STATEMENT ON COBALT TESTING IN GREYHOUNDS:

Derek A Major BVSc MACVSc CMAVA

I have been in Equine Veterinary Practice since 1989. In January, 2014 I was granted an Animal Care and Ethics Permit to perform cobalt excretion studies in horses, and I have been performing various trials on the urine and blood levels of cobalt in horses following routine administration of common vitamins and minerals. I have been involved in providing advice and evidence to horse trainers charged with breaching current cobalt regulations in Thoroughbred and Harness Racing.

I have no interest, financial or otherwise, in the sport of Greyhound racing. I am however deeply disturbed that the industry has followed the lead from horse racing and imposed a urinary threshold on cobalt in dogs. I believe that the horse threshold was developed on inadequate and flawed science.

I am a strong champion of animal welfare, and I fully appreciate regularity authorities concern to protect the welfare of dogs and horses. I would condemn any attempt to wilfully dose any animal with large doses of cobalt, for perceived performance advantage.

Cobalt is an essential trace nutrient in mammals. Its sole role is as a structural component of the Vitamin B12 (cobalamin) molecule, which is essential to red blood cell function.

I have 3 areas of concern:

1. Urine is the wrong test medium

Cobalt is one of a group of elements classified as heavy metals. This group includes iron, copper, zinc, arsenic, selenium and lead, among others. Some of these are essential to life, in varying quantities cobalt being one of them. Characteristic of heavy metals is the tendency to accumulate in a number of body tissues. High levels can lead to signs of toxicity. Cobalt intoxication has been reported in humans, and lead poisoning is recognised in many species.

When a horse or dog is exposed to a continued low level of cobalt levels in the blood plasma and red cells rises. Most of the cobalt in blood is bound to plasma protein, and ultimately is incorporated into the red blood cells, where it remains for the life of the cell around 120 days. This may account for 90% of the cobalt in blood, and is NOT measured in urine tests.

Urine testing simply measures the free ionised cobalt spilling over into the urine. Urine testing measures what was in the animal not what is in the animal.

Indeed, such simple factors as water intake and concentration of the urine can have a profound effect on urine cobalt levels. As a starting point it is essential to correct measured levels against urine creatinine or specific gravity.

The more appropriate test is that adopted.

2. Cobalt is not performance- enhancing

Interest in illicit cobalt use as a performance-enhancer in racing horses and dogs can be traced back to some speculative articles in the lay press from the sport of Cycling. It was proposed that cobalt in humans might stimulate erythropoietin (EPO), and lead to increased red cell production. This speculation comes from discussions in the scientific literature dating back to the 1940s and even 1930s, which referred to laboratory studies on rabbit and rat red blood cells.

Such studies as have been done in horses have failed to support this proposal, showing No increase in red cells and NO increase in haemopoietin, even after very large doses of cobalt.

Given the120 day life span of red blood cells any such effect would require dosing months before racing, and raceday urine testing would be irrelevant. Furthermore, given the massive reserves of red blood cells stored in the spleen it is highly questionable whether increasing the count would make the horse run faster or slower.

3. Uncontrolled Population Studies are Flawed

The horse urine level was set on the basis of statistical analysis of an uncontrolled population study. Without reliable knowledge of the total cobalt exposure of each individual in the study, the normal range cannot be defined. I understand a parallel approach has been adopted for Greyhound Racing. Total exposure includes native cobalt in the feed, water and environment, as well as legitimate vitamin and mineral supplements, in addition to any illicit administration.

4. Greyhound Racing does not need to invent a new scandal.

Having previously stated my disinterest I can only observe that Greyhound Racing in New South Wales is struggling to improve its reputation in the public eye. In my opinion Horse Racing has suffered a severe loss of reputation in recent years, and many trainers have been unfairly disadvantaged, on the basis of flawed and inadequate science. I would urge the Grey hound industry NOT to follow that path.

Association of Racing Commissioners

International. Cobalt in blood plasma is measured, and sanctions applied when the level exceeds 25ppm.

🔹🔹🔹LIKE & SHARE🔹🔹🔹

Much more to come on this subject, we have been busy #ProudProRacers, but we're awake to what is a silent killer of our sport, losing trainers for providing animal welfare is unacceptable and smacks of animal extremist input! 😡

The thresholds are too low, the testing never included dietary intake, nor did it allow for natural accumulation of the micro mineral. On top of all that, testing for cobalt needs to be done via blood, a simple occurrence of a small urine sample can be enough to push levels above 100 due to the high concentration.

Thresholds need to be set at a number that clearly shows misuse. 300+ would be a good start. This would allow for standard animal welfare practices to continue, especially with things like vitamin, mineral and electrolyte supplements... punishing good people for taking care of their dogs is wrong.

The bottom line is cobalt is NOT a DRUG, nor is it a performance enhancer! It's a naturally occurring essential micro-mineral.

#LearnTheFacts

From: Tim Bull [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, 3 August 2017 1:53 PM
To: 'Peter Bryce'
Subject: RE: The Greyhound Industry

Thanks Peter, very interesting and makes some very pertinent points. May I ask where this was published?

Tim

Tim Bull MLA
Member for Gippsland East
Shadow Minister for Disability
Shadow Minister for Public Housing
Shadow Minister for Racing
Ph: (03)5152 3491
Fax: (03)5152 2023
Web EXTERNAL LINK facebook: TimBullMP
Twitter: @TimBullMP

There is ZERO recourse for us as participants to challenge new rules.

There is no ombudsman or over-riding authority making sure that the PTB are introducing rules that are fair and accurate and reasonable.

Carcasses - Brought in under the guise of "Animal Welfare" but is single handedly responsible for the huge uptick in marring and FTC tickets and has ended the racing careers of hundreds if not thousands of dogs (and ensured hundreds more never even made it to the track).

Water bowls - Also brought in under the guise of "Animal Welfare" but goes counter to the overwhelming evidence and expert advice of most vets/participants

Cobalt/Arsenic/Testoprop - As per your article. The main issue being that NONE of the levels for any of these substances have ANYTHING to do with performance enhancement or welfare of the animal.

I repeat my above statement.

"There is no ombudsman or over-riding authority making sure that the PTB are introducing rules that are fair and accurate and reasonable."

What is stopping GA or GRV or GRNSW bringing in rules (like the ones above) that are actually detrimental to animal welfare and/or the industry in general?

NOTHING!

Hell, if they wanted to make a rule that we all have to be naked when feeding, training or handling dogs (because that way we couldn't accidentally contaminate the dogs) then they could do it and there is absolutely nothing we could do to stop it!

They have complete autonomy. No-one is watching the watchers!

Who do we turn to for assistance with a case like yours??
I have no idea who to talk to if it happened to me.

Could you please PM me your phone number.
I forgot to get it off you last time.

From their website
"Our complaint handling work is aimed at exposing and eliminating conduct that is illegal, unreasonable, unjust or oppressive, improperly discriminatory, based on improper or irrelevant grounds, based on a mistake of law or fact, or otherwise wrong."

In respect of government bodies
"We encourage you to talk to the agency/council first and try to resolve the complaint by writing to the agency - giving them up to six weeks to address your complaint. You can read our tips for making a complaint to help you do this.

If you have already contacted the agency involved, please use the ONLINE COMPLAINTS FORM to submit a complaint for assessment."

In Victoria, the Ombudsman tends not to take on complaints that have not already been referred to the government body.

Link follows:
EXTERNAL LINK
Obviously, multiple requests on the same subject should be co-ordinated so as to properly demonstrate the endemic nature of the problem.

And in respect of cobalt, arguably the key issue is with the GRNSW rules, in having no proper scientific basis, not disciplinary board decisions.

The link to the article follows. I have messaged Derek to contact Tim Bull. Good to see that he seems interested in getting a proper scientific basis for cobalt in all the racing codes.
EXTERNAL LINK

Well, blow me down. Even as a mug observer I have been pointing exactly these potential problems for some years - but to no avail.

So, if a mug can see the problem what does that say about the competence of greyhound authorities? Note, my understanding is that GA is responsible for the basic exercise, not the individual states.

That would be consistent with it commissioning an expensive management consultant to derive a formula which tells each state how many pups should be bred (ever heard the results of that?).

Or with its "confidential" proposal to cut racing activity by one third (where did that go?).

Or with getting your photo taken with Grey2k, the world's greatest anti racing organisation.

What do you have to do to get sacked in this industry? Why have all the states followed blindly along these paths? What have the various GBOTAs been doing?

To say nothing about the NZ kibble which was found to have minute amounts of tea (caffeine) in the manufacturer's recipe. And what about the risks of walking your dog past a bread shop where poppy seed is in play?

The underlying principle here is that racing is run by bureaucracies which are dedicated to processes, not outcomes.

Major reform, please.

My next step is to report this to the RSPCA and other groups to challenge this approach.

The current case of the Hope's in VCAT may be the one that gets all 3 codes to correct what they have done. RVL wasted 10 million + and every time I think about it I just shake my head and wonder what the real motive was. Sick of them falling behind the Integrity card to justify the actions and mistakes.

Below is the link to the actual paper.

EXTERNAL LINK

Charles,

If you intend to follow this path you may well be advised to browse the "Racing Act".
When you come across the section that addresses the INTEGRITY of the racing animal be sure to note where it says compromising the integrity of a racing animal is strictly prohibited, or words to that effect.

Many questions could be raised on the forced restriction of vital vitamins, additives, etc that trainers are now having to exclude from feeding the dogs in the lead up to a race, for fear of positives.
One might well be within their right to argue they are being forced to compromise the health and well being of their dogs.

This argument could also apply to the enforced restriction of rewarding a carnivorous animal with synthetics.

And, it could apply to the latest monstrosity by GA of proposing to impose sanctions on just about anything you put in your dog's mouth.

The Racing Act is LAW...it is well and truly ABOVE rules.

Food for thought, so to speak.

I decided not to train (get license back) so I could focus on lobbying politically as my belief is only a change in Govt will alter the culture that needs to be corrected. Being unregistered also means they have no influence over me or power to harass or intimidate which has been happening to others!

Well,
That's very interesting, Charles...it's very very interesting.
I and probably the whole industry would like to know the specifics of that case and what the verdict was, based on what facts.
It would be in the best interest of the industry to know that.
I would love for you or the trainer who is involved to tell his story!

Where ever there is a chance to shed transparency on some of these crazy rules we should expose it.

I remember shortly after the cobalt ruling came in, GRV announced they would not reveal the readings of positives nor the details of what products were responsible for going over their limit.
Their reasoning was they thought participants would use the info so they could push the limits to the edge.
They would rather work AGAINST the industry rather than work with it.

It seems to me that the authorities and Govt still don't get the idea that low numbers of positives means lower resistance from anti racers. I am obviously talking about inadvertent positives to cobalt and arsenic.

Charles. can you give specifics of this case without jeopardising the identity of the trainer if this is his wish?

So now vitamins are performance enhancing, hey.
Well, if he is trying to include normal vitamins best we stop feeding anything...full stop.
Sounds a bit like GA's proposal.

If only we had an independent Greyhound Commission working for the industry.
I reckon it could be funded solely on court victories.

Has anyone tested synthetics for performance enhancing petroleum properties?

Sniff, sniff...

The Racing Act(s)says authorised people can make rules. To change that you need an Act of Parliament.

The Racing Rules say what and how. They are readily changed. While the road to challenges are defined in some instances (eg suspension periods), in others they are not clear (eg administrative excesses or errors in implementing rules) but there you have the opportunity to go to VCAT, ombudsmen or whoever in various states.

GA has dreamed up rules about drugs, some apparently based on inadequate or incomplete advice, but which are later copied into each state's book without checking (much like the over breeding myth).

I don't know the fine detail of your B12 issue but I would guess that VCAT has reasoned (1) GA/GRV made a rule, (2) that rule was correctly applied, (3) another such appeal or protest cannot succeed because there has been no error.

The problem is not the application of the rule but the existence of the rule itself - or parts of it. That is, you need to show an error in the initial process which generated part of the rule. On all accounts, that should not be hard, especially given scientific backing.

Exactly how you do that is a legal matter.

Desirably, this is the sort of thing the various GBOTAs should have picked up at the outset. That's what they are paid for. Sadly that seems never to happen, possibly because they are too close to the authorities and become part of the problem. That is, you did not complain so the rule must be alright.

Policy-wise, it all runs under the banner of zero tolerance for drugs, but here they have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Too little care, too much power.

I liken it to the current spate of screams about freedom of speech in this country. While that is basically true it is not an infinite freedom - ie not when harming other people by your speech. You can go too far.

As I instanced before, GA has form in going down wrong roads or not properly analysing the subject, or jumping to conclusions - all of which amount to a failure to advance or even protect the industry.

Funding protests is an issue but I see no reason why the collective GBOTAs could not and should not do it, perhaps supported by crowd funding of some sort.

Meantime, given a sound story, it seems to me that an injunction might be obtained to stop authorities implementing a "bad" rule. There is little doubt that it is poorly structured, poorly tested, unrealistic and not in keeping with modern societal practices - to say nothing of disrupting trainers' lifestyles.

PS Given the attached paper is several months old, I have to wonder why RV has not undertaken much broader studies. I know GA is sloppy but RV has a huge stake in the subject for a variety of reasons, including legal ones.