The Steroid Plot Thickens

  • 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

PNkt

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2011
8,106
2,033
113
Newmarket
From Racing Post:

Trainer claims more than 100 horses given steroids

BY TOM KERR 7:30AM 29 APR 2013

BRITISH racing lurched back into crisis on Monday as a second Newmarket trainer admitted to using anabolic steroids on his horses.

Gerard Butler has told the BHA that several of his horses received treatment consisting of injections of anabolic steroids for injured joints. The trainer believes more than 100 racehorses across Newmarket may have been given the same treatment.

The news comes just days after Godolphin trainer Mahmood Al Zarooni received an eight-year ban for administering anabolic steroids to 15 horses under his care, a scandal which thrust British racing into the worldwide media spotlight.

However, unlike in the Al Zarooni case, Butler said the treatment came recommended by vets, who told him the treatment was widespread in Newmarket, and included the injections in his official medical records where were seen and returned by the BHA without comment.

Butler told the Independent: "It did not cross my mind that there could be any problem with this medication. And, judging from the fact that the BHA said nothing about it when they saw my medical book, it does not seem to have crossed their minds, either."

Butler believes the medication, known as Sungate, to have been commonly recommend by vets in Newmarket for the treatment of joint injuries.

"I have been very uncomfortable over the past few days, hearing and reading about the Al Zarooni case," he said.

"I feel people need to know about what has happened in my yard. I know I'm obliged to satisfy myself that each and every treatment is within the rules, and I failed to do so in this case.

"But I am certain that this medication has been misunderstood by many others. And I just hope that the BHA is being suitably rigorous in establishing whether that is indeed the case."

Butler, who said he is co-operating with the BHA, added: "I have been totally candid throughout, and it was I who told the BHA that I had treated four colts in December and January. I’m not trying to defend myself, just to explain what happened. And I must emphasise I was advised in good faith by my vets."
 
Sounds more like a case of the vets misinforming trainers, but fair play to Gerard Butler for holding his ands up. It doesn't bode well that BHA had seen his medication records though.
 
The key ponit here seems to be that Gerard Butler insists he was "advised in good faith by his vets." Al Zarooni does not appear to have claimed anything of that nature in his defence, so on the face of it the connection between the two cases is tenous.

Shouldn't all vets who work with racehorses know exactly what substances are banned though? And shouldn't all trainers know that Anabolic Steroids are out? Looks like there may be a serious and widespread problem that needs addressing.
 
Thanks pN. This is beginning to look ridiculous. The BHA have now shown that they've already shot themselves in the foot by waiving through a treatement that was illegal.
I have no idea who in the BHA has a firm hand on things and has the character to be capable of steering them through this, but hopefully there is someone!! Otherwise they'll look a total laughing stock.
 
The problem is that vets are not licensed by the BHA, any qualified vet can set themselves up as a "racehorse vet". I'd imagine that Gerard Butler's advice came from one of the two big racing practices in Newmarket - Rossdales or NEH (formerly Greenwood Ellis).

As Gerard Butler points out, he recorded the use of the steroids in his medication records for the horses concerned, so there is absoultely no question of him trying to hide anything. One of the charges against Al Zarooni was that he failed to keep adequate records.
 
The point I'm making is the BHA saw the treatment administered in the record book sent to them and made no response. That's a huge mistake by them. It makes it more difficult for them to act having done that.
 
Sorry Bustino, I should have said that my post was in reply to Archers Road's comment about vets knowing what substances are allowed and which are not.
 
BHA may release a statement later today on the Gerard Butler case.

The key points that differentiate this from the Al Zarooni case are:

1. The steroids given by Gerard Butler's vet are veterinary medications - the ones given by Al Zarooni were not
2. Gerard Butler kept complete medication records for all horses that were treated - Al Zarooni did not
3. The horses treated by Gerard Butler received their injections direct into their joints in December and January, so there appears to be no attempt to build muscle and influence the training regime - Al Zarooni's horses received their injections intra-muscularly in (approx) March, whilst in training.
 
Statement from BHA:

BHA statement regarding investigation into positive samples relating to a specific veterinary product

"It is the general policy of the BHA not to comment publicly regarding ongoing investigations or speculation surrounding potential investigations.

However, in light of reports and speculation today, and because of recent events regarding horses formerly trained by Mahmood Al Zarooni, it is felt necessary to confirm that a separate investigation is being held into a number of positive samples obtained from horses at Gerard Butler's yard, following a testing in training visit on 20th February.

While conscious of the need not to prejudice the outcome of the current enquiry, the investigation has established that the source of the positive samples was a veterinary product, licensed in the EU and legally imported for use by a veterinary practice, the initial administration of which was recommended by a vet.

This investigation remains ongoing and a number other parties have been and will be interviewed, including representatives of the veterinary practice in question. One of the objectives of this investigation is to clarify the extent to which this product has been distributed and administered to horses in training.

Immediately following the results of the testing in training, the BHA, in conjunction with the National Trainers Federation, notified trainers that the product in question contains an anabolic steroid and should not be used on any horse in training."
 
Does this investigation include bute, which is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. I would doubt there are many horses that have not been medically treated with bute at some time or other.
 
PNkt said:
BHA may release a statement later today on the Gerard Butler case.

The key points that differentiate this from the Al Zarooni case are:

1. The steroids given by Gerard Butler's vet are veterinary medications - the ones given by Al Zarooni were not
2. Gerard Butler kept complete medication records for all horses that were treated - Al Zarooni did not
3. The horses treated by Gerard Butler received their injections direct into their joints in December and January, so there appears to be no attempt to build muscle and influence the training regime - Al Zarooni's horses received their injections intra-muscularly in (approx) March, whilst in training.
Click to expand...

Princess, I don't see the relevance of your comments, nor how they can mitigate Butler's actions.
If the substances containing anabolic steroids are banned at all times, then they are illegal. Full stop. How can 'when or how they were given' or 'by whom' really matter? If they were "veterinary medications," then what does that say about the vets who recommended or administered them? Incompetent? Unprofessional? Or just ignorant?
Also, given that the BHA had seen Butler's "record book," and done nothing, this raises serious questions about their competence.
In a nutshell, the BHA have taken away a man's livelihood for eight years (Al Zarooni) and left his reputation in tatters. Most people will say "quite rightly." If Butler now receives special treatment because he has been candid in what he has done ( obviously trying to take a bullet in the shoulder instead of the heart), it can only be interpreted as red-faced mitigation by the BHA for having done nothing- when viewing Butler's record book.
It would be comparable to Ben Johnson losing his Olympic Gold Medal for taking drugs- but when Christine Ohuruogu failed to attend three drugs tests, her "special mitigating circumstances" -of testing negative on other occasions and merely being "forgetful" -reversed her ban. Absolute hypocrisy!
My view is that it makes the BHA look incompetent and ridiculous- and only reactive to a given situation whenever and IF it arises.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back