@paw, I’ve felt that way ever since Royal Kaliber got hurt jumping in footing Chris Kapler was worried about.
1 Like
Is it just me, or is that a bit unhinged?
34 Likes
Typical quality of that person, IMO.
7 Likes
She asks if we would be having the same conversation. Well, Duh. We are having this conversation because the horse died! His groom would know everything the horse was used to getting and all the therapies, standard and not, that were used to manage the horse. He was pretty sure the horse should not be getting anything. Enough that he tried to get the owner involved before it happened. KMFSH may have some super secret insider info, but I’d be willing to bet it is not more than the groom.
Her imagining of having this same conversation if he won makes no sense.
16 Likes
I’ve seen other comments online indicating that the selevit injection might have acted as a masking agent.
Is there any veterinary truth to that?
Sure it does, the clear inference is that the horse’s own vet was in regular consultation with the treating vet about the course of treatment this particular horse needed to ensure he passed the jog the next day.
As far as we know it’s speculation on the part of the poster, not fact. Speculation just like the idea that all meds were lumped into one 60cc! syringe, except that assumption beggars the imagination. This assumption absolutely tracks at the upper levels.
What also tracks is that if a particular horse has a history of getting held or spun in FEI jogs, that horse’s management team has a program unique to that horse to ensure it doesn’t happen, most especially at WC. And that program will be shared with the treating vet. (And because this is COTH full of cothness, I must clarify that I have no idea if this horse was ever held or spun, I’m just pointing out what would likely happen if that was the case, as the original poster on that thread stated he was).
What seems off is the owner’s explanation, while the one laid out in the comments seems more consistent with the way things are. Team vets aren’t interested in changing the program unless it results in a positive test. If the program (whatever you may think of the ethical aspect) got that horse to that level, qualified for the team, why would the team vet want to tinker with it? Of course, in speculation land, it could happen… but does it sound right? And maybe it’s something as tragic as a miscommunication or language barrier between her vet and the treating vet over the phone (always a great place to not get it right)?
Nevertheless, even though every shot has some risk of anaphylactic shock, it’s tough (impossible) to square the risk/reward of injectable E-Se and I feel for his connections.
7 Likes
That part I found worth exploring. Are we only outraged at the number and type of injections because the horse died?
If the horse was alive and the owner said "my horse won but he got all these unnecessary and potentially deadly injections without my permission " would we be as outraged? Is winning what makes the difference between excessive and what it takes to compete at this level?
4 Likes
I don’t believe that the comments indicated selevit helped the horse pass the jog.
I think the implication was that the horse was receiving a hefty regimen of legal medications… and it was questionable as to whether or not it would pass a jog without it. And the owner’s more recent comments about not knowing anything about any of the other meds in the horse’s system that were listed on the necropsy report? Those comments are being called into question, to a certain extent.
Anyway… it is a super sad situation. It does seem possible to me that the horse was getting a hefty amount of legal meds to pass jogs and continue competing at this level … which is understandably its own topic of discussion and concern … but also that the horse received the IV selevit injection post ride in Riyadh, and died from anaphylactic shock in conjunction with that injection.
1 Like
I think people are expressing concerns because we now know about it. If the horse didn’t have any adverse effects, it wouldn’t make the news and none of us would know. One of the articles mentioned at least 2 other horses got the same or similar treatment (unclear if it was just talking about the E-Se or all of it) and were fine. But did they disclose which horses these were? No. And that tidbit is only mentioned to try to push the EIPH story, like it couldn’t be the injections because all 3 horses didn’t die. 
I do find it interesting how the USEF is doubling down. Remember when they decided to ban Depo Provera all of a sudden because some people were coming forward with stories of horses having anaphylactic reactions and dying sometimes following the injections? Without any data on the compounding pharmacies or anything. People used it to enhance performance (mood) without any clear scientific support and some horses died. So now on the banned list. But they are fine using something else that has been known for decades to be high risk and for seemingly off label use for questionable benefit assuming these horses receive adequate diets.
6 Likes
Oh boy. More comments from KMSFH on FB.
1 Like
It is a bold accusation that the owner is lying about the horse being sound and not needing medications and that the home vet was involved.
Why would the groom call the owner if that was the case? A groom is not likely to know possible reactions of certain meds (would most of us?) So it wouldn’t be concern over one particular medication. That part of the narrative doesn’t line up with the FB comments.
13 Likes
I would guess it would have stayed in house, because there would be nothing to tell, really. I assume she still would have wanted to know what and why and who decided, just as she does now. If he had won, it wouldn’t have been a shock or surprise. But, the horse died. I mean, that is leagues out of what is expected to happen. KMFSH makes a deal out of the home vet being on the phone with the team vet, when I would think that would be SOP for every horse. But once again, the person who probably knows the most about that horse’s management didn’t think he should be doing anything but chilling in his stall.
3 Likes
It’s definitely a bold accusation. I concur.
I read the articles, but didn’t key in on the portion about the groom. I’ll have to go back and re-read to see what to make of that.
The whole situation is tragic. And I can definitely understand an owner who is also a breeder being distraught after suddenly losing a horse in these circumstances. But… there are a few puzzle pieces that are just not making sense to me. And… there is some lack of clarity in statements, and conflicting statements, and that also gives me pause.
Ugggh. If nothing else, I hope this raises awareness of the risks of selevit/E-Se.
1 Like
I thought I read somewhere that the “other meds” were discovered in his bloodstream during necropsy and that Branscomb said she wasn’t aware they had been given until those test results came back. Did I misread or was that a misinterpretation on the author’s part? (And danged if I can remember where I saw that info!)
2 Likes
Typically people supplement with ESe to help with muscle soreness and a muscle sore horse won’t present at his best. If someone believed that the injectable version was better than the oral version, I can see the connection.
Standard coth disclaimer - doesn’t make it ethical or actually effective, just an observation on human nature.
3 Likes
I didn’t think this was a decision made solely by the vet. I was thinking more about the management members of the team.
I also think if these things were part of his normal treatment plan, the horse’s people would not be so vociferous about it, because if there is a lawsuit, there is no doubt his previous vet records would be part of that.
15 Likes
Based on the owners posts she was unaware of the other meds. It is still unclear if those meds were all given at once in multiple or one giant syringe or over a period of time. The FB poster implies that the owner is lying about the horse being sound and not knowing about medications. Or implying that the home vet was at least aware and in communication w the team vet.
Is it possible someone besides the owner was calling the shots about previous injections? I am well aware that in some barns the vet only deals w the trainer and not the owner. All speculation of course.
3 Likes
But wasn’t this was the first time the horse competed in the multi day format that is WC? I can see that the program could have been modified for that due to the multiple jogs that aren’t typical in a week to week style FEI competition… I wonder if there were consultations between vets, again entirely typical, and they decided to do another pre jog treatment program to ensure a good outcome at the second jog and the ONE person there who should have been notified wasn’t?
I don’t know what happened, but the whole idea of a treating vet arbitrarily changing a program just does not quite sound right. I mean it sounds good when you want to make a villain, but somehow I suspect the truth is somewhere in between and far sadder than just having a good old fashioned villain.
2 Likes
Maybe in the COTH article?
Here’s a few key paragraphs:
“About an hour and a half after the last of the awards ceremony, about two hours after the class, I get a call from [Chromatic’s longtime groom Pepe Rodriguez],” Branscomb, Half Moon Bay, California, said. “He was worried and upset that they were asking him to bring the horse to the vet station. We had been very clear earlier in the week nothing be done to him without [permission from] me personally or my veterinarian, who was not in Riyadh but available by phone. He was concerned because I hadn’t told him the horse was getting a shot.”
Owners must sign a horse participation agreement with USEF when their horse participates in an international competition representing the U.S. That agreement effectively requires owners to loan their horse to the USEF and that, “[f]or purposes of horse welfare, by signing this Agreement the horse owner(s) give their full permission to the USEF and its agents to administer medication to their horse(s) in the interest of the horse(s) welfare and well-being during the loan period.”
Branscomb said she was not consulted before her horse received the injection, which she was told was 20 cc of Selevit. She was upset to learn in the horse’s post-mortem report that he also had Legend, Adequan, Traumeel and arnica in his system, which were drugs she was not aware he had been administered. All are typically used to address joint pain, and none are prohibited substances under Fédération Equestre Internationale rules.
As soon as Branscomb received Rodriguez’s phone call, she headed to the barn, she said. She arrived just after Chromatic had received the injection and been walked from the veterinary station to the crossties, where Rodriguez started wrapping him. As she fed him carrots there, Chromatic suddenly screamed and collapsed, then began seizing, she said. FEI and USEF veterinarians attended to him immediately, but efforts to revive the gelding were unsuccessful.
…
Branscomb, who received the final necropsy report Monday, June 10, was upset to see the list of medications present in Chromatic’s blood, and said she is angry that Ulibarri did not disclose the full slate of medications Chromatic was administered on the evening of April 18, even after repeated questioning. While she initially believed him to be contrite, she now feels she was deliberately misled.
She also noted that the post-mortem report, completed by the pathology department at King Faisal University in Saudi Arabia, contained factual errors (for example, it states that the horse competed on April 18 and 19, while the actual dates were April 17 and 18), inconsistencies in the timeline, and typos.
USEF is wrong to be emphasizing the possibility that Chromatic’s death was caused by exercise-associated fatal pulmonary hemorrhage, she said, when it was at least an hour and a half between the end of competition and the horse’s death and the horse wasn’t showing signs of distress in the interim. She thinks it’s much more likely that the injection administered minutes before the horse’s collapse led to his death.
In the aftermath of Chromatic’s death, and before receiving the final reports on it, Branscomb worked with senior officials at the USEF to revamp the Horse Participation Agreement. In the new draft, called the United States Equestrian Federation Inc. Horse Participation Consent Agreement, owners don’t loan their horses to the USEF.
The new document also addresses another of Branscomb’s concerns: Who is in charge of medicating a horse in non-emergency situations? As it stands today, she said, the decision to administer the Selevit and the other medications lay completely with the USEF veterinarian. She compared the situation to flying an airplane, saying that there’s always a co-pilot in case of a mistake, and pointed out in this situation there was no co-pilot to weigh in on whether the horse should have received non-emergency medication.
According to the new draft, the athlete—who is considered the “person responsible” by the FEI—must sign off on all non-emergency medications.
Branscomb is now considering legal action against the USEF.
7 Likes
As I said, I thought more the team management personnel, rather than the vet alone. But two people weren’t informed. The owner and the groom. The owner also made these statements after consultation, I am assuming, with her home vet.
6 Likes
