New York Times article - USEF and Humble

[Pennywell_Bay]

Not being snarky, actually, the insert does not specify whether to stall rest the horse after IV or IA:
DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION:
Legend Multi Dose (20 mL) and Legend 4 mL (40 mg) injected intravenously only. Legend 2 mL (20 mg) injected intravenously or intra-articularly in the carpus or fetlock.

Treatment may be repeated at weekly intervals for a total of three treatments.

Legend Injectable Solution 2 mL: Strict aseptic technique should be observed when administering by intra-articular injection. As with any intra-articular procedure, proper injection site disinfection and animal restraint are important. Excess joint fluid should be aseptically removed prior to injection. Care should be taken to avoid scratching the cartilage surface with the tip of the injection needle. Diffuse swelling lasting 24 to 48 hours may result from movement of the needle while in the joint space.

For intravenous administration, use aseptic technique and inject slowly into the jugular vein.

Horses should be given stall rest after treatment before gradually resuming normal activity.

[findeight]

[QUOTE=juststartingout;6747671]
All good points – however if you restrict administration of the most problematic to vets and require that the vets file a med report with the show office and USEF there is going to be a certain amount of resistance to developing a record showing that certain vets and certain horses are receiving certain meds at every show. While this places a burden on show vets (and an extra expense on owners) its an expense that owners/riders/trainers ought to be willing to incur if the med is truly needed for the health of the animal.

Wuth today’s computer systems and databases, tracking this kind of information is not very difficult and pulling reports once the system is designed is easy - whether by vet, trainer, rider, groom, or horse.

If we are serious about protecting our animals and changing the sport, then we ought to be willing to create, support, and pay for the systems necessary to make sure it happen[/QUOTE]

Ahhhhh, making sure that med record is not available to anybody come sale and PPE time might be an issue with some.

Honestly, I see alot of new trainers jumping on the multiple meds bandwagon because it’s “always been done” and newbie owners blindly accepting all charges on the bill without question because “it’s the way everybody does it”.

Thats sad and is really starting to bother me after seeing what happens to some nice horses pushed too far for too long in their hands.

Also makes me embarassed for the sport.

[JER]

[QUOTE=CBoylen;6747603]
That refers to when it is used IA not IV.[/QUOTE]

No, it does not. That comes from the NIH site here. You’ll notice at the top of the page, it says:

For Intravenous Use in Horses Only

Not for Intra-Articular Use

[juststartingout]

[QUOTE=findeight;6747710]
Ahhhhh, making sure that med record is not available to anybody come sale and PPE time might be an issue with some.

Honestly, I see alot of new trainers jumping on the multiple meds bandwagon because it’s “always been done” and newbie owners blindly accepting all charges on the bill without question because “it’s the way everybody does it”.

Thats sad and is really starting to bother me after seeing what happens to some nice horses pushed too far for too long in their hands.

Also makes me embarassed for the sport.[/QUOTE]

Actually making it available for sale and PPE would be a great idea. Why not – if you are selling a horse based on its record - why shouldn’t the buyer know what medications were necessary to produce that record. I am not naive – it will be an issue, but if we want to be treated as a professional and honest sport with integrity why not.

[Go_Fish]

[QUOTE=Horseymama;6747704]
I’m not saying they are not doing a good job at testing. I have seen testers at most shows I’ve been to, dressage and H/J. And my horses usually get tested once or twice/year.

What I’m saying is that the penalties are not nearly harsh enough for testing positive. Not even close!

Yes the testers are present. Yes, I’m sure the USEF is working to develop new tests for previously undetectable drugs.

But what is the point if it’s a slap on the wrist?[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

I’ve been horseshowing in one form or another for over 50 years. Illegal medication use has ALWAYS been an issue. People can posture and complain all the want about judging, types of horses, training, etc. But bottom line, until a penalty with TEETH affects a trainer’s business negatively, things will not change.

The USEF playing catch up with testing for new medications or substances will not affect drug use. It never has. Setting down a trainer and/or an owner for a year, or permanently, will.

[Sticky_Situation]

According to this web site the peak effect of IV hyaluronate sodium (Legend) is approximately 48 hours …

I got an error message when I tried to pull up the package insert on Bayer’s website.

[gumshoe]

That is intra-articular use, is it not? Aren’t we talking about IV use? Perhaps I am confused on that…

[QUOTE=Sticky Situation;6747768]
According to this web site the peak effect of IV hyaluronate sodium (Legend) is approximately 48 hours …

I got an error message when I tried to pull up the package insert on Bayer’s website.[/QUOTE]

[findeight]

Oh, I think it would be a great idea to have it available for a buyers vet. Rather then have the wheels basically come off an expensive purchase when whatever it was routinely filled with at the shows wears off. If it was purchased in an at home situation some time after the last show? Buyer would have no idea it only showed juiced on “legal” nsaids and various untestable substances.

That has happened to at least a half dozen folks I know even with a reputable agent/trainer on their side and a good PPE with a blood draw.

[bugsynskeeter]

Gumshoe - scroll down the page to where it talks about Legend. It does say peak IV injection time is 48 hours.

Legend is labelled for IV and IA use…however only the 2 ml vial is to be used for IA.
http://bayer.naccvp.com/?m=product_view_basic&id=1040027&u=bayer&p=dvm

In reference to the necropsy - it does no surprise me that Humble had the beginnings of lung disease. I would bet that a large number of horses that travel and show that much would have lung changes. Jeez - think all the NSAIDs and Dex had something to do with it progressing or the pony not showing signs? How would a horse ever show a fever being on so much already?

[Pennywell_Bay]

[QUOTE=Sticky Situation;6747768]
According to this web site the peak effect of IV hyaluronate sodium (Legend) is approximately 48 hours …

I got an error message when I tried to pull up the package insert on Bayer’s website.[/QUOTE]

I received the same error. I just can’t see pharmacologically how given 2 hours prior is effective. It may have become “standard” but that does not say much. Again, I would not mind being wrong about it but considering where the HA or Hsodium needs to get to for maximum efficacy (joints), I don’t see it.

[Peggy]

Legend insert info

Hmmm. I got curious enough to pull out a Legend insert. Front clearly says IV. Back indicates resting after treatment. I suppose that doing anything other than the proscribed up to three treatments at weekly intervals is off-label, meaning that there is more off- than on-label use.

But that is hardly the main issue here.

I can’t find anything on the insert about a time profile.

[adhock]

I agree, but consider the daunting challenges. Most top hunter judges have sold the ponies/horses that are showing in their rings. They’ve promoted them as “the hack winners” or being “quiet as church mice.” This is just the economic truth given the fact that those who judge and train may also sell. When you have a vested interest in performance, it undermines objectivity, regardless how objective you think you might be (and I believe that many judges try like crazy to be fair, even while occasionally glancing down at cell phones). So hunter and eq trainers subscribe to the “do no wrong” theory of making the horses and ponies so quiet that they practically fall over the jumps (just watch the videos from Indoors and the (chortle) National Horse Show). And, to be honest as well, how many mommies and daddies want to schlep their precious kids to showgrounds at 4am so that the horses/ponies can be flatted and prepped without ridiculous amounts of lunging or drugs? Been there, at 4am, and I can say that there are a scant few!

This system is really broken at the base and requires bravery and total re-engineering to fix it! It’s also one of the reasons why hunter derbies, originally envisioned to restore excitement and playfulness, have been dumbed down to elongated classics. People with vision and brass need to step in but it’s not going to be incumbents with vested, parochial interests. I read the USEF’s statements and I will no longer support this spineless drivel. And I hope that I will never see another cover of InStride, featuring such hypocrisy. God bless The NYT!

[QUOTE=RanchoAdobe;6747702]
I’d love to discuss more Julie’s point of view- change the incentives and the behavior will change accordingly.

Change the judging and many problems will be solved (though how to change judging is also a great discussion topic). If horses are not rewarded, as they are currently, for robotic appearances than in turn less horses will be drugged to win in the ring (and less lunging/riding/schooling may also lead to less need for soundness type drugs as well?).

Also, I have heard and agree with talk of changing courses. The current simple courses (single, side, diagonal, side) promote robotic, metronome performances. Less related distances, more singles, less groundlines will, perhaps, reward pace and more “spark” in the hunter ring. Why can’t the hunter ring move more towards the derby ideal?

Any other ideas on how to change the game, so to speak. Every poster on this forum has brought up the difficulties of focusing only on the drug rules/enforcement. The cost of vet only administered injections and problems with FEI type stabling, the difficulty of testing for “naturally occuring” drugs such as Mg, how to decipher between performance enhancing and legitimate comfort.

… so what else can we do to eliminate the incentives for abuse?[/QUOTE]

[Ghazzu]

[QUOTE=MHM;6746190]
There are vets who will do just that.[/QUOTE]

Considering that the vast majority of the parenteral medications currently being abused ultimately got into the hands of the owners/trainers through the cooperation of a DVM, I’m sorry to have to agree with you.

I am ashamed of my profession in this regard.

[juststartingout]

[QUOTE=Ghazzu;6747800]
Considering that the vast majority of the parenteral medications currently being abused ultimately got into the hands of the owners/trainers through the cooperation of a DVM, I’m sorry to have to agree with you.

I am ashamed of my profession in this regard.[/QUOTE]

Agreed… but knowing that the information is being tracked and is available might just prompt vets to act more cautiously

[JER]

Earlier this year, I made a public records request on a state professional/licensing board case against a popular h/j show vet. The vet had a malpractice judgment against him in a lawsuit involving the death of a horse, and his name had popped up in the eye-popping Raggedy Ann pony saga.

The malpractice issue was a rather simple case of overwhelming negligence. But the horse’s vet records were in the document dump, and those were the more interesting part.

This horse, who was IIRC an imported 8 year-old AA or A/O hunter, had so many joint injections it was amazing that he could walk at all. Every part of his leg, foot, back, you name it, all receiving regular injections.

To cap it off, this BN vet – according to his own records – was injecting joints with Tildren. And I do not mean administering it IV, as it’s intended. I mean that his own records said that he was injecting it into the joint capsule.

I didn’t know what to make of this, as I’d never heard of this particular off-label use, so I asked a scientist with experience in that field. He said it was ‘probably useless’ as a joint injection, but also that it shouldn’t harm the horse. But where do vets come up with these things?

This was also a case where the vet’s negligent treatment could easily have resulted in serious injury to the owner.

I do hope all involved learn from these incidents but perhaps I’m being overly optimistic.

[Peggy]

There are a couple of issues here, all intertwined to some extent.

• Judging standards that reward the lopey (dopey?) look in the hunters and a robot in the eq. Not saying that the kids can't ride a non-robot, just that it's extremely helpful to be sitting on one.
• Using pharmaceuticals to achieve said look.
• Using pharmaceuticals to keep a horse comfortable.
• Using pharmaceuticals in off-label manners, doses, and combinations, including some that can cause harm, but generally not death.
• Administering pharmaceuticals in a fashion that has killed horses non-anomalously, for example IV Mg

IMHO, you could probably almost eliminate the deaths via pharmaceuticals by prohibiting needles and syringes in the barn area, but it’s unenforceable and impractical. Yes, the FEI does it, but that is a small, restricted stabling area and my understanding is that you can get around it. No matter what the rules are, some people are going to figure out how to circumvent them and do so.

Given that USEF has enough difficulty enforcing the existing drug in a manner that prevents people from violating them, more restrictions (no needles, zero-NSAID policy, etc) probably aren’t the answer.

Making a violation more painful (larger fines, longer suspensions, suspensions of all trainers and assistants associated with a program), broader (not just trainers, but owners and riders), longer, and having them escalate with each violation is, IMHO, the way to go. It won’t solve everything as, again, some people are going to figure out how to circumvent them and do so. Increased penalties will also make it likelier that people will sue USEF and/or the sample collector and/or anyone they can think of.

Changing the judging standards would also be helpful.

---

I am thinking not only of the horse world, but my experience teaching Organic Chemistry to pre-meds, as I type this. There is zero point in telling them not to cheat if you’re not going to enforce it. Since you can’t watch or catch everyone, you also need to make it harder for people to cheat, or easier for them not to cheat.

[Calhoun]

[QUOTE=Lord Helpus;They are boasting that a task force WILL be meeting in Feb. of 2013.

http://www.usefnetwork.com/news/9441/2012/12/28/usefs_response_to_the_new_york_tim.aspx[/QUOTE]

Wow, what total dysfunction, the task force should have been priority number one at the time of the pony’ death; at the least, after they realized EM could not be charged. Instead they wait until a NYTimes investigative artive airs their dirt. This says volumes!

[RanchoAdobe]

I thought an earlier poster’s suggestion of a new division was very interesting. If it is too hard to change the judging standard, courses, ect in the current divisions- why not create an entire “Performance Hunter” division with standards that promote the original ideal of the derby (pace, brilliance, style) and courses that incorporate a greater variety of jumps and non-related distances. Why not have a “Performance Hunter” ring with open and restricted divisions at various heights? Even the 2’6 ammy hunters may actually desire a little more challenge at a safe, comfortable height. Most shows have more than one hunter ring, would it really be that difficult to designate one hunter ring the “performance” ring. This would give those horses with a little too much spark, but beautiful style and jump a place to excel, as well as offering as giving riders a place to be more challenged (or challenged in a different way) than the current hunter divisions. I think it would be interesting to see if a performance section would soon become more popular thant the current USEF hunter divisions.

[Tackpud]

@Molly99;6747627

One of the scariest things to me, was the realization that many in the room did not know the “brand name” was really X drug.

Molly - I found this to be scary as well. Trainers have to stop trying to “diagnose and treat” their horses without a vet’s prescription. And vets have to start obeying the laws and not dispense medications without specific prescriptions for each shot. Unfortunately that will never happen since the vets have to pay back their student loans and trainers will continue to pester them for bottles. But all trainers should at least take the time to learn what they are putting into their horses and learn the pharmacology behind the medications. It would change a lot.

[Lord_Helpus]

[QUOTE=juststartingout;6747728]
Actually making it available for sale and PPE would be a great idea. Why not – if you are selling a horse based on its record - why shouldn’t the buyer know what medications were necessary to produce that record. I am not naive – it will be an issue, but if we want to be treated as a professional and honest sport with integrity why not.[/QUOTE]

Totally agree.