archoak
Well-Known Member
I didn't know sudocreme was banned (told by our trainer today) - have just looked up banned substances on BE downloads - it's very confusing, don't think I'm going to use anything from now on just to be sure
Sudocreme - a banned substance
- Thread starter archoak
- Start date
connie1288
Well-Known Member
Safest not to use anything isnt it 
jules89
Well-Known Member
oh my goodness! Wouldn't have guessed that...!
archoak
Well-Known Member
I know
I was just about to slap some on Duke's leg - lucky she was there, fancy getting banned for Sudocreme
MandyMoo
Well-Known Member
why is it banned?! thats really strange haha xx
haha xxGrey_Eventer
Well-Known Member
whys that banned? thats really strange!
Foxford
Well-Known Member
It actually contains a local anaesthetic - I'm guessing that's why!
lucretia
Well-Known Member
it has been on the list for ages, it contains a steroid to allieviate nappy rash...... which of course would improve performance
MegaBeast
Well-Known Member
Madness. Although I was told the other day that as it contains an antibacterial it will slow down the healing process so unless got reason to suspect infected would stick with the old vaseline anyway!
archoak
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
it has been on the list for ages, it contains a steroid to allieviate nappy rash...... which of course would improve performance
[/ QUOTE ]
As Lucretia says.
it has been on the list for ages, it contains a steroid to allieviate nappy rash...... which of course would improve performance
[/ QUOTE ]
As Lucretia says.
Britestar
Well-Known Member
Never use it anyway, cos my horses react badly to it.
Bubblegum
Well-Known Member
can't believe that... if it's allowed on babies ( for nappy rash)...and is over the counter drug...surely not ???!!!
Crumbs... we use it alot.... not anymore... *gulp*
Crumbs... we use it alot.... not anymore... *gulp*
bigbluebird13
Member
Worrying as I'd never have known and use it all the time - but not anymore
stroppymare153
Well-Known Member
Contacted Sudocrem and received the following message from their Senior Medical Advisor...
This is something that has been fascinating me for all the time I have worked at Forest with Sudocrem, and interestingly enough, I have received guidance recently. Your information has added to our knowledge set, and we can give you an answer which may clarify what is going on.
Sudocrem antiseptic healing cream is licensed in the United Kingdom as a medicine. I am attaching the data sheet which qualitatively lists the ingredients. Its licence is for human use only, and it is not registered as a veterinary medicine within the terms of their remit. The product has been on the market for over 50 years, and consequently there is very little experimental data, as it was licensed at a time when only a minimum of information was needed, and the lack of safety issues has permitted us to keep it that way. There are no studies with our product on the absorption of ingredients nor metabolism and excretion: because their legacy was and continues to be one of human safety at the doses used,and there have not been demands for additional information.
So point number one is that this is a human medicine and thus would seem to be included in your banned list.
Point two is exactly what you say, in that the benzyl alcohol is perceived to be a local anaesthetic, and we make promotional claims for the licensed indications based on that proposition .According to the most recent edition of Martindales extra pharmacopoeia, benzyl alcohol is used as an antiseptic/actibacterial/preservative, but in concentrations up to 10% (ie relevant to Sudocrem) it has anaesthetic and antipruritic activity. Thus it could be a banned substance for that reason. Clearly the amounts used in humans are insufficient (0.39% w/w) to make the product an effective local anaesthetic which numbs pain, but we make the claim soothes which is a combination of emollient and anaesthetic action.
I have had discussion with the veterinary medicines directorate, and they have informed me that the only way that a human medicine can be sold for animal use is if there is no suitable alternative. This usually means that all but life saving or serious medicines should not be advised (by companies or professionals) for animal use.
Forest also market a non medicinal version of Sudocrem outside the UK (e.g. Netherlands) This is sold under the cosmetic regulations and no medicinal claims are made. The ingredients are the same, but some are in slightly lower quantities but not the benzyl alcohol, and so you probably might not want to go down that route. It might be possible to argue that the benzyl alcohol was not being used for its local anaesthetic action in such a product, but of course it depends on the opinion of the person who raises the point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
So anyway, it seems that the benzyl alcohol is a problem BUT ALSO, simply the fact that it is a human medicine where there is (almost certainly) a suitable animal alternative.
As a great fan, not only of sudocrem but also palmers shea butter it seems I am stuffed!!
This is something that has been fascinating me for all the time I have worked at Forest with Sudocrem, and interestingly enough, I have received guidance recently. Your information has added to our knowledge set, and we can give you an answer which may clarify what is going on.
Sudocrem antiseptic healing cream is licensed in the United Kingdom as a medicine. I am attaching the data sheet which qualitatively lists the ingredients. Its licence is for human use only, and it is not registered as a veterinary medicine within the terms of their remit. The product has been on the market for over 50 years, and consequently there is very little experimental data, as it was licensed at a time when only a minimum of information was needed, and the lack of safety issues has permitted us to keep it that way. There are no studies with our product on the absorption of ingredients nor metabolism and excretion: because their legacy was and continues to be one of human safety at the doses used,and there have not been demands for additional information.
So point number one is that this is a human medicine and thus would seem to be included in your banned list.
Point two is exactly what you say, in that the benzyl alcohol is perceived to be a local anaesthetic, and we make promotional claims for the licensed indications based on that proposition .According to the most recent edition of Martindales extra pharmacopoeia, benzyl alcohol is used as an antiseptic/actibacterial/preservative, but in concentrations up to 10% (ie relevant to Sudocrem) it has anaesthetic and antipruritic activity. Thus it could be a banned substance for that reason. Clearly the amounts used in humans are insufficient (0.39% w/w) to make the product an effective local anaesthetic which numbs pain, but we make the claim soothes which is a combination of emollient and anaesthetic action.
I have had discussion with the veterinary medicines directorate, and they have informed me that the only way that a human medicine can be sold for animal use is if there is no suitable alternative. This usually means that all but life saving or serious medicines should not be advised (by companies or professionals) for animal use.
Forest also market a non medicinal version of Sudocrem outside the UK (e.g. Netherlands) This is sold under the cosmetic regulations and no medicinal claims are made. The ingredients are the same, but some are in slightly lower quantities but not the benzyl alcohol, and so you probably might not want to go down that route. It might be possible to argue that the benzyl alcohol was not being used for its local anaesthetic action in such a product, but of course it depends on the opinion of the person who raises the point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
So anyway, it seems that the benzyl alcohol is a problem BUT ALSO, simply the fact that it is a human medicine where there is (almost certainly) a suitable animal alternative.
As a great fan, not only of sudocrem but also palmers shea butter it seems I am stuffed!!
worMy
Well-Known Member
its WHAT!!!! sh!T!!!!
archoak
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that, I found it really interesting
It seems we will only be allowed to use Sudocreme in the Winter then when there is no BE
Thistle
Well-Known Member
wonder what the withdrawal period is?
If it is a slight local I should think it would be denatured by the body pretty quickly.
If it is a slight local I should think it would be denatured by the body pretty quickly.
Rollin
Well-Known Member
Very interesting reply from medical advisor, esp that professionals should not recommend it for animal use,,,my vet did?
I don't compete but it goes to show how careful you have to be.
I don't compete but it goes to show how careful you have to be.