Kopia Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 The news from across the ditch that Formaldehyde-embalming fluid-has been detected in racehorses is sickening. This chemical has carcinogenic qualities and is apparently given to horses to stimulate hoof growth and hardness, and also to prevent bleeding. The mere fact that so called ' horse people' could administer this to a horse tells heaps about the pressure and desperation in racing. It's Australia-but you can bet that someone in NZ will have or is using it. Not going to name names or identify horses but it's easily discovered who is involved. No doubt Joe 90 of the riu will tell the interviewer 'no nothing much happening Pete' on the radio on Wednesday-if he fronts up that is....talk about having your head stuck in the sand. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 It's no secret that it's Ben Smith koppa... Of course you'd have noted two OUT OF COMPETITION tests were done that had illegall Cobalt levels Now you know Im persona non grata with the RIU after too many tricky questions Im handing the mantle over to you Email Earily today and get him to ask Godber "how many out of competition tests were done on Thoroughbreds over this Carnival and the Xmas one" pretty simple...Peter.earley@nzrb.co.nz Someone just f in do it...I'm totes sick of doing all this shit work anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Come on this is sensational journalism at its worst. Formaldehyde the main constituent of Formalin is a common treatment for hoof issues. Used on most farms for the treatment of footrot in sheep and cattle. It is a strong antiseptic and a tissue hardener. The latter no doubt assists with the repairing of a horse hoof after injury when the new growth is quite soft. To call it an "embalming fluid" is just sensationalism. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 29 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: Come on this is sensational journalism at its worst. Formaldehyde the main constituent of Formalin is a common treatment for hoof issues. Used on most farms for the treatment of footrot in sheep and cattle. It is a strong antiseptic and a tissue hardener. The latter no doubt assists with the repairing of a horse hoof after injury when the new growth is quite soft. To call it an "embalming fluid" is just sensationalism. We're not talking topical... try 'injected'...stops bleedin bleeders...Keep up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 8 minutes ago, Thomass said: We're not talking topical... try 'injected'...stops bleedin bleeders...Keep up How do you know it was injected? Topical application can enter the bloodstream. Why not use Lasix which is a legitimate treatment if the withholding periods are followed? aka Chris Waller. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 I don't know anything about the alleged practice...but nothing surprises me. Nothing at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 I can see the Headline in the Herald now: Embalming Fluid Used to Treat Sheep and Cattle before Human Consumption 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 39 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: How do you know it was injected? Topical application can enter the bloodstream. Why not use Lasix which is a legitimate treatment if the withholding periods are followed? aka Chris Waller. 200mg/L via topical? Yea na One of those unlabelled and/or unregistered substances was found to be formaldehyde, a substance that Racing NSW Chief Veterinary Officer Dr Toby Koenig told the hearing had “welfare implications” and “long-term carcinogenic concerns”. Stewards questioned Smith after Dr Adam Cawley of the Australian Racing Forensic Laboratory's (ARFL) revealed that in September 2015, ARFL started doing a screening test for formaldehyde due to intelligence is was being used in other racing codes. In the past it was known to be injected into horses to prevent bleeding. It is also believed to make a horse's hooves harder. On October 18, four days after In Her Time won the Sydney Stakes, Crawley told stewards a “strip test” showed In Her Time returned a reading of “200 milligrams per litre (mg/L) or greater”. Crawley told the hearing the strip “was so dark” in his opinion, on the balance of probability, the actual formaldehyde presence would have been “significantly greater” than the 200 (mg/L) limit of the test. The positive reading was not certified due to no registered accredited testing protocols being available worldwide for the prohibited substance which Koenig said, “has no therapeutic place in horse medicine”. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 It "has no therapeutic place in horse medicine." The science says it does nothing to stop horses bleeding. At that blood level the horse surely would be displaying some adverse symptoms of poisoning. However in the livestock industry Formaldehyde does have a therapeutic place. I guess cows and sheep are substantially different horses. Note they used a "strip test" which is basically using a special type of paper (remember litmus paper at school?) to test for a reagent. It isn't certified as a positive result. A decent defence lawyer would put that one to bed in 10 minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopia Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 3 hours ago, Chief Stipe said: It "has no therapeutic place in horse medicine." The science says it does nothing to stop horses bleeding. At that blood level the horse surely would be displaying some adverse symptoms of poisoning. However in the livestock industry Formaldehyde does have a therapeutic place. I guess cows and sheep are substantially different horses. Note they used a "strip test" which is basically using a special type of paper (remember litmus paper at school?) to test for a reagent. It isn't certified as a positive result. A decent defence lawyer would put that one to bed in 10 minutes. I'm not sure where you are heading with this Chief...? Are you saying that it shouldn't be prohibited in horses leading up to races? Why would a trainer administer it to a horse prior to it racing if it wasn't to enhance it's performance..in any way? And that fact that it promotes the possibility of cancer is surely a negative...doesn't the issue of animal welfare come into it..especially in racehorses. Clearly , if a little bit does a little bit of' good' then given human nature and cheats..then a lot must do heaps? Just win whatever the consequences and damn the torpedo's ? Can't be right. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 23 minutes ago, Kopia said: I'm not sure where you are heading with this Chief...? Are you saying that it shouldn't be prohibited in horses leading up to races? Why would a trainer administer it to a horse prior to it racing if it wasn't to enhance it's performance..in any way? And that fact that it promotes the possibility of cancer is surely a negative...doesn't the issue of animal welfare come into it..especially in racehorses. Clearly , if a little bit does a little bit of' good' then given human nature and cheats..then a lot must do heaps? Just win whatever the consequences and damn the torpedo's ? Can't be right. For a start I was first referring to the sensationalist headline - "Embalming Fluid inside horse...." It's a common livestock remedy for healing infected hooves. Now it is doubtful that it has any performance enhancing affect on race horses. In fact there is scientific evidence to prove there isnt any and to prove at the levels supposedly found in the horse to have serious deleterious affects. Finally the "positive" was found through an uncertified test using "test strips". That is it isn't an evidentiary test that would stand up in court. It all doesn't add up. At the time why was a follow up evidentiary test done? If a blood test was done on you now they would find low levels of formaldehyde which you have absorbed from the environment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Chief Stipe said: It "has no therapeutic place in horse medicine." The science says it does nothing to stop horses bleeding. At that blood level the horse surely would be displaying some adverse symptoms of poisoning. However in the livestock industry Formaldehyde does have a therapeutic place. I guess cows and sheep are substantially different horses. Note they used a "strip test" which is basically using a special type of paper (remember litmus paper at school?) to test for a reagent. It isn't certified as a positive result. A decent defence lawyer would put that one to bed in 10 minutes. For a start it's agin the rules to have unlabelled and unregistered substances in the stable confines... Why would they develop testing then for a legit substance, as you claim, if "they received intel from other codes it was being used" Your argument doesn't make sense... Edited March 13, 2019 by Thomass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 10 minutes ago, Thomass said: For a start it's agin the rules to have unlabelled and unregistered substances in the stable confines... Why would they develop testing then for a legit substance, as you claim, if "they received intel from other codes it was being used" Your argument doesn't make sense... Well I wouldn't expect you to grasp any argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 2 hours ago, Thomass said: For a start it's agin the rules to have unlabelled and unregistered substances in the stable confines... I just checked-there are no labels on the oats , hay, Lucerne chaff but it looks like the sunflower seeds will be o k if I keep them in the labelled sack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopia Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 3 hours ago, Chief Stipe said: For a start I was first referring to the sensationalist headline - "Embalming Fluid inside horse...." It's a common livestock remedy for healing infected hooves. Now it is doubtful that it has any performance enhancing affect on race horses. In fact there is scientific evidence to prove there isnt any and to prove at the levels supposedly found in the horse to have serious deleterious affects. Finally the "positive" was found through an uncertified test using "test strips". That is it isn't an evidentiary test that would stand up in court. It all doesn't add up. At the time why was a follow up evidentiary test done? If a blood test was done on you now they would find low levels of formaldehyde which you have absorbed from the environment. Your last sentence explains everything..my missus reckons I'm a dead loss. I'll tell her I'm already half embalmed, that'll shut her up.? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 14 hours ago, Fred said: I just checked-there are no labels on the oats , hay, Lucerne chaff but it looks like the sunflower seeds will be o k if I keep them in the labelled sack. I'm surprised at your very poor argument here nod When did they ever label Oats a 'substance'?? Ive abused many 'substances' but never Oats or sunflowers ...painted a few flowers...and smoked a few seeds of unknown origin though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 (edited) 16 hours ago, Chief Stipe said: Well I wouldn't expect you to grasp any argument. If the experts label it as "dark"... ...and Ben Smith has "unlabelled and unregistered" substances in his larder Im grasping the argument very well indeed Edited March 13, 2019 by Thomass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 4 minutes ago, Thomass said: If the experts label it as "dark"... ...and Ben Smith has "unlabelled and unregistered" substances in his larder Im grasping the argument very well indeed No you are speculating and extrapolating on no evidence. "Dark" isn't exactly quantifiable nor evidentiary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 And "Un and un" is ok as well in your World? Hes as gonnnnne as a gonnnneburger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 39 minutes ago, Thomass said: And "Un and un" is ok as well in your World? Hes as gonnnnne as a gonnnneburger Probably but not for the formaldehyde as there is no evidentiary proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 3 hours ago, Thomass said: I'm surprised at your very poor argument here nod When did they ever label Oats a 'substance'?? Try a dictionary definition -don't just rely on your interpretation of what's on your charge sheet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.