Do you support Courtney King-Dye?

[monstrpony]

I CANNOT believe you children are nit-picking a quote from the press release. If this had happened to any one of you, you’d hit the internet to find out what the drug was. No, it wouldn’t take all day; I’m sure it didn’t literally take Courtney and/or her vets all day. This is a statement made by a very upset person in an attempt to describe the total dismay with which she reacted to the discovery of inappropriate substances in her horse’s test samples. It is not a description of what actually happened, minute for minute.

Grow up, people.

Courtney is the person who brought Idocus back to life after the European experts fried his brain. This is not someone who covertly drugs her horses; she rides with feel and compassion. It’s clear there was a period when the horse (Myth) was out of her immediate care due to a short-term medical crisis (horses have returned to eventing careers after atrial fibrilation episodes; it is not a permenant condition, it is not unreasonable that he competed following this episode; we certainly don’t have the information to make that judgement). There is an obvious way that this particular drug could have gotten into the horse’s system (US coupling agent).

Leave it at that until the mechanism in place runs it’s course, and it is possible to hear some real explanations. Go ride your horses. Good grief. :rolleyes:

[passagedreamer]

Sascha: I feel you are 100% correct… SAD to say it… but something does smell like fish.

Can’t blame the clinic… too much time between treatment and blood test to have the “ultrasound” gel theory hold up. … and IF I have my own dates correct … the “cross contamination” theory does pan out either. ( That means the dates the horse was in the clinic and the dates the blood was drawn and the length of time the drug lasts on the skin - that i researched - so ONLY my opinion )

And listen… I am not answering for CKD - but come on - IF it was me, and I was going back and retracing every step that took place and the press release came out : She had to say something … but I guess this is where that old saying comes into place : Speech is Silver … Silence is GOLD …

We will all have our answers in a little over a week. Let’s all keep our fingures crossed.

[Sister_Margarita]

AMEN!!!

[QUOTE=monstrpony;3486419]
I CANNOT believe you children are nit-picking a quote from the press release. If this had happened to any one of you, you’d hit the internet to find out what the drug was. No, it wouldn’t take all day; I’m sure it didn’t literally take Courtney and/or her vets all day. This is a statement made by a very upset person in an attempt to describe the total dismay with which she reacted to the discovery of inappropriate substances in her horse’s test samples. It is not a description of what actually happened, minute for minute.

Grow up, people.

Courtney is the person who brought Idocus back to life after the European experts fried his brain. This is not someone who covertly drugs her horses; she rides with feel and compassion. It’s clear there was a period when the horse (Myth) was out of her immediate care due to a short-term medical crisis (horses have returned to eventing careers after atrial fibrilation episodes; it is not a permenant condition, it is not unreasonable that he competed following this episode; we certainly don’t have the information to make that judgement). There is an obvious way that this particular drug could have gotten into the horse’s system (US coupling agent).

Leave it at that until the mechanism in place runs it’s course, and it is possible to hear some real explanations. Go ride your horses. Good grief. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

THANK GOODNESS! A VOICE OF REALITY!
I can understand questioning what the medical issues are, medications are to understand a situation, but this is being taken into a judgmental discussion as to what people “should” have done.

Great,
be an armchair quarterback on Monday morning.
You were not there, most of you don’t have that level of experience.
You don’t know every fact, you are reacting to press releases that are obviously carefully worded with information excluded for good reason (i.e. until the hearing takes place, everything is not known).

I think the Peanut Gallery approach to who was “lame”, who was “drugged”, hiding behind semantics and “seems to, appeared to” is worst part of this thread.

I am glad to be learning so much from the legal experts here, as it gives insight into the hearing process and precedents. I am glad to learn what the drug is, what it is for. Those are facts. The rest is inuendo.

I have no first-hand experience working with Ms. King-Dye, however I have been along side her team at shows, have watched her, competed against her (always a groan when I see her on my class list ;)) and I have NEVER seen her be anything but thorough, careful and conservative for her horse, thoughtful, fair and hard-working.

No one has a crystal ball to see what could happen. If she followed advice of the experts (i.e. vets, Chef d’equipe, clinic in question), acted responsibly to the owners and the horse, and somehow something happened that she could not explain (who has not had weird crap happen to them?), how can she be judged negatively by us? Who of us is so perfect in all we have made decisions on, that we can make that call on someone who has done/seen/learned more on this level of competition than any of us?

She deserves better than that from this group. Objective discussions to learn of what the situation is, what it could mean is one thing. Speculating on a rider’s actions, whether the competency or integrity of the decisions made, should end.

Perhaps if we were all in a similar situation (like that will ever happen) might let us feel differently. “Walk a mile in the other’s shoes”. Who of us has been accused falsely of something. It feels like @*#?&$. Let’s not do this to our team rider, please. She deserves better than that.

[ridgeback]

Ok wait if it’s topical it would mean it’s absorded through the skin so why don’t you think it would test positive from the ultrasound gel? Like I said earlier I don’t have the facts but I’m not sure how you think the ultrasound gel theory wouldn’t hold up???

[ridgeback]

A double AMEN

[QUOTE=Sister Margarita;3486476]
THANK GOODNESS! A VOICE OF REALITY!
I can understand questioning what the medical issues are, medications are to understand a situation, but this is being taken into a judgmental discussion as to what people “should” have done.

Great,
be an armchair quarterback on Monday morning.
You were not there, most of you don’t have that level of experience.
You don’t know every fact, you are reacting to press releases that are obviously carefully worded with information excluded for good reason (i.e. until the hearing takes place, everything is not known).

I think the Peanut Gallery approach to who was “lame”, who was “drugged”, hiding behind semantics and “seems to, appeared to” is worst part of this thread.

I am glad to be learning so much from the legal experts here, as it gives insight into the hearing process and precedents. I am glad to learn what the drug is, what it is for. Those are facts. The rest is inuendo.

I have no first-hand experience working with Ms. King-Dye, however I have been along side her team at shows, have watched her, competed against her (always a groan when I see her on my class list ;)) and I have NEVER seen her be anything but thorough, careful and conservative for her horse, thoughtful, fair and hard-working.

No one has a crystal ball to see what could happen. If she followed advice of the experts (i.e. vets, Chef d’equipe, clinic in question), acted responsibly to the owners and the horse, and somehow something happened that she could not explain (who has not had weird crap happen to them?), how can she be judged negatively by us? Who of us is so perfect in all we have made decisions on, that we can make that call on someone who has done/seen/learned more on this level of competition than any of us?

She deserves better than that from this group. Objective discussions to learn of what the situation is, what it could mean is one thing. Speculating on a rider’s actions, whether the competency or integrity of the decisions made, should end.

Perhaps if we were all in a similar situation (like that will ever happen) might let us feel differently. “Walk a mile in the other’s shoes”. Who of us has been accused falsely of something. It feels like @*#?&$. Let’s not do this to our team rider, please. She deserves better than that.[/QUOTE]

Very nice…thank you

[freestyle2music]

Courtney is the person who brought Idocus back to life after the European experts fried his brain.

What a bunch of nonsens. Idocus went back to the USA, because he didn’t get enough breedings in Europe. Marlies van Baalen scored much higher in much more difficult competitions than Courtney ever did. Johan Hinnemann tried to turn this max 70% horse into a 75% horse, but gave up on it, because Idocus had reached his max on the training scale. That’s exactly the reason that I was always in favor of Mythilus because this horse can hit the 75% score, IFFFFF Courtney and her trainer can solve the “short in the neck” problem.

Theo

[passagedreamer]

Ridgeback : google ultrasound gel - search absorption time and duration… their is your answer.

And Theo : You are right BUT I did like what CK did with Idocus also.

[Spoilsport]

[QUOTE=Arathita;3486322]
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.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree with this poster. What is the point of this thread? Whatever happened, everyone feels sympathy for Courtney. No one knows the facts. No one has said she did something intentionally wrong. Some are going out of their way to find rationalizations for what happened, all based on speculation. . .and that’s dangerous too because it’s premature. What if it can be proven that Myth couldn’t have come into contact with Felbinac at the clinic? You are just setting yourself up to look bad when there may be another innocent explanation.

I think the point of the “we spent all day googling Felbinac” comments is that this was bad PR in the same way that it was bad PR to vehemently deny that Brentina was NQR. When statements fly in the face of what people can see and figure out for themselves, it’s bad PR.

I work in a field where there is a lot of media attention, and there is good reason why I am instructed to send almost ALL media requests to our PR people. Things you say with the best intentions, that you think are accurate, can come back to bite you.

[ridgeback]

[QUOTE=passagedreamer;3486502]
Ridgeback : google ultrasound gel - search absorption time and duration… their is your answer.

And Theo : You are right BUT I did like what CK did with Idocus also.[/QUOTE]

I still think with how sensitive the tests are it could still show up. Bottom line for me I couldn’t care less if she rubbed the stuff on her horse’s hocks it’s not going to change my view of her being a great rider and a huge asset to U.S. dressage!

I’m not convinced they know for sure how long certain ingredients in ultrasound gel last in the blood stream.

[HORSEBACKRIDER]

It’s entertaining to see that google is now a substitute for a law degree, a medical degree, and PhDs in all sciences.

Hard to understand why it doesn’t seem to help with basic grammar, diction, usage, or spelling.

[freestyle2music]

[QUOTE=passagedreamer;3486502]
Ridgeback : google ultrasound gel - search absorption time and duration… their is your answer.

And Theo : You are right BUT I did like what CK did with Idocus also.[/QUOTE]

The problem in Germany and Holland is always that we have so much combinations that can score around 70%, but to become a teammember you have to aim for the 75%. Some horses can handle this and some can not.
For riders as Anky, Hans Peter, Edward etc… this isn’t a problem, because they get offered so many good horses that they can afford the fact that many 70% horses disappear via the backdoor. This doesn’t always mean that they are sold, but very often the ride is given to a Junior or Youngrider.
Courtney just accepted the fact that Idocus was on his limit, so she just could have some very nice time with him, not over-asking him.

Theo

[monstrpony]

Perhaps others showed Idocus to higher scores, but the horse was not happy when he got back, and it took Courtney some time to restore the joy in his work. Someone who would bother with this effort, knowing full well she was not the rider that the others were, probably realizing that he had maxed out, score-wise anyway, is what we, in this country, call a true horsewoman. She went beyond the learning experience of riding behind all of those experts and made the horse’s life better. This is not someone who would resort to drugs.

I admit it is possible that this illusion will yet be shattered, but I’m betting against it.

The qualities that Courtney brought back to Idocus’ life, regardless of resulting scores, are something that some of us value. A lot.

[ridgeback]

[QUOTE=monstrpony;3486554]
I admit it is possible that this illusion will yet be shattered, but I’m betting against it.

The qualities that Courtney brought back to Idocus’ life, regardless of resulting scores, are something that some of us value. A lot.[/QUOTE]

Would the illusion really be shattered even if she used a topical product, that is hardly considered drugging a horse in my book. Using injectable drugs is a different story.

[sascha]

But, Ridgeback, what about intentionally transdermal meds, what about using DMSO as a transdermal carrier, what about, oh, I dunno, say something like ginger under a tail? I think part of the reason the rules are so tight is to erase the fuzzy line between acceptable and absolutely wrong. Drugging is drugging period no matter how a forbidden substance is administered.

[ridgeback]

[QUOTE=sascha;3486568]
But, Ridgeback, what about intentionally transdermal meds, what about using DMSO as a transdermal carrier, what about, oh, I dunno, say something like ginger under a tail? I think part of the reason the rules are so tight is to erase the fuzzy line between acceptable and absolutely wrong. Drugging is drugging period no matter how a forbidden substance is administered.[/QUOTE]

I’m not talking about the rules I am saying I wouldn’t consider using a topical as drugging a horse…of course JMO.

[freestyle2music]

[QUOTE=monstrpony;3486554]
Perhaps others showed Idocus to higher scores, but the horse was not happy when he got back, and it took Courtney some time to restore the joy in his work. Someone who would bother with this effort, knowing full well she was not the rider that the others were, probably realizing that he had maxed out, score-wise anyway, is what we, in this country, call a true horsewoman. She went beyond the learning experience of riding behind all of those experts and made the horse’s life better. This is not someone who would resort to drugs.

I admit it is possible that this illusion will yet be shattered, but I’m betting against it.

The qualities that Courtney brought back to Idocus’ life, regardless of resulting scores, are something that some of us value. A lot.[/QUOTE]

Send me one quote from Courtney where she made these kind of statements.

[slc2]

Courtney would never make such blatant statements, I don’t think.

It is an opinion that Courtney’s training and riding changed this horse’s life and that he was getting ruined before.

Others have a very different opinion and are not wrong either (opinions can’t be wrong or right, they are opinions, not facts) - for example, that as a less experienced rider, she demanded less of the horse, and that ANY horse would be content to be ridden and be asked to perform at a lower level of expectation and exertion.

Courtney is often very, very publicly criticized for riding ‘conservatively’ and ‘not going to the max’, but I think a more experienced person would realize that she is riding exactly as she SHOULD at this point in her career.

Carefully and with an emphasis on correctness and getting experience - one should note, it’s a fact, too, just look at her scores, it’s a fact that she scores extremely well doing just that, and has risen really quickly to the top of the sport, doing just that.

“I wouldn’t consider using a topical as drugging a horse”

Considering only injections to have the potential to influence a horse’s performance or affect his body processes in a profound way, is not ‘just an opinion’, it’s a highly inaccurate statement, and it has nothing to do with how the FEI’s policies work, which is that a performance altering drug can be given by any route and any performance altering drug is not allowed.

There are many extremely powerful medications that are given topically. Surpass and other NSAIDS are very powerful meds and are given topically. Surpass can have a profound effect on pain and injuries that affect a horse’s performance.

The idea of it being ‘topical’ is to allow as much medication to get right to the affected area as quickly as possible.

There are also drugs that have serious side effects if given systemically or have other properties that make them incompatible with going thru the digestive or circulatory system, for example, some drugs are just too irritating to be injected into a vein, or on the skin, or thru the digestive tract, or may not work if metabolized thru the digestive tract.

These are powerful, powerful drugs, the fact that they are topical has nothing to do with their potential to ‘drug’ a horse, their power or how profoundly they affect the horse.

The route of administration of a drug says NOTHING about whether it would affect a horse’s performance, score or body processes profoundly.

[ridgeback]

[QUOTE=slc2;3486579]
Courtney would never make such statements, I don’t think. I’ve read her say she enjoyed riding the horse, things like that.

“I wouldn’t consider using a topical as drugging a horse”

Considering only injections to have the potential to influence a horse’s performance or affect his body processes is not ‘just an opinion’, it’s a highly inaccurate perception, and it has nothing to do with how the FEI’s policies work, which is that a performance altering drug can be given by any route and any performance altering drug is not allowed.

There are many extremely powerful medications that are given topically. Surpass and other NSAIDS are very powerful meds and are given topically. Surpass can have a profound effect on pain and injuries that affect a horse’s performance.

The idea of it being ‘topical’ is to allow as much medication to get right to the affected area as quickly as possible.

There are also drugs that have serious side effects if given systemically or have other properties that make them incompatible with going thru the digestive or circulatory system. These are powerful, powerful drugs, the fact that they are topical has nothing to do with their potential to ‘drug’ a horse.

The route of administration of a drug says NOTHING about whether it would affect a horse’s performance, score or body processes profoundly.[/QUOTE]

Not sure if you read or not but I said I wasn’t talking about the rules I was saying I don’t think using topcials is drugging a horse JMO…I also do not think surpass is so powerful that it would be drugging a horse again IMO. I have not seen it have a PROFOUND impact. The rules are the rules I just don’t agree with them:D:lol:

[QUOTE=slc2;3486579]Courtney would never make such statements, I don’t think. I’ve read her say she enjoyed riding the horse, things like that.

Wow Courtney would never…, I don’t think…SLC why don’t you just say you don’t know if she would…LOL I’m sure she would never say it in the press but who knows privately.

[YankeeLawyer]

[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]

So how did it get into Mythilus’ system? I really wonder sometimes if we are all reading the same thing. I THINK the quote indicated that they were trying to figure out how it could have possibly gotten to Mythilus. That is what CKD actually said, anyway. A quick googlre search would not give you all possible uses or scenarios. Otherwise people would never have to conduct any kind of investigation. They were also probably trying to find examples of its use in horses specifically. Most of the information that pops up related to that substance has to do with its use in humans.

Half the people here saw something about the substance sometimes being used in an ultrasound gel, and all of a sudden a number of people assume that must be the source, or are debating whether it could have been on equipment when he was ultrasounded. And no one here even knows whether the horse was ever ultrasounded!! Or bothers to see that it is not used as some kind of ultrasound lube, but for a specific treatment purpose.

[ridgeback]

[QUOTE=YankeeLawyer;3486601]
So how did it get into Mythilus’ system? I really wonder sometimes if we are all reading the same thing. I THINK the quote indicated that they were trying to figure out how it could have possibly gotten to Mythilus. That is what CKD actually said, anyway. A quick googlre search would not give you all possible uses or scenarios. Otherwise people would never have to conduct any kind of investigation. They were also probably trying to find examples of its use in horses specifically. Most of the information that pops up related to that substance has to do with its use in humans.

Half the people here saw something about the substance sometimes being used in an ultrasound gel, and all of a sudden a number of people assume that must be the source, or are debating whether it could have been on equipment when he was ultrasounded. And no one here even knows whether the horse was ever ultrasounded!! Or bothers to see that it is not used as some kind of ultrasound lube, but for a specific treatment purpose.[/QUOTE]

What is your point? Yes people are speculating how it could have gotten into his system… Ultrasound is logical considering the heart condition.