline just how far we have to go. Under the present system Trainers are damned no matter what & that is just straight up wrong.
Greg, was not inferring that Barry Lew administered the drug, just using it as a generalisation. In fact haven't mentioned the trainer at all in my posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
Under our rules (which are generally aligned to Australia), Ketomine and its metabolites has a withholding period of 5 days. (120 hrs). There is no threshold for this substance.
IMO this long withholding period is consistent with my understanding of the drug with properties including but not restricted to..
Anti inflammatory,
Pain killer
Broncodilator
My sister's dog is currently being treated with Ketomine by infusion to reduce inflammation and pain following amputation of a foot.
I have no intention to revisit an old arguement Jamie, as it never got resolved and won't either, however, under the current rules ( or any other for that matter) there MUST BE a line in the sand somewhere....long may we argue where that line is....but if the line is there, and it's there for all to see..ridiculous in your opinion, but realistic in the opinions of some others, then you play within the rules and YES, you give yourself a safety factor, and if you don't and get done? Blame yourself IMO, don't blame the rules!Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple V
How can you blame the rules if everyone else is playing within those rules and you get busted for stretching them??
The rules are always up for amendment, but we need to play within the rules of the day on the day, otherwise we can be accused of cheating, ask Lance, although, maybe don't 'cos I get the impression he still doesn't actually get it.
cheers,
Dan
No worries Rob but we are talking about Barry Lew in this thread or at least i am.
I'm with Jamie about threshold level's they need to be done and quickly as at present with the miniscule amounts that can be found in a swab now it is ridiculous. Not saying the rule need's changing but something need's to be done about threshold level's for therapeutic drug's in general as in this case with Barry the amount found is equivalent to 1 minute in 38 year's. It's laughable if it were not so serious of a charge.Surely in this day and age of the level of testing that is available they could say that at this level 1 nanogramm no action is required just inform the trainer that there is an abnormality in the test result or something to that effect and move on. I personally am more concerned with team driving and pulling them up than 1 nannogram in a swab result. If it was EPO or ITTP or something as sinister the steward's would be justified in charging the trainer under the rules perhaps. This is just my opinion.
Where can you get a list of drugs and withholding times from. They should be readily available to all so as to play within the rules as Danno put it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triple V
Hi Jaimie
Unless they have changed the rules I found this which clearly states Ketamine is NOT generally a therapeutic drug.
There are over 250 horse racecourses and 100 racing authorities worldwide (1). According to The International Federation of Horseracing Authorities (IFHA), racing takes place in 48 countries.
The ARCI (Association of Racing Commissioners International) are the international regulatory body for prohibited substances in racing. They have established a uniform classification for foreign substances. These drugs are classified into 5 categories: (2)
Class 1 drugs
Stimulants and depressant drugs that have the greatest potential to affect performance and have no generally accepted medical use in racing. Drugs include; opiates, synthetic opioids, amphetamines.
Class 2 drugs
Drugs that have a high potential to affect performance, but less so than class 1 drugs. These drugs are not generally accepted as therapeutic agents in racing and have a high potential for abuse. Examples include; ketamine and ractopamine.
The possibility exists that ketamine, or ketamine in combination with xylazine, is being used Illicitly to affect the performance of racehorses.
ALSO...they are doing studies that are intresting.
CONCLUSIONS: This first observation that norketamine produces effects in the opposite direction of ketamine requires additional proof & tests are ongoing.
So if a horses needs norketamine as a theraupitic drug then he is in NO condition to race.
Even with 1 nannogram.
Are John and Barry brothers?
Yes Trevor John is the older brother.