Racing has a long history of amateur pharmacology and the dose of the day is cobalt. Current stewards’ inquiries into cobalt use in NSW and Victoria have put a very public microscope on some of racing’s slyest characters.
Quebec’s most committed beer drinkers accidentally proved the lethality of high cobalt levels in the 1960s, when 50 of them developed unexplained heart disease and 20 dropped dead from heart attacks.
Autopsies blamed the cobalt that local breweries used to stabilise foam. When cobalt (a transition metal that can cause acute or cumulative poisoning) was removed, the deaths stopped.
Cobalt doping is a type of blood doping that assumes horses will react to cobalt in the same way that humans and laboratory animals do. In those species, research shows that high cobalt levels stimulate production of oxygen-carrying red blood cells.
The downside is that high cobalt levels cause severe damage to organs and sensory systems, and hamper blood clotting. For obvious reasons, cobalt is no longer used in medicine and is banned for athletes.
There are no recorded cases of horses having cobalt deficiency. High cobalt readings cannot result from the use of veterinary supplements. Knowing that high doses of cobalt are poisonous made further research unnecessary.
Due to the damage it causes, a group of leading equine vets has expressed serious concerns over the cruelty implications of cobalt doping. The Victorian RSPCA is following the case closely and will lobby for changes to animal cruelty laws to make administering illegal substances to animals a cruelty offence.
Urine tests on ordinary horses will always show tiny traces of cobalt – single-digit readings, around 5 micrograms (µg)/litre – because it is a naturally occurring trace element and essential micronutrient. High cobalt levels are caused by cobalt injections and drenches, not feed supplements or hoof treatments.
On January 1 2015, the national cobalt standard for racing horses was introduced. The threshold is a generous 200 µg/litre – double scientific recommendations.
Harness Racing NSW first became aware of cobalt doping in 2013 and have led research into preventing it. They took initial advice from Dr Terence Wan of the Hong Kong Jockey Club’s Racing Laboratory who has been working on cobalt doping since 2007.
Wan said that 60 µg/litre was an absolute upper limit reading for an untreated horse but that 100 µg /litre would clearly show that a horse had been treated on race day. This is the cobalt threshold used in Hong Kong.
When Harness Racing NSW conducted an 80-sample population study in NSW and Queensland, the average reading was 17 µg /litre – three times what would be expected. However, statistical analysis of those 80 samples still supported Wan’s threshold.
Despite this evidence, the Harness Racing NSW Board accepted NSW Integrity Manager Reid Sanders’ recommendation that they introduce a cobalt threshold double Wan’s recommendation – 200 µg/L.
As an aside, it is worth noting that Australian horses were excluded from the International Confederation of Horseracing’s international testing and analysis of cobalt use in racing done in 2013. They suspected (and were proven right) that cobalt was being being used in Australian racing and that it would skew the results.
Research shows that one-off doses of cobalt do not benefit horses’ EPO concentrations, red blood cell parameters or heart rate. Cobalt doping in human athletes shows that it is best used repeatedly, which preconditions tissue to hypoxia, protects skeletal muscles from exercise-induced oxidative damage, and enhances endurance.
The focus on race-day testing won’t catch those who are exploiting the real advantage of cobalt – preconditioning. Catching them would require widespread out-of-season and post-competition testing by authorities.
Instead of clearing things up, introducing an out of season testing regime is likely to muddy the waters even more.
Different thresholds would have to be set for non-race-day tests to account for legitimate use of veterinary supplements, but the manufacturers can offer little test data to say what those levels should be.
Understanding of clinical and pathological conditions that may affect horses’ cobalt levels is comparatively poor. Even if it was understood, accurately factoring those conditions in would require a substantial baseline data set of untreated racing horses from different regions, and there isn’t one.
The aggressive smoke and mirrors shows put on by legal eagles at the NSW and Victorian inquiries are a distraction from the core issue. So is their chorus line – trainers, stable hands, vets and hangers on, who range from bumbling accomplices to out-and-out liars.
Cobalt is a banned substance. Cobalt doping is a calculated risk that assumes horses will react to cobalt preconditioning as other species do, resulting in a clear competitive advantage.
When a horse tests high for cobalt it shows that someone has deliberately exposed the horse to likely organ failure, permanent lameness, damaged senses or death. It is undeniably cruel and against the rules of racing.
Which raises the question – does the 200µg/litre threshold prevent cobalt doping? Does testing below the 200µg/litre limit prove that a horse is clean or just that it hasn’t been dosed recently?
At the Racing NSW inquiry, a text from John Camilleri said it all: “These galloping Cs have to wake up a week before to outsmart us trotting grubs.”
The excessive cobalt threshold means that the grubs don’t have to be smart or subtle to slip through the net.
bullock
Guest
nathams punitive attitude is hardly in keeping with the facts. Current testing by ICP-MS is non-discriminatory and measures every atom no matter its source compound, plus Co accumulates in RBCs over time. Many RBCs are haemolysed by race exercise releasing Co and increasing serum/urinary analysis access. A well meaning trainer would be ignorant of the full facts and the authorities for the most part also., The horrendous calamities forecast will only occur when stupidly high overdosing by the vein injection is done. Plus at normal supplementation no danger will ensue. Simply ban possession of Cobalt chloride in any form, that is the real criminal compound.
cowcorner
Roar Pro
Critical--very interesting addition--knowledge and data are powerful--I knew very little about cobalt before the article and subsequent comments. Thank you By chance, I played golf recently with a guy heavily involved in selling horses into HK racing---he sold Silent Witness, winner of its first 17 starts----and he said HK owners who all have to win a ballot to own a horse that races at HKJC, are just not willing to try racing mares there --mainly because hardly anyone has tried mares previously.
Critical
Guest
Interesting article. I am a medical professional well versed in occupational metal exposure and its testsing, cobalt (which was going to be used in humans experiencing chest pain to diagnose heart attacks) and EPO in kidney/heart failure patients. Unfortunately the latest "evidence" re: cobalts effects on a horses hooves (eg. inducing laminitis) is based on a non-peer reviewed article by a Dr involved in the testing- this is VERY dangerous territory for the industry to be quoting "research" in this way ( such things in the past have led to for example the anti-vaxxer movement due to a published journal article connecting autism to MMR vaccines). In the journal article published on cobalt and equine urinary excretion by the HKJC and Dr Terry Wan, there is a paragraph in that article that reiterates that not enough is known about cobalt, its pathophysiological effects and factors that effect levels in the body... I am totally against doping and potentially causing harm to an animal but I am at heart a person of science and I think this rule was introduced prematurely, before any proper research was conducted (which, you cannot compare HKJC thoroughbreds to Australian ones- they have majority geldings (gender can effect protein levels that bind cobalt) with few mares or stallions. The horses there are compounded with their food, water, stable temperature and vets/staff etc CONTROLLED and they are housed at the track they race on... Unlike in Australia, where the horses travel long distances in fluctuating temperatures with potential for stress and altered hydration state in doing this...... Unfortunately, unless we follow suit, no comparison can be made to their levels...Also, look at how much the research these rules were based on have changed since its introduction and the lead witnesses that were involved in implementing such rules (ie. NSW) were instructed to be ignored in a case when their view had changed... All food for thought that needs considering before we crucify these trainers In medicine, a hard and fast rule is not to interpret any single result in isolation- it can have very far reaching and detrimental consequences...
Jason Cornell
Expert
just looking from a different angle. In the case of Darren Smith it was proven that he was trying to get an unfair advantage and his horses had an incredible run of success. The same seems to have applied to Sam Kavanagh. I was actually at the Magic Millions and saw Sam and some of his owners celerbrating as Midsummer Sun went across the line in the Gosford Cup - interesting aside Matt Rudolph was also in the area that day. But take the case of Peter Moody. He has one positive - and his stable has been pretty consistent re results. As Moody has explained the punishment for him far outweighs any advantage of one race win - plus if it was that he was using for a positive effect and had had success - why not do it for more horses. I was probably more concerned re the evidence from the Chris Waller stable that it was normal procedure to give horse a dose of bute (frusemide) when they did fast work on a Tuesday leading into a raceday start on a Saturday. Would be interesting to get the owners bills for the horses suspected of being treated. Maybe the stewards should be reviewing all owners invoices - as i presume the trainers are passing on and and all vets expenses. In the case of Moodys horse Lidari - Oti's Terry Henderson is not the guy you would be able to pull a swifty off anyway discuss.
Nathan Absalom
Roar Guru
Yes, I expect the readings will become lower, even if only because people look more carefully at the supplements they're giving and don't use the ones with Cobalt. Be careful not to give the threshold level too much significance as it is dependent on pharmocokinetics and my understanding is Cobalt is excreted pretty quickly, around a day I think. So, if you're worried the threshold is too low, or someones horses are giving readings higher than others, just turn up the night before a race, or early in the morning on race day, and take the sample. Some racing administrators just don't seem happy when they catch the cheats, as though they would rather not deal with negative publicity.
Tristan Rayner
Editor
Great article Kath and well done for pursuing the issue. The threshold is a difficult one. No one wants an innocent party victimised for an elevated cobalt reading. No one wants someone to get away with doping but keeping just under a generous level. I imagine the threshold will be reigned in once further testing facilities are in place and the vast, vast majority of readings are closer to zero than 100+ ug/L
paulywalnuts
Guest
"The threshold is a generous 200 µg/litre – double scientific recommendations." Which is of course just one of the problems with this dog of a rule. We'll condone massively elevated levels of cobalt, but not a microgram more. In other words, cheat but not too much. Secondly, as the author points out, cobalt deficiency is not a problem but the industry condones the use of feed and vitamin supplements that have been shown to spike cobalt to huge levels. And then 6 month after introducing the rule warn participants of this. A rule which is introduced to stop performance enhancing, except that it doesn't.... and lo and behold they're having great difficulty prosecuting their cases. Rub it out and start again.
Brent Ford
Roar Guru
Midsummer Sun the tragedy of this whole Cobalt saga.
cowcorner
Roar Pro
Very interesting article Kath. I like the cruelty angle. Fair enough given the chances of sudden death ensuing.
Clarence the Clocker
Guest
Good article Kath. Surprising you didn't refer to the death of Midsummer Sun, after it returned elevated cobalt levels in its Gosford Cup win earlier this year.
Nathan Absalom
Roar Guru
I agree there should be more out of competition testing, I think that sometimes racing authorities fall back to the historic view that they are trying to protect the integrity of the race itself, rather than the broader integrity of the sport. This means they are more worried about an old-fashioned plunge on a drugged horse or greyhound rather than people using substances for sustained benefits to win more prizemoney. Not sure the physiological effects of cobalt will be the same for humans and horses (or greyhounds) though, horses and greyhounds have much greater red blood cells stored in their spleen that are released when they sprint, so I would think that there'll be some differences with the effects of the drug in this case. Also, while I agree the act of administrating cobalt is cruel, a problem for animal cruelty legislation in this instance is that it would contain a different standards of guilt and different levels of permissible evidence than the racing tribunals. Racing tribunals need to show that the horse contains a prohibited substance, or that you have possession of a prohibited substance, and then the trainer is responsible. To find someone guilty of animal cruelty, you would have to show beyond reasonable doubt that the person you accuse of administrating the drug, did indeed administer the drug. So while I see the point of the legislation, I would expect there'd be very few convictions, and could even be counter-productive if a high-profile case is found not guilty in court after being rubbed out of racing. It's easy to call for such legislation, but much more difficult to get legislation of that type correct.