BHA Releases Anti-Doping Guide

by T.D. Thornton

United States breeders, owners and regulatory officials attempting to figure out the export implications of the British Horse Racing Authority’s impending zero-tolerance steroid policy were given guidance in the form of a 23-page expanded rules clarification released on Tuesday. 

But while the new regulations shed light on a number of concerns such as the non-retroactivity of the rules prior to their Mar. 2 implementation and the chain of responsibility for exported U.S. horses, other issues remain in limbo, such as when or if testing labs will be accredited in the U.S. or what will happen if the owner of a U.S.-based horse is faced with the decision of administering anabolics for a legitimate veterinary reason prior to a potential sale to a British-based client.

BHA guidelines initially released in June 2014 mandated that “a horse must not be administered an anabolic steroid at any point in its life” under penalty of being ineligible to start in Britain for 14 months. “Responsible persons” associated with a breach of the BHA doping rules are “likely to receive a penalty of within one to 10 years’ disqualification, dependent on the circumstances of the case.” 

Although anabolics are the main thrust of the new rules, “substances that have no legitimate justification for use in racehorses” also include “peptide hormones, growth factors and related substances; hormone and metabolic modulators; manipulation of blood and blood components; blood transfusions; genetic and cellular manipulation and oxygen carriers.”

U.S.-based Thoroughbreds exported into Britain to race must have registration paperwork turned in 14 days prior to arrival and must be in the country and available for testing 10 business days in advance of their intended race (permanent imports have a separate, although similar, set of guidelines). Thoroughbreds sent to Britain from Ireland, France and Germany that have spent 12 months under the equivalent policies of those countries will be exempt from these requirements.

The BHA regulations state: “The registration process remains almost exactly the same as currently—the only difference is the breeder (or their agent on their behalf) must sign a declaration that they agree to be bound by the Rules of Racing, and they confirm the horse hasn’t been administered nor could have ingested any substances which are prohibited at all times at any point in its life…The trainer should bear in mind that any delay in the BHA being able to collect a sample from the horse could result in the analysis being delayed and not returned in time for their horse to be cleared to race.” 
A key component of the expanded rules is that the prohibition of the lifetime-banned substances only counts for drugs administered from Mar. 2 onward. 

“The new Rules will not be applied retrospectively,” the BHA underscored in its report. “Instead their purpose is to ensure that the zero-tolerance policy is adhered to moving forwards.” 

To illustrate, the BHA gave the following example: “If a hair sample collected in October 2015 tests positive for an anabolic steroid, but further investigations identify it was administered in October 2014 whilst the horse was in another jurisdiction, then no action will be taken against the October 2015 trainer. In addition, no action will be taken against the horse (i.e. no stand down period or suspension will be applied).” 

The BHA continued: “However, if the administration was after the [Mar. 2] effective date of the new rules, the horse would not be permitted to race in Britain, either as a permanent import, or as an international runner, for 14 months from the date of the administration.” 

While the BHA had previously accentuated that hair sampling would be the primary testing protocol (because of its ability to better pinpoint lifetime usage), the new clarifications outlined that urine and blood testing would continue to be used while hair sampling gets phased in. 

“While hair sampling is available to the BHA at all times as part of the testing regime, it is not envisaged that it will be deployed extensively immediately upon implementation of the new rules,” the BHA stated. “We expect hair sampling to become a more useful and more frequently deployed tool as the rules mature over time.” 

The BHA will pay for the costs associated with the sample collection and analysis for international runners. For horses permanently imported into Britain, those costs will be the responsibility of the importer. 

The BHA stressed that it is trying to mitigate the “perceived risk” that trainers or owners will be penalized for substance administrations that might have occurred prior to their taking possession of a horse. 

“The BHA wishes to assure participants that this is not the case,” the report explained. “A positive hair sample…will not, on its own, constitute a breach of the rules…Instead, a positive hair test will require BHA to investigate further to determine when the substance was administered to the horse…The consequences to any associated persons and to the horse will depend on when the substance was administered.” 

Owners or trainers who know that a horse has been administered anabolic steroids prior to Mar. 2 “for legitimate therapeutic reasons and at a time, and in circumstances, when that was not a breach of the rules” are encouraged to notify the BHA in advance of required testing. 

The BHA addressed circumstances in which a veterinarian might advise an owner that a horse needs a prohibited substance or method, and provided a list of exceptions that includes: Beta-2 agonists (in an appropriate dosage as a bronchodilator); synthetic proteins and peptides registered for veterinary or medical use; manipulation of blood or blood transfusions when used for life-saving purposes or as veterinary regenerative therapies; modified hemoglobin products in situations of acute, life-threatening anemia. 

Regarding protections for buyers at international auctions, the BHA deferred to the conditions of sale and available testing protocols at each auction house. Major U.S. sales companies, for example, give the buyer the option of rescinding the sale if the horse shows evidence of steroid administration 45 days prior to the sale. 

But the BHA went on to warn that “at the current time, these [auction house protocols] will not be to the same standards as the BHA’s testing, and therefore this testing is not a guarantee that the horse will pass any testing by the BHA, or that it won’t subsequently be found to have been administered an anabolic steroid.” 

The rules further continued: “The BHA is intending to have other elective testing available outside of the sales house environment…This is being addressed as a matter of priority, with a view to implementing it in the next few weeks. As part of our discussions with sales houses, we will explore the opportunities for the catalogue to identify if the horse is already satisfied the requirements for registration with the BHA.” 

In the U.S., The Jockey Club distributed a press release on Tuesday that responded to the new BHA rules, as viewed by a collective of U.S. stakeholders. 

“We appreciate that the BHA has acknowledged some of the practical and logistical challenges of implementing these new rules,” the release said. “We look forward to the publication of critical information regarding testing protocols and the laboratories, in the United States and elsewhere, that have been accredited to conduct the tests…The BHA recognizes that, at present, there is no facility for trainers or owners to request sampling to provide assurance that a horse is clear before they take on or purchase a horse.”