Understanding Racing Fatalities

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

PNkt

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2011
8,106
2,033
113
Newmarket
I know much has been said on this topic already, but I thought I ought to post an excellent article that has appeared today on The Guardian website:




Nothing undermines horse racing more than the fact that its heroes may suffer a fatal injury at any moment. It doesn't even need a hurdle or a steeplechase fence; one false step, one misplaced hoof may be all it takes for a bone to break in such a way that the horse cannot be saved.

Racehorses are incredibly tough animals, brave, hardy and durable. At the same time, in the wrong combination of circumstances, they may as well be made of glass.

Among the stoutest of staying chasers I've seen was Young Kenny, who won the Scottish National, the Midlands National and the Becher Chase. Then one day at Haydock, while galloping on flat turf between fences, he suddenly shattered a fetlock joint in one of his hind legs.

When racehorses die in action, accusing fingers are often pointed at the sport. But, although exertion and the possibility of falls increase the risk, the main reason for these thoroughly upsetting moments is that horses often cannot recover from injuries that would pose no threat to humans.

Horses do not just sustain injuries while racing. It can happen when they take part in any kind of sport or leisure activity, or even while they are messing around on their own in a field. However much they are loved and however much money their owner is happy to spend on them, there is no way back from the wrong kind of break.

Cynics assume that money is the issue, but regular followers of the sport know this cannot be true. Neither Barbaro, the hugely popular Kentucky Derby winner, nor Rewilding, who pipped So You Think in a thriller at Royal Ascot this summer, survived their broken legs. Both would have been worth millions if they could have been preserved for a quiet life at stud, but it could not be done.

Why not? In search of explanations, I pitched my naive questions to two well-respected vets at the British Horseracing Authority. Professor Tim Morris is their director of equine science and welfare while Jenny Hall is a vet based in Lambourn who will be veterinary services manager at the Olympics next year. I'm very grateful for their time and patience.


1) Most humans recover easily from broken legs. Why can't horses?


"The problem is, because their bones have become lighter," Hall told me. "They're very strong, to carry their weight, yet they're light, for them to be able to go fast. So, unfortunately, sometimes, when they break, they just shatter."

When that happens, it is not possible to repair the bone, and not just because it is now in lots of little pieces that won't heal together. Another issue is what Hall called "plastic deformation", meaning that the bone bends before it breaks and it is the bent shape that is preserved in the pieces. Even if it were possible to put the pieces back together, you would end up with a madly bent bone.

Hall continued: "When you look at their lower limbs, which is where a high incidence of these injuries are, there's very little soft tissue covering the bone. So unfortunately, often, if there's a fracture, it may well be that the bone penetrates the skin, which turns it into an open fracture.

"Even in people, that makes it a much harder situation to get good healing. So you can imagine, with a horse, no matter how quickly a jockey pulls it up, it's hard for the skin not to get damaged and also for the blood supply to get damaged."

"And living tissue needs blood," Morris added. "If there was a fracture there, there's all the tendons, the nerves and the blood vessels that a sharp edge of bone could cut. So, down the rest of the leg, there's no blood supply to it, so the tissue may die, let alone having enough blood supply to heal."

Even if there were a remote possibility that the bone might heal, it may not be a good idea to wait and see, because of the complication of laminitis.


2) Laminitis?


The horse's hoof is attached to its leg by interdigitating laminae, fibrous tissue. These are strong enough to support the horse's weight when that burden of 500kg or so is shared across four legs. But when a horse breaks one of those legs and tries to support itself constantly on the other three, the increased burden creates serious problems for the laminae at the base of those legs.

Morris: "Instead of the 500kg being distributed around four hooves and being able to take it, you are giving a third extra force to the remaining hooves and that comes under pressure. The problem is … you're within a hard outer box [the hoof], so [the laminae] get inflamed, which is incredibly painful."

Hall: "And it affects the blood supply. It's a pressure necrosis. Like a bed sore."

Morris says that laminitis can be treated with painkillers, along with other drugs to deal with "the failure of the bloody supply, because there's so much inflammation ... But the problem is, you can get a vicious circle of more pain, more inflammation, building on itself very, very quickly in a severe case."

So any owner considering whether their horse may recover from a broken leg has to consider the pain of laminitis that they may well have to go through. And then, as Hall points out, there is also the question of "the quality of life that they will have at the end of it.

"If you have a limb amputation, you're still going to have a good quality of life, aren't you? But how do you judge a horse's quality of life? Will it have the ability to be turned out at liberty in the paddock, will it need long-term pain medication? Because you or I can have a new hip or new knee if we need one. That's not possible [for horses].

"It isn't that some of these fractures couldn't be prepared. It's that, even if you do that and put the horse through all that, where's your end-point? You've got to be able to get him back to having four functional legs."

Hall refers to the euthanasia guidelines published by the American Association of Equine Practitioners, which include these "guidelines to assist in making humane decisions regarding euthanasia of horses":


• A horse should not have to endure continuous or unmanageable pain from a condition that is chronic and incurable.

• A horse should not have to endure a medical or surgical condition that has a hopeless chance of survival.

• A horse should not have to remain alive if it has an unmanageable medical condition that renders it a hazard to itself or its handlers.

• A horse should not have to receive continuous analgesic medication for the relief of pain for the rest of its life.

• A horse should not have to endure a lifetime of continuous individual box stall confinement for prevention or relief of unmanageable pain or suffering.


3) Can't we do more to help them? Support them with slings while the bone heals? Replace the bone artificially?


Even if the horse could be persuaded to lie still and let the bone recover, there are other problems. Its weight, in particular, works against it. "They get pressure sores if they're lying down all the time, things that are difficult to manage in people, let alone in a 500kg horse," says Hall.

Are pressure sores the reason we don't just knock them out and leave them on their side until they recover? "No," said Hall. "They'd get pneumonia for starters."

Morris: "You've probably heard quite often, particularly with elderly people going into hospital for a hip-bone fracture which keeps them in there and then they get secondary pneumonia because they're lying down. When you're lying in your wrong position, the fluids that accumulate in the lung don't get cleared so well and that's the point of infection."

Surely, I suggest, you could support the horse in a sling, sparing it the risk of laminitis while its leg heals. "In the old days, they used to try. And it used to go horribly wrong," Morris said.

"The horse version of bed sores is sling sores. They will be rubbing and also [the horse] won't be used to it. And you're talking weeks, not days, and that is one of the biggest welfare issues."

Hall: "Again, they're heavy. So, to take a meaningful amount of the horse's weight, you're then compressing its intestinal tract and everything. Temperamentally, as well, you can't explain to a horse what you're doing. You can't say, look, mate, stay there quietly, it'll all be fine, you're only going to be there for three weeks, don't worry about it."

What about replacing the bone with something synthetic? "Human hospitals store either synthetic packing materials or irradiated human bone to be a scaffold," Morris said. "Again, it's the problem that it's invariably weight-bearing in the horse. You might use it if you've got a simple fracture, to pack a gap, but they're not structural at all."

Hall: "And bone is a living tissue, it's forever turning over. You do need a biological structure, really, for the long term."​

Continues...
 
Part 2



4) Horses are sometimes put down very quickly on the racecourse. Is it possible to make a proper assessment so quickly?


Hall: "Because of the way the emergency services are deployed on the racecourse, the first opinion, the first veterinary surgeon to attend the horse, will be there very quickly because he will have been following the race [in a vehicle on the inside of the course].

"His colleague, because there are always multiple veterinarians on duty to cover a race meeting, paid for by the racecourses, will be there very quickly. For the horse to have a full clinical assessment and second opinion can be done very quickly.

"The horses that have fatal injuries, they have very extreme injuries. There's no possible misunderstanding of those. The horse will not have a supporting limb. The limb that he's injured will no longer be able to take any weight."

Racecourses, Hall said, are very efficient at transporting any connections from the grandstand to the injured horse, "so everyone connected with that horse will have been able to assess the situation and understand the severity of the situation".

"If the horse can travel comfortably, safely, off the racecourse, then the horse will go back in the horse ambulance and be taken to the veterinary treatment area, where time can be taken to evaluate the horse further and decide whether he needs to go off to hospital. [Those present can] make a proper, informed decision as to what exactly the injury is and how realistic it is for the horse's long-term future and welfare, whether repair is a good option."

In contrast to the fear behind my question, that critical decisions are being made very quickly, Hall and Morris cited a recent case at Sandown where some of those in the crowd apparently expressed concern that it took a long time for the vet to put a horse down after it had broken a limb in front of the stands.

In fact, they pointed out, the vet had given the horse a painkilling injection as soon as he arrived on the scene, as is standard practice. The horse was in no pain and there was time to make a thorough examination and reach an unhurried decision.


5) Can we hope for fewer fatalities in future?


Morris refers to a graph on the BHA's website that shows the number of equine fatalities each year, expressed as a percentage of total runners. There are ups and downs but the graph shows a gradual downward trend over the past 15 years.

Morris attributes this decline, at least in part, to improved technology. "It's changed completely. Better anaesthetics, better pain relief, better technology to hoist horses, stronger implants, better understanding of bone biology and how it heals, better diagnosis. It's the whole package of knowledge and then people do more, then they get better at it and you're in a virtuous circle.

"We think we've done the easy things in terms of ground, obstacles, veterinary treatment. To get it down to the next jump down, what we're doing now is, what are the complex risk factors?

"Since 2000, in a systematic way, we've been collecting every single death or injury and details of it. That's about a million runners over 10 years, so that's big enough to do stats and we're looking at our entire racing database to see what causes and associations are.

"That's being done with the University of Glasgow, by the epidemiology research group. So we're doing a systematic review of the horse that has a fatality or an injury, what factors are different from the horse that doesn't? That's going to be finished, I think, in 2013."

Once the risk factors have been identified, Morris, Hall and their colleagues can consider possible interventions that could minimise those risks. Across the whole of British horse racing, no one is doing more worthwhile work.​


Article in full here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2011/sep/23/claims-five-broken-leg-horse?CMP=twt_gu
 
Very interesting article Princess, many thanks for posting.

Does anyone know how a horse is put down on course? I assume it is done in the most humane way possible. Is it by injection?
 
Very informative, thanks Princess for posting this... The bottom line is the quality of life for the horse and it must break the hearts of the owners etc when this dos happen... So sad when any horse dies this way...

Prevention i suppose is always going to be hard, as in the case of Rewilding, running on the flat...(i do think that John Gosden was superb in the aftermath of this particular incident...) as most people i would think would say that its a 'jumping' issue as to something that can happen anywhere else... But understanding the mechanics of the horses and studying them will hopefully push the sport forward to safer and more preventable incidents...
 
Excellent Princess. Thank you.

Could someone explain this within the context of Mill Reef?
 
Mill Reef suffered a very simple, clean fracture whilst working on the gallops at home. The fact that he was not moving at full speed at the time helped to minimize the damage.
The operation to pin his leg back together (I believe the first of its kind) took place in his stable at Kingsclere - the vet came out to him and he was operated on within hours of the accident taking place. I've heard Clare Balding say that the vets told her father that, had they not been able to operate on him so quickly he would probably have had to be put down.
 
Apologies, I seem to have got my facts totally wrong <doh>

From Wikipedia:

"Fully recovered Mill Reef was being trained for an Autumn campaign and a return to the Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe in October when tragedy struck during a routine gallop where he stumbled and shattered his foreleg. Only great veterinary skill could save him. The colt showed remarkable temperament and patience. The racing world had lost one of its best-loved performers.

Charles Allen, a veterinary specialist was flown in, Mill Reef's fracture was a complicated one. A triangularly shaped piece of bone about two and a half inches long was broken from the lower end of the cannon bone and was considerably displaced. The inner sesamoid bone was completely shattered and the rim of the top of the main pastern bone was damaged. It seemed likely that the inner sesamoid bone was the first to break with the result the next step the fetlock was not braced and the foot and the pastern were pointing outwards. The sheer pressure of the horse's weight caused the crumbling of the rim of the Pastern bone and the breaking of the cannon bone.

It was decided that an operation would be performed in a building in Ian Balding's yard. A six-hour period was taken to place a simplified stainless-steel compression plate held by 3 screws to pin the broken pieces to the cannon bone. The injuries on the sesamoid bone or the rim of the pastern were avoided. The operation was successful. Miracles of modern veterinary science and undaunting courage had saved the life of this superstar. Professor Edwin James Roberts had performed the operation thus Mill Reef's life was saved by him. His vet John Hallam, played a major role in nursing him for three months and his relationship with this great horse and the meticulous care he took of the horse while nursing him, was one of Racing's most touching stories. After the painstaking operation he was saved and, though his racing career was over, he became a stallion at The National Stud in Newmarket."
 
Thanks Princess. That does make it difficult to accept the article totally. If they could have brought Mill Reef into the discussion it would have been much more valuable (from my personal viewpoint).
 
Just posted this on the Grand National thread but it's equally appropriate here:

Just had a look at the horsedeathwatch site (not a place I normally visit) as I was interested to see what sort of races had resulted in equine fatalities in the last couple of months. Synchronised and According to Pete were casualties number 40 and 41 in 2012 already, so that tells me this is not an issue isolated to the National, more a case of the National, with it's high media exposure, bringing the issue to the fore.

On the day before the National, Just Jordan broke down at Sedgefield in what was her 5th and final race under rules. Her first 2 races were bumpers, where she was beaten 129.5 lengths and 67.38 lengths. She then went novice hurdling and was beaten twice, by 100.75 lengths and 101.25 lengths. It seems painfully obvious to me that the mare had no semblance of ability and, even at that early stage of her career, you'd wonder why Susan Corbett felt it worth persisting with her. At any rate, she was a young horse being asked to compete in a novice hurdle race when clearly not up to the task. Had she been adequately schooled?

On the Thursday at Aintree we had the sad demise of the Pricewise selection, Gottany O's, in the juvenile hurdle. That was his 5th start over hurdles but his first at Grade 1 - was that a possible contributing factor? Another young horse being asked to contest a top-class hurdle race when maybe not ready?

29th March saw the demise of Milans Man at Newcastle, in a handicap hurdle over 3 miles. Milans Man was a 7YO having his 13th start over obstacles. But on his previous 4 starts he was pulled up (all of them over fences) and he was maybe being switched to hurdles to get his confidence back.

The same card saw the demise of the mare Let's Go Girls, who fell when in 4th place in a 2 mile handicap hurdle, and just one day earlier, on March 28th, we had the tragic story of U B Carefull who collapsed and died after winning a handicap hurdle over 2m5f at Ludlow.

The list, of course, goes on and on. The fact that 41 horses have lost their life already this year actually shows the Grand National is the very well publicised tip of the iceberg and that, statistically, the Grand National is just as deadly as a 2 mile novice hurdle.

What other measures could be taken? I think we see far too many novices taking crashing falls and perhaps some control over the quality of schooling should be applied? What does a trainer need to demonstrate, in terms of schooling over hurdles / fences, in order to gain a trainer's license? Also, horses who consistently show very poor form (i.e. a row of Ps in the form figures, or consistently beaten dozens of length) should maybe be reviewed for "suitability for racing"?? I can't help thinking that, if more care were taken in ensuring that the horse is actually capable of doing the task it is being asked to perform (and I think many of us would agree that Synchronised was, at best, a marginal case in terms of his ability to jump the National fences safely) then maybe that would help reduce the number of fatalities.

I must admit I am shocked to see so many deaths already this year and I think something much more radical needs to be done than just looking at field sizes or the fences at one particular course. Of course it is a high risk sport for the horses, and tragic accidents will, unfortunately, always happen. But it seems to me that many deaths are avoidable if more is done to ensure that horses are capable of doing what they are asked to do, otherwise they should not be allowed to run.
 
"The list, of course, goes on and on. The fact that 41 horses have lost their life already this year actually shows the Grand National is the very well publicised tip of the iceberg and that, statistically, the Grand National is just as deadly as a 2 mile novice hurdle."


I don't think it's fair to say that a Grand National is only as dangerous as a Novice Hurdle. Imagine the number of deaths that would occur if as many GNs were runs as Novice hurdles.
 
"The list, of course, goes on and on. The fact that 41 horses have lost their life already this year actually shows the Grand National is the very well publicised tip of the iceberg and that, statistically, the Grand National is just as deadly as a 2 mile novice hurdle."


I don't think it's fair to say that a Grand National is only as dangerous as a Novice Hurdle. Imagine the number of deaths that would occur if as many GNs were runs as Novice hurdles.

Fair point Cyc, I guess "statistically" was the wrong word to use there. Just trying to highlight that the problem isn't restricted to the GN - far too many deaths elsewhere too <ok>
 
In the case of the first horse you mention Odddog, I've had dealings with Susan Corbett and lets just say, in my opinion, she's a few sandwiches short of a full picnic.

The deaths are always unpleasant, but they are a fact of life. Even if we made all races as safe as possible and found a way of healing broken limbs, horses would still suffer heart attacks, as they do standing in their stables/running around their fields, etc.

Prior to Saturday's race, in an arguement on another non-racing forum, I looked at the stats for the Grand National fatality-wise. In 1980 - 2011, assuming 40 horses have run in each running, approx 1,240 horses ran in the National. There were 23 fatalities in this time, giving the race a 1.8% fatality rate. Taking into account the 2012 running this becomes 1,280 runners with 25 fatalities increasing the fatality rate to 1.95%.

Bear in mind that there are some 90,000 runners (not individual horses) every year in Britain, the fatality rate, which can always be improved, is by no means massive.

I'd also point out that the fatality rate in US Flat racing is 2 deaths per 1,000 starts, compared to our own Flat racing which is 0.6 per 1,000 starts.
 
I know a lot has been done in the UK Princess, and that we are way ahead of the US in terms of the stats. I do just wonder, though, if National Hunt fatalities could be further reduced by improving schooling of novices and making sure they are "fit and ready" to take on a set of obstacles at speed. This is also linked in to the "too many horses" debate as we often see some pretty talentless beasts hacking round in novice hurdles about a furlong behind the rest. Of course good horses also fall, dear old Twist Magic springs to mind.
 
The only way to stop bad horses racing is to introduce a minimum rating, as they did in Ireland a few years ago. Eg, any horse not achieving a minimum handicap mark (say 50) within it's first 3 runs is barred from racing. It will mean reduced field sizes and a knock on effect of perhaps fewer race meetings as a result, but to my mind this is no bad thing.
 
Outstanding article PN, thanks for sharing.
Incredible insight from someone who knows a hell of alot more than me and helps me develop a greater understanding of the matter, would be terrific if the do gooders/great unwashed could be convinced to spend 5 mins educating themselves.
 
I take it the American stats include dirt racing Princess, which would bump up the figures. Are they not reviewing the replacement of dirt tracks due to their high fatality rate?
 
Ron, yes the US stats include dirt racing. Sadly any moves to replace these tracks with the much safer synthetics have stalled - Santa Anita replaced their (badly installed) synthetic track with dirt just last year, and accordingly the fatality rate has shot back up.

The trainers are very powerful in the US and many were anti synthetics purely because (though they will not admit it) they do not know how to train on it. They, and some professional gamblers (confusingly called handicappers in the USA) argued that bettors would not be able to use form lines when comparing races on dirt and synthetic, and some breeders were against the changes as they have invested so much money in producing dirt horses that cannot cope with synthetic surfaces.

There was a table of stats produced by the US Jockey Club that showed a breakdown of racing fatalities over a 3 year period recently. I'll see if I can find it.