Arthramid ethics

[Eventing2022]

Someone I know has dosed horse with arthamid (6yo, in stifles) and is back jumping etc. Horse had/has chondromalacia. Surely this isn't OK? The problem is still there, it's just masked. The pain is removed but surely surely jumping the horse again isn't ok?! I can't get my head round it.

 

[rextherobber]

I agree, just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. The ethics of a few treatments/surgeries do bother me,if it's simply to further our own ambition ,not wholly in the best interests of the horse.

 

[Orangehorse]

This is a treatment for a condition, not a painkiller? I would agree if they were giving the horse Bute to compete to mask pain, but if it has received an injection that has enabled it to continue to work, pain free without painkillers, isn't that a cure? And it is allowable under the rules.

I remember reading the autobiography of a top lever eventer, and noted that in the breakdown of costs and budget per horse, by far the largest amount was veterinary costs, so I daresay there are lots of animals receiving all sorts of treatments.

I have arthritis of the knees, and got the X ray to prove it. But I am currently pain free and carry on as normal, but it hasn't gone away and no doubt will catch up with me at some stage. But just right now I am OK, not sitting around saying I can't do anything because my knee joint is crumbling.

 

[Eventing2022]

This is a treatment for a condition, not a painkiller? I would agree if they were giving the horse Bute to compete to mask pain, but if it has received an injection that has enabled it to continue to work, pain free without painkillers, isn't that a cure? And it is allowable under the rules.

I remember reading the autobiography of a top lever eventer, and noted that in the breakdown of costs and budget per horse, by far the largest amount was veterinary costs, so I daresay there are lots of animals receiving all sorts of treatments.

I have arthritis of the knees, and got the X ray to prove it. But I am currently pain free and carry on as normal, but it hasn't gone away and no doubt will catch up with me at some stage. But just right now I am OK, not sitting around saying I can't do anything because my knee joint is crumbling.

Hmm see I don't think this is correct. Arthramid isn't curing or fixing anything. It is a clever and effective way of meaning the horse doesnt feel the pain in the joint and is "sound". I'm not against that of course. I am against treating the horse as if it doesn't have any issues. As far as I'm aware the joint is still able to degenerate further...the horse just can't feel it. Until potentially the arthramid wears off.
So yeah low level hacking etc....probably OK. Jumping again at 1m plus. I find this unethical.
The difference with your situation is you have the agency and understanding of your condition and can choose for yourself. The horse has no such choice.

 

[Orangehorse]

This is a hard one. Would it pass a vetting? Does the medication have to be declared? How long does the treatment last?

I guess the owner feels that if the horse is sound, then it must be OK, and let it carry on with its competition career. What does the vet say, or what is the recommended exercise regime after treatment and what is the long term prognosis.

I suppose the question to ask is if the injection you are referring to is to enable the horse to return to its previous level of work without further harm, or is only sufficient for it to be used as a hack.

 

[spacefaer]

Arthramid is not a painkiller. It's a gel that replaces missing intra articular fluid.

(It's the same gel as in breast implants)

 

[Orangehorse]

Arthramid is not a painkiller. It's a gel that replaces missing intra articular fluid.

(It's the same gel as in breast implants)

So the horse can return to full work?

 

[spacefaer]

So the horse can return to full work?

While the gel is in place, no reason why not. We've used it several times in arthritic hocks. It gets squished out due to pressure on the joint over time but the horse is absolutely sound while it's there. I'd guess it'd last longer in joints that aren't under the same forces as our 17.3 Irish Draught!

 

[Roasted Chestnuts]

Low level just being an RC/PC fun horse I wouldn’t have an issue with this, however serious competing well I don’t think I’d do that personally.

Kia got a bute a day to manage arthritis in his neck, it also helped the arthritis in his hocks but that had been un medicated since he was diagnosed at 15 and I started medicating his neck in his late 20s. He was just a happy hacker by this point mind you. He was never competed medicated however he did have a powerful joint supplement daily since his diagnosis.

Personally I wouldn’t find it ethical to do it to my horses. Just like I’d never compete a horse on a load of painkillers but that’s just my opinion

 

[SEL]

A friend who had the same treatment was said to manage workload if they wanted the horse to go on for longer because in time the arthramid would stop working. They're dressage divas but she was told jumping was ok.

 

[Red-1]

If it is legal for the sport and the horse is not in pain, then I won't get excited about someone else doing it. Not sure I would do it myself though.

However, I know a stack of people who compete illegally and that does rile me. I am a rule-follower by nature. I have seen several posts on here about people de-nerving a horse and then competing. That is not legal with the affiliated bodies, and unaffiliated usually runs under the same rules. I know it is not as de-nerving was suggested for a horse of mine once. I looked into it. I got letters/ emails from the bodies to confirm that no, this was not legal.

I also know of a number of people competing on bute, even though they know it is not right.

Even then, it is the fairness that bothers me. If the horse isn't in pain then I can't feel sorry for them.

We often see threads in here where a horse could have a long retirement as a field ornament yet people think it is OK to PTS as it can't work and the owner doesn't want to fund the retirement as it means they can't have another competing one on livery. I don't get excited about that either, as PTS is better than being sold down the line of unscrupulous dealers. In fact, now I am alone, I have left instructions that if something were to happen to me, Rigs would be PTS rather than handed on. He would easily be taken advantage of and requires strict management.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Hmm see I don't think this is correct. Arthramid isn't curing or fixing anything. It is a clever and effective way of meaning the horse doesnt feel the pain in the joint and is "sound".

Arthramid works very differently to general purpose painkillers and anti inflammatories such as bute. It is not a painkiller, it has genuine therapeutic qualities.

As Spacefaer says, the gel lubricates the joint so the joint can work almost normally. It can be extremely effective in hocks, and I've used it successfully in front coffins, too. A vet I know describes it as a complete game changer.

That said, I have no knowledge of chondromalacia or of Arthramid being used in stifles, so can't really comment on that.

 

[ycbm]

It's a replacement cartilage, is how I prefer to see it. If it can be done again in future at intervals of 6 months or greater, so jumping doesn't shorten the horse's working life, then I wouldn't see any problem with it. If it's not repeatable I'd say that was maybe different.

Does anyone know how repeatable it is?
.

 

[conniegirl]

it. If it can be done again in future at intervals of 6 months or greater, so jumping doesn't shorten the horse's

Yes. It is

 

[Hormonal Filly]

So yeah low level hacking etc....probably OK. Jumping again at 1m plus. I find this unethical.

You’d be shocked to know how many top level eventers, dressage horses receive joint injections regularly as standard. Heard some stories from my FEI vet.

I much rather see a 6yo injected and be comfortable (sounds like said owner is on top of it and cares) than see horses who clearly have pain behaviours which are ignored.

 

[millitiger]

I'd be interested to understand why some posters only have an issue if the horse is competing and not low level hacking?

If the horse is pain free and happy to be out competing, why would it bother you?
Assuming, as the product works by lubricating the joint, it doesn't accelerate any further break down of the joint itself.

 

[PinkvSantaboots]

I know lots of horses have treatment regularly so they can compete but I'm very much of in the camp of I know the horse has an issue so I would ease off and try and prolong the horses working life, because this kind of treatment does not last forever so if your having to use it on a 6 year old that horses working life will surely be reduced if kept at the same level of work and medicated every six months or so.

 

[Sossigpoker]

Hmm see I don't think this is correct. Arthramid isn't curing or fixing anything. It is a clever and effective way of meaning the horse doesnt feel the pain in the joint and is "sound". I'm not against that of course. I am against treating the horse as if it doesn't have any issues. As far as I'm aware the joint is still able to degenerate further...the horse just can't feel it. Until potentially the arthramid wears off.
So yeah low level hacking etc....probably OK. Jumping again at 1m plus. I find this unethical.
The difference with your situation is you have the agency and understanding of your condition and can choose for yourself. The horse has no such choice.

You need to look into what Arthmid is and does. It becomes a part of the horse's synovial tissue and restores function of the joint. It isn't an anti-inflammatory or a pain killer.
My cob has had it into an almost fused hock and he's now sound and in full work and I've been told to just crack on with him.
So by your reasoning I shouldn't be riding and jumping him despite being sound ?

 

[ycbm]

this kind of treatment does not last forever

I think that the only reason it won't help forever is if the cartilage continues to degrade. If Arthramid can be repeated, and if it stops the degradation which it sounds as if it might, then I see no issue with it if the owner can afford it.
.

 

[Sossigpoker]

Hmm see I don't think this is correct. Arthramid isn't curing or fixing anything. It is a clever and effective way of meaning the horse doesnt feel the pain in the joint and is "sound". I'm not against that of course. I am against treating the horse as if it doesn't have any issues. As far as I'm aware the joint is still able to degenerate further...the horse just can't feel it. Until potentially the arthramid wears off.
So yeah low level hacking etc....probably OK. Jumping again at 1m plus. I find this unethical.
The difference with your situation is you have the agency and understanding of your condition and can choose for yourself. The horse has no such choice.

Oh it absolutely does "fix things "!
There are tons of videos and articles explaining how it works, it essentially becomes a part of the horse's own tissue .
Please go and read up on it before spouting such utter nonsense .

So jumping 80cm is fine in your mind but not 1m ? Despite the horse being sound ?
Where does such a random measure come from ?

This is one of the silliest things I've read in a while !

 

[Sossigpoker]

I think that the only reason it won't help forever is if the cartilage continues to degrade. If Arthramid can be repeated, and if it stops the degradation which it sounds as if it might, then I see no issue with it if the owner can afford it.
.

It doesn't stop the disease from advancing,.things like Tildren and Osphos are used for this.

 

[PinkvSantaboots]

I think that the only reason it won't help forever is if the cartilage continues to degrade. If Arthramid can be repeated, and if it stops the degradation which it sounds as if it might, then I see no issue with it if the owner can afford it.
.

Maybe but on such a young horse the damage has started so early so I can't see it working for 15 years say, I don't know really as I don't know anyone that has been using it that long.

 

[Sossigpoker]

Maybe but on such a young horse the damage has started so early so I can't see it working for 15 years say, I don't know really as I don't know anyone that has been using it that long.

Average age for arthritis is now 6 , especially in hocks.
Some competition yards actually routinely do hocks with Arthmid even before there are issues.
You would struggle to find a young competition bred horse that doesn't have at least hock arthritis, OCD or a bit of a both. Those conditions are incredibly common now and whilst Arthmid won't treat OCD, it absolutely does restore joints rather than mask the pain.

I have zero issues with the "ethics " of Arthmid, it's an absolute game changer and got my horse back to health and happiness.
What I do have an issue with is the way we treat and breed horses , which means they are damaged at juvenile ages so we've needed to invent something like Arthmid.

So this is yet another social licence issue. Why begrudge a medication that gets horses pain free ? Why not begrudge the industry that does so much damage to horses ? Having been at livery at a very high end eventing yard, I've seen things that don't sit right with me - the use of Arthmid is absolutely not one of them.

 

[humblepie]

I don't know enough to comment specifically on this but I do have concerns - a close relative has had joint injections and in one case it has made the joint much worse and is uncomfortable in a different way - presumably it wasn't done very well but it didnt improve the situation at all. They also had one in another joint which improved it for about a fortnight whereas a week off work and it settles down. Changing job is probably their real option.

 

[ycbm]

Average age for arthritis is now 6 , especially in hocks.

What do I have to pay you to stop you writing this SP?

ETA

For the third time now, this claim is statistically so improbable as to be almost impossible and whoever told you this must, surely, be talking through their backside.

For the average age of a horse to be diagnosed with arthritis to be six, then for every 15 year old diagnosed, there would need to be three 3 year olds, for every 21 year old there would need to be three yearlings, and that very clearly is not happening.

Most old horses have some arthritis. Most young horses don't.

 

[TPO]

I find all this kind of thing edge of the rabbit hole stuff.

In my mind (& I've never been in a position to have to make these decisions) I'm personally OK with jabbing horses to keep them comfortable *if* there's a step down in work.

E.g an advanced eventer is jagged and steps down to novice/intermediate

I don't feel comfortable when horses need intervention and then go on to do more iykwim. I mean, I know it happens, but personally it doesn't sit comfortably with me.

One example is someone I knew took on an 11(I think) ex racer who had joint issues. They jagged hocks and SI and continued to do more and more, including jumping 1.20ish with him. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

I'll just continue living in my bubble!

 

[PinkvSantaboots]

Average age for arthritis is now 6 , especially in hocks.
Some competition yards actually routinely do hocks with Arthmid even before there are issues.
You would struggle to find a young competition bred horse that doesn't have at least hock arthritis, OCD or a bit of a both. Those conditions are incredibly common now and whilst Arthmid won't treat OCD, it absolutely does restore joints rather than mask the pain.

I have zero issues with the "ethics " of Arthmid, it's an absolute game changer and got my horse back to health and happiness.
What I do have an issue with is the way we treat and breed horses , which means they are damaged at juvenile ages so we've needed to invent something like Arthmid.

So this is yet another social licence issue. Why begrudge a medication that gets horses pain free ? Why not begrudge the industry that does so much damage to horses ? Having been at livery at a very high end eventing yard, I've seen things that don't sit right with me - the use of Arthmid is absolutely not one of them.

I haven't said I don't agree with it both of my horses have had it I just have the mindset of if the horse has an issue so young is it wise to continue with such a high level of work.

Maybe I'm just a bit old fashioned and can't grasp the concept right now as I don't have alot of experience of it, both my horses didn't need it until they were in their late teens.

 

[Squeak]

I do agree with SP that the soundness of horses being bred needs to be a focus.

 

[Sossigpoker]

What do I have to pay you to stop you writing this SP?

ETA

For the third time now, this claim is statistically so improbable as to be almost impossible and whoever told you this must, surely, be talking through their backside.

For the average age of a horse to be diagnosed with arthritis to be six, then for every 15 year old diagnosed, there would need to be three 3 year olds, for every 21 year old there would need to be three yearlings, and that very clearly is not happening.

Most old horses have some arthritis. Most young horses don't.

You can speak to the specialists at Donnington Grove and tell them they don't know what they're talking about ?

 

[Sossigpoker]

I haven't said I don't agree with it both of my horses have had it I just have the mindset of if the horse has an issue so young is it wise to continue with such a high level of work.

Maybe I'm just a bit old fashioned and can't grasp the concept right now as I don't have alot of experience of it, both my horses didn't need it until they were in their late teens.

Most horses now have issues from a young age. People need to really accept the fact that especially in competitive circles, there are a lot of medical interventions that are being done from a young age to get the most use out of the horse. If they didn't compete horses with issues such as bad hocks , there wouofng be many competitive horses around.

Again- this is a social licence question. Is it ethical that we have to give young horses a lot of treatments just so we can use them for our own benefit ?