by PEC 10 Replies latest jw friends
Some say the race horses are treated better the humans. Some may be, others are being injected with cobra venom.
http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/2007/02/saratoga_invest.html
http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=1073024&boardsparam=Page%3d1
http://www.equinelawsafety.org/case/racing/25
http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/ky-commission-impotent-over-blood-doping/
It is used as a pain killer. It isn't given in amounts large enough to kill or even make the horse sick. that being said, I do agree that there are better things to use for pain. The substance is banned almost everywhere and anyone caught with it faces stiff penalties.
In the 'what will they think of next' category falls this story from the Saratogian.com. Appears there is a horse doping scandal at the big race track in New York. In the past we reported on steroids found in trotters and sprinters. Saratoga is focusing on two other drugs: cobra venom (CTX) and an EPO-like compound.
The New York Post said Monday that horses were injected with painkilling cobra venom and Epogen, a drug that produces red blood-cells, increasing oxygen levels to make horses go faster.
Epogen would increase the number of red blood cells, increasing the oxygen carrying capacity of the horse's circulatory system.
Cobra venom? For pain? Reports indicate this is true. The cobra toxin, CTX, can produce a long term opioid-like analgesic effect that is mediated through central cholinergic activity, not opioid receptors. We would suspect that this compound would also avoid detection by anti-doping tests, tests that would nail an opioid in the horse's system.
In the end this could be deadly. The venom disrupts the neuromuscular junctions involved in human respiration by reacting with the receptor sites in place of the acetylcholine molecules, thus blocking the receptor sites. That would effectively shut down the horses lungs. (a curare-like action to paralyze the muscles of respiration)
t's believed that cobra venom, which blocks pain, was obtained from sources in Florida, the newspaper said. The substance can be injected directly over a nerve or into a horse's joint to deaden pain.
Epogen is designed to treat anemia for people with chronic kidney ailments on dialysis or cancer patients. The prescription drug was developed by Amgen of Thousand Oaks, Calif. and can only be taken as an injection.
By the way, more investigations into harness racing doping, reported here.
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania (2009) Doping trainer received due process
Vaders v. Pennsylvania State Horse Racing Comm?n
Doping trainer received due process
Vaders v. Pennsylvania State Horse Racing Comm?n
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
2008 WL 5473629
Jan. 9, 2009
Summary of the Case
Vaders? owner/trainer license was revoked by the Board of Stewards.? One of her horses tested positive for 2-1 (Hydroxyethyl) Promazine Sulfoxide after winning a race at the Philadelphia Park Racetrack.? After the ruling was issued, she was warned that if she got another positive test result her license would be revoked.? The next year, another one of her horses won a race at Philadelphia Park and tested positive for the same substance, and for Acepromazine.? The sample was confirmed by two labs.? The court found that Vaders was offered sufficient due process at her administrative hearing, and upheld the ruling.?
Text of the Case
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.
Jayne VADERS, Petitioner
v.
PENNSYLVANIA STATE HORSE RACING COMMISSION, Respondent.
No. 703 C.D.2008.
Argued Dec. 8, 2008. FN1
FN1. Argued seriately with Jayne Vaders v. Pennsylvania State Horse Racing Comm'n (704 C.D.2008, filed January 9, 2009).
Decided Jan. 9, 2009.
Alan Pincus, Las Vegas, NV, for appellant.
Jorge M. Augusto, Asst. Counsel, Harrisburg, for appellee.
BEFORE: FRIEDMAN, Judge FN2 SIMPSON, Judge, and JOHNNY J. BUTLER, Judge.
FN2. The decision in this case was reached before January 1, 2009, when Judge Friedman assumed the status of senior judge.
OPINION BY Judge BUTLER.
Jayne Vaders (Vaders) petitions for review of the April 16, 2008 State Horse Racing Commission (Commission) order affirming the Board of Stewards' (Stewards) Ruling No. 07128PP, in which her owner/trainer license was revoked. The issue in this case is whether Vaders' due process rights were violated because the Commission: a) would not turn over documents related to the charges against her; b) failed to allow the introduction of mitigating evidence; c) selectively applied 58 Pa.Code ? 163.316; and d) redistributed Fourteentwentyone's purse money without first conducting a hearing.
Vaders trains and/or owns 35-45 horses stabled at Philadelphia Park Racetrack. On August 26, 2006, the Stewards issued Ruling No. 06299PP against Vaders after determining that her horse Idol Gina had tested positive for 2-1 (Hydroxyethyl) Promazine Sulfoxide after winning the fifth race on April 11, 2006. After issuing the ruling, the Stewards sat down with Vaders, explained that she was getting too many positives, and warned that if she got another positive test result, her license would be revoked.
On February 4, 2007, Vaders' horse, Fourteentwentyone, won the second race at Philadelphia Park. Consistent with Commission procedures, following the race, blood and urine samples were taken from Fourteentwentyone for drug testing. FN3 Fourteentwentyone tested positive for 2-1 (Hydroxyethyl) Promazine Sulfoxide and Acepromazine; 2-1 (Hydroxyethyl) Promazine Sulfoxide is a metabolite of Acepromazine, a Class III drug used as a therapeutic drug. Even though the drugs were found in the horse's system on race day, it could not be determined whether they were administered on that day. Once the blood and urine samples are tested by the Pennsylvania Equine Toxicology Laboratory (Commonwealth's lab), a trainer may choose to have a split sample sent to another lab to verify the testing. Vaders exercised her right to send a split sample to another lab. The second lab confirmed that the drugs were in the horse's system. A report was completed by a Commission investigator and sent to the Stewards to determine if a hearing should be held. The purse money for the second race on February 4, 2007 was redistributed on March 10, 2007 by Ruling No. 07088PP. FN4
FN3. Every horse that wins a race is tested, along with approximately five other horses each race day. Notes of Testimony, November 16, 2007 (N.T.), at 10; Reproduced Record (R.R.) at 19a.
FN4. The redistribution of purse money is a matter separate from the action taken against the trainer.
A hearing was held before the Stewards on April 13, 2007, based on the positive test result for Fourteentwentyone. The Stewards determined that Vaders violated 58 Pa.Code ?? 163.302(a)(1)-(2), 163.303(a)-(c), 163.309, and 163.521(f) (Commission's regulations). Vaders' attorney made a written request for documentation from the Commission of data packs from its lab, all investigative reports, and any other documents relevant to the proceedings. The Commission never provided this information. The Stewards, in a ruling issued April 28, 2007, revoked Vaders' license, effective May 8, 2007, under the authority of Section 163.316 of the Commission's regulations. On May 2, 2007, Vaders appealed the Stewards' decision to the Commission and requested supersedeas, which was granted. A hearing was held in front of the Commission's hearing officer on November 16, 2007. The hearing officer affirmed the Stewards' decision. Vaders appealed to this Court. FN5
FN5.?This Court's scope of review of an adjudication of the Commission is limited to a determination of whether constitutional rights were violated, whether findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence of record, or whether an error of law has been committed.? Monaci v. State Horse Racing Comm'n, 717 A.2d 612, 616 n. 15 (Pa.Cmwlth.1998).
Vaders argues that the Commission violated her due process rights by refusing her attorney's request for discovery which would have provided mitigating evidence, by selectively enforcing 58 Pa.Code ? 163.316 against her, and by redistributing her horse's purse money without first affording her a hearing. In an administrative hearing, due process requires, at a minimum, notice and the opportunity to be heard. See Section 504 of the Administrative Agency Law, 2 Pa.C.S. ? 504; Grossman v. State Bd. of Psychology, 825 A.2d 748 (Pa.Cmwlth.2003); and Gruff v. Dep't of State, 913 A.2d 1008 (Pa.Cmwlth.2006). Further, discovery, as provided for in the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure for court proceedings, is not made available in administrative proceedings, and Rule 35.142(a) of the General Rules of Administrative Practice and Procedure (Administrative Rules) FN6 allows parties to request subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses or production of documents upon written application to the agency's head or oral application at a hearing. Weinberg v. Ins. Dep't, 398 A.2d 1120 (Pa.Cmwlth.1979).
FN6.1 Pa.Code ? 35.142(a).
Vaders' attorney made informal requests through letters to the Commission for documents related to her case, but the Commission refused to provide any information, stating that it has a policy not to grant discovery in any of its hearings. Notes of Testimony, November 16, 2007 (N.T.), Ex. A-1; Reproduced Record (R.R.) at 193a-199a. Vaders claims that by failing to provide her with the information, ?[t]he Commission's policy effectively precluded [Vaders] from presenting evidence and arguments to counter the Commission's contention that her owner/trainer's license should be revoked for violations of the Commission regulations.?Appellant's Br. at 8. However, Vaders' burden was to rebut the presumptions created under Sections 163.303(b) and 163.315 of the Commission's regulations which provide, inter alia, that a positive test finding is prima facie evidence that a foreign substance was in the horse while it participated in a race. Knowing the concentration levels that were present in Fourteentwentyone would not help her rebut the presumption that there was a foreign substance in her horse on race day.
Section 163.303(a) of the Commission's regulations states: ?A horse participating in a race may not carry in its body a substance except as provided in ? 163.304 (relating to substances of therapeutic value).? In Section 163.304 of the Commission's regulations, the Commission has established tolerance levels for a select few therapeutic drugs; Acepromazine is not one of them. 58 Pa.Code ? 163.304. There is no provision in the Commission's regulations that the concentration of a drug in a horse's system could mitigate a licensee's liability. Vaders does not deny that the drug was found in her horse's system. FN7 In addition, Vaders' attorney did have the ability to obtain the informally requested documents through the subpoena process available under Rule 35.142(a) of the Administrative Rules, but failed to use this course of action.
FN7. The only evidence Vaders presented was her testimony explaining her racing record, that she was never given documents by the Commission, and that she was not with her horses at all times on race day; and the testimony of Michael Ballezzi, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association, concerning his ?campaign? to get the Commission to change its ?discovery? policy. N.T. at 69-79, 90-92; R.R. at 78a-88a, 99a-101a.
Next, Vaders argues that the Commission abused its discretion by selectively enforcing 58 Pa.Code ? 163.316 against Vaders because it had never utilized that regulation to revoke a license in the past. Section 163.316 of the Commission's regulations provides:
An owner or trainer who once having been suspended for a violation of this chapter ... and who is thereafter found guilty of a further violation by this Commission ... shall be considered guilty of a second offense, and the owner or trainer or both shall be ruled off the tracks in this Commonwealth.
Vaders contends that Meyer v. Pennsylvania State Horse Racing Comm'n, 456 A.2d 1164 (Pa.Cmwlth.1983), should rule in this case. In Meyer, the owner of a horse that placed second in a race contested the penalty assessed to the horse that placed first in that race after a prohibited substance was found in its system. Id. Meyer contended that the Commission abused its discretion because it did not disqualify the winning horse. Id. The Court found that, because the Commission's regulations stated that penalties may include one or more of a list of sanctions, the Commission did not abuse its discretion when it did not disqualify the winning horse from the purse money. Id. The Stewards in Meyer took into consideration the expert testimony of a professor of veterinary science and toxicology, who indicated that the level of drugs in the winning horse's system would not affect the horse's performance.Id.
In the present case, one of the Stewards testified that, in issuing Ruling No. 06299PP, dated August 26, 2006, Vaders was warned, both in writing and in a face-to-face discussion with the Stewards, that another positive test result would result in the revocation of her racing license. N.T. at 44; R.R. at 53a. He testified that between 2003 and 2007, Vaders had five or six positives, and they sat her down and told her she needed to change whatever she was doing. N.T. at 45; R.R. at 54a. Vaders did not appeal Ruling No. 06299PP, nor did she argue, at that time, that the Stewards information on her record was incorrect. N.T. at 45-46; R.R. at 54a-55a. This Steward testified that the Stewards had never enforced 58 Pa.Code ? 163.316 before because they never had a trainer or owner with as many violations as Vaders. N.T. at 46; R.R. at 55a. In addition, the Steward testified that they had never revoked a trainer's license at Philadelphia Park Racetrack before Vaders' revocation. N.T. at 47; R.R. at 56a. Even though the regulation calls for revocation after two positives, the Stewards did not revoke Vaders license until she had accumulated seven positive test results. The testifying Steward defended their action stating they wanted to be fair to Vaders and that if they revoked every trainer's license after two positives, there would 25% less trainers licensed by the Commission. N.T. at 46, 62-63; R.R. at 55a, 71a-72a. The Stewards had never encountered another trainer with as many positive test results as Vaders had, and they had given her a warning in a ruling prior to her revocation that she had to make changes or face losing her license. Therefore, the Stewards did not abuse their discretion, and the holding in Meyer does not compel a different result.
Finally, Vaders complains that the purse money was redistributed without holding a hearing. However, the Stewards' ruling which redistributed the purse money is not the ruling being appealed in the present case. The ruling which redistributed the purse money was Ruling No. 07088PP, dated March 10, 2007. N.T., Ex. C-10; R.R. at 2a. The ruling being appealed is Ruling No. 07128PP, dated April 28, 2007. N.T., Ex. C-10, C-11; R.R. at 2a, 4a. Vaders never appealed the purse distribution ruling and cannot do so as a part of this appeal.
Vaders was entitled to notice and the opportunity to be heard. The evidence shows that she received both. Therefore, the Commission did not violate Vaders' due process rights. Vaders made no attempt to introduce evidence or testimony that she did not violate the Commission's regulations; nor did she ever deny that there were banned substances found in her horse.
Based on the reasons stated above, the Commission's order is affirmed.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 9th day of January, 2009, the April 16, 2008 order of the Pennsylvania State Horse Racing Commission is hereby affirmed.
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Tuesday, May 6th 2008, 10:29 PM
TRENTON - Six harness racing horses have tested positive for performance-enhancing substances under expanded testing protocols in New Jersey, state racing officials said Tuesday.
New Jersey Racing Commission Executive Director Frank Zanzuccki said laboratory tests confirmed that the six horses under the care of trainer Ernest Adam and owned by Stephen C. Slender had tested positive for the performance-enhancing drug Erythropoietin-Human, also known as EPO.
The six horses have been declared ineligible to compete in New Jersey, consistent with the rules of the Racing Commission's new "out-of-competition" testing initiative.
Launched late last year, the new program allows the commission to test horses for illegal substances not only at racetracks but also at horse farms, and at any time. Previously, the commission was only authorized to conduct testing of horses on race day, and only at New Jersey's four racetracks.
Slender, of Del Mar, Calif., did not immediately return either a telephone call or an e-mail left by The Associated Press seeking comment.
The state racing commission did not have a telephone number for Adam of Clarksburg. He is not listed in telephone directory assistance.
Acting on a tip, Zanzuccki said racing commission officials tested the horses at Winner's International Farm in Chesterfield in Burlington County last month, and New Jersey State Police on Tuesday searched the farm where the six horses were being kept.
Adam, who has 46 wins in 208 starts this year, stables his horses at Winner's International Farm.
Slender, a California veterinarian, races his horses under the moniker Summersby Stable. He has 10 wins in 57 starts at the Meadowlands this year, No. 2 in the owners' standings, track spokeswoman Amy Silver said.
Based on lab results and other information obtained during the investigation, the commission will conduct a hearing to determine whether Adam and Slender have violated commission rules. Pending the outcome of their respective hearings, both men remain eligible to participate in New Jersey racing.
Under commission rules, a trainer is responsible for the condition of a horse within his or her care and custody.
Violations of the state's testing rules are punishable by a 10-year license suspension and $50,000 fine.
EPO artificially increases red blood cells and hemoglobin, and can enhance oxygen consumption during racing. According to the commission, the use of human EPO products is dangerous to the well-being of the horses because it causes unnatural increases in blood viscosity, which can lead to heart attack or stroke during intense exercise.
The six horses identified as having tested positive for EPO have all raced at Freehold and the Meadowlands in New Jersey this year, and have raced at tracks in New York and Pennsylvania as well.
Read more: "New Jersey race horses test positive for doping" - http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2008/05/06/2008-05-06_new_jersey_race_horses_test_positive_for.html#ixzz0EYntpi6f&A
The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission, stung by the recent disclosure by its former chief veterinarian that no testing for TCO2 loading (also known as milkshakes) was conducted at the Ellis Park Thoroughbred meeting this summer, is facing another embarrassment involving its impotence over positive tests for blood-doping agents in four horses at the Red Mile harness track in Lexington, the Paulick Report has learned.
High-placed sources at the horse racing commission and Kentucky’s Equine Drug Research Council told the Paulick Report that out-of-competition testing on at least four horses detected a form of erythropoietin, which helps increase the production of red blood cells and has been used in both human and equine sports to illegally enhance performance. It is virtually impossible to detect in normal post-race tests because the drug is given up to two weeks before a race and can only be detected for about 48 hours thereafter. Cycling and other human sports rely on out-of-competition testing to catch blood-doping cheaters.
Because the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission has no rules on the book regulating the results of out-of-competition testing, it is unable to prosecute any of the positive tests or penalize those involved. Officials at the Red Mile, according to sources, have merely barred the horses from further competition at the current meeting, which ends on Saturday. Rules concerning out-of-competition testing at the Red Mile can be found here .
Red Mile president Joe Costa could not be reached for comment.
“ The state does not have rules for out-of-competition testing,” said Jim Carroll, a communications officer for Kentucky’s Public Protection Cabinet. “I would refer you to the Red Mile. The track has authority.”
Carroll would not confirm whether the indefinite suspensions announced on Thursday of two veterinarians, Rick Mather and Rick Rothfuss of Columbus, Ohio, were related to the alleged positive blood-doping tests. A press release from the commission said two Kentucky Horse Racing Commission investigators searched two trucks owned by the veterinarians and seized records and unidentified substances, which are being sent to a laboratory for testing. Richard Williams, the commission’s presiding judge for Standardbred racing, imposed the suspension after reviewing the physical evidence. A hearing on the suspension is pending.
“ It’s gotten ridiculous,” one prominent Standardbred horsemen told the Paulick Report. “We have more vets driving around on the backstretch than we have horses back there.”
One state that takes a harsher view of blood-doping positive tests and possession of illegal blood-doping agents is New Jersey, whose racing commission routinely conducts out-of-competition testing. The New Jersey Commission has issued bans of more than 15 years for horsemen and veterinarians caught in blood-doping schemes, and in one case criminal charges have been filed.
Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report
September 17th, 2008 filed in Animals
Barbaro and Eight Belles, both allegedly steroids related. Then came the scandal of Big Brown, his trainer Rick Dutrow and Steroids. Now finally, two of the three Triple Crown states, Kentucky and Maryland, have taken a stand on this issue. Both states have banned steroids at the track in September of 2008. However, some believe that the penalties will not be stiff enough to have the intended effect.
Those bans come on the heels of the recent controversy at the Olympic Games, in which six horses were expelled from the show jumping final for doping. Apparently horse doping in the Olympics is not a new problem, as a similar scandal shook the Athens games just four years ago. Have we reached a point where horses are more doped than Baseball players?
Thanks for posting, PEC, I have tried to read most of what you posted, It seems to me that someone is trying to stay on top of this and hold owners, trainers etc accountable.
I did hear that safety is becoming ever increasing since Barbaro's and Eight Belle's deaths. There is some new agency formed to handle all this better, I am sorry I did not catch the name nor the initials for it.
It does not surprise me that this is done, since humans also dope themselves.
I still don't think horseracing should be outlawed, some horses are born and bred to run. Some of the practices to get them to become winners, yes that should be outlawed.
We do it the other way round over here - our trainers give brilliant horses drugs or even just extra feed which slows them down.
The horses lose a few races, their handicap weight gets lowered and their bookies odds get longer.
Then they get put in for a big prize race and outrun everything else - everyone's happy! (except the bookies and the racing authorities and the losing trainers!).
I disagree with the snake venom treatment you're highlighting PEC - that must be like playing Russian roulette with the poor horses life. Overall though, I believe that horse racing is one of the more humane sports involving animals. Yes they can suffer broken legs and then have to be put down, but this isn't because they'll never race again, rather, the logistics of trying to keep a horse relatively immobile for around 6 months whilst a break heals means that putting the horse down is often the kindest option.
They don't care about the Horse. Its the ( MONEY ). What is that in his hand, to hit the horse.
