| |
Main
Date: 29 Jan 2007 12:52:16
From:
Subject: RIP Barbaro
|
Just saw that they finally put an end to his misery.
|
|
| |
Date: 31 Jan 2007 09:48:09
From:
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
On Jan 30, 10:45 pm, "AKA gray asphalt"
<goodidea1...@hotmail.spam.com > wrote:
> "David Geesaman" <dgeesamanIHateS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> Thanks for reading and responding to my post. I fell like you got exactly
> what I was tryng to say and responded in an intelligent and thoughtful way.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks I'm glad it was actually read.
But I regret that we had a thoughtful conversation in this group. Some
things just don't belong :o)
Dave
|
| |
Date: 31 Jan 2007 07:20:44
From: Miss Anne Thrope
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
Racing's loss is Alpo's gain.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Jan 2007 12:45:22
From: AKA gray asphalt
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
"Miss Anne Thrope" <High_Colonic@webtv.net > wrote in message
news:4098-45C0899C-967@storefull-3152.bay.webtv.net...
> Racing's loss is Alpo's gain.
Your parents should have been in therapy.
|
| |
Date: 30 Jan 2007 23:55:49
From: Birdie Bill
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
On Jan 30, 7:18 pm, "Darrell Jefress" <eve...@tokyo.com > wrote:
> "Birdie Bill" <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1170205665.701384.255130@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I read somewhere that Barbaro would have been worth $30M in
> > stud fees if they could have saved him. So, they tried very hard.
>
> figure him at about $10 million a year - more if they sent him to the
> southern hemisphere in the Fall to breed down there. And even more if he
> became a successful sire, as I suspect he would have. I think Storm Cat
> brings in around $50 million a year without leaving Kentucky.
>
> > . . . . . , so
> > the horse was worthless without being able to stand and mount
> > a e.
>
> > So that's the bottom line.
>
> The Jacksons were happy enough to keep him around even if he weren't able to
> stand at stud. I was always very impressed thet they were genuine horse
> people, not just people in it as a business venture.
I'm sure the owners had feelings for their animal. How could they
not?
However, I just wanted to point out certain economic realities of the
situation.
|
| |
Date: 30 Jan 2007 17:07:45
From: Birdie Bill
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
On Jan 30, 5:05 pm, "AKA gray asphalt" <goodidea1...@hotmail.spam.com >
wrote:
> <bigoldc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1170103936.196842.156870@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Just saw that they finally put an end to his misery.
>
> It seems that the owners spent a lot of money to keep Barbaro alive and I
> choose to believe that they did it out of love for the horse. Their caring
> was beyond what most, maybe every one so far in the entire horse world, have
> done .... but ...
>
> Why is it that keeping the horse from pain was such a big deal? A very very
> close friend of mine went through a lot of terrible pain with the hope that
> it would eventually get better. What is the big deal about Barbaro going
> through pain?
I read somewhere that Barbaro would have been worth $30M in
stud fees if they could have saved him. So, they tried very hard.
Unfortunately, they don't allow AI in Thoroughbred Racing, and
they have mandatory DNA testing, so it is hard to cheat, so
the horse was worthless without being able to stand and mount
a e.
So that's the bottom line.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Jan 2007 20:20:52
From: Herbert
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
"Birdie Bill" <bighorn_bill@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1170205665.701384.255130@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Unfortunately, they don't allow AI in Thoroughbred Racing, and
That's interesting, I never knew that. I would have thought they'd have
milked that poor horse steady for the past 6 months to stock up.
What about indirect lineage - can an AI'd sire produce offspring that race?
> they have mandatory DNA testing, so it is hard to cheat, so
> the horse was worthless without being able to stand and mount
> a e.
|
| | | |
Date: 01 Feb 2007 00:30:32
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:20:52 GMT, "Herbert"
<humphrey_herbert@yahoo.com > wrote:
>> Unfortunately, they don't allow AI in Thoroughbred Racing, and
>
>That's interesting, I never knew that. I would have thought they'd have
>milked that poor horse steady for the past 6 months to stock up.
>
>What about indirect lineage - can an AI'd sire produce offspring that race?
Nope. The whole lineage has to have witnesses that each papered
stallion covered the papered e. ("Cover" is equestrian speak for
fuck)
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Feb 2007 11:40:10
From: John Reddy
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
In article <s2d2s2lovsk57ksh5ovn60ah3a2bg3ol12@4ax.com >,
Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net > wrote:
> Nope. The whole lineage has to have witnesses that each papered
> stallion covered the papered e. ("Cover" is equestrian speak for
> fuck)
Thank you, Howard.
I will now know to never ask an equestrian type person to cover my ass.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Jan 2007 01:18:53
From: Darrell Jefress
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
"Birdie Bill" <bighorn_bill@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1170205665.701384.255130@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I read somewhere that Barbaro would have been worth $30M in
> stud fees if they could have saved him. So, they tried very hard.
figure him at about $10 million a year - more if they sent him to the
southern hemisphere in the Fall to breed down there. And even more if he
became a successful sire, as I suspect he would have. I think Storm Cat
brings in around $50 million a year without leaving Kentucky.
> . . . . . , so
> the horse was worthless without being able to stand and mount
> a e.
>
> So that's the bottom line.
>
The Jacksons were happy enough to keep him around even if he weren't able to
stand at stud. I was always very impressed thet they were genuine horse
people, not just people in it as a business venture.
DJJ
|
| |
Date: 30 Jan 2007 15:05:35
From: AKA gray asphalt
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
<bigoldcat2@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1170103936.196842.156870@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Just saw that they finally put an end to his misery.
It seems that the owners spent a lot of money to keep Barbaro alive and I
choose to believe that they did it out of love for the horse. Their caring
was beyond what most, maybe every one so far in the entire horse world, have
done .... but ...
Why is it that keeping the horse from pain was such a big deal? A very very
close friend of mine went through a lot of terrible pain with the hope that
it would eventually get better. What is the big deal about Barbaro going
through pain? There is probably a lot more to it: things that only a vet and
someone who really was involved with this type of case would know, but I
object to the idea that saving someone, whether animal or human, from pain
except in the case where it is overwhelmingly obvious that the condition is
terminal. And 'overwhelmingly obvious' can be argued.
I love horses. We grew up with them and raised Arabians. It was very sad for
me to see Barbaro hurt so seriously. It was uplifting to see him get better
and it was sad to see him die but I do feel his owners did a great job and
showed a lot of care. I just think that the idea of pain avoidance shouls
get some more thought.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Jan 2007 01:15:00
From: Darrell Jefress
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
"AKA gray asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com > wrote in message
news:ScQvh.32375$Ej7.22692@newsfe15.phx...
> Why is it that keeping the horse from pain was such a big deal? A very
very
> close friend of mine went through a lot of terrible pain with the hope
that
> it would eventually get better. What is the big deal about Barbaro going
> through pain? There is probably a lot more to it: things that only a vet
and
> someone who really was involved with this type of case would know, but I
> object to the idea that saving someone, whether animal or human, from pain
> except in the case where it is overwhelmingly obvious that the condition
is
> terminal. And 'overwhelmingly obvious' can be argued.
I followed the Barbaro case pretty closely from Day 1. The difference betwen
the pain this week and the pain of previous months was that this time it was
caused by conditions from which there was no longer any chance of recovery.
By last Sunday the colt literally had no good legs left, as even the front
feet had gone lamanitic.
The Jacksons' earlier comments about being pain free were along the lines of
"We don't want him to live if it means living in constant pain, because we
don't believe that would be fair to the horse." So early on in the game, he
was under pretty significant medication in order to manage the pain that
went along with healing, and would eventually go away if all four legs were
able to heal. And by all accounts, from roughly September through December,
the colt required fairly minimal pain management, as the recovery process
was going quite well.
Beyond that is the philosophical/spiritual issue of humans dealing with pain
because it's what life has given us and many believe that adversity is
something we learn from and grow. This is something that doesn't really
apply to horses.
DJJ
|
| | |
Date: 30 Jan 2007 19:06:14
From: David Geesaman
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
AKA gray asphalt wrote:
> <bigoldcat2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1170103936.196842.156870@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Just saw that they finally put an end to his misery.
>
> It seems that the owners spent a lot of money to keep Barbaro alive and I
> choose to believe that they did it out of love for the horse.
Or the economics of breeding. I think nearly every horse owner, no
matter how much they adore their horse, would have stopped far earlier
and euthanized their animal out of love. The possible breeding money
opened doors to explore treatments that no ordinary owner could have
considered.
> Their caring
> was beyond what most, maybe every one so far in the entire horse world, have
> done .... but ...
Far beyond because the nature of recovering horses is nothing like
people. Horses damage their other limbs while waiting for the first
limb to heal. In most cases, the resultant problem is far more
long-term and damaging than the original trauma. Vets have learned long
ago that trying to bring a horse back from such trauma consistently ends
in a painful and heartbreaking end to a very long, expensive, and
painful effort. Unlike humans, these long trauma recoveries
overwhelmingly end up worse than they begin.
> Why is it that keeping the horse from pain was such a big deal? A very very
> close friend of mine went through a lot of terrible pain with the hope that
> it would eventually get better.
> What is the big deal about Barbaro going
> through pain?
Your friend had a choice. Not all people make that kind of choice,
either. Horses are not like that; we have to make the call for them.
> There is probably a lot more to it: things that only a vet and
> someone who really was involved with this type of case would know, but I
> object to the idea that saving someone, whether animal or human, from pain
> except in the case where it is overwhelmingly obvious that the condition is
> terminal. And 'overwhelmingly obvious' can be argued.
Broken legs on a horse are generally considered 'overwhelmingly obvious'
terminal cases. Many valuable and treasured horses have been put down
on the spot in liu of waiting for a more detailed medical evaluation.
While surely there is an element of tradition in these actions, it's
mostly based on centuries of hard-learned experience.
> I love horses. We grew up with them and raised Arabians. It was very sad for
> me to see Barbaro hurt so seriously. It was uplifting to see him get better
> and it was sad to see him die but I do feel his owners did a great job and
> showed a lot of care. I just think that the idea of pain avoidance shouls
> get some more thought.
Well I agree that pain avoidance, in and of itself, is a silly way to be
guided in life. It's certainly foolish and naive. I don't think
Barbaro's owners were callous to the pain avoidance issue, but they
might have pushed it further than I would have. But I don't think I can
judge that since I didn't know Barbaro personally and wouldn't be able
to judge his emotional and physical changes. Only the people who worked
closely with him before the accident can really know that.
Dave
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Jan 2007 19:45:43
From: AKA gray asphalt
Subject: Re: RIP Barbaro
|
"David Geesaman" <dgeesamanIHateSpam@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:epomhl01a65@news2.newsguy.com...
> AKA gray asphalt wrote:
>> <bigoldcat2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1170103936.196842.156870@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> Just saw that they finally put an end to his misery.
>>
>> It seems that the owners spent a lot of money to keep Barbaro alive and I
>> choose to believe that they did it out of love for the horse.
>
> Or the economics of breeding. I think nearly every horse owner, no matter
> how much they adore their horse, would have stopped far earlier and
> euthanized their animal out of love. The possible breeding money opened
> doors to explore treatments that no ordinary owner could have considered.
>
>> Their caring was beyond what most, maybe every one so far in the entire
>> horse world, have done .... but ...
>
> Far beyond because the nature of recovering horses is nothing like people.
> Horses damage their other limbs while waiting for the first limb to heal.
> In most cases, the resultant problem is far more long-term and damaging
> than the original trauma. Vets have learned long ago that trying to bring
> a horse back from such trauma consistently ends in a painful and
> heartbreaking end to a very long, expensive, and painful effort. Unlike
> humans, these long trauma recoveries overwhelmingly end up worse than they
> begin.
>
>> Why is it that keeping the horse from pain was such a big deal? A very
>> very close friend of mine went through a lot of terrible pain with the
>> hope that it would eventually get better.
>> What is the big deal about Barbaro going through pain?
>
> Your friend had a choice. Not all people make that kind of choice,
> either. Horses are not like that; we have to make the call for them.
>
>> There is probably a lot more to it: things that only a vet and someone
>> who really was involved with this type of case would know, but I object
>> to the idea that saving someone, whether animal or human, from pain
>> except in the case where it is overwhelmingly obvious that the condition
>> is terminal. And 'overwhelmingly obvious' can be argued.
>
> Broken legs on a horse are generally considered 'overwhelmingly obvious'
> terminal cases. Many valuable and treasured horses have been put down on
> the spot in liu of waiting for a more detailed medical evaluation. While
> surely there is an element of tradition in these actions, it's mostly
> based on centuries of hard-learned experience.
>
>> I love horses. We grew up with them and raised Arabians. It was very sad
>> for me to see Barbaro hurt so seriously. It was uplifting to see him get
>> better and it was sad to see him die but I do feel his owners did a great
>> job and showed a lot of care. I just think that the idea of pain
>> avoidance shouls get some more thought.
>
> Well I agree that pain avoidance, in and of itself, is a silly way to be
> guided in life. It's certainly foolish and naive. I don't think
> Barbaro's owners were callous to the pain avoidance issue, but they might
> have pushed it further than I would have. But I don't think I can judge
> that since I didn't know Barbaro personally and wouldn't be able to judge
> his emotional and physical changes. Only the people who worked closely
> with him before the accident can really know that.
>
> Dave
Thanks for reading and responding to my post. I fell like you got exactly
what I was tryng to say and responded in an intelligent and thoughtful way.
|
|
