the galah

The whole manipulation of data around the vaccine is nuts. I read not that long ago they did a study on women having miscarriages .Data from 249,000 women. They found those who had been vaccinated were almost twice as likely to have a miscarriage as those that weren't. So what did they do. They then decided they had to look closer into the data and came up with the answer,so they say. Women having pregnancies later in life are more likely to have a miscarriage and because those women are more likely to be vaccinated and because more of those who had had miscarriages also came from socio economic groups,which they said were more likely to be vaccinated,they factored that in and instead of the women being almost double the chance of having a miscarriage if vaccinated as the original data showed,after the recalulation they were in fact more likely to have it if unvaccinated. if you do a goggle search,goggle filters out studies like that and all you get are the results saying vaccine good,unvaccinated bad. The whole thing is so dishonest. you mentioned excess deaths. I used to look up the oecd excess deaths. anyone can see it although they are swithcing off the patform from next week. Why they are doing that,i'm not sure as its so easy to understand the data they show. Maybe thats why. but anyway,new zealand excess deaths in the whole of last year were not good reading % wise. I wonder why?

To summarise everything you have said. You have said i talk bullshit,wasting time,i'm ignorant,blah,blah,blah...blah blah. I've re read the posts on this topic. Whats seems to have started sending you off the rails is that i said levamisole metabolises into the known performance enhancer aminorex.And because i inferred the reason people like trainor and grimson would be using levamisole, would be for its performance enhancing effects. before you get your tits in a tangle i know grimson has no positives.And i have never said they have positives for aminorex. So you say its unreasonable for me to argue that someone caught cheating,as trainor has with his levamisole positive,can ever have it inferred they would be looking for the performance enhancing effects of the drug they used,because it has not been detected. Butb thats not the language you use to do that,the language you use is name calling. Now i can understand your point of view,because i can follow that logic. i believe you are wrong ,because i believe the latest performance enhancers can be manipulated to avoid detection when tested,but you don't even seem to agree with that. but all this name calling seems rather over the top. like i have said previously,its obvious you find some of my posts irritating,seemingly because i have an opinion based on my own observations and interpretations of them. i'm sure even this reply will irritate you just a little more.lol

You seem to have an obsession with saying i talk bullshit. Not having a good day? But heres a quote from the RACING MEDICATION TESTING CONSORTIUM,based in lexington ,kentucky. They are internationally recognised as authorities on equine research,testing and recommending medication policies. "Levamisole metabolizes in the horse into aminorex and possibly also pemoline,both of which are potent stimulants assigned a 1/A classification in the association of racing commissioners international uniform classification of foreign substances. the identification of either of those substances in a post race sample is associated with a potential career ending penalty."... ...therefore,the RMTC recommends that following the withdrawal of levamisole, treated horses be tested prior to entry to ensure levamisole and its metabolites have been eliminated from the horse. Before submitting a sample for clearance testing it is advisable to consult the regulatory authority to make sure your sample meets the laboratory requirements for matrix and volume." did you get that chief,metabolizes into aminorex..a potent stimulant. but hey maybe you know more than them. Nah,safe to say you don't.. I'm not replying to anymore of your comments about my posts. I'm tired of wasting my time .

hrnz have had their board member,staff,handicappers,trainers look at the current rating system..Even as late as last year they came back and said no changes needed. Blind freddy can tell the non win horses are unfairly started at a rating 50. Because of that any horse who wins a non win early in its career, immediately has to race against horses it shouldn't. They did have a committee that about 4 months ago came out and said they needed to bring non win ratings down to r 40,but with less than 2 months to go, when they said they may look at that change,nothing has been said recently. Then again the same committee recommended 2 year olds who win go back to being rated non win horses when they turn 3. So on one hand they were trying to implement something that would help encourage people to continue participation with horses at the lower end(where the most horses are),but on the other hand were re introducing a policy that in the past discouraged the very same group of people. In my view they are right if they change to start as r40 non win horses. they don't actually have to change much else in the way horses are rated. But they do need to change the people or the mindset of the people who programme races. For example they should have more races with appropriate conditions to encourage participation at all ends of the spectrum. You should have non win races for lower stakes.e.g $6000,where they could have rating 35 horses with no earnings or earnings under $2000 in their last 5 starts. Then the horse that wins that race could then start in a $12,000 race against non win horses,with a condition that the race was for non win horses or horses with a winning stake equivalent to that received in the $6,000. people say thats catering to the bottom end. Well turnovers show that you would be more likely to generate a profit for hrnz on races like that,it would just be a matter of running them in the right mid week or sunday time slots. Then you could programme races for horses with whatever rating ,but with conditions that they have only 1 career win. and so on. Then you could have races for say 3,4 or 6 plus win horses and set conditions based on total earnings and earnings in last so many starts.It would not be hard to programme races where all horses can find a suitable race based on recent form and past record. they need to use Preferantial barrier draws properly. it doesn't seem over complicated but the programmers or handicappers keep tinkering but haven't worked out how to do it right. stakes need to be reduced for the conditioned races where there is not much form and increased a little for races where the ratings are higher. people need to face the facts. There is only so many races run. you are better to spread a bit more of the wins across the board,as that is how you will encourage continued participation. for some reason they seem to think stakes are the be all and end all for everyone ,but they aren't for connections of horses at the bottom end. They just want to occasionally run in races where they may have a chance and are happy to compromise on the stakes won front. its just logic. would you rather run in races with little chance of earning but good stakes,or a chance of earning,bit low stakes. The extra mid week meetings should have been focussed in canterbury. The tuesday meetings should have been for these lower stake,less form type of horse with say 2 lots of 3 heats and 2 penalty free finals on the friday nights 3 days later,with the field being comprised of 12 horses,made up of the first 4 home in the heats.Obviously realistically they probably need to run at least the heats over sprint distances. the

here we go again. neither of us are experts but we both obviously have time to read a lot and do our research. you like sasing i know nothing about things. whatever yet again. Your replies never contain anything which contradicts what i have said. You never back up the i know nothing thing.Same old same old. Like your current reply. You say aminorex has been around since 1968. yet i read it was developed in 1962. the experts say it resembles adrenaline and ephedrine in its chemical structure. Surely that gives you a hint of its effects when administered.. it was marketed in 1965 as an appetite suppressant but then when they saw a big increase in pulmonary hypertension(the heart working harder to pump blood into the lungs because the blood pressure in peoples lungs had been raised),in just a matter of months after people started taking it. So they withdrew the product for that in 1968. Then you say, So where did i contradict that. of course its got a withholding time. if your going to say i know nothing about something at least be more specific. but you never are. as to me applying to be archie butterflys sub editor,whether you like him or not,his headlines are always interesting and he obviously considers his platform a good place to write about all things racing,witjh a special focus on cheats. have you not worked out why he has quite a following or maybe he just irratates you as well.

Without getting into the how much of something is needed debate. From what i have read, they say most,not all, of the aminorex positives around the world have been tied to levamisole.smaller % seem to be from certain plants. In some racing jurisdictions in the usa its described as a class 1,penalty class A stimulant with a high potential for influencing a horse's racing performance owing to its stimulant properties. And it just makes sense that the trainers who include it in what they give their horses, must think it gives them an edge.

At the time i had a horse with a virus. someone told me to try a sheep drench and that it was the levamisole in it that would help. But they said you had to be careful to get the dosage right. At the same time i had heard, that was what some trainers were doing for 5 straight days pre race. So i thought it must be safe. This was just a horse we had that wasn't racing but seemed to have a lingering virus . i already had some of the drench for my sheep so gave it a go and the horse really picked up. then the next thing i knew there was all this publicity about levamisole and potential positives. At the time i thought well i only want it for treating a virus,and had another couple of horses with what i thought was the same lingering virus, so must be able to get some from somewhere if i use it just for that. as i had used the balance on my sheep,i went into pgg to get some more. But they told me it was currently taken off the shelves due to the racing thing. They told me to ring their supplier and after some calls was finally told if anyone had some,it would be a vet in invercargill. So i rang him and he told me he had none,couldn't currently get any in and said part of the reason was because some people in racing,had not been using it safely and to get the performance enhancing effect of the levamisole,had been over dosing their horses with the sheep drench and there had been a run of horses deaths believed to have been for that reason.He gave the example of someone in the lower north island had accidently overdosed and killed some of their horses. He speculated that sheep drenches have several things in them and you can overdose on some of those if you don't follow the recommended doses. so you can call that hearsay. while i didn't know him and he wouldn't have known me, i don't think that vet had any reason to lie to me.

Just had a look at the nominations for addington on sunday. 176 nominations. 5 horses share the highest rating for the day. R50. martha stuart who has won $99,000,very majestic,chicago bear,both 1 win horses and 2 non win horses.,1 of whom has had 1 start and the other a first starter. So the first starter is equal highest rated for the day,and higher than 171 other horses nominated. At least the 2 start non win horse,betting gift, doesn't have to draw the outside in the amatuer race this week, due to its high rating. But it still draws 7, due to the draw being preferential based on ratings. It draws outside horses who have won the likes of 16,5 and 4 races.

At least theres more 2 year olds looking for a start in southland than auckland. They got 1 nomination for the southland 2 year old race. The most obvious thing about the idea 2 year old bonuses would mean more starters,is people who commented on this website like ourselves,said this will never achieve what hrnz said it will. So clearly we have more idea of what works than the people in charge.

It was common knowledge about 15 years ago that some trainers were drenching their horses with small amounts , 5 days in a row leading into races in nz. it was about that time that HRNZ went public and said,hey we know your using this stuff and we know its a performance enhancer and we know you think its not being tested for and may think its legal,but you must know its a performance enhancer that they have been catching people in the usa for using it,so we don't want the scandel; so stop please. How nice of them. Also the over use of levamisole had been known to have been linked tio horse deaths in parts of nz. Apparently some people ,i understand in particular the lower north island so maybe gallopers,had been drenching their horses with the worming drench a lot to get the effects of the levamisole,but by doing that how given deadly amounts of the other things that came with the worming drench. Thats what a vet told me anyway at the time.

apparently trainor will most likely get a disqualification for a couple of positives. One recent but also one dating back to 2021. Its very interesting. The 2021 positive was for levamisole for the horse chubby checker. Chubby checker may no longer be alive,but he was trained by ken barron here and went to Trainor where he won first up about 6 weeks after having his last race from the barron stable here. What is interesting about that time frame is, its about the same as the kerryann morris case where she also had a levamisole positive from an ex ken barron trained horse. Black edition. In her case there was evidence black edition had been drenched with a product containing levamisole prior to leaving nz and a few weeks before racing for her.. An appeal commttee recently found that the levamisole in black editions system would not have come form the barron administration and they kept her 6 month disqualification,which she had already served anyway. The judicial hearing found barrons administration would have been well out of its system by the time it raced in australia. So i guess trainor may have been awaiting the outcome of that case,given the circumstances were similar. it all seems a strange coincidence and makes you wonder why.But they are saying the withholding time is only a few days. Levamisole is used for differing reasons. One is to stimulate the immune system and is used in some cancer treatments. i did read where it at one point it said for horses,it wasn't recommended as to get the positive effects,you would have to give it in doses that could lead to other problems.They do put in in the worming drenches for other animals. Apart from the feel good effect from boosting the immune system,the most obvious reason trainers would give it is levamisole metabolises into aminorex. Aminorex has a potency comparable to cocaine. It acts as a psychostimulant due to its amphetamine like properites.given those qualities its used as a cutting agent for cocaine and is believed to be in over 80% of cocaine sold in the usa. So that does sound like how the likes of trainor and grimsons horses run,doesn't it. I suppose they jhave worked out the adminsitration time for it to work for them,but trainor got it wrong as couple of times.

The whole handicapping system is applied differentlly in nz and i think sometimes they stand on their head when deciding what to dp. For example. In the areas where they need more horses to progress higher up the ratings system,they programme the most races that can be penalty free if driven by a junior driver.. Today they had 5 horses in the highest rating race at invercargill.Just 5 horses. who wants to bet on 5 horse races? So you have to ask,why does southland and the other region with the smallest number of higher rated horses,auckland/waikato,run the most races that are possibly penalty free. This week 40%(4/10) of the races in the north island were possible penalty free races. 20%(2/10) of southland races were and just under 5%(1/22) in canterbury. They seem to be working on the theory that having less horses going up in the ratings is of less importance than giving juniors additional opportunities. it also seem to be an admission that the half penalties aren't enough to encourage trainers in those areas to give junior drivers who have less than 50 wins a drive. So they virtually have to double the incentive.

It did go good,but had a hard run for nothing. I just thought trackside capturing the other 2 drivers smiling at each other,then b barclay pressing on hard straight after that,effectively undermining his own chances,indicated something. I suppose they are only human and showed personalities or relationships,past or present,egos,wanting to make a statement, come into drivers tactics sometimes. Its just that normally never helps their chances in the particular race involved. today an example of that.

just watched race 9 at invercargill and it was interesting the close up they had after the race of kirk larsen smiling to brent barclay and then brent barclay smiling back with 1000m to go. kirk larsen had just driven his horse into submission by keeping out the favorite,eventually fininshing at a walk 200m last,then b barclay immediately attacked from that poinbt,driving with real intent to ensure the leadwer got no peace. Of course he gave his horse no chance either by doing that. Thats racin g i suppose,but t wasn't amusing if you backed any of those 3 horses,espcwi wonder why they thought it was amusing especially larsens. strange

well done to the morrisons. A very professional effort from a first starter. ran up to its impressive trial form and will no doubt learn a lot form that as well. Only problem is,having won first up it is unfairly treated by the handicapping system and if it had lined up today as a 1 win,1 start horse it would be running against the likes of The bloss,Boyz invasion and Missalysa.

off the top of my head,i can't recall whether he did or not.

just reading a written decision about race 1 at the winton workouts on the 10th of may. B wallace driving the horse in the trail. with 600m to go his helmet fell off,striking the trailing horses leg. you have to laugh when you look at the video. haven't seen that happen before. Interestingly he was charged under a rule which said the chin strap must be properly secured. The decision noted,because he had no prevbious breaches of that rule,his fine was reduced by $50. Not having on your record, your helmet coming off previously,well, like,thats got to be worth the $50 credit for sure.

I think the most interesting horse racing tomorrow is the first starter Dark ghana in race 1. Trained by chris morrison. Chris morrison of course ,well known for the saddlery business he had run for years until he recently sold it. I remember speaking to him a couple of years ago and him saying he was looking forward to retiring and also working a nice trotter that he rated and could have a bit of fun with. Dark ghana is from a family that he has loyally bred from for the last 30 years and which he has raced and trained the progeny from. Dark ghana is a half brother to random spur who placed a few times from 65 starts and random jude who won 3 from 39. i see its favorite which may be expecting a lot from any trotter having its first start in a full field,but he has trialed up well and the locals will be cheering it on for sure.

the average punter comments more on drivers and their drives that haven't gone as the punter expected or hoped,than if they had. you just have to read this forum to see that. Gammalite may be the exception and good on him,but hes in the minority. So there always will be more comments about driver tactical error or questionable tactics than you read about top drives. Punters,unrealistically i know,think they should be winning most of the time and expect everyone to be trying to win all the time,especially if they have invested their hard earned on a race. Besides,sometimes the harshest judges of a drive can often be the drivers themselves.They probably know when they may have been better doing something different tactically.. So why should anyone or anyones family get upset because a punter says the same thing on social media or at the local pub. I think you have to have a thick skin in harness racing and a realistic perspective of how punters think. I know many haven't,but it helps. As to s burley driving bolt for the hill,she would have had the most eyes on her because she was driving the hot favorite.I think anyone watching would have seen she made her move a bit late and her horse didn't pull out as quick as she may have planned. Thats what happened so its not being too negative to say that. But like gammalite has said,she must have been very satisfied driving a win and a second from her drives.

Peoples reminisce on here mostly about the good horses,but thats partly because they are memories that others reading this are likely to have shared.. But the most obvious memories people have, are their own personal memories and experiences.. They don't get discussed as much on here,but they are by far the most relevant and important memories to each individual. Memories of their first win,most likely in a non win race,memories of the characters they met,most likely locals who most likely were not high achievers. Memories of family involvement and of course memories of the experiences ttey had with their horses,who most likely are the horses running in what you have referred to as crap racing. memories of those who helped them or they worked for or with, along their harness racing jouney. I think you need to give some thought to the importance and releveance of what you are disparaging.

Not going to play this game anymore. Read the judgment. the answers are there . Just put your fog lights on to help you.

You would know there was a very obvious reason for that wasn't there. They would have to have been stupid to make the same mistake twice. Fueler is by defintion i suppose anyone that keeps something burning.. So being dscribed as a fueler can be interpretted as being a good thing if the fuel they are supplying is accurate,or someone trying to do the right thing if they believe they are supplying information that they believe to be accurate.

whatever. when it comes to me saying the judgment says something,i can't go wrong because i can just refer you to the part where i have said it says that. opinions/interpretations is mostly what we do on here,but understanding what words from a decsion mean is not over complicated. Only once did you give a specific example of something i had said,that you say the judgment did not say.To which multiple times i quoted the words where it did say that,then you ignore that and still say it didn't.

For petes sake. for example I have quoted the same thing about 3 times now from the judgement. yet you still say,where do they say that. honestly to me its clear as day To you,well your still lost in the fog.

But where on the scale of priorities for someone having a racehorse, does paying their way sit? When you think about it ,having an understanding of owners expectations and priorities, should be an answer everyone should know. I suppose we all have different views on what motivates us.