Mysterious Breast Cancer Drug Case Sees Trainers Fined Modestly Amidst Unproven Origins
Five prominent stables found at the centre of a perplexing case involving a banned breast cancer drug have received relatively minor financial penalties. This comes after authorities were unable to definitively pinpoint the source of the prohibited substances detected in their racehorses. The Victorian Racing Tribunal (VRT) delivered its verdict, acknowledging a distinct lack of evidence directly implicating the trainers in the horses’ positive tests for formestane and its metabolite, 4-hydroxytestosterone.
Formestane, a medication primarily recognised for its use in treating breast cancer in overseas markets, is strictly prohibited from use and importation within Australia. When administered, it can function as an anabolic-androgenic steroid, a class of drugs known for their performance-enhancing capabilities. The mystery deepened as five horses, hailing from five separate training establishments, returned positive results for formestane and 4-hydroxytestosterone following races conducted at various tracks between February 22, 2023, and April 13, 2023.
Tribunal’s Decision and Penalties
On Monday, the VRT imposed penalties on the involved trainers. Smiley Chan, Julius Sandhu, and the training partnership of Amy and Ash Yargi were each fined $4000 for presentation offences – essentially, having a horse test positive on race day. Of this amount, $2000 was suspended for a period of 12 months.
Fellow trainers Symon Wilde and the father-son combination of Mark and Levi Kavanagh faced a slightly higher penalty of $6000 each for the same charge. This distinction was attributed to their prior racing records, with $3000 of their fines also suspended for 12 months.
The Unexplained Origin: A Key Factor
Tribunal chairman Magistrate Peter Reardon highlighted a significant challenge in the proceedings: neither the trainers nor Racing Victoria could establish the source of the banned substances.
“The trainers were unable to explain to stewards what caused the positive findings, and they had never heard of the substance,” Reardon stated during the tribunal’s decision announcement. He further noted that some veterinarians involved were also unfamiliar with the drug.
Crucially, no incriminating evidence was discovered within the stables or any other associated locations. The VRT also observed that the levels of the prohibited substance found in each horse were notably low.
Magistrate Reardon concluded that the tribunal could not definitively determine how the substances entered the horses’ systems. Despite the unusual circumstances, he deemed financial penalties appropriate, albeit at a “significantly reduced” rate.
“The tribunal should not be seen to condone the presence of prohibited substances in horses on a race day,” he emphasised.
Formestane: A Substance with Nuances
While the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) was not directly involved in this specific case, Reardon acknowledged that WADA has established threshold levels for formestane in human athletes. This is partly because formestane can occur naturally in humans.
“With no threshold level for this substance found in a horse, presentation offences have been committed,” Reardon explained. However, he tempered this by adding, “But the levels found in each horse are so low it is doubtful it would have any effect on the performance of each horse – either illegal performance enhancement or a negative impact.”
A Negotiated Plea and Agreed Facts
The trainers initially contested the charges, pleading not guilty. However, after a five-day hearing in December of the previous year, they agreed to alter their pleas to guilty following an arrangement with Racing Victoria.
As part of the agreed facts, the trainers committed to not arguing that formestane and 4-hydroxytestosterone were produced naturally within the horses (an endogenous origin). In return, Racing Victoria agreed not to pursue the argument that the substances were deliberately administered to the horses (an exogenous origin). Racing Victoria also conceded that it lacked evidence to contradict the trainers’ statements to stewards.
Strict Liability and the Trainers’ Stance
Under the prevailing rules of racing, presentation offences are considered strict liability offences. This means Racing Victoria is not required to prove how the substance entered the horse, only that it was present.
For three years, since the initial positive urine samples were recorded by Racing Analytical Services Limited (RASL), the trainers have consistently denied any knowledge of the substances’ origins.
Their legal counsel, Damian Sheales, put forth the argument that formestane and 4-hydroxytestosterone could potentially occur naturally in horses, mirroring their natural occurrence in humans. He maintained that this possibility was “impossible to discount.”
Sheales described the case as unique due to the inability to establish a definitive cause for the positive results. He argued that no inference of wrongdoing, negligence, wilful ignorance of inadequate stable practices, or unsupervised actions by third parties like veterinarians could be made against the trainers. He further contended that no penalty should have been imposed, considering the substantial and ongoing costs already incurred by the trainers.
Ramifications for the Horses
As a direct consequence of the positive tests, all five horses were disqualified from the races in which they had competed. In Symon Wilde’s specific case, the disqualification resulted in a significant financial blow. His mare, Sirileo Miss, forfeited $150,000 in group-3 race winnings. Furthermore, her potential sale value as a brood mare reportedly plummeted from an estimated $800,000 to $400,000.
