Do you support Courtney King-Dye?

[sascha]

@HORSEBACKRIDER;3485907

Again, I ask, what is the “damage?”

You distance yourself from making a judgment by listing all whom you don’t “blame.”

But close with dramatic words – “the stench of burning tires and extraordinarily cheap cologne is overpowering.”

What does that mean?

Seems like an intent to indict to me.

Editing to add for HORSEBACKRIDER’S edification that I did not say I don’t “blame”. I said that I’m not saying that I blame them. I left off the obvious ‘I’m not saying that I don’t blame them’ for brevity’s sake. Oh well, this post shoots the idea of brevity all to hell :lol:

Oh my. I don’t have sufficient facts to place the blame on any individual but , IMO, clearly there was/is a problem with one horse allowed to compete arguably lame, not only in the GP but in the qualifying competitions and another horse testing positive for a banned substance. Individuals or a group of individuals are responsible, IMO.

I sincerely hope and doubt that the entire blame should be placed on either rider. I don’t know where the breakdown in the system that is supposed to take the welfare of the horses above and beyond the quest for medals but from my vantage point there was a breakdown somewhere along the line.

The ‘damage’ is the tarnish on the US dressage team’s squeaky clean image that a lame horse allowed to compete and another testing positive have, IMO caused. Perhaps I am the only person in the world who feels that way. Nonetheless, that is my opinion. I would agree with BahamaMama’s choice of words. From my perspective, “Damage has already been done.”

My final sentence is likely a product of the fact that I work day in and day out with advertising and PR people and I see spin and ass-covering up close and personal while remaining outside the manufacture of such. The language of the press releases in regards to Brentina positively reeked of both spin and ass-covering, IMO. The statement about CKD and the vets spending the day on the internet trying to figure out what Felbinac even is because they had never even heard of it speaks to me of idiocy and/or incompetence. That can be pointed at either the individual who made the statement or the person that allowed it to get out. Perhaps both.

Perhaps plain language would be even more clear. To me, something smells fishy and I think that’s a shame.

[sascha]

Just adding that I don’t have an opinion as to CKD. I don’t know her personally. I have nothing on which to base an opinion. I got dragged into this thread because my post from the original? thread got dragged over here. That doesn’t bother me btw, just sayin’

[ridgeback]

[QUOTE=sascha;3486011]
Oh my. I don’t have sufficient facts to place the blame on any individual but , IMO, clearly there was/is a problem with one horse allowed to compete arguably lame, not only in the GP but in the qualifying competitions and another horse testing positive for a banned substance. Individuals or a group of individuals are responsible, IMO.

I sincerely hope and doubt that the entire blame should be placed on either rider. I don’t know where the breakdown in the system that is supposed to take the welfare of the horses above and beyond the quest for medals but from my vantage point there was a breakdown somewhere along the line.

The ‘damage’ is the tarnish on the US dressage team’s squeaky clean image that a lame horse allowed to compete and another testing positive have, IMO caused. Perhaps I am the only person in the world who feels that way. Nonetheless, that is my opinion. I would agree with BahamaMama’s choice of words. From my perspective, “Damage has already been done.”

My final sentence is likely a product of the fact that I work day in and day out with advertising and PR people and I see spin and ass-covering up close and personal while remaining outside the manufacture of such. The language of the press releases in regards to Brentina positively reeked of both spin and ass-covering, IMO. The statement about CKD and the vets spending the day on the internet trying to figure out what Felbinac even is because they had never even heard of it speaks to me of idiocy and/or incompetence. That can be pointed at either the individual who made the statement or the person that allowed it to get out. Perhaps both.

Perhaps plain language would be even more clear. To me, something smells fishy and I think that’s a shame.[/QUOTE]

I kinda thought the same thing since it took me oh about 10 seconds to google it and found it was also connected to ultrasounding…

[HORSEBACKRIDER]

[QUOTE=sascha;3486011]
Editing to add for HORSEBACKRIDER’S edification that I did not say I don’t “blame”. I said that I’m not saying that I blame them. I left off the obvious ‘I’m not saying that I don’t blame them’ for brevity’s sake. Oh well, this post shoots the idea of brevity all to hell :lol:

Yes, that’s reallly clear. Not!

I blame, I don’t blame, I’m not saying I blame, but I do blame . . .

Oh my. I don’t have sufficient facts to place the blame on any individual but
that little problem won’t stop me!

IMO, clearly there was/is a problem with one horse allowed to compete arguably lame, not only in the GP but in the qualifying competitions and another horse testing positive for a banned substance. Individuals or a group of individuals are responsible, IMO.

Isn’t it fun to have “opinions?”

I sincerely hope and doubt that the entire blame should be placed on either rider.

Oh, that “blame” again!

I don’t know where the breakdown in the system that is supposed to take the welfare of the horses above and beyond the quest for medals but from my vantage point there was a breakdown somewhere along the line.

The ‘damage’ is the tarnish on the US dressage team’s squeaky clean image that a lame horse allowed to compete and another testing positive have, IMO caused.

Oh . . . we have moved from “arguably lame” to “lame.” And you know that how?

Perhaps I am the only person in the world who feels that way. Nonetheless, that is my opinion. I would agree with BahamaMama’s choice of words. From my perspective, “Damage has already been done.”

Yes, it can be tough to be that voice crying in the wilderness. Funny though how you and others who write the kind of comments seen here seem to delight in adding to that “damage.”

My final sentence is likely a product of the fact that I work day in and day out with advertising and PR people and I see spin and ass-covering up close and personal while remaining outside the manufacture of such. The language of the press releases in regards to Brentina positively reeked of both spin and ass-covering, IMO. The statement about CKD and the vets spending the day on the internet trying to figure out what Felbinac even is because they had never even heard of it speaks to me of idiocy and/or incompetence. That can be pointed at either the individual who made the statement or the person that allowed it to get out. Perhaps both.

Idiocy and incompetence. OK!

Perhaps plain language would be even more clear. To me, something smells fishy and I think that’s a shame.[/QUOTE]

Plain language is good. So is clear writing. So are facts.

Blame, unsubstantiated “opinion”, innuendo, snideness – not so good.

[Whitfield_Farm_Hanov]

I’m pulling for Courtney. “Stuff” happens. To bad it had to happen to her. I just hope she focuses on the wonderful experience of representing the USA & doesn’t let this overshadow those memories. I believe in you Courtney!!! You can ride my horses any day!!!

[ise]

It really does seem to be and incredible situation that the owner and rider of a horse can be held responsible when a horse tests positive for a restricted substance EVEN WHEN other people have had “hands on” control of the horse - very often without the owner or rider present.

Where are all the legal beagles out there? I certainly can see how this “no doping” rule works for human athletes who are competing in other sports - but when you have a horse/rider combination and they are not physically attached 24/7 - how can this rule hold up legally?? We would have to have video cameras on these horses the entire time they were at the Olympics to rule out either intentional transfer of a restricted substance or accidental transfer due to contact with either infected materials or individuals.

[YankeeLawyer]

[QUOTE=Whitfield Farm Hanoverians;3486131]
You can ride my horses any day!!![/QUOTE]

That, too : )

[YankeeLawyer]

[QUOTE=ise@ssl;3486147]
It really does seem to be and incredible situation that the owner and rider of a horse can be held responsible when a horse tests positive for a restricted substance EVEN WHEN other people have had “hands on” control of the horse - very often without the owner or rider present.

Where are all the legal beagles out there? I certainly can see how this “no doping” rule works for human athletes who are competing in other sports - but when you have a horse/rider combination and they are not physically attached 24/7 - how can this rule hold up legally?? We would have to have video cameras on these horses the entire time they were at the Olympics to rule out either intentional transfer of a restricted substance or accidental transfer due to contact with either infected materials or individuals.[/QUOTE]

ISE, don’t get me started on the FEI … ; )

And by the way, to my knowledge, no other athlete in the Olympics is held to anything approaching the FEI’s standard.

[ceffyl]

[QUOTE=sascha;3486011]
Editing to add for HORSEBACKRIDER’S edification that I did not say I don’t “blame”. I said that I’m not saying that I blame them. I left off the obvious ‘I’m not saying that I don’t blame them’ for brevity’s sake. Oh well, this post shoots the idea of brevity all to hell :lol:

Oh my. I don’t have sufficient facts to place the blame on any individual but , IMO, clearly there was/is a problem with one horse allowed to compete arguably lame, not only in the GP but in the qualifying competitions and another horse testing positive for a banned substance. Individuals or a group of individuals are responsible, IMO.

I sincerely hope and doubt that the entire blame should be placed on either rider. I don’t know where the breakdown in the system that is supposed to take the welfare of the horses above and beyond the quest for medals but from my vantage point there was a breakdown somewhere along the line.

The ‘damage’ is the tarnish on the US dressage team’s squeaky clean image that a lame horse allowed to compete and another testing positive have, IMO caused. Perhaps I am the only person in the world who feels that way. Nonetheless, that is my opinion. I would agree with BahamaMama’s choice of words. From my perspective, “Damage has already been done.”

My final sentence is likely a product of the fact that I work day in and day out with advertising and PR people and I see spin and ass-covering up close and personal while remaining outside the manufacture of such. The language of the press releases in regards to Brentina positively reeked of both spin and ass-covering, IMO. The statement about CKD and the vets spending the day on the internet trying to figure out what Felbinac even is because they had never even heard of it speaks to me of idiocy and/or incompetence. That can be pointed at either the individual who made the statement or the person that allowed it to get out. Perhaps both.

Perhaps plain language would be even more clear. To me, something smells fishy and I think that’s a shame.[/QUOTE]

Why on earth did they had to spend the day on the internet to find out what Felbinac is? It is listed right there on the Post-Arrival Elective Testing information that ALL competitors / team members from the FEI well before the games. You mean the team veterinarians did not bother to look at the PAET list - substances on there because they fall into the most “frequently used” catagory.

[YankeeLawyer]

[QUOTE=ceffyl;3486175]
Why on earth did they had to spend the day on the internet to find out what Felbinac is? .[/QUOTE]

Perhaps they were told what metabolite was found in the system and had to research to figure out what substances it is associated with. Who knows, though.

[Arathita]

What is the point of this thread? Who doesn’t support Courtney King at this point? No one knows the real facts.

I agree with ceffyl. Any competition vet knows the metabolites of the frequently used fenbufen. If for some reason they don’t, it takes less than 30 seconds on google or scientific literature search engines, to find this out. I don’t believe that it took them “all day” to find out what this drug is used for. That said, I’m waiting for the facts like everyone else.

[YankeeLawyer]

[QUOTE=Arathita;3486322]
I don’t believe that it took them “all day” to find out what this drug is used for. [/QUOTE]

Who cares? Maybe the press release was loosely written. At least the USEF stood behind their rider, not like the other federation that threw its rider under the bus before even the B sample results were in and apparently could not be bothered to wait for any investigation or hearings to be completed.

[Arathita]

[QUOTE=YankeeLawyer;3486334]
Who cares? Maybe the press release was loosely written. At least the USEF stood behind their rider, not like the other federation that threw its rider under the bus before even the B sample results were in and apparently could not be bothered to wait for any investigation or hearings to be completed.[/QUOTE]

I care. The press release directly quoted Ms. King. Someone somewhere got things wrong. What other federations do is not the point.

[YankeeLawyer]

[QUOTE=Arathita;3486336]
I care. The press release directly quoted Ms. King. Someone somewhere got things wrong. What other federations do is not the point.[/QUOTE]

And none of you have ever seen a press release or news report get things a bit muddled, assuming of course all of you know better than Ms. King and whoever drafted the release?

[YankeeLawyer]

[QUOTE=Arathita;3486336]
I care. The press release directly quoted Ms. King. Someone somewhere got things wrong. What other federations do is not the point.[/QUOTE]

This is the quote from the press release:

“We spent the entire day doing internet research on the uses for this drug and how it could possibly have gotten into my horse’s system.” (emphasis mine).

Presumably it would take more than a 30 second google search to figure out what occurred in her particular case.

[ceffyl]

[QUOTE=YankeeLawyer;3486367]
This is the quote from the press release:

"We spent the entire day doing internet research on the uses for this drug

Presumably it would take more than a 30 second google search to figure out what occurred in her particular case.[/QUOTE]

No it only took 5 seconds - enough time to key in FELBINAC and search. 1st result is wikipedia:

< Felbinac (or biphenylylacetic acid) is a topical medicine, belonging to the family of medicines known as NSAIDs, which is used to treat muscle inflammation and arthritis. NSAIDs are sometimes also referred to as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents/analgesics (NSAIAs) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medicines (NSAIMs). >

I would hope that both Courtney AND her Vets and the Chief’s de et al knew instantly what a NSAID is!!! Should not have taken her all day to figure out the use for a NSAID.

Not apportioning blame - more out of curitosity why it would take all day to find out the use of a NSAID.

[Bats79]

[QUOTE=ceffyl;3486371]
No it only took 5 seconds - enough time to key in FELBINAC and search. 1st result is wikipedia:

< Felbinac (or biphenylylacetic acid) is a topical medicine, belonging to the family of medicines known as NSAIDs, which is used to treat muscle inflammation and arthritis. NSAIDs are sometimes also referred to as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents/analgesics (NSAIAs) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medicines (NSAIMs). >

I would hope that both Courtney AND her Vets and the Chief’s de et al knew instantly what a NSAID is!!! Should not have taken her all day to figure out the use for a NSAID.

Not apportioning blame - more out of curitosity why it would take all day to find out the use of a NSAID.[/QUOTE]

And if they KNEW they hadn’t used it in that fashion they would have spent all day trying to work out if it could be part of another drug regime or administered in some other manner than what wikipedia spat out. Wouldn’t you have spent all day?

[ceffyl]

[QUOTE=Bats79;3486374]
And if they KNEW they hadn’t used it in that fashion they would have spent all day trying to work out if it could be part of another drug regime or administered in some other manner than what wikipedia spat out. Wouldn’t you have spent all day?[/QUOTE]

No - I would have asked the veterinarian who administered the treatment to the horse in what context / why it was used. And also if you care to Google Felbinac again and look further down the search results on the 1st page it will show information it is used as a coupling agent in ultrasound for TREATMENT OF SPRAINS / STRAINS / SPORTS INJURIES. This is not research for a college paper, a time to spend hours trawling the internet. Did the veterinarian clinic just vanish, a Bettina Hoy moment “But he was in the veterinary clinic in the clothes of a veterinary representative and he came when summoned by the receptionist”?

[ceffyl]

[QUOTE=YankeeLawyer;3486367]
This is the quote from the press release:

“We spent the entire day doing internet research on the uses for this drug and how it could possibly have gotten into my horse’s system.” (emphasis mine).

Presumably it would take more than a 30 second google search to figure out what occurred in her particular case.[/QUOTE]

FEI general regulations.

Article 146.1 insists that horses found to have prohibited substance inside them are automatically disqualified. Ringwood Cockatoo was not disqualified.

Article 146.3 states that written permission from an official FEI delegate must be obtained before treatment or medication is administered to a horse. No written permission was sought or obtained. There was a case this year of a British rider failing to obtain the correct written permission and being thrown out of a competition.

Article 174.2 forbids ignorance of the rules as an excuse

So where exactly is the written permission as laid out in Article 146.3??? FEI delegates were crawling out of the woodwork in Beijing, it would not have been an impossible request this at the time, even in an emergency.

[ceffyl]

[QUOTE=YankeeLawyer;3486367]
This is the quote from the press release:

“We spent the entire day doing internet research on the uses for this drug and how it could possibly have gotten into my horse’s system.” (emphasis mine).

Presumably it would take more than a 30 second google search to figure out what occurred in her particular case.[/QUOTE]

OK last post on this (for know) I promise

But I thought the Dressage veterinarian name sounded familiar. So I Googled - took me all of 30 seconds. The WE spending the whole day on the internet to find out about Felbinac??? Does not make sense this should apply to a vet who has Quote:-

Dr. Mitchell has served on multiple Boards of Directors including the American Horse Shows Association (USAE), the Connecticut Veterinary Medical Association and the American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP). He has served on advisory boards for Boerhinger, Pfizer, and IDEXX pharmaceuticals.

Dr. Mitchell has presented lectures for many veterinary medical societies in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, and Europe.

A swift phone call to Pfizer may have been in order?