Frauds: When Advocates Are Anything But

When is an advocate not really an advocate? Or perhaps the better question, when we are discussing an advocate (I’m talking to you media), shouldn’t we at least identify for whom the advocacy is aimed?

A recent Fox Harrisburg article on the new “safety” regs rolled out by PA officials in January is entitled: “Advocates continue to fight against thoroughbred racehorse abuse and mistreatment in Pa.” But the piece, in fact, quotes only one “advocate,” prominent PA vet Bryan Langlois. The good vet was also featured in a May 4 “Letter to the Editor” at the Thoroughbred Daily News, saying things like: “The changes being announced, implemented, and backed up with action are extremely pleasing to see. … PA is finally taking the right steps to bring integrity and safety back to the sport.”

To the unsuspecting eye, all this sounds fine, even admirable. Don’t we want more vets, especially those outside the industry (Dr. Langlois is not employed in racing), speaking out on behalf of the horses? Well, in truth, Langlois is an unabashed horseracing fan. Yes, fan – as in someone who can’t imagine a world without it, as in someone who will do and say anything to reverse the industry’s recent public slide. I know this because I’ve had dealings with him.

Look, as I’ve said about “reformist” racing writers (Joe Drape, Ray Paulick, et al.), people like Bryan Langlois, with their impressive credentials, are, in many ways, our greatest enemies – wolves in sheep’s clothing. Undeniably intelligent and articulate, their opinions and ideas can, at least to the lay public, be utterly persuasive – you know, all Racing needs is a good housecleaning, a return to its roots, the “Horseracing Integrity Act.” But you see, in Dr. Langlois’ worldview, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with breeding and exploiting horses for gambling. By touting PA’s specious measures (see the fraud that is NYRA’s “reforms”: here and here), Langlois is helping the horseracing industry, thereby condemning countless more horses to lives of abject suffering and, more often than not (track/stall/slaughter), painful, premature death. In short, and in answer to the question at the top, the Bryan Langloises of the world are advocates for horseracing – not horses. And to that I say, for shame.

Subscribe and Get Notified of New Posts


  1. I’m sure this “advocate” is advocating for the opportunity to continue his career in this industry so that he also may contribute to the HANDBOOK OF HORSE-KILLING with contributions already made by such illustrious figures in the industry as BAFFERT & BREWSTER.

    • Not being directly employed as a track vet or State vet is beside the point. He is a fan of this horse-abusing, horse-killing, gambling industry that exploits horses as though they were used cars! God knows what kind of under the table exchanges are made in this seedy “game” of cheating, doping, corporate welfare-dependent gambling and horse-killing.

  2. For many years i noticed the comments of the vet Bryan Langlois on the Paulick Report. At first I thought he was a voice for the horse (this was when the shocking abuse of the racehorses in Pennsylvania was a hot topic) but I later realised that he was far from it. He supports the horseracing industry big time and it would not surprise me if he was a racehorse owner and/or gambler. The veterinarian oath states that no harm is to be done to the animal. The great majority of the vets in the horseracing industry make a mockery of the oath they swore to after years of studying veterinary science.

Comments are closed.