This bute study was mentioned in the Allday interview on Steve Byk's show that is the subject of another thread:

[www.bloodhorse.com]

I don't intend to demean the study (I have not read it), Scotland, South America, or grad students (I was one once myself), but it seems a little ridiculous to me that the current science on this topic comes from a grad student in Scotland using data from races in South America.

Have the alphabet organizations in racing have not had their own studies done on this topic using data from US races? If they have, where is the response in Bloodhorse? If they have not, why not? Certainly it is not for lack of available statistical expertise. Is it that the data regarding US races is not accessible? If so, the data should be made accessible. Or is this something that has been swept under the rug.

The Feinstein press release that accompanied her co-sponsorship of the Horse Racing Integrity Act is filled with statements that are, from a scientific point of view, either misleading (being charitable) or just wrong. A few weeks ago, the Paulick report published a piece by Bill Casner linking Lasix to risk of fracture citing studies from a human context that is totally different from the way Lasix is used in racing. That article met with a quick response pointing out the flaw in its logic. That kind of response has to be made more often. For that to happen, the relevant scientific data has to be available.