Chief Stipe

There are no extra marginal costs. The initial blood tests are done anyway - sunk cost. If a positive is returned then the B sample is tested. Stuff all extra cost. To identify and set thresholds just requires the head vet to establish a threshold based on current science. For example they know with Morphine that unless it is over a certain dosage it has no therapeutic effect likewise in terms of performance enhancement. In terms of testing for the origin of the Morphine they know most of that detail now. All it requires is the development of an typical chemical profile to sample against. Organic morphine will be present with about 5 other chemicals in certain ratios. It isn't an expensive test process. The cost is such that it doesn't matter who the stable is as it isn't an expensive process. However I'm sure Freda if you won the Derby and returned a positive to poppy seeds I'm sure you would find enough people to crowd fund the process.

Not sure what your point is but if the excuse for not changing the protocols is expense then it doesn't have any foundation. In this case the Owners and Trainer copped all the losses. The RIU incurred no additional marginal cost at all.

It isn't that expensive. Especially when you consider the expense to stakeholders of what happens now.

Not many do know. But the larger training operations don't make their own hay. If you have 150 horses in work at anyone time that is a lot of hay to check. Unfortunately the efforts you describe may not pick up contamination. Hence my opinion that there needs to be a look at the rules - if a positive to something that could be an environmental contaminate is returned then why not have minimum thresholds and testing that determines the origin of the contaminate. The current process in my opinion is a bit of a cop out. There wasn't even publication of the level of the substance.

No. According to the JCA report - no. However you may wish to ask them. However from the JCA's perspective what would be the point? For a start it would involve trying to determine which meadow the hay came from. I doubt any farmer has that level of traceability. Then they would have to walk all over the property looking for a needle in a haystack. Once cut the poppy plants would be hard to detect as they wouldn't be there. The JCA had a proven positive. The testing showed that the morphine was from a non-synthetic or commercial source. There was no evidence of deliberate administration. Either way the result would have been the same and the outcome is set in stone. Disqualification of horse, loss of stakes and black type and the Trainer fined.

I wouldn't expect you to be across the chemistry involved however why should someone be held responsible for something they have no control over? Not only have no control but at levels which are not performance enhancing nor therapeutic. In my opinion this issue is only going to get bigger. Dont be surprised if it is one of the key areas of review of the Covid-19 pandemic. When does a positive actually have relevance in terms of actions or outcomes?

Weren't you on course for the day?

Jess you are well off the mark on this issue. I understand you are a licensed trainer and I suggest you get yourself up to speed on this issue. There are numerous instances of morphine contamination in NZ racing. The primary source being poppy plants/seeds.

Nup. If you walk down any city street you are on video - where are the signs? If you are delivering to a home address there is nothing to stop you or the home owner from video recording what is happening. There is also a misconception that you can't record a private conversation in a public place. You can. Where the privacy considerations kick in is if you publish it globally - i.e. on the internet. The key is "intended purpose".

Nope. Wrong.

Rule Number(s): 869(2) and Whip RegulationsFollowing the running of Race 3, Fear The Dragon At Macca Lodge Mobile Pace, Information A10668 was lodged by Stipendiary Steward, Mr V Munro alleging Junior Driver, Mr T Larsen (Bettors Highlight) used his whip in more than a wrist flicking motion in the home straight. Mr Larsen admitted the breach ... (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Rule Number(s): 869(3)(b)At the conclusion of Race 8, The Todd Realty Mobile Pace, Information A10669 was lodged by Stipendiary Steward, Mr V Munro alleging Junior Driver, Mr M Hill (Mach’s Back) struck a wheel (Benio Ben) driven by B Barclay, passing the 300 metres mark. Mr Hill was present at the hearing and confirmed he admitted ... (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

It is possible that there has been some confusion in translation over the timeline of the investigation. For example my understanding is it was the RIU that pointed towards feed contamination. The commercial grain formula was used for all the horses tested on 26 December (7 in total) and the only feed that was different was the hay. So by a process of elimination the likely source was the hay. The blood tests identified that the morphine was not synthetic nor commercial grade and pointed towards hay contamination. So yes I may have written something that wasn't 100% correct in detail (my translation) however that doesn't detract from the conclusion that the villain was contaminated hay. The science of food contamination and adulteration is a fascinating one and one that has made amazing advances in the last 20 years. My interest in this science was piqued when I organised an international symposium on the identification of manuka honey in Hamilton. Scientists from England, Australia, China and New Zealand presented research. Honey is in the top three of foods that are passed off as something that they aren't. I'm sure we have all heard of stories where beef patties in Europe have been found to contain horse meat. Honey and olive oil are two other examples of where they are often not true to label. I had the pleasure of driving two of the scientists back from Hamilton to Auckland to catch their flights home. One Dr Adrian Charlton (https://www.fera.co.uk/scientist-profiles/adrian-charlton/) from FERA in the UK. The drive back was a loaded discussion on food and contaminate testing and I was amazed at how incredible the science was. Agricultural foods and their contaminants (environmental and illegal) have chemical signatures so specific that the source can be identified accurately right down to region. https://www.fera.co.uk/food-safety/popular-services/veterinary-medicine-residues-testing.html To cut a long story short and not bore you with a science that I find incredibly fascinating the conclusion reached by the RIU investigator based on the chemical analysis of the blood sample I find it to be accurate.

The "nothing to hide" argument is seriously flawed. The counter is you have a lot to lose if some nefarious activity goes undetected. Don't forget that if you have CCTV and are recording stable activity you are also providing evidence that indeed you do have nothing to hide. The digital evidence is discoverable by the Feds. Try explaining any gaps in the evidence!

Yeah it is so cheap nowadays that I would recommend that every major stable installed them. The days of old where you could just wander onto a training property and walk around and pat the horses are long gone.

Ummmmm society outside of your keyboard? Add to that the cheapness of technology. I know a Raw Milk supplier. They have installed cameras all through their milking shed. Staff monitoring, process monitoring, QA control and identification/notification of unauthorised visitors. The owner can monitor the cameras from his smart phone anywhere he has an internet connection. Has proven useful when MPI has done an audit. Take the recent feed contamination issue with Te Akau. The CCTV review was able to identify that no unauthorised persons had access to the horse in question.

Not suggesting any such thing. Surely it is prudent to monitor who enters your property and particularly your stables? Makes no difference if it is the RIU, the local P addict or even the odd errant galah. Yeah na - what the hell who cares about the safety and integrity of millions of dollars worth of horses stabled on the property.

There you go just as I was typing a post saying someone would be bound to make this type of post. It isn't about "having nothing to hide" it is about security and integrity and protecting your horses. I guess you forget the old days where the strapper would sleep in a cot outside the stable of the top horses. There is a great story about Bonecrusher. In the lead up to the Cox Plate one of the owners son's was tasked with doing the night shift outside Red's stable to make sure no one who wasn't approved got near the horse. The day's of trusting everyone has long gone.

With the low costs nowadays not as many as there should be. Allstars is one that does. But then the conspiracists turn that around and say it is only because they have something to hide.

Then what would you have done with the hay? We are just debating timelines here nothing more. As for proving innocence that had already been achieved by the RIU through the results of the blood test. The testing determined that the morphine was not synthetic nor commercial in origin i.e. it was organic. As I pointed out in another post that is how sophisticated modern testing is. The RIU are not particularly transparent with regard to the test results so one cannot comment on the level nor the chemical signature. I assume that they saw enough in the results to support their conclusion that the source was feed contamination.

You tell me. I'm sure you'll find some conspiracy theory. What is it? As for removing the hay and feeding to cattle - wouldn't that be the prudent thing to do if there was suspected contamination?

You do have a point there. However as I have posted a lot about - the potential for this to happen again and again is very real. At the end of the day the punishment far outweighs the crime. One thing that I would have liked to have seen is the level of morphine that was found. Saying it wasn't at a level that would have been performance enhancing is not enough in my opinion. They also seem to have done enough testing to determine that the morphine was indeed organic in origin rather than commercial grade. A thorough chemical analysis would have confirmed to a reasonable degree of certainty the source of the substance. So if the level is low enough not to enhance performance, is a permitted substance for therapeutic treatment (although rarely used) and the origin is know with a degree of certainty surely the fine, the black mark against the Trainer (the next offence will cost more), the loss of $32,000 in stakes and black type is an over the top punishment?

Why is it irrelevant? Hell if you think in any sport that there isn't any crossing the line then you are as naive as Galah. Where is the race fixing and widespread doping? With the latter it seems to be only themselves that are being self doped and dopey.