Re: RC: RE: It's a Drug.

[Jim Holland <lanconn@tds.net>]

Hmmmm...

Truman, I totally agree.  However, when everything else is gone,
"principals" are all that is left.  I have only have issue with your
post.  There IS no such thing as an "Ex" Marine.  Semper Fi....

Jim and Sun of Dimanche

"Truman Prevatt, PhD" wrote:
> 
> Bob,
> 
> As I stated, I agree with Rule 13, but I don't believe Rule 13 will stand up to
> legal scrutiny. We do ourselves no favor by "standing on principal" when the
> rule in question is most likely to vague to be enforced. We live in a society of
> guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and an ex-Marine you risk you life to preserve
> and protest that tenet, and while it may not be morally pure it the best
> approach that has ever been tried before.
> 
> To sanction and/or punish someone for a violation of a rule, you need proof pure
> of simple or else it is an establishment which none of us would care to be part
> of.
> 
> Truman
> 
> Bob Morris wrote:
> 
> > Truman states:
> >
> > <<<<Back to Rule 13. The bottom line, if it doesn't test, then it is not in
> > violation of
> > Rule 13 - pure and simple. >>>
> >
> > I have to say one simple thing; If you care for the welfare of the sport, if
> > you care for the welfare of the horse, If you have any sense of
> > sportsmanship then you will read the AERC Rule concerning drugs as stated in
> > the first several lines " THE INTEGRITY OF ENDURANCE COMPETITION REQUIRES
> > THAT THE EQUINE IS NOT INFLUENCED BY ANY DRUG, MEDICATION OR VETERINARY
> > TREATMENT. ENDURANCE EQUINES MUST COMPETE ENTIRELY ON THEIR NATURAL
> > ABILITY." You will not go looking for the loophole that is described in the
> > following lines that bring in the testing for drugs.
> >
> > As I have stated before on this forum, I tend to be a moral purist. I also
> > feel that those persons that have to look for protection for their actions
> > behind a screen of "proof by laboratory testing" before admitting they use
> > enhancing substances, and should not be competing, are ultimately fooling
> > only themselves.
> >
> > It is sad for the sport and sad for the horses that so many persons have the
> > attitude that drugs are OK as long as they do not get caught.
> >
> > Bob Morris
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Truman Prevatt, PhD [mailto:truman.prevatt@netsrq.com]
> > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 6:18 PM
> > To: katswig@earthlink.net; RideCamp
> > Subject: RC: It's a Drug.
> >
> > Not that I disagree with you Kat, this substance is a drug because it does
> > have a
> > pharmacological effect, but the same can be said about ice boots!  Ice boots
> > applied
> > properly can have a very strong anti-inflammatory effect. I've heard at
> > least one very
> > well know endurance vet state that there is little way a unsound horse could
> > do a 50
> > mile ride on bute and finish, but I would expect an unsound horse could
> > complete a 50
> > ride with judicious use of ice boots.
> >
> > Is ice a drug? The drug issue is tricky. If something doesn't test is it a
> > drug? Well
> > yes and no. It's pharmacological effect may indicate it is a drug, but
> > legally cannot
> > be classified for enforcement because it does not test.
> >
> > In the 99 Tour de France, there was a scandal over the use of a blood doping
> > drug.
> > There was no test so their drug policy was unenforceable. In a recent
> > "Scientific
> > American" article there was an article on the next generation of performance
> > enhancing
> > drugs. These are compounds that will cause genetic changes in the athletic.
> > This type
> > of enhancement is absolutely undetectable, hence cannot be outlawed!  It is
> > becoming a
> > "Brave New World."
> >
> > Back to Rule 13. The bottom line, if it doesn't test, then it is not in
> > violation of
> > Rule 13 - pure and simple.  I have read the arguments starting with the
> > origination of
> > this rule, long before Ridecamp was a gleam in Steph's eye, over why the
> > drug rule is
> > as is and in theory it sounds good. Take an example from drug laws in the
> > US. Our
> > courts will not allow prosecution for the possession of a substance that is
> > not
> > specifically described as a prohibited substance. You can not write a law
> > that is
> > vague enough to catch the "designer drugs" when they first come out. You
> > could but the
> > courts would throw them out. The architects of Rule 13 understood this and
> > didn't want
> > to get into this quagmire, as the AHSA did. However, any rule we have will
> > have to
> > withstand the challenge of a court - which it may just have to do some day,
> > and I do
> > not believe Rule 13 would if applied to substances which are not considered
> > by the
> > community of experts at large to be a drug, e.g., bute.
> >
> > So our rule is fine as long as no one challenges it. When it is challenged
> > it doesn't
> > really matter what is written, what matters is a) does it test and b) is it
> > a
> > substance that is considered by the community of experts at large to be a
> > drug. On the
> > latter matter I asked by own vet, who does test for the FL winter Grand Prix
> > circuit,
> > about Rule 13. His comment was, "hope they never have to enforce it on a
> > horse worth a
> > million dollars, because they will lose."  This is not good bad or
> > indifferent, it is
> > a fact of life in the US. We do in the final analysis have to live within
> > the legal
> > structure of guilt has to be proved beyond a resonable doubt.
> >
> > Don't get me wrong, I agree with Rule 13 and support it, but as more money
> > creeps into
> > the sport and as FEI competition becomes more a mainstream part of the sport
> > which
> > mixes different concepts of drug policy, then we will probably find that we
> > will have
> > to revisit the drug issue to make it more bullet proof to challenge.
> >
> > Truman
> >
> > "guest@endurance.net" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Just because current drug tests do not test for metabolites of the
> > chemical
> > > compounds contained the herbs that have the above stated pharmacological
> > > effects, there should be little doubt in anybody's mind (no matter how
> > strict
> > > of a definition used for the term "drug"), that using APF on an endurance
> > horse
> > > would be in violation of the AERC's rule 13 (despite the assertion that
> > current
> > > drug tests would not pick it up, and therefore it is unlikely that anybody
> > > using it is likely to get caught).  The fact that it is allowed by the
> > > medications rules of the AHSA is of no consequence when determining if it
> > is
> > > allowed by AERC rules.  The AHSA has gone to the trouble of making a list
> > of
> > > forbidden medications...and, apparently, this medication is not on it.
> > That
> > > doesn't mean that it isn't a medication; there are lots of medications
> > that are
> > > not on the AHSA's list.
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Vertex Engineering, Inc.
> > Innovative Solutions
> > Superior Support
> >
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> > Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> >
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> > Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> > Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
> > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> 
> --
> Vertex Engineering, Inc.
> Innovative Solutions
> Superior Support
> 
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=