I'm picking this will be a pleasing result for many but the proof will be the initial test case which RIU will bring and JCA adjudicate on. As per normal the legal beagles and vets will be the winners IMHO.
I remain neutral as to its effectiveness or use as some sort of performance enhancer but im sure others will have plenty to say about it and hold stronger views on both sides of the arguement.
Manipulation of Blood and Blood Components
1004K(1)A person shall not directly or indirectly:(a)withdraw blood from any horse for the purpose of manipulating the blood; or(b)administer to, reinfuse or reintroduce into a horse any homologous, allogenic(heterologous), or autologous blood,blood products, or blood cells of anyorigin.
(2)Sub-rule (1) is not contravened when the act is undertaken by a veterinarian:(a)for life-saving purposes;(b)for veterinary regenerative therapies for the treatment ofmusculoskeletal injury or disease; or(c)for veterinary treatment of respiratory bleeding by nebulizer or similar device.
(3)If sub-rule (1) is contravened, in addition to the person who breaches the rule, both the trainer and person in charge of the horse commits a breach of the rules.
(4)A breach of sub-rules (1) and (3) are declared to be a serious racing offence.
(5)Where sub-rule (1) is contravened or a permitted act is undertaken by a veterinarian under sub-rule (2) the horse is:(a)ineligible to be entered or start in a race for a period of eight clear days fromthe date of the act or such longer period as a Judicial Committee may decide;and(b)must be disqualified from any race in which it started during theeight-day period or longer period referred to in paragraph (a).
(6)Rule 1005E shall apply with any necessary modification to any disqualification under sub-rule (5)(b).
Greg