Does anyone hunt barefoot horses?

SusieT said:
still no research?Not of any sort?
I am quite gobsmacked you could write such reams of text in such an authoritative manner and then not be able to direct people to the information that led to your conclusions
Click to expand...

SusieT sweetheart you don't seem to have a great grasp of the use of search engines. I can find supporting information on Google for anything that you think is a personal assertion of mine. It isn't all peer reviewed research by any means, because who is going to finance research that results in drug free treatments? Tell me which things you're having trouble finding more information on and I'll try to help you.

Or have you simply got an issue with the fact that I touch type at 50 words a minute and can write more than other people more easily, and a strong intellect so I write fluently and clearly???
 
oh dear oh dear-I hope this has shown anyone thinking of following your 'advice' what sort of advice it is and the rather arrogant viewpoint it comes from.
Luckily others are not nearly as self absorbed and actually interested in horses rather than building a false ego for themselves :)
As I say-I can find or write supporting information for a two headed fish. Doesn't mean it isn't a pile of rubbish.
 
SusieT said:
oh dear oh dear-I hope this has shown anyone thinking of following your 'advice' what sort of advice it is and the rather arrogant viewpoint it comes from.
Luckily others are not nearly as self absorbed and actually interested in horses rather than building a false ego for themselves :)
As I say-I can find or write supporting information for a two headed fish. Doesn't mean it isn't a pile of rubbish.
Click to expand...


Ah, so you aren't really interested in me helping you to answer your questions. You are, though into personal insult in a fairly big way. I thought all you were looking for was a fight. Looks like I'm right, doesn't it?
 
Last edited:
My friend hunts barefoot, and even team chased without shoes on. gives the horse that bit of self preservation!!!
 
SusieT said:
oh dear oh dear-I hope this has shown anyone thinking of following your 'advice' what sort of advice it is and the rather arrogant viewpoint it comes from.
Luckily others are not nearly as self absorbed and actually interested in horses rather than building a false ego for themselves :)
As I say-I can find or write supporting information for a two headed fish. Doesn't mean it isn't a pile of rubbish.
Click to expand...
That's not fair. cptrayes is obviously passionate about the health of horses and their feet.
 
SusieT said:
still no research?Not of any sort?
I am quite gobsmacked you could write such reams of text in such an authoritative manner and then not be able to direct people to the information that led to your conclusions
Click to expand...

I'm always a bit puzzled by requests for research. To put the shoe on the other foot (sorry about the pun!) where is the research that proves shoeing is so great for feet... e.g. that egg bar shoes and wedges are beneficial for navicular horses? Maybe it's out there and I'd be interested to read it if anyone could point me in the direct of published studies.

The best set of study data to show how welln a horse's hoof copes without shoes is a few million years of evolution. Evolution produced Equus Caballus. Modern domesticated horse is still Equus Caballus... however much humans interfere. If wild horses can cope without shoes then why not our domesticated horses? Same species, same physiology. Yes it's true they didn't evolve to carry the weight of a human being but in the wild their hooves carry them distances of 20 miles every single day. How many domesticated hooves work so hard? Covering such distances how do the hooves not get worn away to bloody stumps? Miracle? Fluke? Nope... just healthy feet functioning as nature intended.
 
mrdarcy said:
If shoeing was so good for horses why do we see so many horses with lameness issues?
Click to expand...

so keeping them barefoot will keep them all sound? i think there are plenty of lame barefoot horses out there. mine for one. he's done his cruciate ligament. he's never been shod and has the best feet i've ever laid eyes on. hasn't stopped him damaging himself. horses were designed to go lame. foot balance issues certainly will make them more prone to lameness, but you can have balance issues barefoot as much as shod horses can. keeping them barefoot does not guarantee you a sound horse. equally, shoeing them will not make them go lame!
 
mrdarcy said:
The best set of study data to show how welln a horse's hoof copes without shoes is a few million years of evolution. Evolution produced Equus Caballus. Modern domesticated horse is still Equus Caballus... however much humans interfere. If wild horses can cope without shoes then why not our domesticated horses? Same species, same physiology. Yes it's true they didn't evolve to carry the weight of a human being but in the wild their hooves carry them distances of 20 miles every single day. How many domesticated hooves work so hard? Covering such distances how do the hooves not get worn away to bloody stumps? Miracle? Fluke? Nope... just healthy feet functioning as nature intended.
Click to expand...


Hello everyone ;)

mr darcy- i have to disagree with your comparison.
If wild horses can cope without shoes then why not our domesticated horses?
Click to expand...

because domesticated horses have been selecively bred for speed, jump, big movement, etc and not necessarily consideration of their feet.

because domesticated horses are kept in stables, on relatively small turnout, manufactured diets, etc

because domesticated horses have hoof oil painted on, they are wormed, vaccinated, rugged, etc

So you cant directly compare them because there are 100s of variables between how they live, many of which can affect the feet.
 
mrdarcy said:
I'm always a bit puzzled by requests for research. To put the shoe on the other foot (sorry about the pun!) where is the research that proves shoeing is so great for feet... e.g. that egg bar shoes and wedges are beneficial for navicular horses? Maybe it's out there and I'd be interested to read it if anyone could point me in the direct of published studies.

.
Click to expand...

Heres one-

N Z Vet J. 2007 Jun;55(3):120-4.

The effect of plain, eggbar and 6 degrees-wedge shoes on the distribution of pressure under the hoof of horses at the walk.
Rogers CW, Back W.

Abstract
AIM: To quantify the effect of plain, wedged and eggbar shoes on the distribution of pressure under the hoof of horses at the walk, at selected areas of interest (AOI), to find scientific evidence for the perceived efficacy of these shoes in the treatment of palmar heel pain. METHODS: Six clinically sound adult Warmblood mares weighing 551 (SD 25) kg were shod (forelegs) with either plain, eggbar or 6 degrees-wedge shoes using a latin-square experimental design. All horses were shod by the same farrier, and each balanced and aligned for its individual conformation. Data were collected on three walking strides for each foreleg using a 550 x 405-mm pressure plate to quantify the distribution of pressure under each type of shoe at five AOI. RESULTS: Landing of the hoof with all three shoes was predominantly from lateral to medial (range 7-15 msec). Irrespective of the type of shoe, the greatest pressure was found in the lateral and medial toe (lateral 39.7 (SE 0.6) N/cm2 and medial 35.0 (SE 0.5) N/cm2) and the point of the toe (33.3 (SE 0.5) N/cm2). The lowest peak pressure was in the heel (lateral 25.9 (SE 0.5) N/cm2 and medial 21.1 (SE 0.4) N/cm2; p<0.05). Eggbar and wedge shoes increased total stance time (938 (SE 8) msec and 952 (SE 6) msec, respectively) compared with plain shoes (898 (SE 14) msec) (p<0.05). The wedge shoe reduced breakover compared with the plain and eggbar shoes (13.8% vs 15.8% and 14.5%, respectively; p<0.05). The eggbar shoe had lower total shoe peak pressure (29.5 (SE 0.7) N/cm2) than plain (31.8 (SE 0.5) N/cm2) and wedge (30.9 (SE 0.6) N/cm2) shoes. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Both the eggbar and 6 degrees-wedge shoe offer advantages for palmar heel pain. In comparison to the plain shoe, the eggbar shoe had less peak pressure at the heel AOI, and across the entire shoe, due to the greater bearing surface and the effect of the longer heel. The 6 degrees-wedge shoe had greater loading on the lateral heel AOI, but promoted earlier breakover at the toe. Both shoes offer advantages for the horse with palmar heel pain, though choice of shoe will depend on clear identification of the causative factors, to provide therapeutic shoeing that maximises the individual horse's response.
Click to expand...

And another-
Equine Vet J Suppl. 2006 Aug;(36):377-82.

Effects of egg-bar shoes on the 3-dimensional kinematics of the distal forelimb in horses walking on a sand track.
Chateau H, Degueurce C, Denoix JM.

Abstract
REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Understanding of the biomechanical effects of egg-bar shoes remains incomplete because kinematic studies are usually performed on hard tracks and with skin markers that do not measure the actual 3-dimensional (3D) movements of the 3 digital joints. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the effects of egg-bar shoes on the 3D kinematics of the distal forelimb in horses walking on a sand track. METHODS: Four healthy horses were equipped with ultrasonic markers fixed surgically to the 4 distal segments of the left forelimb. The 3D movements of these segments were recorded while the horses were walking on a sand track. Rotations of the digital joints were calculated by use of a joint coordinate system. Data obtained with egg-bar shoes were compared to those obtained with standard shoes. Mean differences were expressed in a 0.95 confidence interval. RESULTS: With egg-bar shoes, the initial sinking of the heels into the ground during landing was reduced and the heels were raised by up to 5.1 degrees (3.5-6.7 degrees) compared to standard shoes at mid-stance. Concurrently, maximal flexion of the distal (DIPJ) and proximal (PIPJ) interphalangeal joints was increased by up to 3.2 degrees (2.2-4.2 degrees) and 1.8 degrees (1.1-2.5 degrees), respectively, at the beginning of the stance phase. At heel-off, extension of the DIPJ was reduced by 3.8 degrees (2.6-5.0 degrees). In extrasagittal planes of movement, egg-bar shoes prevented sinking of the medial quarter into the ground which led to a slight decrease of DIPJ medial rotation and lateromotion. CONCLUSIONS: Egg-bar shoes prevent the heels and, to a lesser extent, the medial side of the hoof from sinking into the ground on a sand track. They contribute to a decrease of DIPJ maximal extension at heel-off and to hoof stabilisation in the transversal plane. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Such quantitative results support the clinical indications of egg-bar shoes.
Click to expand...

Theres actually quite a bit, i just picked these 2 at random!
 
teddyt said:
because domesticated horses are kept in stables, on relatively small turnout, manufactured diets, etc

because domesticated horses have hoof oil painted on, they are wormed, vaccinated, rugged, etc

So you cant directly compare them because there are 100s of variables between how they live, many of which can affect the feet.
Click to expand...

Very true but as part of keeping a barefoot horse we recommend 24/7 turnout on Paddock Paradise systems, with very simple diets, avoiding manufactured feeds, don't recommend the use of hoof oil or any other commercial hoof products, recognise the problem that worming and vaccination can cause and preferably don't rug. In other words get the horse as close back to nature as possible - the closer you get the better the feet will be. Of course most people have to make compromises and recognise we can't provide a perfect environment. Because of this compromise not all horses will have perfect feet and that's where hoof boots come into play. Ideally we'd never have to use them but the reality is that they allow horses kept in less than optimum environments to keep working at the highest levels. The benefit over shoes is that at the end of the day the hoof boot comes off, the hoof wall has not been damaged/weakened by nails, and the horse goes back into the field with natural hooves that are able to flex and breath as nature intended.
 
mrdarcy said:
Cheers teddyt!

The first study involved six horses and the second study four horses. If we put forward barefoot research using such a tiny pool of horses we'd have been laughed out of town!
Click to expand...

Yes, larger sample sizes are of course better. But some research in peer reviewed journals is better than no research :p
 
"Yes, larger sample sizes are of course better. But some research in peer reviewed journals is better than no research "

But is it better than anecdotal evidence supported by hundreds of barefoot horse owners?????

Discuss.

:)
 
teddyt said:
Yes, larger sample sizes are of course better. But some research in peer reviewed journals is better than no research :p
Click to expand...

Those two pieces of research also are only comparing egg bar shoes to normal shoes and more crucially don't give any indication of what time period the study was conducted over. It reads as if it was a very short term study, which is fine but how useful is it really? Shod horses don't wear shoes for a few days, they wear them for years - it's the long term effects that are really relevant.
 
Peer reviewed published research has to stand up to a thorough assessment from other researchers and veterinary professionals.
Even with a small sample size the conditions will have been standardised so the results can almost certainly be down to the 'treatment' or condition that the horse has been put under, rather than another influencing factor.
There is little room for opinion unless it is supported by empirical evidence.
The results are statistically analysed for significance- not just someones idea of significance.

for example, i could say that there are a significant number of people on HHO that are stupid ;). But that is just my opinion, based on anecdotal evidence. But if everyone was given a test under the same conditions and 75% passed, thereby proving they werent stupid then there would be hard evidence to say that a significant number of people on HHO are not stupid after all! :)
 
mrdarcy said:
Those two pieces of research also are only comparing egg bar shoes to normal shoes and more crucially don't give any indication of what time period the study was conducted over. It reads as if it was a very short term study, which is fine but how useful is it really? Shod horses don't wear shoes for a few days, they wear them for years - it's the long term effects that are really relevant.
Click to expand...


i just picked those studies at random, there are lots more. You can find lots of pros/cons of most research studies. Just because its published its not fact and you can look at everything from different angles. But you asked for examples, so i was just pointing out that there is research out there. Its not necessarily perfect or exactly answering what you want but its still valid and relevant in parts.

what a big headed cow you are communicating with, unbelievable!!!
Click to expand...

Do you mean me? :confused: Do elaborate! If it is directed at me then im afraid responses like that dont do you any favours. Mrdarcy, cptrayes and myself have had a few discussions without the need for insults. its called learning- explaining each others points of view and teaching each other things. I dont know why others cant do the same!
 
teddyt said:
Peer reviewed published research has to stand up to a thorough assessment from other researchers and veterinary professionals.
Even with a small sample size the conditions will have been standardised so the results can almost certainly be down to the 'treatment' or condition that the horse has been put under, rather than another influencing factor.
There is little room for opinion unless it is supported by empirical evidence.
The results are statistically analysed for significance- not just someones idea of significance.

for example, i could say that there are a significant number of people on HHO that are stupid ;). But that is just my opinion, based on anecdotal evidence. But if everyone was given a test under the same conditions and 75% passed, thereby proving they werent stupid then there would be hard evidence to say that a significant number of people on HHO are not stupid after all! :)
Click to expand...

Research can tell you anything you want it to... depending on the question you're asking and the validity of the research subjects and the researcher themselves. The research linking the MMR vaccine to autism was compelling enough to convince lots of people, including doctors and other researchers, yet it has now been shown to be bogus. There are many many examples of research projects that have come to one conclusion only to be contradicted by subsequent research project.

Don't get me wrong I'd love to see more research done contrasting barefoot horses with shod horses - funding is always going to be an issue but hopefully it will be done.
 
teddyt said:
The results are statistically analysed for significance- not just someones idea of significance.
Click to expand...

I did a stats course a wee while ago, and the statistic they quoted was that in around 50% of published papers the statistics are inappropriately applied.

I'll refer back to my earlier post about peer-reviewed published work - how would anyone go about researching the effects of diet on feet in a controlled manner? All the current studies to my knowledge are on specific lameness issues, not simply diet for 'normal' horses. Would publishing a summary of a large number of case studies in a peer-reviewed journal be the only way to provide the sort of empirical evidence that keeps being requested?
 
teddyt said:
i just picked those studies at random, there are lots more. You can find lots of pros/cons of most research studies. Just because its published its not fact and you can look at everything from different angles. But you asked for examples, so i was just pointing out that there is research out there. Its not necessarily perfect or exactly answering what you want but its still valid and relevant in parts.



Do you mean me? :confused: Do elaborate! If it is directed at me then im afraid responses like that dont do you any favours. Mrdarcy, cptrayes and myself have had a few discussions without the need for insults. its called learning- explaining each others points of view and teaching each other things. I dont know why others cant do the same!
Click to expand...

no, i did not mean you- i was referring to CP Trayes very arrogane and unnecessary retort to SusieTabout her typing abilities!!! nothing to do with barefoot or anything else, so totally uncalled for!!!! if thats how folk write these days thank god i am an old and outof date mare!!
 
I would disagree with the statistic that 50% of statistics are inappropriately applied, for peer reviewed research anyway! You have to look at the whole paper to draw conclusions though, the stats analysis is just one part of it.

with regards to assessing the effect of diet on feet then you would need a group of horses all kept under the same conditions except for the variable you want to study. so you would have say, 10 horses fed oats, 10 fed just hay and 10 fed both then compare foot growth (for example) between the groups. You could then assess that (for example) the oats diet make the feet grow the slowest. If the horses were kept under different conditions e.g. some were stabled and some were in the field then that could influence the results, so you couldnt say for sure that the oats were the reason for slower foot growth.

Analysing a large no of case studies would be a good contribution but there would be many variables that could be argued as affecting conclusions.
 
rosiefronfelen said:
no, i did not mean you- i was referring to CP Trayes very arrogane and unnecessary retort to SusieTabout her typing abilities!!! nothing to do with barefoot or anything else, so totally uncalled for!!!! if thats how folk write these days thank god i am an old and outof date mare!!
Click to expand...

sorry, i jumped to the wrong conclusion. I thought ive barely joined in and im being called a big headed cow :eek:. im tired and need to go to bed!:)
 
teddyt said:
I would disagree with the statistic that 50% of statistics are inappropriately applied, for peer reviewed research anyway! You have to look at the whole paper to draw conclusions though, the stats analysis is just one part of it.
Click to expand...

That's what they said though, and they were a fairly heavyweight bunch of statisticians... they did say it's getting better these days though with a trend towards using a statistician rather than doing your own. I'm rubbish at stats, just to clarify!

teddyt said:
with regards to assessing the effect of diet on feet then you would need a group of horses all kept under the same conditions except for the variable you want to study. so you would have say, 10 horses fed oats, 10 fed just hay and 10 fed both then compare foot growth (for example) between the groups. You could then assess that (for example) the oats diet make the feet grow the slowest. If the horses were kept under different conditions e.g. some were stabled and some were in the field then that could influence the results, so you couldnt say for sure that the oats were the reason for slower foot growth.
Click to expand...

I totally see your point, but practically is anyone ever actually likely to do this? I think it would need some eccentric multimillionaire to fund it as a pet project as I can't imagine anyone else would.
 
rosiefronfelen said:
no, i did not mean you- i was referring to CP Trayes very arrogane and unnecessary retort to SusieTabout her typing abilities!!! nothing to do with barefoot or anything else, so totally uncalled for!!!! if thats how folk write these days thank god i am an old and outof date mare!!
Click to expand...


Rosie I am puzzled by what you or Susie think you have actually contributed which will help any person or any horse in this discussion?

You both seem happy to insult me. If you find it offensive that I mention that I touch type at 50 words a minute then you must be desperately easy to offend. If insulting me gives you some kind of kick, so be it.

Meanwhile I will, as I always have, and always will, continue to put my own experience up for public scrutiny to try to help horses and horse owners who actually want to be helped.

I shall sleep well in the knowledge that there is a sound and happy horse in my barn who is going to give fifteen years of joy to the person who I give him away to, who would be dead by now if I didn't believe what I believe.
 
I dont think that I have ever read so much waffle before in my entire life! You seem to baffle yourselves with bull****!
 
teddyt said:
I would disagree with the statistic that 50% of statistics are inappropriately applied, for peer reviewed research anyway! You have to look at the whole paper to draw conclusions though, the stats analysis is just one part of it.

with regards to assessing the effect of diet on feet then you would need a group of horses all kept under the same conditions except for the variable you want to study. so you would have say, 10 horses fed oats, 10 fed just hay and 10 fed both then compare foot growth (for example) between the groups. You could then assess that (for example) the oats diet make the feet grow the slowest. If the horses were kept under different conditions e.g. some were stabled and some were in the field then that could influence the results, so you couldnt say for sure that the oats were the reason for slower foot growth.

Analysing a large no of case studies would be a good contribution but there would be many variables that could be argued as affecting conclusions.
Click to expand...

The number of variables are huge. In the study you suggest surely you would have to use the same 10 horses - first fed oats, then fed hay, then fed both, because otherwise you are not comparing like with like. Each horse will have a different metabolism so comparing three different groups wouldn't give valid results, unless those groups were so large as to account for a myriad of differing metabolisms. I am sure there must be a statistical way to work out the minimum number of research subjects in order to make a study valid... or maybe not?

For now we have to make do with anecdotal evidence. I've seen the improvements in my own horses' health since going barefoot and there are many many other people out there reporting similar. Ultimately we can only go off our own experiences. But as an example I did a 25 mile endurance ride with my horse last Sunday. We completed it sound as a pound in two and a quarter hours, an average speed of 17.91kph. Yes we wore hoof boots but he's done very little work this year... both him and his feet are lacking in conditioning... but he did that ride in the fastest time he has ever achieved in his seven year endurance career. Do I put that down to the fact he no longer wears shoes. You bet I do! Also the fact that the day after his legs were totally without any filling - unheard of when he wore shoes. I don't even need to use cooling gels or bandages now to try and keep the filling down. None of which ever worked btw, though I spent a bloomin fortune trying every lotion, clay and gel under the sun. I wish I'd known it was as simple as removing his shoes - would have saved a fortune! But yes - he isn't a scientific research subject... just my horse that I've owned for three years and know inside out.
 
I always read these barefoot threads hoping to learn something, and I never do because of all the mud-slinging and 50 foot high horse mounting.
 
Spudlet said:
I always read these barefoot threads hoping to learn something, and I never do because of all the mud-slinging and 50 foot high horse mounting.
Click to expand...

I don't believe I've done any mud slinging... don't understand the second comment. But if you have any specific questions just ask... or even better come along and have a look at my horses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top