Horse racing has been in the media a lot over the past few weeks, in both positive and negative lights. One of many issues being debated among industry insiders these days is the use of medication in horses near race day — particularly the use of the breathing medication furosemide (sold as Lasix or Salix).
Lasix is used in horses to prevent exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage (EIPH). The increased pressure in horses’ lungs during high-speed exercise such as Thoroughbred and Standardbred racing can sometimes cause alveolar capillary membranes in the lungs to rupture, allowing blood to seep into the lungs. The presence of blood in the lungs inhibits the horse’s breathing and, in extreme cases, may result in bleeding from the nose. A trainer or jockey may suspect exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage if the horse demonstrated a sudden loss of speed during a race (workouts often do not require a horse to travel fast enough to induce hemorrhage).
Lasix works by lowering blood pressure and hence preventing the EIPH. It also acts as a potent diuretic. There is no way to know by looking at a horse whether he will be prone to EIPH, so many trainers race their horses on the drug as a precaution.
The debate among industry insiders is a fierce one; some are firmly opposed to a ban of Lasix on race day, while others believe that elimination of the drug is the only way to make racing fair and to market the sport effectively.
Both sides believe their view is in the best interest of the horse.
At a recent panel discussion hosted by the University of Kentucky’s Horse Racing Club on training for the Triple Crown, participants were asked their opinion on the Lasix issue, and the group of four experts was evenly split on the question.
Trainer Dale Romans likened the use of Lasix to Jerome Bettis’ use of an asthma inhaler during a football game.
“It didn’t make him a better football player, but it allowed him to play the game,” said Romans. “Any medication policy that’s put out there, I just want the horse’s health put first.”
Romans said that bleeding during a race takes a lot out of a horse physically and appears to trigger a psychological issue when the horse returns to the track, since they are understandably afraid of experiencing that sudden, extreme shortness of breath again.
The difference, claimed Team Valor owner and CleanHorseRacing.com supporter Barry Irwin, is that a human can vocalize when they need asthma medication, while horses cannot. Irwin believes that the need for Lasix is overblown, with many horses racing on it that would experience minimal or no bleeding without it. He also believes that the poor public perception of any race-day medication is justification enough for eliminating it, stressing the need to help non-horsemen to feel comfortable with the ethics of the sport.
“If horses can’t run without it, we don’t need the sport,” said Irwin. “We’re abusing animals if, in fact, that is the case, but that’s not the case. I’ve got 443 horses … I can’t think of more than 10 or 12 that had major bleeding issues.”
In a recent interview on WVLK, Rood and Riddle veterinarian Larry Bramlage, an orthopedic surgeon specializing in Thoroughbreds, explained that the issue is really a difference of opinion rather than a fight of absolute right versus wrong.
“Some people believe that Lasix is hard on the horse in the long term,” said Bramlage. “The medical studies don’t support that. … Medically, it’s good for the horse. It protects their lungs …[however] Lasix may be good for the horse, but may not be good for racing.”
Since horse racing’s connection to gambling requires it to be controlled by individual state governments rather than a national regulatory agency, the ban on race-day medication (including Lasix) will be debated in each state’s industry one by one. Bramlage expressed concern that if Lasix is banned in Kentucky but not in neighboring Indiana or Ohio, trainers may feel more comfortable taking their horses there than risk an episode of EIPH.
European racetracks have never allowed the use of Lasix, and many horsemen across the Atlantic are puzzled by Americans’ hesitation to ban it. French jockey Jean Cruguet, also at the UK Horse Racing Club’s panel event, chimed in to the spirited discussion, noting that American horses do not perform well in international company, particularly in races on European turf or at the Dubai World Cup events, a phenomenon he and many others attribute to the use of the breathing medication.
Bramlage believes that the differences in racing styles are more likely the cause of the different medication standards; European races are run on the grass and are typically longer than the average American race. To withstand the longer distances, horses often take the majority of the race at a slow gallop, only requiring a short burst of speed at the very end. He attributes the incidence of EIPH in the United States to the fast-paced, sprint-style contests that constitute the majority of American race cards.
Though the Kentucky Racing Commission failed to pass a ban on Lasix in April (the final vote was a 7-7 tie), the debate is far from over. A decision is expected in the coming weeks from the New York State Racing and Wagering Board on the use of Lasix, as a two-week public comment period on the issue ended May 14.