Santa Anita- do you think somethings up?

[CVPeg]

Oh, she’s perfect, Laurie! Congrats!

[Palm_Beach]

@danacat

From PReport article: [I]The issues Bramlage is seeing are in horses that have been given bisphosphonates outside manufacturer guidelines. The guidelines state the drugs should not be administered to horses under the age of five.

“If you’re interested in using them, you should go to the manufacturer’s website because more than 50 percent of the package insert is telling you why you shouldn’t use them in young horses,” he said. “However, they’re perfectly willing to sell them to you for use in young horses. All of those disclaimers are meant to put the blame for anything bad that happens to your young training horse on you and not the company.”[/I]

[I]Bisphosphonates became a concern for racing regulators in 2015 when the Kentucky Equine Drug Research Council announced its intent to study the drugs after receiving information some managers and trainers could be using it for its analgesic effect.

In England, the British Horseracing Authority issued a mandatory 30-day stand-down period for horses receiving bisphosphonates and prohibits their use in horses less than 3 1/2 years of age.

Unfortunately, the drug is difficult to test for and Bramlage worries the temptation of general analgesia can prove too much for some horsemen.

“Routine use of it I think is accelerating on the racetrack based on the number of horses we see that don’t follow the normal healing pattern,” he said. [/I]

So…somebody is using it. But maybe in the year since the article was written, use has curtailed.

I am not denying that probably someone has used it somewhere, but it is NOT widely used, nor has it ever been widely used, and it is not a “large problem” as snaffle stated above. The issues with it were brought to light pretty quickly, and it never became a popular drug in racing, much less a “large problem.”

Compromised healing and compromised bone will show up on a necroscopy. And Bramlage himself states that the issues at Santa Anita are most likely not related to biophosphates. I don’t know what article you referenced, but Bramlage lays it out in this recent March 2019 article:

"Could this be bisphosphonates rearing their ugly heads?

Dr. Larry Bramlage: That’s a question we don’t really know. I doubt that the spate of injuries in California is directly related to bisphosphonates because if that were the case we’d see a generalized change throughout the horse industry. From my perspective looking at the healing of fractures after they’ve happened, the discussion about bisphosphonates really had a big effect in the horses that we see. The increased awareness that there’s a cost for bisphosphonates has decreased the number of disturbed healing cases we see dramatically. I think the education process for horsemen really is working as far as letting them know bisphosphonates are not a good way to treat lameness [in young horses]. If you asked me the trend we’re seeing with bisphosphonate usage, I’d say in the racing horses, it’s down. I think people listened and grasped the situation and are responding.

The question people ask is “What if the horse got it as a yearling? Could that be predisposing them to injury?” If that were happening I’d expect we’d be seeing that at every racetrack and that is not the case."

Using biophosphates results in “disturbed healing” (see Dr Bramlage’s comments above) and that would absolutely show up on a necroscopy.

@snaffle1987 you need to read this article over and over and over again.

https://www.paulickreport.com/news/r…ions-answered/

[Where_sMyWhite]

@LaurieB

Thanks so much guys! We are thrilled to have her. The dam is stakes placed homebred All Aces (by Lemon Drop Kid). We bred her to Quality Road for last year and didn’t get a foal so we are delighted with this nice healthy filly this year. All Aces is half-sister to G2 winner Stanley Park and SW, GSP Turf Melody. Also half-sister to the dams of G2 winner, multi G1-placed Paid Up Subscriber and G3 winner Top Kisser.

I don’t know how to put pics here, but this is a link to a FB pic from this morning. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2151105118310830&set=a.116507338437295&type=3&theater

She is so dang cute

Let us know when you name her so I can add her to my stable!

Glad you are thrilled with her. Hope she is everything you wanted and more!

Who do you think you’ll be breeding her mom to this year? I’d be bummed by no Quality Road. He’s nice too!

[Pronzini]

@Palm Beach

I am not denying that probably someone has used it somewhere, but it is NOT widely used, nor has it ever been widely used, and it is not a “large problem” as snaffle stated above. The issues with it were brought to light pretty quickly, and it never became a popular drug in racing, much less a “large problem.”

Compromised healing and compromised bone will show up on a necroscopy. And Bramlage himself states that the issues at Santa Anita are most likely not related to biophosphates. I don’t know what article you referenced, but Bramlage lays it out in this recent March 2019 article:

"Could this be bisphosphonates rearing their ugly heads?

Dr. Larry Bramlage: That’s a question we don’t really know. I doubt that the spate of injuries in California is directly related to bisphosphonates because if that were the case we’d see a generalized change throughout the horse industry. From my perspective looking at the healing of fractures after they’ve happened, the discussion about bisphosphonates really had a big effect in the horses that we see. The increased awareness that there’s a cost for bisphosphonates has decreased the number of disturbed healing cases we see dramatically. I think the education process for horsemen really is working as far as letting them know bisphosphonates are not a good way to treat lameness [in young horses]. If you asked me the trend we’re seeing with bisphosphonate usage, I’d say in the racing horses, it’s down. I think people listened and grasped the situation and are responding.

The question people ask is “What if the horse got it as a yearling? Could that be predisposing them to injury?” If that were happening I’d expect we’d be seeing that at every racetrack and that is not the case."

Using biophosphates results in “disturbed healing” (see Dr Bramlage’s comments above) and that would absolutely show up on a necroscopy.

@snaffle1987 you need to read this article over and over and over again.

https://www.paulickreport.com/news/r…ions-answered/

I’m glad you posted this because I don’t even know why this became an issue when there are so many other issues out there to legitimately address. Personally I have raised a bunch of horses and some didn’t have the best X rays and I’ve never been advised to use it and in fact never heard of it before the recent great unveiling in the Paulick Report. I’ve had friends and acquaintances say the same thing to me. Some heard of it but never used it and most just said “what?” It would be a great story to debate if it’s true–and maybe it’s the circle of people I run with and the use is actually rampant but Bramlage who has a reason to know seems to be discounting that.

I care about horses and I care about the sport and I really wish these vague accusations would be reined in by people who should know better or at least presented in a realistic and non sensational manner.

If I ran the racing world, things that I would look into include an inquiry as to why there are 30 % trainers out there at the biggest tracks and at the highest levels? On a pure business basis, it is making large parts of the sport unbettable and I can’t imagine there isn’t an animal welfare component. I have to admit that when one of these super trainers has another reported laminitis case, I think to myself hmmm. Maybe there is nothing to it, but I have yet to see that addressed in any coordinated way like this.

[Palm_Beach]

@Pronzini

I’m glad you posted this because I don’t even know why this became an issue when there are so many other issues out there to legitimately address. Personally I have raised a bunch of horses and some didn’t have the best X rays and I’ve never been advised to use it and in fact never heard of it before the recent great unveiling in the Paulick Report. I’ve had friends and acquaintances say the same thing to me. Some heard of it but never used it and most just said “what?” It would be a great story to debate if it’s true–and maybe it’s the circle of people I run with and the use is actually rampant but Bramlage who has a reason to know seems to be discounting that.

I care about horses and I care about the sport and I really wish these vague accusations would be reined in by people who should know better or at least presented in a realistic and non sensational manner.

If I ran the racing world, things that I would look into include an inquiry as to why there are 30 % trainers out there at the biggest tracks and at the highest levels? On a pure business basis, it is making large parts of the sport unbettable and I can’t imagine there isn’t an animal welfare component. I have to admit that when one of these super trainers has another reported laminitis case, I think to myself hmmm. Maybe there is nothing to it, but I have yet to see that addressed in any coordinated way like this.

Success begets success, and a hot trainer gets more and better horses. They don’t get hustled by the racing secretary as much, and they can scratch out of races with less hassle. Are some of them pushing the medication withdrawal times? Possibly. I personally think the breakdown rate, dnf, racing fatality rate and non racing fatality rate should be tracked and published for each trainer.

[DarkBayUnicorn]

@Palm Beach

Success begets success, and a hot trainer gets more and better horses. They don’t get hustled by the racing secretary as much, and they can scratch out of races with less hassle. Are some of them pushing the medication withdrawal times? Possibly. I personally think the breakdown rate, dnf, racing fatality rate and non racing fatality rate should be tracked and published for each trainer.

That would be a really interesting statistical analysis.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

^ yes.

FWIW, as someone who was hooked by the recent group of articles that came out pointing to bisphosphonates, it’s positive and reassuring to see these comments indicating a lack of even anecdotal evidence of widespread use, both with respect to yearlings prepped for sales, and horses in training.

Conversely, as a casual, periodic follower of racing news (I admit to not being on top of many issues you all are discussing) I was saddened (not surprised… but saddened) to read comments on this thread earlier concerning inappropriate supplementation of thyroid as a common practice. That can have pretty serious health impacts over time, and be challenging to test for. Anecdotally, how widespread is/was that practice? From what little I’m reading in these comments… it seems like there is more of a known issue with thyroid supplementation abuse than off label bisphosphonate use/abuse.

[Where_sMyWhite]

@Pronzini

If I ran the racing world, things that I would look into include an inquiry as to why there are 30 % trainers out there at the biggest tracks and at the highest levels? On a pure business basis, it is making large parts of the sport unbettable and I can’t imagine there isn’t an animal welfare component. I have to admit that when one of these super trainers has another reported laminitis case, I think to myself hmmm. Maybe there is nothing to it, but I have yet to see that addressed in any coordinated way like this.

Maybe I’m still asleep but this paragraph didn’t sink in for me (or old ).

When you say 30% trainers… 30% of what? The total number of horses at a track? Wins? Not making sense to me and how would this 30% contribute to making parts of the sport unbettable (which might be more clear if I knew what the 30% referred to).

I know that what goes on on the backstretch is often just flat out not visible to someone like myself… not in the industry other than watching it on TV (TVG is my “background noise” channel). So, most horses in most races are “invisible”. I can follow them on something like Equibase to see when they work or when their next race is. If they’re sent away from the track for a layoff for any reason, pretty much don’t know (unless, again, name horse).

Are there that many horses on the backstretch that get laminitis? Does it appear to be linked to a trainer or trainers? If so, I would assume medication related? What possible meds?

Just curious as, like I said, this is something that is really completely invisible to me.

[TCA_Arabians]

A new foal! Something in this thread that I actually understand. Warm congratulations!

[LaurieB]

@TCA Arabians

A new foal! Something in this thread that I actually understand. Warm congratulations!

Thank you!

One day old filly with her dam: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2152556851498990&set=a.116507338437295&type=3&theater

[End of hijack! Thank you for all the good wishes. ]

[Palm_Beach]

@Where'sMyWhite

Maybe I’m still asleep but this paragraph didn’t sink in for me (or old ).

When you say 30% trainers… 30% of what? The total number of horses at a track? Wins? Not making sense to me and how would this 30% contribute to making parts of the sport unbettable (which might be more clear if I knew what the 30% referred to).

I know that what goes on on the backstretch is often just flat out not visible to someone like myself… not in the industry other than watching it on TV (TVG is my “background noise” channel). So, most horses in most races are “invisible”. I can follow them on something like Equibase to see when they work or when their next race is. If they’re sent away from the track for a layoff for any reason, pretty much don’t know (unless, again, name horse).

Are there that many horses on the backstretch that get laminitis? Does it appear to be linked to a trainer or trainers? If so, I would assume medication related? What possible meds?

Just curious as, like I said, this is something that is really completely invisible to me.

A win percentage of 15% means you are “average,” and getting the bills paid and keeping the roof over your head. You want to be in the money (1,2,3) 50% of the time as well. Upwards of that is getting good, with 20% meaning you are doing really well and anything 25% or more is pretty hot. To be at 30% consistently with a large number of runners is unusual and sparks lots of rumors.

The win percentage really doesn’t reflect the level of horsemanship. A lot goes into picking the right race for your horse, and there are a lot of good horsemen who are not so great race pickers, and therefore not so very successful race horse trainers. And there are some not so great horsemen who make a decent living because they can read the condition book.

I think with tightening up the medication rules, maybe we will see more better horsemen being successful since they will have fewer tools to maintain the horse. Maybe.

[skydy]

LaurieB I hope you’ll keep us up to date on your filly on the breeding forum. She’s wonderful.

[ASB_Stars]

@LaurieB

Thank you!

One day old filly with her dam: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2152556851498990&set=a.116507338437295&type=3&theater

[End of hijack! Thank you for all the good wishes. ]

She is adorable!

[Where_sMyWhite]

PB, thanks. I was just looking for the word ‘win’ in conjunction with the % number as I wasn’t sure what the % was of what

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Another question about the win percentage - when you all are speaking about big trainers who are up near 30% in terms of winning percentage at major tracks, do smaller field sizes factor into distorting that percentage in a significant way?

Essentially, would successful trainers at a track with consistently smaller field sizes possibly have a better than average win percentage by virtue of basic statistics?

Please, don’t mistake this for me thinking that an honest trainer, who is a great horseman with a small barn will go from a 15% to 30% just by virtue of small field sizes… I’m just curious if it is a factor to take into account.

Additionally… I have a what is admittedly an ignorant “chicken or egg” question… but thought it might not hurt to pose it. Which came first - smaller field sizes at Santa Anita (and any other obvious major tracks that come to mind for knowledgeable folks), or 30% trainers at the top of the sport? It’s probably a hard thing to answer in simple terms though… multiple factors are in play.

As for laminitis… corticosteroids can play a role. Though the risk is low in a horse that is getting joint injections on a “normal” schedule, but we all are aware that joint injections can be abused. Additionally, the low risk of steroids inducing laminitis also assumes that a horse has no other risk factors such as hypothyroidism. Hypothyroidism is very unusual in horses… especially young horses. And is a known risk for laminitis all on its own, but even more so when combined with steroids. Cobalt chloride even at low levels is known to induce hypothyroidism…

[DarkBayUnicorn]

![](nterestingly, this just came in as part of an email from Equestrian Canada regarding new medications rules:
[TABLE=“border: 0, cellpadding: 0, cellspacing: 0”]
[TR]
[TD]Bisphosphonates Testing

		Clodronate and tiludronate are the only bisphosphonates approved for use in horses (aged four and older) in Canada. No other bisphosphonate is licensed for use in horses in Canada. EC recognizes the importance these drugs can have in the treatment of lameness and will follow the Canadian Pari-Mutual Agency's (CPMA) Elimination Guideline of 30 days for horses four years of age and older, which aligns with withdrawal periods previously set for these drugs by the British Horseracing Authority and the FEI.

		In 2019, testing will occur at all levels of EC sanctioned competitions for clodronate (OSPHOS®), tiludronate (TILDREN®) and all other bisphosphonates.

		For horses aged four (4) and over, a positive test to clodronate or tiludronate will result in a published warning letter. Starting in 2020, it will result in a Class 3 medication violation.

		For 2019 and beyond, the use of clodronate or tiludronate in a horse under four (4) years of age, or the use of any other bisphosphonate in a horse of any age, is prohibited and any positive test will result in a Class 3 medication violation.[/TD]
	[/TR]

[/TABLE]
[TABLE=“border: 0, cellpadding: 0, cellspacing: 0”]
[TR]
[TD] [TABLE=“border: 0, cellpadding: 0, cellspacing: 0”]
[TR]
[TD][IMG]https://ci4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/-SJioF6vHfgXkLULZIrGLPH0zp5ajR0umcXVOe_J1KWTsRLvz5XrDaVRsoj83vobTwCFB60AUiz0YZ4yoFXZiNrcKxnhpnm0cxeqWtUaxFbHOtzsvBEkQU3ffyu8KjkzrBUA2r-gDezo0dbfVbx3_yiuMqsxv4dbuTfB1jkDBuo3mYOX8YtP26WsgU2FGjpmKcp-YqdmlwnmKteMJoIusGRP7BJIo-pmn0xI_NgkHnpw8xE=s0-d-e1-ft#https://cdn.cyberimpact.com/clients/23337/public/de86c494-dea1-4f37-8545-65264720a059/image/2019/April_2019/Equine_Meds_Biophosphonates_Table.jpg?1554915347997)[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE=“border: 0, cellpadding: 0, cellspacing: 0”]
[TR]
[TD]Further information on clodronate, tiludronate and other bisphosphonates can be found in the ECbisphosphonate fact sheet.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[skydy]

No crop day has been canceled. https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/233017/santa-anita-riders-will-use-riding-crops-april-12

[Palm_Beach]

@Virginia Horse Mom - smaller fields can affect the win percentage because you have fewer horses to beat, but that is due to small foal crops over the past decade. The win % probably has more to do with fewer horses to distribute among trainers. The winning trainers can charge more and get better horses, and can handle having XXX horses in training at any given time. Over time, that number of horses became a bigger % of a reduced foal crop, so there were fewer horses to distribute among the rest of the trainers, and fewer opportunities to get a good horse. Kind of like life - they were good at the right time and were able to withstand the contraction of the horse population, where smaller trainers went out of business.

[betonbill]

How’s the weather out there? Has it gotten drier, or is it the same wet surface? Anything to compare with how it was before?

[Where_sMyWhite]

@betonbill

How’s the weather out there? Has it gotten drier, or is it the same wet surface? Anything to compare with how it was before?

In Arcadia now?

Track appears to be in fine condition. Maybe a bit on the slow side time wise. Track rated as fast. Don’t think they’ve seen any rain for a while now.