Interesting - the AERC accepts money for advertisement for this
product. Could that be interpreted as an endorsement of the product
and the claims of the product being "nutritional support?" I don't
remember reading any disclamers in the EN concerning the
advertisements.
That is your opinion. In the words of the
rider, it was expressly emphasized that the supplement used was
responsible. In that case it was a clear intent to violate the rules.
Bob
Looking at the March issue of EN, on page 8. There is an ad for APF.
It say it is the #1 recommended adaptogenic formula for stress
protection and nutritional support. Endorsed by top riders, trainers
and veterinarians. Stress protection, immune support, increased
endurance, improved recovery.
Then, above the ad is the Vet Forum, written by Dr. Jim Baldwin. The
topic: Rule 13: Equine drugs and treatment.
If APF is illegal to use during competition and should be treated like
banamine -- then let's ask the AERC board to put something to that
effect in (or next to) the advertising for this product -- and any
others that may fit into that category. I'm sure now that most people
would turn to page 8 and see that ad, read the article and not realize
using that product during competition could be a rules violation; it
looks like APF is "nutritional support".
Karen
in NV
============================================================
Arabians were bred for years primarily as a war horse and those
requirements are similar to what we do today with endurance riding. ~
Homer Saferwiffle
