- Messages
- 1,362
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 38
nigel if people have wat there about to say just leve them be there is no point editing them if they are only stating there point of view even of u dont agree with it?
The Most Dog Friendly Community Online
Join Dog Forum to Discuss Breeds, Training, Food and More
B.W.R.A. championship testing
- Thread starter john m
- Start date
The title of this thread is 'B.W.R.A. championship testing'. Posts that had nothing to do with the thread subject were moved to the 'Chit Chat Zone' in order to keep this thread on track.
The posting rules say -
No trolling. Don't make posts that are inflammatory just to get people riled up. Substance is the key to not being labeled a troll.
No spamming - No flooding with useless content.
The posts that were moved had no substance relevant to the subject and added nothing to the discussion.
The posting rules say -
No trolling. Don't make posts that are inflammatory just to get people riled up. Substance is the key to not being labeled a troll.
No spamming - No flooding with useless content.
The posts that were moved had no substance relevant to the subject and added nothing to the discussion.
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been through the replies on this topic several times and, frankly, I find it all very depressing. Not once has anybody suggested seeking advice from a greyhound or veterinary body to set acceptable levels. Does everybody in whippet racing have a degree in biochemistry or some other veterinary science? First of all, forget percentages. This 8% figure is something set by the BWRA committee that has no meaning in lab reports. It should be referred to as 8 microgrammes per millilitre, best written on a keyboard as 8ug/ml. And my first question is this:-
how was this 8-10ug/ml band reached? What authority helped the BWRA to reach this band? My best guess, and I may be wrong, is that it was reached arbitrarily to fall in line with the lab reports of Hillside Lad (9.3ug/ml theobromine), and Don Ambro. Perhaps somebody who was at the national meeting Jan 11, 1998 can enlighten me.
Tony Taylor, Vicky and Michelle have read the information I sent them and now accept that the BWRA and NWRF have got this drug testing all wrong, particularly where the methylxanthines (caffeine, theophylline, theobromine) are concerned. It may be only 3 converts, but it's 3 more than I had before coming on to k9 and therefore consider all the work and abuse worth while. But there are still people that haven't grasped the basics, so allow me to explain in simple terms.
Caffeine (eg. coffee) will show up in a urine sample as predominant caffeine, with little or trace theophylline and theobromine.
Cocoa (eg. chocolate) give a high theobromine peak with little or trace theophylline and caffeine.
As Tony correctly pointed out, the Hellbound lab report is not consistent with chocolate, and suggests other source.
The lab reports of Xstasy, Hillside Lad, and Avalanche are without any doubt from having eaten a very small amount of cocoa product, and I mean small. Our research has only found one test on running dogs and chocolate. A greyhound, having been given a single chocolate drop, after 4 and 1/2 hours gave a urine sample showing 14ug/ml theobromine.
Quick maths, people, how much chocolate then to get a 20lb whippet over the absurd 8ug/ml line set by the BWRA?
Want to know something interesting? Caffeine has just been removed from the WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) list of banned substances. Something even more interesting? Theobromine has NEVER appeared on it! Why? Well this is going to hurt those that are desperate to say they were only beaten by Hillside Lad, Xstasy etc. as they were on drugs, but theobromine has never been on the list because it is virtually inert. It doesn't affect the dog's performance. Still don't get it? Let's use an analogy some of our 'learned' friends may be able to understand. Let's use booze as an example. One whippet racer drinks 2 pints of whisky. One has 2 pints of lager, yet another 2 pints of mineral water. As far as the BWRA is concerned, they're all '2%'. What's the argument, it's all stuff you drink in a pub isn't it? They've all had 2 pints haven't they?
Think of caffeine as the whisky, theophylline as the lager and theobromine as the mineral water and you'll start to understand that, even though all 3 are classed as xanthines, they are all different.
The BWRA and NWRF are not qualified to set levels any more than I am.
And try to understand, that just because a lab issues a report showing substances found it doesn't mean that those substances affected the animal's performance. It just means that the substances were there. The HFL test mainly for the horse and greyhound fraternities. These animals don't live in the houses or steal things off the kitchen counter. They are professionally stabled and kenneled. As such, chocolate does not as a rule get into their systems. When it does, and it occasionally happens, they are called before the authorities to explain. I once went down to the NGRC headquarters in London and spoke to their head of security, responsible for dope testing. Anything that is not normally in animal feed is illegal, this includes chocolate. It's not banned because it affects performance, it's baned because it's not part of a greyhound's diet. We treat our whippets to chocolate treats. It does not make them run faster. The BWRA rule book clearly states that substances are illegal only if they affect performance. Theobromine should either be off the list, or treated for what it is. Virtually nothing.
how was this 8-10ug/ml band reached? What authority helped the BWRA to reach this band? My best guess, and I may be wrong, is that it was reached arbitrarily to fall in line with the lab reports of Hillside Lad (9.3ug/ml theobromine), and Don Ambro. Perhaps somebody who was at the national meeting Jan 11, 1998 can enlighten me.
Tony Taylor, Vicky and Michelle have read the information I sent them and now accept that the BWRA and NWRF have got this drug testing all wrong, particularly where the methylxanthines (caffeine, theophylline, theobromine) are concerned. It may be only 3 converts, but it's 3 more than I had before coming on to k9 and therefore consider all the work and abuse worth while. But there are still people that haven't grasped the basics, so allow me to explain in simple terms.
Caffeine (eg. coffee) will show up in a urine sample as predominant caffeine, with little or trace theophylline and theobromine.
Cocoa (eg. chocolate) give a high theobromine peak with little or trace theophylline and caffeine.
As Tony correctly pointed out, the Hellbound lab report is not consistent with chocolate, and suggests other source.
The lab reports of Xstasy, Hillside Lad, and Avalanche are without any doubt from having eaten a very small amount of cocoa product, and I mean small. Our research has only found one test on running dogs and chocolate. A greyhound, having been given a single chocolate drop, after 4 and 1/2 hours gave a urine sample showing 14ug/ml theobromine.
Quick maths, people, how much chocolate then to get a 20lb whippet over the absurd 8ug/ml line set by the BWRA?
Want to know something interesting? Caffeine has just been removed from the WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) list of banned substances. Something even more interesting? Theobromine has NEVER appeared on it! Why? Well this is going to hurt those that are desperate to say they were only beaten by Hillside Lad, Xstasy etc. as they were on drugs, but theobromine has never been on the list because it is virtually inert. It doesn't affect the dog's performance. Still don't get it? Let's use an analogy some of our 'learned' friends may be able to understand. Let's use booze as an example. One whippet racer drinks 2 pints of whisky. One has 2 pints of lager, yet another 2 pints of mineral water. As far as the BWRA is concerned, they're all '2%'. What's the argument, it's all stuff you drink in a pub isn't it? They've all had 2 pints haven't they?
Think of caffeine as the whisky, theophylline as the lager and theobromine as the mineral water and you'll start to understand that, even though all 3 are classed as xanthines, they are all different.
The BWRA and NWRF are not qualified to set levels any more than I am.
And try to understand, that just because a lab issues a report showing substances found it doesn't mean that those substances affected the animal's performance. It just means that the substances were there. The HFL test mainly for the horse and greyhound fraternities. These animals don't live in the houses or steal things off the kitchen counter. They are professionally stabled and kenneled. As such, chocolate does not as a rule get into their systems. When it does, and it occasionally happens, they are called before the authorities to explain. I once went down to the NGRC headquarters in London and spoke to their head of security, responsible for dope testing. Anything that is not normally in animal feed is illegal, this includes chocolate. It's not banned because it affects performance, it's baned because it's not part of a greyhound's diet. We treat our whippets to chocolate treats. It does not make them run faster. The BWRA rule book clearly states that substances are illegal only if they affect performance. Theobromine should either be off the list, or treated for what it is. Virtually nothing.
Welcome to Dog Forum!
Join our vibrant online community dedicated to all things canine. Whether you're a seasoned owner or new to the world of dogs, our forum is your go-to hub for sharing stories, seeking advice, and connecting with fellow dog lovers. From training tips to health concerns, we cover it all. Register now and unleash the full potential of your dog-loving experience!
Login or Register