Efficacy of testing for illegal medication in horses.

The research examines the efficiency of drug testing methods in detecting illegal substances in race horses. The study shows variations across different jurisdictions and didn’t find any correlation between tested drugs prevalence and differing medication rules.

Research Overview

• The study involves surveys and data collection from 28 horse racing jurisdictions. Questionnaires from these jurisdictions showed variations in both the number of samples tested and drugs detected.
• The research categorized the drugs into two classes, “hard” drugs, which encompass stimulants, depressants, local anesthetics, narcotic analgesics, and tranquilizers, and “soft” drugs, which are legal in some jurisdictions.
• The efficacy of drug testing was evaluated by comparing the positive test results of hard drugs only. Here, a considerable difference was noted among multiple jurisdictions over several years (1975-1983).

Testing Efficacy and Phenylbutazone

• Data from collected samples indicated that pre-race testing with blood samples is less effective than post-race urine testing in detecting illegal drugs.
• However, the research found no cause for the noted variations in positive drug test results.
• To evaluate the impact of medication rules on drug test results, jurisdictions with differing policies on Phenylbutazone (PBZ), a common medication in horses, were compared. This research established that the allowance or restriction of PBZ did not significantly affect the rate of positive tests for hard drugs.

Implications

• The study seemingly indicates that the presence of PBZ in equine forensic samples does not reduce the ability of forensic laboratories to detect the use of hard or illegal drugs.
• The research suggests that further investigation is required to explore and identify causes for the variations in positive drug test results found in different jurisdictions.