Chief Stipe

I got I got. Maree Lyndon is holding the Adelaide Cup 1987. Lord Reims?

Mr Lomondy (horse).

Adelaide Cup?

Proactive? Really? This Maylin is an 81 year old dinosaur who judging by his public utterances is past his use by date with modern science having passed him by. Scollay has been equally disappointing in her public utterances and she heads the Kentucky Thoroughbred testing regime. I give Maylin less than a year in his current job. Scollay might get a bit longer as she has done some reasonable work on equine muscoskeletal injuries. Fishman and Robinson the suppliers were conmen who peddled common readily available drugs as something special. Now all the anti-racing media, the click bait merchants like Paulick and Butterfly and all the failed owner, trainer and punter conspirators have been thrown a good few sacks of nothing more than chaff to chew on.

I've attached the relevant indictment papers from the Navarro et al case. From what I've read all the mislabelled and adulterated PED's are known existing drugs. The rHuEPO is a known brand name EPO which has been repackaged. The only "compound" that I can see that would be "unknown" is the product sold here https://sgf1000.com/vecta-sgf-1000-activation called SGF-1000. If true to its specifications then it is a sheep placenta extract. Ironically I sold sheep placenta extract about 15 years ago to the Chinese! It would have any EPO effects - the theory the Chinese had was it rejuvenates injured or damaged tissues i.e. anti-ageing. I doubt it would have any therapeutic effect on a horse. Fishman and co bought it and repackaged it just like all the other named drugs and that is what they were convicted on. navarro_et_al._indictment_-_usao_sig.pdf robinson_et_al._indictment_-_usao_sig.pdf grasso_et_al._indictment_-_usao_sig.pdf

The following comment by Maylin is also odd. I've looked through the indictments and all the so called PED's are recognised drugs that should be tested for. Any "unknown" ones can be picked up via modern testing techniques. Asked why the performance-enhancing drugs described in the federal indictments were not caught by his tests, Maylin said he can test for some of those drugs, but not all. He is not familiar with some of the compounds described the indictments, and therefore cannot test for them. He has requested samples of those drugs from the Justice Department. "I don't believe anybody doing drug testing knows what the heck these things are, if they're anything," he said.

As for the "Who are you kidding?" section of the article at https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/horse-racing-doping-new-york-16771265.php. The following comments by Maylin is absolute bullshit. Why he would make such comments publicly astounds me as there would be numerous scientists that would say he is wrong. But the New York Equine Drug Testing Lab and most similar facilities across the U.S. can only test for three varieties of EPO, while scientific literature cites 82 kinds of EPO worldwide, he said. “Are they being used? I don’t know,” Maylin said in a recent interview. “But they’ve been synthesized; they’re available. So if you’re testing for EPOs and you’re only doing three and there are another 70-plus out there, who are you kidding?” Mary Scollay, executive director and chief operating officer of the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium (RMTC), said she's heard allusions to a "rainbow" of EPO varieties, but she hasn't identified all of them and doesn't know where one would get them. Maylin said that his lab is working to develop more EPO tests, but the research is difficult, time-consuming and expensive. It can take months or years to identify a tiny trace of a substance showing up in a horse’s hair, urine or blood. More time is required to develop a reliable way to test for that compound. Research needs to be conducted to determine the effect of the substance on the horse and in what concentrations, if any, it should be permitted.

Don't you find it odd that all through this NY doping saga that the testers have access to samples of what was used and yet there has been nothing published? Instead we get the line "there are undetectable drugs" which is absolute bullshit which means one of two things - they tested the stuff and couldn't find anything because nothing was there or they are incompetent. I politely suggest it is the former. Anything that was in the snakeoil that Fishman was peddling was not new under the sun. It costs $1billion to develop a new Biopharmaceutical. Do you seriously think that has happened? As I've said repeatedly the charges were for mislabelling and adulteration - nothing to do with a new fancy high tech drug. You'll probably find that if Fishman had put the ingredients on his snakeoil that it was made up of vitamins, minerals and amino acids. Navarro has already admitted using mislabelled Clenbuterol.

Another ageing science academic trying to source funding for his research. As for the cost of testing doesn't his lab do the testing and the cost is a charge to the industry?

No I fall into the group that logically looks at the science using the formal education that I have acquired and recent practical experience with modern testing techniques.

@the galah I've read the article you refer to. It has numerous inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Most of which I've already covered above. Two points: Every drug is detectable using today's technology; The reference to micro-dosing at 4,000 UI being undetectable is incorrect. The Kentucky funded study commissioned by Scollay used 10,000 UI but elicited NO increase in the blood parameters that would result in an improvement in performance. The statements made about EPO are incorrect. If EPO is to be effective then it needs to have a longevity longer than minutes or hours. Hence all the research by Pharmaceutical companies on extending the half life. However the constituent parts of EPO don't disappear with minutes as shown in some of the research I posted. Yes blood cells have a life of 120 days but the body self regulates - if it doesn't have enough it produces more, if it has too many it stops producing them. The trigger is the amount of oxygen that is detected circulating in the blood. So although there might be a boost in the number of blood cells when EPO is administered the body quickly self-regulates back to normal. 10,000 UI in the Kentucky study wasn't enough to increase the number of red blood cells.

Not as humid today but still warm and a good breeze. Track should keep improving at Ruakaka.

MEETING NEWS Whangarei RC | Wednesday 9 February Tuesday Morning Weather: Cloudy Track: Dead 5 Rail: True | 8mm Rain Last 24 Hours Weather and Track updated at 8.59am Tuesday 8 February

Of course it isn't working. "Oh you are just being negative. Be positive and get with the programme." "Yeah but hang on you're describing how beautiful the rain looks while I'm drowning!"

That's because there isn't any leadership amongst stakeholders and there may not be until self-interest bites them in the arse. The other aspect that is deferring action is something that a lot of New Zealanders are weighing up - Australia as a horse racing destination looks so much better! Hell even if you were a hobby five horse trainer imagine the lifestyle of touring the Ozzie bush and country meetings for 6 months of the year with a chance to make some real money!

You only have to look at the so called champion of positividdy and what that has done to the country. Such is the danger of believing the propaganda.

Pointing out where the propaganda spouted from the likes of NZTR and TAB NZ is blatantly wrong shouldn't be construed as negative. I prefer the term realistic. Otherwise you end up joining the drummers like @JJ Flash singing in front of Nero has he plays his fiddle. How long will the BGP phenomena last? I think what is missing is leadership amongst the mass of stakeholders that are being ground slowly into the dirt. What is required is a co-ordinated effort of positive action putting aside self interest and focusing on one issue/constraint at a time until it is fixed. The first issue is - a to fix the tracks NOT close them. The second is to fix the handicapping system the forces good average wager earning horses out of the game. Forget about whips. Forget about bigger parties at key days - the crowds will come when you fix the grass roots - pun intended and the excitement comes back into racing.

Waiting for your link @the galah to the "scientific literature citing 82 kinds of EPO". I also correct my statement above - there are 6 types of Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA)'s: Erythropoietin (Epo) Epoetin alfa (Procrit, Epogen) Epoetin beta (NeoRecormon) Epoetin zeta (Silapo, Retacrit) Darbepoetin alfa (Aranesp) Methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta (Mircera) Now where you and Dr Maylin may be confused is that of the above types there are a number of different formulations produced by numerous companies. Like most Pharmaceuticals generics are produced. However ALL the formulations can be grouped into one of the 6 types. Yes there may well be 80+ formulations on the market. The reasons for the different formulations can be likened to the different brands and formulations we see with paracetamol for example where the active ingredient is formulated in different ways to improve delivery and absorption. For example some of the formulations have had molecules added to the base to extend the half life of the drug. BUT at the end of the day ALL the types of manufactured EPO have amino acid commonality (raw EPO is a glyco-protein comprised of 165 amino acids) because they are manufactured from human erythropoietin. It is that commonality that is targeted in testing. Why do they have this commonality? At the end of the day the cheapest source of the raw material is human EPO (often sourced from the livers of fetuses) which is first duplicated/multiplied into large volumes using a biological process in large fermentation vats (the mRNA vaccines are produced the same way). The EPO is then subjected to chemical processes to arrive at the final formulation. The other reason for the commonality is that the stimulus of the cells that initiate the erythropoiesis (Red Blood Cell generation) process is very specific. It is essentially a hormone that has specific RNA/peptide/amino acid strands. The testers look for these strands. Two such stands being peptides VNFYAWK (T6) and VYSNFLR (T17).

Thanks @hunterthepunter. I said I wasn't sure but with all due respect the point I was making is that the technology is readily available in NZ to do the required tests for EPO and if the RIB were suspicious then it wouldn't take much effort to select any horse that had a change of form and send the sample to HKJC and or the NZ Lab. If they aren't doing that then they should spend less time acting like Cops doing phone taps and hiding in hedges and focus on their real job.

I believe it is part of the standard test assay of the HKJC Lab where the majority of our samples go to. But the point is contrary to the BS some people are posting online tests for EPO are readily available. Now if the RIB has suspicions that EPO is being used either by one or a number of stables then you would think that they would selectively sample and test for it. They wouldn't have to go to the HKJC for the first scanning test as there are labs in NZ that have the equipment and skills to do the job. I know that for a fact as I've been fortunate to have been involved in a project that enabled me to see these techniques in action. In that project the testers found molecules of substances that they did not even know existed. As for the cost - well you minimise that by being selective with what samples gets tested.

@Archie Butterfly and @the galah all my sources of information are from reputable (real) scientific journals. For example the research paper that you pre-empted the results of was published by the National Center for Biotechnology Information, US National Library of Medicine i.e. the USA Government. BTW are you critical of that research now that it doesn't support your conspiracy? As for evidence of the availability of tests for rHuEPO I could flood you with papers and links to papers from any number of reputable Journals and publishing houses. I've attached a few for you to read. If I have time I may do a literature review. As for a DBS (dried blood spot) test I don't know what cave you live in but drug testing has moved on since the 1960's. Have you heard of ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay), HPLC (High Performance Liquid Chromatography), Mass Spectrometry or Proteomic Testing? All these methods have been used successfully to test for rHuEPO in horses. Techniques have been developed and are being used that identify rHuEPO after 14+ days of administration and at very low concentrations e.g. 9pg/ml of rHuEPO (9 x 10-12 or 0.0000000000009). Note that it is believed for rHuEPO to elicit an improvement in performance that it needs to be administered no later than 72 hours before competition. The reason being is that the horses system adapts over time and adjusts its own production of EPO to get its blood back in balance. Many of the tests focus on a couple of marker peptides that are common to all the types of EPO (about 5 or 6 types). If you think about the logic of that it is because cell receptors that initiate the creation of more blood cells only respond to a limited range of RNA signals. You could liken it to a key opening a door. So Butterfly before you rant on about something you clearly know nothing about I suggest you get some good scientific advice or at the minimum do what good journalists do - research! Plus while you are at it - try and get some solid evidence. You remind me of the failed punter who has degenerated into the conspiracy mire to explain why he is losing. I suggest you try @Thomass's Blueprint to improve your punting outcomes. The attached documents are not a definitive list of what testing is available for rHuEPO but just a sample. There are dozens of research papers on the topic and the consensus is that rHuEPO is detectable in horse plasma and or urine using fast and cost effective tests. ASMS12_M121_CDauly-sm.pdf Fast confirmatory analysis of rHuEPOs in plasma for horse racing doping control.pdf Detection of Recombinant Epoetin and Darbepoetin Alpha after Subcutaneous Administration in the Horse.pdf

I agree to a point but the colts and geldings don't have an alternative e.g. the NZ Oaks. The point being you don't always get the best fillies in the Derby. I know that sounds counter intuitive but Trainers are generally risk adverse. Some very good Fillies have won the Derby: Habibi Silent Achiever Popsy Tidal Light Our Flight From what I've seen so far this season I haven't seen a really good colt or gelding emerge. We'll get a good line on La Crique in the Avondale Guineas.

Another classic case of where dear old Archie the lepidoptera clearly shows he doesn't understand science and certainly has no clue about the differences between human and equine physiology. This one article refers to micro-dosing in male HUMAN athletes with HUMAN growth hormone and HUMAN derived EPO. To suggest that the concept can be transferred to equine athletes is just plain scientific ignorance. FFS Archie if this is the best you can do I'd advise you to take down your paywall before you are sued for fraud!

Not at all. Just because HE can't test for them doesn't mean that they can't be tested for or that others can. I'm assuming that the quote is out of context as you haven't posted a link. His comments regarding EPO are not accurate. There aren't 80 types of EPO (eyrthropoetin).

But it didn't work in the research study that you spruiked up in the Black Horse Newsletter. You are so onto it you didn't know that the results of that research commissioned by Dr Mary Scollay had been submitted for publication in October 2021. You are nothing more than a fraud.