[QUOTE=Beowulfnk;7648508]
Hi . It’s not my interpretation, I asked USEF Judges “is it illegal as of today” and they said no. My comments were regarding that context specifically.[/QUOTE]
With all due respect, asking USEF judges, a significant percentage of whom are trainers, whether this stuff is “legal”, is akin to asking Br’er Fox whether the henhouse door ought to be closed at night…
Interesting…just watched the video…horse does look very strong to me and the rider is doing a pretty good job keeping him together. Does look like her saddle is too small (not in the seat but for her leg. And she looks to be riding too long…which is why she is struggling to stay with his jump. Since I don’t think things like PP really work…no opinion on that. But really, horse is green and just needs miles. Rider just needs to keep doing her flat work to improve his ridability (lots of shoulder ins, leg yeilds, shorting and lengthening his stride exercises) and shorter her stirrups a hole or two (once her ankle is healed) and maybe try a different saddle. I bet on with a better balance for her leg will make a huge difference.
[QUOTE=french fry;7648513]
RugBug, we’ve been around in circles on this. It is a supplement, not a narcotic. I take it that you report exhibitors who up their horse’s roughage/lower their grain or otherwise change their feed/supplement program in an effort to find the balance that produces a calmer horse.
I don’t use it. My friends don’t use it. I have no dog in this fight. But to call it unequivocally illegal is your interpretation of a rule that is left open-ended for a reason. Perhaps tomorrow USEF will come out and declare it illegal. But to assume that they’re unaware of it and the way people use it is silly.[/QUOTE]
Acepromazine isn’t a narcotic; it’s not permitted.
Chamomile isn’t a narcotic; it’s not permitted.
Nor are skullcap, lavender, lemon balm…
The fact that there is no way currently to test for the use of many substances is simply a nice big loophole you could drive a 12-horse rig through…
I emailed USEF this morning and have been clarifying things with them since. They are very responsive. I don’t think anyone should be taking anyone’s word on what is legal under the Drug and Medication rules EXCEPT the Drug and Medication team’s word. Not even what a judge says. Judges aren’t responsible for interpreting or enforcing the D&M rules.
Once I get an answer I’m happy with, I’ll happily provide an update. But I don’t think anyone should take my word on my conversation with USEF as definitive, either.
If you really want to know whether your (any “your”, for or against the legality of calming supplements) interpretation of the rule is correct, definitely email USEF. They are friendly and professional.
My, my, this has been interesting and gone several directions. Obviously there are different viewpoints in play, all of which we are entitled to express. Thing about the internet is it’s like that bell you can’t unring, even if you didn’t ring it in the first place or hit it by accident or that double edged sword. Perhaps it’s best to embrace that and roll with it then let it get personal.
My initial reaction and post simply dealt with my opinion the advice was not appropriate and did nothing to help the young rider in her quest to improve by offering things she needs to do that will improve herself and the horse. That’s the truth I thought should have been told. Not a calming supplement on a horse that that does not need to be calmed.
Far as PP, no I don’t like the whole concept and have heard rumors not everybody over at USEF does either. Maybe 6 or 7 years back I was given several tubes of the stuff as were some of my friends. We tried it over about a week, the spooky horse still spooked, pissy mare was still pissy and the big lug that pulled pulled worse. I’m sure it might have a slight effect on horses that are actually misbehaving because of nerves or vitamin imbalances, which strike me as better handles with daily supplements and dietary adjustments.
Yet today, I see an ever growing group of riders who will not get on at a show unless horsey has it, rave about its effects in making horse what it is. And trainers who know it’s legal, they can add it to the meds bill and look like they are acting in the clients best interests. That’s what I do not like.
I would love to see a double blind study against a placebo because IMO they have a tremendous marketing machine in place making riders think they need it to be successful.
For those bemoaning the trend in the H/J world? Ya’ll need to get out more and look in their trash cans.
Carry on…
Oh, BTW, if a trainer was asked for advice and the advice was get another horse? Harsh truth but they asked for it. Don’t have a problem with that ( rider here does NOT need a different horse, just work)
I take it that you report exhibitors who up their horse’s roughage/lower their grain or otherwise change their feed/supplement program in an effort to find the balance that produces a calmer horse.
Arguments from exaggeration really don’t help. 
They are faulty to start with.
FWIW: As I stated earlier, I don’t really police anyone. If someone else feels the need to use a supplement or medication to calm their horse, that’s on them.
What I do have a problem with is people saying some it “not illegal,” which for USEF purposes actually equals ‘a forbidden substance,’ and implying that means it is legal. Again, faulty logic. If people could stop using faulty logic, I’d be happy.
The rules say that something given to alter the horse’s performance is a forbidden substance unless is meets certain criteria, which, BTW, PP does not meet. This does include supplements, not just “narcotics.”
Again, there is some circular logic going on here with the supplements issue: Do I give B Vitamins because my horse has a deficiency or do I give them because it calms him? I think one way to answer that is “is the horse given this supplement continually to address that deficiency?” You could say your addressing a Mg deficiency with PP, but unless the horse is on Mg all the time, you most likely are not addressing a deficiency and are rather using it for the calming effects.
But to assume that they’re unaware of it and the way people use it is silly.
Oh…I’m not assuming they are unaware. I’m just assuming they have bigger fish to fry at the moment then trying to battle the use of PP.
Oh, I’m inclinded to believe judges as well, until 2 have made unsupported statements. I’d really like to hear from the USEF on the matter.
We know they are developing tests for excessive Mg, perhaps they will come out with allowed limits and PP will fall into that and we can all go home and use PP if we’d like with no further ethical dilemmas.
[QUOTE=Ghazzu;7648549]
Acepromazine isn’t a narcotic; it’s not permitted.
Chamomile isn’t a narcotic; it’s not permitted.
Nor are skullcap, lavender, lemon balm…
The fact that there is no way currently to test for the use of many substances is simply a nice big loophole you could drive a 12-horse rig through…[/QUOTE]
I am not saying that the only illegal substances are narcotics, merely illustrating the point that PP is far from a black and white case of drugging with a narcotic.
I don’t use PP, but I will await USEF’s official stance before I start accusing a judge of flagrantly defying the rules.
I understand that of course. Once again I am clarifying comments regarding what USEF judges told me and it’s being interpreted by you as my “thinking that USEF Judges are the same as the USEF drugs and medication commitee”? I was referring to a specific comment which you apparently did not see.
[QUOTE=IPEsq;7648538]
Re the comment to “get an eq horse”…While I think the PP comment was irresponsible, RG didn’t actually offer any of the advice the rider was seeking-- how to stay with her horse better and smooth out the ride. Having ridden many green horses in Big Eq classes, the answer is also not to just get a better horse. Wouldn’t we all love to have access to the top schoolmaster eq horses. I think this horse is not a bad type for the equitation classes. He is just green. The response shouldn’t have been 1) full of errors, 2) advocating a calming supplement that isn’t going to solve this rider’s primary problems with this horse (horse is behind the leg, on the forehand, and rider is riding backwards) even if it does work to calm the horse (rider may still ride backwards to the chip even if her horse is slower/calmer/less strong), and 3) telling her to get a better mount. Not all of us can afford the top equitation horses yet we have goals to make it at that level. The advice the rider was looking for what she could do to help both her and her horse perform better over these types of courses. I don’t have to have the background or experience of RG to expect his answer to have something to do with her riding. The advice not only opened a can of worms regarding shortcuts vs hard work but didn’t even begin to legitimately offer advice that the rider can work with. PP won’t help her stay with the horse’s motion over the fence. And while “get an Eq horse” might have been tongue in cheek, how about using JMR to offer actual riding tips? Such as, your horse may be too green/not the best type/too strong/etc. for this level still but here’s what you can do to work with what you’ve got. I get that it is a free advice forum, but that doesn’t mean that you don’t have to be careful about what you say, although what is most disappointing to me is that the rider in this instance got none of the constructive advice she was seeking, whether or not others would have agreed with that advice. Instead, she got some irrelevant and controversial comments not at all directed to her riding.[/QUOTE]
Did you even watch the video in question? We are talking about two different horses/riders. The “Get an Eq horse” was not directed at the subject on this thread…and was a perfectly legitimate comment for that rider it was directed at. :rolleyes:
I love how some people think it’s completely okay because it’s “natural” and a “supplement.” Like natural things are never dangerous.
Humble, anyone?
It’s only a matter of time before someone shoves 4 or 5 tubes of the stuff into a horse’s mouth and ends up with a serious reaction.
[QUOTE=Beowulfnk;7648567]
I understand that of course. Once again I am clarifying comments regarding what USEF judges told me and it’s being interpreted by you as my “thinking that USEF Judges are the same as the USEF drugs and medication commitee”? I was referring to a specific comment which you apparently did not see.[/QUOTE]
I didn’t interpret that you thought that. I was just saying that just because USEF judges told it to you doesn’t mean they’re the ones you want to get the information from.
[QUOTE=AffirmedHope;7648574]
I love how some people think it’s completely okay because it’s “natural” and a “supplement.” Like natural things are never dangerous.
Humble, anyone?
It’s only a matter of time before someone shoves 4 or 5 tubes of the stuff into a horse’s mouth and ends up with a serious reaction.[/QUOTE]
Yes, that is exactly what Rob was advocating.
I worry about this constantly, since no one can tell the difference between feeding an appropriate amount of grain and giving their horses free-choice grain, thereby letting ALL THE HORSES DIE OF COLIC.
</sarcasm>
[QUOTE=hj0519;7648530]
A USEF judge isn’t the USEF Drugs & Medication Committee. While Perfect Prep doesn’t contain any of the substances listed on the published list of Forbidden Substances examples, that doesn’t automatically make it “legal.”[/QUOTE]
Correct. I am genuinely puzzled that seemingly otherwise rational people don’t understand this.
[QUOTE=french fry;7648587]
Yes, that is exactly what Rob was advocating.
I worry about this constantly, since no one can tell the difference between feeding an appropriate amount of grain and giving their horses free-choice grain, thereby letting ALL THE HORSES DIE OF COLIC.
</sarcasm>[/QUOTE]
If a respected BNT says it okay to use it, others will take that advice interpret it as “I can use any means necessary to get my perfect horse, BNT says so!” Slippery slope and all that…
For some reason people seem to go totally stupid when there are $.60 ribbons on the line.
[QUOTE=RugBug;7648570]
Did you even watch the video in question? We are talking about two different horses/riders. The “Get an Eq horse” was not directed at the subject on this thread…and was a perfectly legitimate comment for that rider it was directed at. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
I watched the video that was linked in the OP. If there was another video buried in this thread between the OP and that comment, then, yes, I missed it. Sorry.
Doesn’t change my view on the complete lack of useful advice given to the rider referenced in the OP.
Oh good lord, no one thinks the man will lose his career over a drama thread on COTH.
It’s simply a good illustration of what’s seen as an issue in the H/J world - shortcuts, drugging, random other shenanigans. Mr Gage kindly obliged the internets by aptly illustrating that problem - here’s a BNT telling some kid to put her horse on a calmer an hour before a show, instead of giving her tips on how to ride better (which btw is what she asked for).
Really, no matter what “industry standard” is for upper level H/J, this is probably a good lesson for all pros in it: try not to publically endorse performance-enhancing chemicals. It makes the sport look somewhat less awesome.
It was edited.
Here’s meupatdoes’ screenshot of when her comment was in the moderation queue (also linked on post #4 in this thread). It shows Mr. Gage’s original, full comment:
http://smg.photobucket.com/user/meupatdoes/media/Mobile%20Uploads/JMR_zps287f967d.png.html
The sentence in question is in bold:
That’s a big strong horse for a pettite girl like you Alex. That doesn’t mean you can’t ride him, but he needs to be prepared more. I see you already have him in a pelham. I don’t think you will ever be able to ride him in a snaffle. That’s OK. First & foremost, you need control. I get it, that he is only 6 and can get excited in the show ring.
If you check the currently posted reply, the bolded part has been removed.
Since I assume the question-asker can’t edit the critique she received, nor can meup or any other random guest, it was either a member of your staff or Mr Gage himself. Why?
To be clear, I’m not saying PP is definitely legal. (I don’t use the stuff, partially because I don’t want to take any chance of coming down on the wrong side of the rule.) I’m not saying I liked Rob’s advice. I’m just bringing up the point that it is not definitively a banned substance and may or may not violate the spirit of the rule. It is certainly not the black and white situation some posters have claimed it is.
Ok, I just got off the phone Diana Tartal at USEF. I want to make a few things VERY clear:
By the time I called her, the conversation WAS NOT about Robert Gage or Perfect Prep in particular.
She was immensely professional and helpful all morning and is very happy to answer peoples’ questions. She says the encourage anyone with questions/concerns to contact them and they are always happy to help–which is exactly my experience. We went through several emails before the phone call, and she was professional, helpful, and made sure all of my concerns were addressed.
It was a phone call, so I don’t have a screen shot. You don’t have to believe me; as I said, call USEF yourself. I believe I have captured all of this accurately, but if something is misrepresented here, it would be my fault, not Diana’s/USEF’s.
That said, what I got from the phone call was:
The “spirit and intent” portion of the rule is to help people understand what they should do/should not do. However, if a substance does not contain a forbidden ingredient, there is no violation of the letter of the rule.
So, while people should not be giving their horses calming supplements and violating the spirit and the intent of the rules, as long as the supplements do not contain forbidden ingredients, they fall within the letter of the rule and can be given.
I have always thought people could be set down for violating the spirit and intent of the rule, even if the ingredients were not forbidden, but she said no. When it comes to violations, the letter of the rule (e.g. if an ingredient is permitted or forbidden) is all that matters.
So, there you go. It is definitely not the answer I was expecting, based on how I have previously read the rules.
I think this is what people are missing on this thread. I would argue that a shot of bute or banamine at a show is affecting the horse’s performance. I guess you could also argue that they are “calming” agents as a sore horse can get a bit testy at the end of a week-long circuit without a little “chemical” help.
I’ve never used PP so I don’t know if it helps or not. I don’t condone the blanket use of it on all horses in a trainer’s barn as a matter of course. But I can see it’s use on a green horse or a horse that’s having a bad day at a particular show ground to help give them a positive experience.
And, yikes, it’s pricey. I’d rather try and figure out a program that works for a particular horse at a show to get them on track. I think with the larger show barns, there’s no time to treat each horse as an individual and they all get prepped the same.
Regardless of whether or not Perfect Prep is in violation of the rules, or whether or not it is effective, there is no doubt that someone at PP has devised a brilliant marketing scheme. This thread and the comment on JMR is nothing but gold for their sales, since we are all discussing the fact that a nationally known trainer uses and endorses the product. Let’s go out and buy more!
I have no idea why trainers are so enamored with it.
I know of at least one barn in my area where its use is actually written into the board/training contract, giving the trainer complete discretion to dispense PP, bute, and Robaxin for every horse at every show. Which could be another brilliant scheme, since most owners would never even know if the horse actually ate the stuff, but could get charged for it anyway. (Let’s see…$20/tube at 2 tubes each day for a 5-day show…and voila, an extra $200 in the trainer’s pocket! Freakin’ brilliant!)
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
