Peter Profit and the Black Horse Newsletter Fall Flat on Their Faces: One of their key assertions is shattered by the Vet who first made the allegation!

[Chief Stipe]

The Black Horse Newsletter on the 4th of February 2022 published an article by Peter Profit aka Archie Butterfly in which he asserts that both NZ and Australian Harness Racing is corrupted by doping cheats using EPO.  He directly points the finger at the NZ Chief Racing Vet, Dr Andrew Grierson, Woodlands Stud and the All Star Racing Stable.  Butterfly (who would seriously change their name to Butterfly?) has also made these claims against the Robert Dunn stable and nearly every other stable domiciled at Woodend Beach just north of Christchurch.

I contend that not only are his claims baseless but they are also libellous and harming to the racing industry only because the uninformed and those with an agenda are taking notice.  I find his claims laughable and not surprising when such baseless claims are made by a journalist (I use that reservedly in Butterfly's case) that they in the course of their discourse(s) shoot themselves in the foot.  Primarily because they have no understanding of the science of what they claim.  

In the Black Horse Newsletter Mr Butterfly aka Peter Profit not only shoots himself in the foot but blows his cranium off.

In the interests of brevity I will address just one claim in this post.  In another post I have written some detail on EPO as a PED (rHuEPO Use as a PED in Horses:  Fact or Fiction?).  He claims that - 

Racing authorities are noticeably quiet about the growing threat from blood doping. The truth is most of them are clueless about what is really going on, the easy option is to look the other way and just let the cheats get on with it, which is how it’s playing out in Ireland and the UK.

Experts like Dr Mark Cheney of the Kentucky Equine Drug Research Council argue the use of blood dopers in US racing reached epidemic levels three years ago.  Dr Mary Scollay, equine medical director of the Kentucky Horseracing Commission, highlighted risks presented by microdosing EPO:

“The effect exerted by these substances far exceeds the window of detection of these substances which are typically present in the blood for less than 48 hours following administration.”

She sought backing from the commission for a two year study that aimed to develop an affordable test to detect the drug quickly. The result of that study is due now and can't come soon enough, except for the cheats. The rest of the racing world watches and waits.  

Well Archie the racing world didn't have to wait as they had already read the outcome of this research which was first published over 2 months ago in October 2021!  I can understand Archie Butterfly not keeping up with the play but have been surprised that The Paulick Report hasn't reported on it especially as the comment made by Dr Scollay was first reported in that publication.

Dr Mary Scollay and the USD$147,000 Research that Found Nothing!

Yes Archie Butter the Scollay championed research funded by the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium to the tune of USD$147,000 (NZD$225,000) found nothing!  Or rather they found that micro-dosing using rHuEPO did NOT increase red blood cells (the number of), hemoglobin (the red blood cell protein that carries the oxygen) or hematocrit (a measure of the proportion of red blood cells).

Dr Mary Scollay Bio

Dr Scollay is a world recognised equine welfare vet.  She is currently the Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer at the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium, Lexington, Kentucky.  She has been in that position for two years.  Prior to that for 11 years she was Equine Medical Director, Kentucky Horse Racing Commission.  She has a degree in Veterinary Medicine from the University of Illinois.  She has published 12 research articles primarily on the topic of equine musculoskeletal injury.

The Research - Transcriptomic Markers of Recombinant Human Erythropoietin Micro-Dosing in Thoroughbred Horses

The research was undertaken by the School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California Davis.  One can only assume that direction was given by Scollay and her team Racing Medication and Testing Consortium on the objectives of the research.  However some of the research design and objectives is questionable.  The objective of the study was:  To address the challenge of detecting rHuEPO doping in horse racing, by determining the transcriptomic effects of rHuEPO micro-dosing over seven weeks in exercised Thoroughbreds.

Study Design

The design entailed the selection of 5 mares and 5 geldings aged between 5 and 6 who after examination were determined to be healthy.  They were put on a constant exercise protocol prior to and throughout the study.  Six of the horse were randomly assigned to the treatment group (those administered rHuEPO) and 4 to the saline control group.  The number of horses chosen is statistically significant.

The horses in the treatment group received injections of 20 IU/kg of rHuEPO (brand EPOGEN) two times a week for seven weeks.  The dosage was determined based on reports of micro-doping in humans.  The 20 IU/kg assuming 500kg per horse equates to 10,000 IU per injection.

20mL of blood was drawn from each horse for testing on days 1, 3, 10, 14, 17, 24, 35, 38, 42, 49, 56 and 63 for for a complete blood count (CBC) which measured RBCs, hemoglobin, hematocrit, mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular hemoglobin, and mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration.  

RNA sampling was also undertaken for sequencing and analysis.  This was to determine pieces of RNA (transcripts) that showed differences between the treatment and control group.  Once these transcripts were identified PCR tests were developed to test for the presence of these transcripts.  The theory being that this would enable a low cost way of detecting that rHuEPO has been administered.

The Results

One horse colicked during rHuEPO administration but they state that there was no evidence that this was caused by the EPO.  5 out of 6 horses showed apparent discomfort after each injection, as indicated by pawing after the injection, leg swelling in one horse, and hives and swelling or edema at the injection site in four horses the day after injection. The control group (saline) experienced no reactions.

Red Blood Cell Count, Hemoglobin and Hematocrit (the Oxygen carrying blood elements) showed NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.

 

Figure S1. Complete blood count results of (A) red blood cells, (B) hemoglobin, and (C) hematocrit across time points (in days Each data point is an individual horse with saline treatment as teal and EPO-dosed horses as purple. There is no overall significant difference effect of treatment.

Now this is where the study gets really technical so I'll cut to the chase as best as I can.  Basically they looked for pieces (transcripts) of RNA that were significantly different between the treatment and control group.  The theory being that they could develop a PCR test to easily identify these RNA transcripts.  They identified the following five from a total of 25 that were significantly different.  So they developed PCR primers and PCR tests for these.  But when they used the tests they could not find any significant difference.  Essentially the PCR tests were of no use.

Now you could argue that that was proof that EPO can't be detected.  Well if you did that then you would be wrong.

Discussion and Conclusion

To quote from the paper - 

This study set out to identify transcriptomic markers of rHuEPO micro-doping in Thoroughbred racehorses. Like endogenous EPO, rHuEPO binds to the EPO receptor on erythroid progenitor cells, initiating a signaling cascade that leads to the binding of key transcription factors that induce the production of more red blood cells [36]. Increasing the number of red blood cells increases the total oxygen available and aerobic power [1]. Thus, we hypothesized that we would identify significantly differential transcripts that were involved in erythropoiesis.

RNA-seq from PBMCs isolated throughout the experiment identified three transcripts that changed significantly over time between treatment groups. C13H16orf54 and PUM2 were upregulated and CHTOP was downregulated with rHuEPO administration...

With the significant gene expression differences not validated using RT-qPCR, the development of a diagnostic test to detect rHuEPO doping in racehorses is hindered...

In simple terms the research -

• identified some RNA that could be markers for EPO detection;
• was unable to develop a PCR test identifying those markers;
• no significant change occurred in the oxygen carrying components of the blood.

The Weaknesses of the Research

Aside from the fact that the Archie Butterfly and Black Horse pre-announcement of some ground breaking research didn't come to fruition in reality the study has a number of flaws.  Why didn't they use the existing EPO tests used by the HKJC to test for rHuEPO?  Or why didn't they use a plethora of other tests that are available for detecting rHuEPO?  Yes the intention of creating an easier cheaper PCR based test may have some merit but is it really necessary when more reliable tests already exist?  I won't go into the in's and out's of false positive and false negative PCR testing - we've all had enough of that with Covid-19.

But one aspect that is significant is that a micro-dosing EPO dosing regime which is similar to what has been touted in the media showed no significant difference!

Come on Archie and Paulick where are your retractions and or your updates on this research that is supposed to have every top trainer in OZ and NZ quaking in their boots?

Finally the following statement by Dr Scollay is patently false - “The effect exerted by these substances far exceeds the window of detection of these substances which are typically present in the blood for less than 48 hours following administration.”

I can only assume that the statement was either taken out of context or was hyperbole and embellishment to secure funding for the research.  Surely she would have been across the many pieces of research that show that rHuEPO can be detected for weeks after administration.

genes-12-01874.pdf

[Forbury]

The newsletter sounds like my life with the govts.i know for sure that thirty years ago Chris Gleeson was using something that could not be detected.he could improve a horse a lap and of course his fav spot in running was the death seat.its all animal cruelty drugging horses.i find in NZ it is the opposite more.meaning they are doing something with the horse to make it run badly.just look at today and the first4s.it happens all the time.poor old Cristen me ran today as a fourteen year old at northfield park usa..dexter retire the poor horse.all this makes me sick.