Advice please for shoeing a chronic founder case

quirky said:
Hmm, then how come barefoot is held up as some type of Utopia if there is no such term defined :confused:?
Click to expand...

I don't think you are confused at all, I think you know exactly what is meant by everything that has been written on here and that you are trying to split hairs to create an argument. No thanks, I have more important things to argue about.
 
If you work a foot which is sufficiently compromised, hard enough then there is a possiblity that the additional trauma to the weak foot could lead someone dealing with the consequences to give a diagnosis of 'concussion' laminitis. But the true causal factor is most likely to be the fact that the foot was already compromised by diet etc.
Click to expand...

Good point Lucy, you may well be quite right about that. In that horse's case, yes, I believe they werre already compromised - but not showing any symptoms until after the concussive damage was done.
 
cptrayes said:
I don't think you are confused at all, I think you know exactly what is meant by everything that has been written on here and that you are trying to split hairs to create an argument. No thanks, I have more important things to argue about.
Click to expand...

I do understand most things, I'm a bright button :).

What I am trying to say, which you don't seem to be able to accept is ......

The barefooters (no such word :o) go on about their horses being able to go barefoot blah, blah, blah.

But, how many are truly barefoot?
Having boots/socks on does not constitute a barefoot horse in my eyes.
A barefoot horse would be one that has no shoes on and survives happily without man made attachments being applied for work at any time.

Are there actually any barefoot horses out there by that definition :confused:?

Genuine question :).
 
quirky said:
I do understand most things, I'm a bright button :).

What I am trying to say, which you don't seem to be able to accept is ......

The barefooters (no such word :o) go on about their horses being able to go barefoot blah, blah, blah.

But, how many are truly barefoot?
Having boots/socks on does not constitute a barefoot horse in my eyes.
A barefoot horse would be one that has no shoes on and survives happily without man made attachments being applied for work at any time.

Are there actually any barefoot horses out there by that definition :confused:?

Genuine question :).
Click to expand...

I've got one who will stomp over flints in his bare feet, and does many miles on rough forestry tracks in the summer with no boots, one who wears boots a minority of the time, and a third who needs boots to cope with some of the hacking and jumping. I'd like to get them all out of boots completely, and I am working hard at it, but in the meantime the boots are great. The difference between using boots and using shoes is that the shoes are on all the time, but boots are only on when you need them. Shoes constrain many of the physiological processes in the foot and effectively act as a splint so that the hoof structures are not able/don't need to develop. Boots don't do this. I consider all mine to be barefoot, but only one is an absolutely true performance barefooter.
 
brucea said:
And we have some barefoot horses who perform brilliantly too....barefoot horses are all over the place! ;)
Click to expand...

Doesn't one of yours have a problem with recurring absesses ?

Following frequent advice from the Barefoot brigade on using boots, I think the belief of all horses being able to be worked normally over all terrain, unshod, is flawed. Since 'Barefoot' become reinvented as utopia for all, a few years back- as opposed to many tough ponies and cobs never being shod 40 years ago -the market in hoof boots has ballooned. Funny that. Maybe the mantra should be Barefoot-with-boots-in-your-pocket.

Anyway, none of this helps the OP who actually asked for shoeing advice before thread was hijacked by a few their own agenda.
 
A barefoot horse would be one that has no shoes on and survives happily without man made attachments being applied for work at any time.

Are there actually any barefoot horses out there by that definition



my first horse, barefoot all his life and PTS at 31. He didn't just survive happily he worked hard!!!
My old arab has done 20 years work barefoot,
My connie X
my heinz 57
my arab
my other arab
my Peruvians x 2

is that enough? LOL
sorry I haven't read the rest of the thread as no doubt it is the usual boring barefoot shod stuff but your question amused me.
 
horserider said:
Following frequent advice from the Barefoot brigade on using boots, I think the belief of all horses being able to be worked normally over all terrain, unshod, is flawed. Since 'Barefoot' become reinvented as utopia for all, a few years back- as opposed to many tough ponies and cobs never being shod 40 years ago -the market in hoof boots has ballooned. Funny that. Maybe the mantra should be Barefoot-with-boots-in-your-pocket.
Click to expand...

But boots and shoes are not in any way equivalent.... I think the mantra often IS 'boots in your pocket'. Why do you see this as 'failure'? I think of boots in similar terms to rugs - 20 years ago my delicate flower of a TB wouldn't have been able to live out 24/7 in the north of Scotland because the rugs weren't up to it. Now, with various advances in materials etc, he can - the rugs are brilliant and his health and welfare are better than they would have been. Same with the boots. He isn't yet (I have high hopes) a performance barefoot horse, but he can go bare most of the time because I have the option to use boots when I need them, which I wouldn't have done 20 years ago.
 
quirky said:
Are there actually any barefoot horses out there by that definition :confused:?

Genuine question :).
Click to expand...

My two ponies and my three liveries are all bootless barefoot or unshod horses, yes they exist. My TB is barefoot over stones ...but I do own a pair of boots which I used at the start.

horserider - this thread was not hijacked, the OP did ask about shoeing but most threads allow for alternatives the OP may not have considered or it would be a very limited forum. Surely more options are better than just a few.
 
quirky said:
Must say I am surprised that there are true barefoot horses out there and not just the odd one by the sounds of it :).
Click to expand...

And all but one of the Houston Mounted Police Force. 8 hour shifts sometimes more, all on the road and worse.

They use boots for transition and riots, but generally end up completely bare.
 
Doesn't one of yours have a problem with recurring absesses ?
Click to expand...

Thanks for asking. Yes - interestingly enough he did for a number of months. There was a lot of healing had to go on in his feet - and he went through quite a lot of decontraction.

I've a picture that was taken 6 months after the shoes came off - the shoe against the hoof. You can see how much change there was caudally.

Not the best or prettiest foot in the world - but pretty functional

dscf0381.jpg


By the way - I have no problem using boots when I need to - becuase they are bare footed the other 23 hours of the day and getting the benefits of it.
 
Last edited:
alsiola said:
I really do want to know. I am not fundamentally for shoeing and against barefoot. At the moment it is simply that the body of evidence for shoeing is much stronger than the body of evidence for barefoot. I am aware that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", but I cannot ethically recommend a treatment that is unproven over one that is proven. Obviously I am keen to see any studies on barefoot trimming as if the current body of evidence points toward an incorrect conclusion, the sooner the veterinary and horse owning community knows about it, the better.

I appreciate that getting funding for studies is not easy - there are thousands of potential studies that could be performed every year that will never be performed in all likelihood. However, funding difficulties exist for everyone, not just barefoot practitioners. I really dislike the calling of conspiracy theories e.g. there is no money in shoeing, so no-one will fund it. Yes, a big company with a new drug or treatment will fund a trial (often a woefully inadequate and inaccurate trial but that is beside the point), but there remain many charitable organisations who fund studies with no commercial motivation. As an example, I believe you mentioned the Laminitis Trust earlier in the thread. The LT gains money through licensing its safe feed tick to feed manufacturers, its premium rate "advice" line and charitable donations. Why does it have a financial motivation to encourage shoeing? Or how about the HBLB Trust, whose only stated aim is to improve horse welfare in the UK?
Calls to imagine conspiracy theories do nothing more than liken the foot trimmer to the homeopath. Funding is available to those with the time and knowledge to perform the studies adequately.

I do also have some problems with the philosophy of some foot trimmers. For example, earlier in this thread it was stated that Imprint shoes were detrimental as they made the horse too comfortable, so it moved around more. The implication being that debilitating pain is an appropriate tool to use. I do not know if these are your views, but regardless, they are espoused by barefoot devotees and reflect dimly on the community.


The joy of living in an enlightened age of scientific reasoning is that we no longer have to rely on the anecdotal. Experience has shown time and time again that anecdotal evidence can be completely wrong, and that only properly conducted trials can be trusted. For example, for many years A&E doctors gave spinal cord trauma patients steroids, because it was supported by logic, and had anecdotally good success. Eventually a double-blind placebo controlled randomised trial was performed, and the death rate of patients receiving steroids was significantly higher. Years of medical "wisdom" and anecdotal "evidence" was overturned, and standard practices were changed. How many patients died due to the power of anecdotal evidence however?
Human instinct cannot be trusted - we are hard-wired pattern spotters. The human who mistook a pattern of leaves for a tiger and mistakenly ran survived better than the one who mistook the tiger for leaves. If we are to improve medical knowledge, we now realise it is not sufficient to trust our own pattern-recognising behaviour.

For every anecdotal success that barefoot supporters can list, I could counter with a success story for shoeing. How about the 17 year old mare with a history of lameness? She had chronic laminitis with mild rotation and moderate sinking, and had not been ridden for 3 years. I saw her at this point when she was requiring a minimum of 2 sachets of bute daily to stay sound. 3 months after applying heart bar shoes I had the pleasure of watching her buck around the field bute free, and 6 months later of meeting her owner riding her out on a hack. Of course we made some dietary and management changes as well - no lami case will be a success without this whether we use shoes or not.

I haven't read Jaime Jackson's book on Founder - I did read his article on P3 rotation posted in this thread. I struggled to place too much faith in it after he described the skeleton as non-weightbearing. The article as a whole was full of speculation and theorising without any proof. This makes me loathe to waste my hard-earned on a full books worth of the same.

When I ask for evidence of the superiority of barefoot over shoeing approaches to treating laminitis, then to be convinced I would need to see a study showing statistically significant differences between the two, such as length of time spent on box rest, length of time receiving painkillers, objective lameness grading, survival time. If this exists then please point me in the right direction.
Another study might compare non-diseased horses kept barefoot vs non diseased horses kept shod, and compare the incidence of lameness between the two. Again, this does not exist to my knowledge.

I am not interested in supporting one treatment or another based on fundamental beliefs, but based on published sound evidence. My rebuttal of barefoot trimming is based solely on the evidence, and I would happily be convinced as to its superiority.
Click to expand...


OMG. I have no idea who you are or where you came from but I am deeply in love with you. Will you marry me? Someone who actually understands scientific trials, methods and funding on HHO. Hurrah!
 
alsiola said:
I am not interested in supporting one treatment or another based on fundamental beliefs, but based on published sound evidence. My rebuttal of barefoot trimming is based solely on the evidence, and I would happily be convinced as to its superiority.
Click to expand...

This I what I've been trying to say throughout this thread, but have lacked your eloquence.
I have also mentioned I have one, and only one barefooter he doesn't even need trimming. The rest do. I only have one with a full set and that's my big driving Normandy cob. They all have their own individual requirements. It's my responsibility to give them what they need by keeping an open mind.
 
brucea said:
Thanks for asking. Yes - interestingly enough he did for a number of months. There was a lot of healing had to go on in his feet - and he went through quite a lot of decontraction.

I've a picture that was taken 6 months after the shoes came off - the shoe against the hoof. You can see how much change there was caudally.

Not the best or prettiest foot in the world - but pretty functional

dscf0381.jpg


By the way - I have no problem using boots when I need to - becuase they are bare footed the other 23 hours of the day and getting the benefits of it.
Click to expand...

Absesses and chunks of heal falling away 2 years after shoes came off ??
Equally, that photo disturbs me everytime you post it. Whoever owned that horse when the photo was taken must have been incredibly neglectful. The mind boggles. The horse is better off without shoes if the owner thinks that is an acceptable way to leave a horse.

Never had an absess in any of my present and past unshod horses, but hard work and self trim or old fashioned farrier seems to keep them healthy. Sometimes bad trimming is the cause allowing gravel to enter the hoof. Change trimmer perhaps ?
 
horserider said:
Equally, that photo disturbs me everytime you post it. Whoever owned that horse when the photo was taken must have been incredibly neglectful. The mind boggles. The horse is better off without shoes if the owner thinks that is an acceptable way to leave a horse.
Click to expand...

Why?
 
jesstickle said:
OMG. I have no idea who you are or where you came from but I am deeply in love with you. Will you marry me? Someone who actually understands scientific trials, methods and funding on HHO. Hurrah!
Click to expand...

Um, read this bit again
'When I ask for evidence of the superiority of barefoot over shoeing approaches to treating laminitis, then to be convinced I would need to see a study showing statistically significant differences between the two, such as length of time spent on box rest, length of time receiving painkillers, objective lameness grading, survival time. If this exists then please point me in the right direction.
Another study might compare non-diseased horses kept barefoot vs non diseased horses kept shod, and compare the incidence of lameness between the two. Again, this does not exist to my knowledge.'

How can you use an argument like this against recommending barefoot when these types of study haven't been done in shod? How on earth would you carry out the laminitis study - you would need many, many in the sample before you could say anything statistically valid because you would be dealing with different individuals in different situations. Unless you had facilities in which you could keep a herd of similar horses in which you were willing to induce laminitis and then treat differently.
The second might be more likely, but very long term and again to say anything statistically valid, numbers would have to be huge and horses pair-matched.
Please don't assume the rest of us are thick because we say that these types of study are UNLIKELY to happen.
 
soloequestrian said:
Um, read this bit again
'When I ask for evidence of the superiority of barefoot over shoeing approaches to treating laminitis, then to be convinced I would need to see a study showing statistically significant differences between the two, such as length of time spent on box rest, length of time receiving painkillers, objective lameness grading, survival time. If this exists then please point me in the right direction.
Another study might compare non-diseased horses kept barefoot vs non diseased horses kept shod, and compare the incidence of lameness between the two. Again, this does not exist to my knowledge.'

How can you use an argument like this against recommending barefoot when these types of study haven't been done in shod? How on earth would you carry out the laminitis study - you would need many, many in the sample before you could say anything statistically valid because you would be dealing with different individuals in different situations. Unless you had facilities in which you could keep a herd of similar horses in which you were willing to induce laminitis and then treat differently.
The second might be more likely, but very long term and again to say anything statistically valid, numbers would have to be huge and horses pair-matched.
Please don't assume the rest of us are thick because we say that these types of study are UNLIKELY to happen.
Click to expand...

Of course you wouldn't induce laminitis. How on earth do you think clinical studies progress now in humans? We don't go round giving people cancer or HIV! As you say, you get as big a sample set as possible and you normalise as much as possible and you go from there. That is EXACTLY how many, many current studies work. They run over the course of 15 or 20 years. It is unlikely because it is low on the list of priorities for most vets and scientists NOT because it is too difficult to do.

And I think that the poster was saying that they are neither pro or anti bare foot or shod. That they sit on the fence. I think they're point was that they would like the 'barefooters' for want of a better word, to calm down their zeal until someone can prove it actually works. By the sounds of it they want shod and unshod investigated to solve the argument.

And I didn't say anyone was thick, I was just happy to find someone who understands scientific rigour and the issues of funding. I wasn't even really commenting on this thread.

Lighten up love
 
Last edited:
quirky said:
I do understand most things, I'm a bright button :).

What I am trying to say, which you don't seem to be able to accept is ......

The barefooters (no such word :o) go on about their horses being able to go barefoot blah, blah, blah.

But, how many are truly barefoot?
Having boots/socks on does not constitute a barefoot horse in my eyes.
A barefoot horse would be one that has no shoes on and survives happily without man made attachments being applied for work at any time.

Are there actually any barefoot horses out there by that definition :confused:?

Genuine question :).
Click to expand...


My current hunter, I'mjust about to go out and plait him up:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_IaGqwoQlnmA/TOvlktjYQHI/AAAAAAAAAqg/NHHYx77wYNo/s1600/Coming+Down+WR.jpg

My previous eventer - look at the landing. He is one of five who I have affiliated up to novice (3ft 9 max at affiliated level, not what most people would define as "novice").

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_IaGqwoQlnmA/SKsobjsaQpI/AAAAAAAAAU4/Qo7zu6lPsBU/s1600-h/george080110-2.jpg

These horses are only a couple out of hundreds of us doing this kind of thing. This is why we are so frustrated that people want scientific evidence that barefoot works when they have no such evidence that shoeing works. I wonder how many of the people who call for scientific evidence believe in homeopathy. Homeopathy fails every scientifically conducted trial that it is put through, human and animal.


ps jesstickle they DO induce laminitis to test horses. There at least one project where they force fed fructans to induce laminitis which is commonly used to illustrate the dangers of fructans. I'm pretty sure steroids have been tested in the same way.
 
Last edited:
Absesses and chunks of heal falling away 2 years after shoes came off ??
Click to expand...

Yep - that happened last summer. He had an abscess in the spring that grumbled on. A chunk of the heel flaked off, and underneath was all the abscess gunk.

There has been a long term healing process. Hoof shape changes have been going on since he was unshod - it's been later starting in the left foot and taken longer than the right, but it was the most contracted. We have sets of xrays all the way through and the vet has been seeing him regularly.

It took 9 years of shoeing to get his hooves to where they were - and a long term healing process for them to recover brings no surprises. He has also move environments in the last 18 months and that had an effect (positive on the whole) on all of them.

When he was shod, it was by one of the best regarded farriers in the area. But I had a choice between a horse that was simply getting less and less sound in shoes, or doing something radically different.
 
jesstickle said:
Of course you wouldn't induce laminitis. How on earth do you think clinical studies progress now in humans? We don't go round giving people cancer or HIV! As you say, you get as big a sample set as possible and you normalise as much as possible and you go from there. That is EXACTLY how many, many current studies work. They run over the course of 15 or 20 years. It is unlikely because it is low on the list of priorities for most vets and scientists NOT because it is too difficult to do.

And I think that the poster was saying that they are neither pro or anti bare foot or shod. That they sit on the fence. I think they're point was that they would like the 'barefooters' for want of a better word, to calm down their zeal until someone can prove it actually works. By the sounds of it they want shod and unshod investigated to solve the argument.

And I didn't say anyone was thick, I was just happy to find someone who understands scientific rigour and the issues of funding. I wasn't even really commenting on this thread.

Lighten up love
Click to expand...

But find me a study on (shod) treatment of laminitis in horses that was run in the same way as clinical studies for treatments in humans.
It's all very well understanding controlled studies, scientific rigour and the like - we could all devise a perfect clinical trial, but devising one that is practical and ethical is something very different. You don't prove that something works, you disprove that it doesn't, or show that it works better than something else.
If you read back, you'll see that the poster is a vet who is unwilling to recommend unshod treatment for laminitics until there is clinical evidence to back it's efficacy. I'm arguing that this won't happen, and that at least owners should be made aware of the option - they can then go and investigate the large body of anecdotal work that does exist and decide for themselves, like I did for my (now sound and working) horse who had laminitis. It's very unscientific, but the shod route would have had her in a very restricted area for at least 2 months after the laminitis had gone. The barefoot route, which I chose, meant that she was back out with her pals, leading a normal life, very much earlier. For a horse who gets extremely stressed stabled, it was I think obviously a better option.
Please stop saying 'lighten up' when you are discussing serious and interesting issues.
 
cptrayes said:
I wonder how many of the people who call for scientific evidence believe in homeopathy. Homeopathy fails every scientifically conducted trial that it is put through, human and animal.
Click to expand...

Certainly not this one. There are two reasons not to believe in homeopathy:
1) It is logically absurd.
2) Trials have shown it does not work.

Reason 1 is a crap reason in reality - many things that seem illogical in the paradigm of the time are later shown to make sense. Reason 2 is irrefutable.
I really think we should probably do away with homeopathy talk in this thread - firstly it is even further off topic than we have all been so far, and secondly I don't think it is anyone's best interests to be compared with homepaths.
 
soloequestrian said:
But find me a study on (shod) treatment of laminitis in horses that was run in the same way as clinical studies for treatments in humans.
Click to expand...

If you look through my previous posts on this thread then you will see how quality of evidence is graded. As stated there, we do not have large randomised clinical trials directly comparing shoeing with barefoot management. However we do have many papers supporting shoeing, certainly for laminitics. The examples I listed earlier in the thread were not supposed to be examples of great papers, or of great proof, just to demonstrate that there IS evidence for shoeing that does not exist for barefoot. I have spent a bit more time looking for better papers to use as examples:

Evaluation Using Hoof Wall Strain Gauges of a Therapeutic Shoe and a Hoof Cast with a Heel Wedge as Potential Supportive Therapy for Horses with Laminitis
NICOLAS HANSEN MS, HH, FLORIAN BUCHNER DVM, PhD, JÜRGEN HALLER Ing., GERHARD WINDISCHBAUER DI Dr
Veterinary Surgery
Volume 34, Issue 6, pages 630–636, November 2005

Direct comparison in an experimental setting of unshod, therapeutically shod and hoof cast with wedge, and their effects on dorsal hoof wall strain. DHW strain was significantly lower in both shod and cast groups compared with unshod.

And to show fairness here is a published paper in favour of barefoot:
Published in Animal Welfare Science, Ethics and Law Veterinary Association Journal,
January 2008
1
METAL, MYTH & EQUINE MISERY
Robert Cook
http://www.strasserhoofcare.org/articles_pdf/2.pdf

Compare the language used in both papers - there is a significant difference. Also, a key point in the article...
Today, most horsemen still believe that the purpose of the horseshoe is to protect the hoof. But evidence gathered in the last 25 years shows this to be incorrect.9-11 In fact, shoes cause serious harm to the hooves and ultimately to the whole horse.12

Here are those references.
9. .Strasser H and Kells S: A lifetime of soundness. Sabine Kells, PO Box 44, Qualicum Beach, BC Canada V9K 1S7. 1998
10. Strasser H: Shoeing: A necessary evil? Ed: Kells S. Sabine Kells, PO Box 44, Qualicum Beach, BC Canada V9K 1S7. 1999
11. Jackson J: The natural horse. Star Ridge Publishing, Harrison AR 1997
12. Strasser H and Kells S: “Listing of the harmful effects of shoeing.” 2002.
Available at www.thehorseshoof.com/listing.html.
Click to expand...
9,10 and 12 from a man now prosecuted for animal welfare issues, and credited with inventing a brutal trimming technique. 11 - a book, not published evidence.
When writing a paper it is fine to build on the conclusions of others, but only if those conclusions are sound. It is easy to fool people by putting a reference, because many will not check either the quality or the content of the reference, and simply believe it is true because it is referenced.
I am not cherry picking a bad paper for barefoot here, this is simply the first one I came across in over 100 papers I glanced over that are on the topic of laminitis.
 
Hi again all - it's me, the original poster :D

Many thanks for all your private messages - from both the Barefoot Brigade and the Shoe Team (I can say this without getting struck off or beheaded or having my eyes poked out with a hoof pick because I have one barefoot horse and my laminitic, who's own personal motto is 'No shoe, no horse'):D

Just to update you, the steel heart bars have been removed, as my lovely gelding is clearly not tolerating them. I have opted to put the Stable Support System on for a few weeks (styrofoam pads) to give his feet a rest, as I feel they've had a lot of trauma recently.

So, barefoot aside for this moment in time please, does anyone have any ideas on where to go next? Has anyone had success with Imprint shoes after the steel heart bars have failed? Or the adjustable Eustace shoe?

My horse remains happy and resilient and a long, long way from giving up on life, so any advice would be gratefully and warmly received.:)
 
soloequestrian said:
Please stop saying 'lighten up' when you are discussing serious and interesting issues.
Click to expand...

I only said it once. I wasn't discussing anything serious. I don't give a toss what you all do with your horses feet and I made no contribution one way or the other on the matter.

I made a light hearted commented about how I was happy to see someone who knew how to read a paper and you jumped on me and accused me of calling you thick.

Just because you think this is the most important thing in the world doesn't mean we all have to. If I want to make a joke I'm perfectly within my rights to do so.

To the OP, I'm really sorry but I don't know anything about rehab for lamis. I've never had a laminitic pony in my life and I'm not a vet. I do hope however that you find something which makes him comfortable. Please pass on a low sugar, high fibre treat from me and my beasts :)
 
alsiola said:
9,10 and 12 from a man now prosecuted for animal welfare issues, and credited with inventing a brutal trimming technique.
Click to expand...
Dr H Strasser is a woman. Please read the link posted earlier... history of barefoot movement by Jaime Jackson. Strasser does not perform a non invasive (do no harm) trim. :( I don't believe that invalidates all her work though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top