Who's Next..... Isabell Werth suspended for using Fluphenazine

If IW was trying to make a statement about the FEI’s NFS policy

OH good grief I guess this is the newest theory on the internet. If she wanted to make a statement why would she not say so. I doubt very much she would risk her career and irritate her sponsor in that way.
Sponsors aren’t going to give the ride on their fantastic horses to people who are banned from showing. She knows that.

When she flipped the finger at the FN it was about keeping a log of medications at home, not about this.

She is at the very top of the sport and it’s all in jeopardy now for her. It seems she admits she took a calculated risk based on advice from her vet and she has taken responsibility for that and not blamed others. She will have a suspension and be under a cloud for a long time .

What more do people want.

Modecate is definately long lasting and most certainly used on horses who need to chill out. I have no personal experience with it but I have heard a few horror stories of horses having adverse reactions to it ect.

[QUOTE=egontoast;4192732]
OH good grief I guess this is the newest theory on the internet. If she wanted to make a statement why would she not say so. I doubt very much she would risk her career and irritate her sponsor in that way.
Sponsors aren’t going to give the ride on their fantastic horses to people who are banned from showing. She knows that.

When she flipped the finger at the FN it was about keeping a log of medications at home, not about this.

She is at the very top of the sport and it’s all in jeopardy now for her. It seems she admits she took a calculated risk based on advice from her vet and she has taken responsibility for that and not blamed others. She will have a suspension and be under a cloud for a long time .

What more do people want.[/QUOTE]

High trees catch a lot of wind, So they probably want to hang her on one of this high trees. Even in Germany they want her to be send to place in Cuba :cool::wink:

The German Inquisition Members are already sharpening their blades.

Let her come to the USA, then. There are plenty of people here who would be perfectly happy to work with her. And I’m sure if she got a note from her Mom, the USEF would be very happy to have her coach our team, except that I don’t think they can afford her.

You might want to brush up on your USEF reading. Some of us are basing our arguments on documentation issued by a governing body. 90 days isn’t pulled out of a hat, nor was the concept that the old 45 day guidelines were inadequate based on personal observations. I can’t say for sure why the old 45 day recommendation was changed to 90 after a few more positives came up, but either the USEF has a dartboard to develop the guidelines or a few horses flunked the 45 day option and the guidelines were modified.

Ummm slc, it can’t have escaped your notice that horses and people are pretty different. You can’t compare the metabolic response of schizophrenics to horses with any accuracy.

And to clarify my earlier comment, I was responding to the FU to the FN comment Fixerupper made. I seriously doubt that is what she was doing. The use of flu-phen is controversial enough in the US where we do allow some medication of horses. If IW were trying to make a statement, it would have been foolish to pick that drug.

I think it is more likely that she has been medicating the horse and showing under her vet’s protocol for a while and something different happened now. Possibly something at the testing facility changed that caused the sample to come up positive. Maybe they hired a tech that handles samples a little differently or bought a new chromatograph or mass spectrometer. Who knows … But because of the way this drug is (well) known to work with horses, the “I was treating the horse for shivers so it could stand for the farrier” argument doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. It sounds too much like the “I had to Ace my horse for the trailer ride” excuse.

WPOM? Listen, Helen, I am quite sure that just as much as different humans react very differently to these drugs, an animal with a completely different brain structure would ALSO have a far different reaction again, I have mentioned the lack of research data several times (but did find six items on pubmed about adverse reactions, one about positive effects of fluphenazine on fescue toxicity, and several other articles on using fluphenazine on wild animals). I don’t even think the animal has the midbrain and forebrain structures (some of the structures horses have, but I really do not think to the exact same results) these drugs act on. I said that quite early on in this.

I am no Beerbaum (if he really said ‘whatever I can do to enhance performance undetected is fine’), I’m much closer to one of those Mr. Natural types if you need to know (I intensely dislike ALL the psychiatric drugs, if you must know, and consider them not ‘a great thing’ and not a ‘gift’, but quite imperfect and worthy of intense respect and caution), and I am NOT in favor of people medicating horses to enhance their performance, and I am NOT on ‘Isabel’s side’ in this, but I’m not hysterically angry at her either, mostly because I feel there’s a great deal going on that we have no idea about.

Just because I’m not beating my chest about it, don’t assume I actually like any of this. I retired my own horse rather than give in to medicating or doing risky surgery, I am NOT in favor of doing anything extreme to get a few more miles out of a horse. Saying that riders are put in a bad position by the demands of owners, competition organizers or trainers, doesn’t mean I also think it’s perfectly fine for them to ride the snot out of an old horse with medical problems just to get to go to the WEG again, either.

I would like, in principle, for riders to be able to maintain horses that have chronic medical conditions and compete, but only if it can be done without giving cheaters an advantage or becoming a detriment to the horses (detriment currently or making their future less comfortable). I would prefer not to see older horses warmed up at a walk and underworked before a major competition, too, but I don’t think the answer to that problem is to allow medication, I think the answer is to say enough already and retire the horse.

I am not sure if it is actually possible to allow people to medicate horses and still control cheating. I am afraid those who don’t have a legitimate medical need will use such rules to their own advantage.

I said very early on in this that there is no guarantee that human and horses react to this medication exactly the same way, and that I imagined it’s possible that the horse has been in this sort of program for quite some time.

Isabel said, I think, that this horse has had the medication, once or twice. It’s quite possible that the first time, it was not detected or the horse just was not shown during that time.

whose vet was he?

Is the vet the team vet, or one hired elusively :eek:by her? One sight reported it was two years has this been confirmed? It will speak volumes if she keeps this vet.

no need to make this a personal issue or take this personally, slc. Maybe your posts about how the drug works with humans was a non sequitor. I apologize if I misinterpreted your input.

If you don’t like what IW did, don’t seek explanations for it or defend it-pretty simple that.

Personally, I am in favor of supporting healthy competition horses, in ways that don’t compromise them, so they can reach their potential. That means if they are sore from an intense work out, I don’t have a problem with giving them an analgesic. Or if giving them Adequan will prevent arthritis - good. But if a horse that has a “medical condition”, it should be treated and given the time to heal or retired. Otherwise they are unsuitable for competition. We owe them that. There is no middle ground, IMO.

I think you are making a lot of assumptions based on what I wrote, Helen.

“Don’t look for explanations”.

Sorry, I believe I am allowed to look for explanations.

I am, I believe, still allowed to wonder, here, and to consider different sides of the issue, even when I don’t agree with them. If you are assuming that because I don’t sound absolutely furious, that I am in favor of drugging horses for competitive success, I can assure you you are assuming too much.

slc, you are allowed do anything you like. And you are assuming I am furious. I am not.

But you can’t have it both ways. It is reasonable to conclude that because you defend someone’s behavior and offer explanations for them, you support their actions. :wink:

If I am have mis-interpreted you please correct me.

I took Fixerupper’s FU comment to be tongue in cheek. (As was mine)

IW trying to make a (FU) statement to the FN is at least as credible as
IW believing a “well-known” vet that flu-phen would be a credible drug choice to use on a small tour horse that had issues standing for the farrier AND would not test several weeks out or whatever.

OR that IW would be willing to take that chance given the current atmosphere and ultra sensitive drug testing capabilitites since HK.

I took Fixerupper’s FU comment to be totally tongue in cheek. (As was mine) :winkgrin:

IW trying to make a (FU) statement to the FN is at least as credible as
IW believing a “well-known” vet that flu-phen would be a credible drug choice to use on a small tour horse that had issues standing for the farrier AND would not test several weeks out or whatever.

OR that IW would be willing to take that chance given the current atmosphere and ultra sensitive drug testing capabilitites since HK.

Hard to believe that IW was duped into anything…

Thanks for that :yes:

the rest…pretty inexplicable…

[QUOTE=class;4188892]
somehow you missed the other 4 pages where it was discussed extensively what the horse’s problem was and what the drug was administered for.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I skimmed lots of it, I’m so busy most of the time, I hardly have time to read all the posts. Frankly, I do not know how people have the time to worry so much over other people’s problems. I have my own life. :frowning:

and you are posting…why???

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

You’re good.

It would be unwise to assume the pharmacokinetics are identical in humans and horses.

In any case, I’d not be in the least surprised that any medication in an oil suspension would be within detectable limits a couple of weeks post administration.

Too, most of the people I know who take the injections, are completely psychotic after 2 weeks. They go from being absolutely pole axed on day one to completely psychotic in 2 weeks. It doesn’t stay with most people for a month, at least not in my experience.

You had better email this highly important and relevant information to IW and her vet as quickly as possible. They may wish to use you as an expert witness.

uh, slc, notwithstanding the foolishness of comparing horse rxn to human rxn, the issue isn’t whether it works 2 weeks after administration or not. It’s whether it is detectable in x days, clearly it IS detectable in 14 days. And 30 days. And 45 days. And quite possibly longer if one is to go by the written documentation available in this country, at least.