As I see it, one of the most disturbing trends over the last decade or so has been the way experts in one subject, as well many others who are not experts in any subject, are willing to make authoritative sounding pronouncements on issues they know very little or nothing about, without doing even basic research. On this issue at least, now there’s information and an opinion from someone who actually is an expert on the subject. Well done TGJB.
I’m not up to date on the nasal strip issue, but I do remember the long fight necessary before the industry finally gave in and disclosed whether a horse was running on Lasix, after taking (for almost two years, if memory serves) the bizarre position that such disclosure would only “confuse” bettors. At first glance, the issues certainly seem similar to someone who believes as a basic proposition in both full disclosure and that players are more than capable of deciding whether and how to use whatever information is disclosed.
Finally, perhaps you can correct me if I’m wrong hooper, but my understanding is that in Europe and most other non-lasix countries, horses can and regularly do train on Lasix, and that the only difference between us and them is that horses there cannot race on Lasix, which typically means it can’t be administered within something like 72 hours of a race.
