JB (and others),

Three questions concerning Lasix as related to TGJB's comment that no case can be made against Lasix on its own.

1. On its own, doesn't Lasix dehydrate horses in such a significant amount that it leads to less starts per year for all of these horses? Leading to less starts, smaller field size, smaller handle, etc.


2. (Not on its own). Isn't Lasix considered a masking agent for other [illegal] drugs?


3. Byk and others love to make the distinction that Europe and others race on turf, not dirt, as an argument to keeping Lasix in place here. Why not a consideration to only allow Lasix along the lines you proposed on dirt and eliminating it on turf altogether? Everyone on here can likely recall the time that turf racing truly seemed more immune from suspicion than dirt. Curious if this would return turf racing to this same situation as days gone by.

____________________

An interesting article from a while back predicting the future. Interesting comments from Pletcher at the bottom among many other nuggets here.

[www.thoroughbredracing.com]