genuine question re barefoot

Exactly. I am not talking about tendon injuries, but the cases of navicular DISEASE rather than navicular syndrome, which encompasses tendon, ligament and boney changes.
Take rockley farm which is being touted as doing great navicular disease research-which is not differentiating between the causes of palmar hoof pain by MRI's but just treating them. Which effectively means their research will be not much use in treating navicular disease, although I accept for treating undiagnosed causes of palmar hoof pain, their research may be useful.
You are talkiing about radiographs-changes seen on radiographs are not diagnostic-I know that. I also know that MRI is the gold standard as it will show damage to the tendons and ligaments-hence my comment. Navicular disease is actual damage associated witht eh navicular bone and bursa, the navicular syndrome is used to often diagnose conditions such as injury to the ddft, collateral ligaments etc. It comes from the days pre-MRI/where MRI is not affordable. Your need to differentiate between the two.
Your assumption is astoundingly inaccurate.. and very much a case of trying to make yourself look good using dramatic prose.
 
whisp&willow said:
it has no relevance what so ever- i don't think anyone has said it does? i can only speak for myself here, but i don't have someone nail steel to my horses feet because the professionals do.
Click to expand...

NO, my comment was directed at Changes, who wants us to do EXACTLY THAT.

I'm sure you have more sense.
 
there is actually scientific studies which led to long term soundness using remedial shoeing for a significant proportion of horses. there is none available for unshod horses-this does not detract frm previous studies but yes, ideally three groups, unshod, shod and remedial shod should be evaluated long term,
 
SusieT said:
Exactly. I am not talking about tendon injuries, but the cases of navicular DISEASE rather than navicular syndrome, which encompasses tendon, ligament and boney changes.
Take rockley farm which is being touted as doing great navicular disease research-which is not differentiating between the causes of palmar hoof pain by MRI's but just treating them. Which effectively means their research will be not much use in treating navicular disease, although I accept for treating undiagnosed causes of palmar hoof pain, their research may be useful.
You are talkiing about radiographs-changes seen on radiographs are not diagnostic-I know that. I also know that MRI is the gold standard as it will show damage to the tendons and ligaments-hence my comment. Navicular disease is actual damage associated witht eh navicular bone and bursa, the navicular syndrome is used to often diagnose conditions such as injury to the ddft, collateral ligaments etc. It comes from the days pre-MRI/where MRI is not affordable. Your need to differentiate between the two.
Your assumption is astoundingly inaccurate.. and very much a case of trying to make yourself look good using dramatic prose.
Click to expand...



There is an increasing body of scientific opinion that there is no such thing as "Navicular disease". Damage to the navicular bone is almost never seen without damage to the soft tissues inside the foot and there is research which shows that it is the soft tissue damage which creates the changes in the navicular bone. The soft tissue damage comes first. So the disease is correctly described as collateral ligament strain, ddft damage, impar ligament strain etc, depending on which structure is causing the lameness.

Navicular syndrome is simply the name given to horses which are lame where the lameness blocks to the caudal hoof, the back half.


Some of you guys really don't want it to be true that horses can be saved with barefoot rehabs, do you. Why would you rather horses were shot?
 
Last edited:
SusieT said:
there is also no evidence for barefoot, and i've done the searches. whereas there is some for remedial shoeing.
Click to expand...

Where, might I ask, have you searched? Of course there is evidence for the benefit of bf rehab, as there is evidence that remedial shoeing has helped some horses!
Please look on Rockley Farm website, also www.performancebarefoot.co.uk
Saying there is no evidence is a sweeping statement in the extreme.
 
lazybee said:
To the dogmatic few that refer to themselves as 'us' and 'we'


Throughout this and other threads you have advocated barefoot as some kind of miracle cure, you have also implied on many occasions the only reason people don't all go barefoot is that they lack commitment. which of course is nonsense. You have tunnel vision, even when debating with open minded people. You refer to shoeing as 'nailing on' shoes or pieces of metal as if it's some kind of barbaric act. You remain totally polarised in you views, even with people like me with mixture of shod and unshod depending on their individual needs. You turn on anyone (en masse) who has the audacity to have a different opinion, however reasonable.

I think you would carry on this thread ad infinitum, in the vain attempt to get the last word.
Click to expand...

As the 'we' thing is being banded around seemingly from my post...
Yes I advocate barefoot but then i'm sure if you'd had an animal, or family member or friend for that matter, made well with an alternative treatment after months of failed conventional treatments you'd probably be singing that treatment from the rooftops too!

I've never (and I can't recall seeing anyone else do, but please link to the thread) suggested people with shod horses lack commitment, its not always the easiest option and some owners will never have the facilities at their disposal to make the change if they wanted to. Personally I do think nailing on shoes is a bit barbaric and yes I used to shoe all my horses without question because thats what I was taught.
For the record I couldn't give a monkeys uncle whether you shoe your horse or not, makes no difference to me. I will however continue to recommend people research the advantages of taking a horse barefoot if and when they ask for opinions and advice just as the 'shoe' folks will continue to recommend box rest, drugs and remedial shoeing the owner will make whatever decision they feel is best based upon their own findings.
 
SusieT said:
there is actually scientific studies which led to long term soundness using remedial shoeing for a significant proportion of horses. there is none available for unshod horses-this does not detract frm previous studies but yes, ideally three groups, unshod, shod and remedial shod should be evaluated long term,
Click to expand...


I repeat there are NO

SCIENTIFICALLY VALID

studies. The numbers in the studies, which I have looked at, are generally ten horses or less and there is no control group as to how horses matched like for like would have fared with no shoes.

Research without a control group is completely inconclusive and would not be accepted for publication by a peer review.

Funnily enough, there is one study that compared treatments for navicular syndrome. All the horses improved to some extent. The only thing that was common to all of them?

They had all had their shoes removed to prevent differences in shoeing from corrupting the results.

Did anyone conclude that removing shoes was helpful? No, THAT's how blind the veterinary community are to barefoot rehabs. Talk about Emporer's New Clothes!
 
Last edited:
debsg-look closely at the rockley farm data. Many of their horses they are simply palmar hoof pain with no official diagnosis, hence why I mention it. Whilst I'm sure they are doing a good job etc. there is no evidence to suggest a concentrated rehabilitation programme on shod horses would not have the same effect-how many owners would pay as much attention to every little detail of their horses lives as a professional rehab service will? In terms of navicular therefore it is not that useful as the majority of the horses are going with navicular 'syndrome' as opposed to diagnosed navicular disease, which requires expensive imaging that may be beyond owner sbudgets. As well a lot of the horses feet are really in a poor state-which is bad farriery as much as anything and it is likely a good trim is better than bad farriery-as I 'm sure you will agree.
 
Santapaws-I'm afraid you are wrong. There are studies with much greater numbers than ten, published in peer reviewed journals. Not something you can say for unshod horses. We often don't evaluate many treatments against each other directly-but evaluate its effect on the disease and its prognosis and progression.
 
SusieT said:
debsg-look closely at the rockley farm data. Many of their horses they are simply palmar hoof pain with no official diagnosis, hence why I mention it. Whilst I'm sure they are doing a good job etc. there is no evidence to suggest a concentrated rehabilitation programme on shod horses would not have the same effect-how many owners would pay as much attention to every little detail of their horses lives as a professional rehab service will? In terms of navicular therefore it is not that useful as the majority of the horses are going with navicular 'syndrome' as opposed to diagnosed navicular disease, which requires expensive imaging that may be beyond owner sbudgets. As well a lot of the horses feet are really in a poor state-which is bad farriery as much as anything and it is likely a good trim is better than bad farriery-as I 'm sure you will agree.
Click to expand...



It's NOT JUST ROCKLEY


There are hundreds of us who have done barefoot rehabs. There are trimmers all over the country saving horses from the bullet.

How many of us is it going to take before you stop insisting that we are all wrong and that a bit of good shoeing would sort the horses out that we are saving?
 
Santa Paws said:
There is an increasing body of scientific opinion that there is no such thing as "Navicular disease". -Where is this? Damage to the navicular bone is almost never seen without damage to the soft tissues inside the foot and there is research which shows that it is the soft tissue damage which creates the changes in the navicular bone. The soft tissue damage comes first. So the disease is correctly described as collateral ligament strain, ddft damage, impar ligament strain etc, depending on which structure is causing the lameness.
-Yes, I fully accept the most likely pathogenesis for boney damage is soft tissue damage.
Navicular syndrome is simply the name given to horses which are lame where the lameness blocks to the caudal hoof, the back half.
Yes- I agree with you there.

Some of you guys really don't want it to be true that horses can be saved with barefoot rehabs, do you. Why would you rather horses were shot?
Click to expand...
-I would rather they were kept pain free-if that's not possible euthanasia is necessary. Some of you guys wont believe that saying that could well be the attention to detail in rehab management that makes the difference plus a good trim as opposed to bad farriery..
 
SusieT said:
Santapaws-I'm afraid you are wrong. There are studies with much greater numbers than ten, published in peer reviewed journals. Not something you can say for unshod horses. We often don't evaluate many treatments against each other directly-but evaluate its effect on the disease and its prognosis and progression.
Click to expand...


There may be studies showing that one method of shoeing is more effective than another but what use are those studies if you do not know if the same result would have been achieved with no shoes on at all?

There is NO SCIENTIFICALLY VALID research that remedial shoeing of any kind is more effective for either laminitis or navicular disease/syndrome that a barefoot approach would be.
 
Santa Paws said:
It's NOT JUST ROCKLEY


There are hundreds of us who have done barefoot rehabs. There are trimmers all over the country saving horses from the bullet.

How many of us is it going to take before you stop insisting that we are all wrong and that a bit of good shoeing would sort the horses out that we are saving?
Click to expand...

A proper study. Not just a half arsed one. Yes-and we have no idea what conditions your horses had half the time, half the time it is really crap shoeing we are seeing as opposed to well shod feet. It's like comparing a crap trim to a well shod foot.. Or novice owners with no idea how to feed a horse. Etc. etc. So many factors, and yet somehow people think that taking the shoes off is the only thing they change, when they seem to decide they need to actually manage their horse in any way shape or form only when they take the shoes off.

I don't believe you are saving horses a lot of the time through taking the shoes off. Having done the research, remedial shoeing is not the big evil you make it out to be.
I will find the studies, possibly not tonight as I'm on my way out but will come back to post them.
 
Where is your study then saying that barefoot works for navicular? It is essentially an unvalidated treatment-it is your job to prove it works by doing a study of success rates with barefoot and publishing it and comparing the success rates with the shoeing studies. Not that hard if it is so successful.
 
SusieT said:
-I would rather they were kept pain free-if that's not possible euthanasia is necessary. Some of you guys wont believe that saying that could well be the attention to detail in rehab management that makes the difference plus a good trim as opposed to bad farriery..
Click to expand...

SO are you suggesting that our rehabs are not pain free?

Have you looked at the changes that occur in UNTRIMMED feet at Rockley? Even the ones which arrive looking well shod? And ESPECIALLY the ones that arrive remedially shod with bars/wedges etc. It's clear that you haven't followed the blog, or you would know that Rockley rarely trims a rehab, the horse trims itself on their track system.

I'm at a loss to understand how you think the complete absence of any kind of trimming fits with "attention to detail" causing the horse's recovery.

You are DESPERATE not to believe in barefoot rehabs, aren't you Susie? Why?
 
Last edited:
SusieT said:
Where is your study then saying that barefoot works for navicular? It is essentially an unvalidated treatment-it is your job to prove it works by doing a study of success rates with barefoot and publishing it and comparing the success rates with the shoeing studies. Not that hard if it is so successful.
Click to expand...

I did not claim to have any, but you did claim to have them for remedial shoeing when there are none.

It is not my job to do anything. I am a private individual, I don't even trim for a living.

Rockley is trying to publish but the Professor who is involved is too busy, probably with studies that companies will pay him for.


Susie please explain, I am baffled. Why are you so desperate for it not to be true that barefoot rehabs work? Do you REALLY think that the vets and farriers who have referred horses to Rockley simply got their diagnoses and shoeing wrong? Studies do show that remedial farriery and drugs only work 20% of the time to return a Navicular horse to full work. WHY do you want that to remain the situation?

Have a nice night out.
 
Last edited:
SO are you suggesting that our rehabs are not pain free?

Have you looked at the changes that occur in UNTRIMMED feet at Rockley? Even the ones which arrive looking well shod? And ESPECIALLY the ones that arrive remedially shod with bars/wedges etc. It's clear that you haven't followed the blog, or you would know that Rockley rarely trims a rehab, the horse trims itself on their track system.

I'm at a loss to understand how you think the complete absence of any kind of trimming fits with "attention to detail" causing the horse's recovery.

You are DESPERATE not to believe in barefoot rehabs, aren't you Susie? Why?

I'll turn taht round-you are desperate not to belief in there being scinetific research because it doesn't fit with your ideas (or it might..but you aren't willing to look at it.)
I don't think you understand the point that owners with poor feet often tootle along happily until the horse goes lame, then panic, then eventually decide to go barefoot, then change the diet, feet, exercise regime all at once-which means any of these could be the important factor in recovery-not just the barefoot part..
I dont follow any blogs as laypeoples potentially biased opinions dont tend to provide treatment changing options.
There is evidence for horses being helped by remedial shoeing i.e. horses being sound long termafter a diagnosis of navicular disease- are you suggesting those horses would have benefitted more from being barefoot?
You are quite happy to say we have to prove our way but won't prove your own? There are hundreds and hundreds of sound horses out there too with shoes on you know.

Some studies. I am not saying that there could not be further advances in treatment as the results are not 100% satisfactory and as I said- a study with shod, barefoot would be good to see, which is what you would like to see too no?
but in the mean time I'd rather use a validated treatment that has been shown to have some effect rather than a treatment that some people think works, but has had no published research on it. The term escapes me for the moment to describe this.
Navicular bone disease : Results of treatment
using egg-bar shoeing technique

Quantitative comparison of three commonly used treatments for navicular syndrome in horses-this one doesn't conclude much but uses quantitative measures and has no long term effects-interesting all the same.
 
So to do a valid study we have to find a number of horses that have always been well shod and well managed / fed that have also been diagnosed with navicular - would you prefer syndrome or disease for this study? We have to do every know diagnosis to be 100% sure that they have the right sort of problem. The we have to take them though conventional treatment, with good shoeing, feeding and management and only after they're not sound can we then try the barefoot route to be 100% sure that they got better from removing the shoes and not poor farriery!
Seriously what planet are you on!!!
 
What i read from the Barefoot Taliban is an alternative to shoeing that can be of great benefit to your horse as long as you take in all the other factors involved in good hoof growth with regards to diet, living conditions etc. I have never once read a BT be negative or unhelpful to anyone that is looking for information.

I actually do not give a monkeys chuff whether any "scientifically proven" studies are made available, what i do do is look at the horses i am around. I watch the difference in their feet when shoes are taken off and how much stronger and healthier they look after a few weeks. It also works in my head that the hoof wall needs to be able to "move" and that putting a shoe on restricts that movement. I believe, from what i have witnessed, that shoes negatively impact upon the over all health of the foot, add to this a farrier that is not absolutely perfect in his job the problems can lead to lameness in all different areas of the body.

Having looked at a lot of jumping/dressage horses feet over the last few years i am often shocked by the state of some of the feet and would love to see what would happen if they did go barefoot (especially the "stoppers"). Mind you if things get too bad they can always denerve them, once the injections have stopped working of course, and carry on regardless:rolleyes:

IMO shoeing your horse to improve movement regardless of long term issues is poor sportmanship.

People are entitled to ask questions and be answered in a civil manner, regardless of your point of view on the subject
 
SusieT said:
oberon-do you appreciate fully what navicular disease is as opposed to navicular syndrome?. If so you might appreciate why they are 'still putting horses down with it'.
If you compare dairy holsteins to other cows (e.g beef/jerseys) you see that different breeds have different abilities to grow good feet-holsteins are bred to intensively they often have terrible feet through breeding, so it stands to reason the same stands for horses. Not every horse can grow a 'good foot' nor is it suitable to make sound shod horses go barefoot for the sake of it.
Click to expand...

Thank you, yes I do appreciate the difference between syndrome and disease.

I can't comment on dairy cows versus horses - I have no knowledge on how to keep a cow sound and I wasn't aware they were shod nowadays:)
I do believe every horse can grow a good foot. They can't always be fully comfortable on them though and this is where good management and hoof boots can help. If that doesn't help, then shoes are the best option. I have said before and will again, I am not against shoes - I am against misinformation.

With regards to research - well, I am as frustrated as you are! I wish I had something that would validate the cases of lame horses coming sound barefoot - then perhaps I wouldn't be considered such a crackpot
lol.gif


It would be nice if the answer to every lameness issue wasn't always heart bar shoes straight away :)
They SUPPORT the heel, but I want to DEVELOP the heel.

My friend's horse had changes to the navicular bone, did the whole heart bar and wedges thing. He was lame the whole time. I kept my mouth shut but was waiting for them to ask me. Eventually they pulled the shoes. The only change in his management was the hoof care. He's been sound ever since
http://www.progressivehorse.co.uk/html/shoko.html

He would have been put down by now if he'd still been lame with traditional treatments. This frustrates me too.

It's not a scientific paper, but it's a sound horse and he is one of many.

I post on here because I want people to at least consider the option of barefoot if they are facing a tough choice....but I want them to do it properly. So (with my little knowledge of the subject) I'm here if anyone needs me.
 
I haven't read the entire thread, so excuse me if I have repeated anything!

I've recently decided to try barefoot. My horse suffered a tendon injury and despite months of careful rehab it re-occured. Through HHO I heard about Rockley Farm and in the back of my mind i've always been thinking, if all else fails i'll send him there. There is no denying the results they have. I recently bought the book 'Feet First' written by the lady who runs Rockley, and another who advices people on their horse's feeding. It's an interesting read and makes some very valid points.

I think the reason that we don't see many barefoot horses at the top levels is because the managment required to get them to grow the correct hoof structure is huge. With just one horse I find it mindblowing. It's also not cheap, the minerals ect. come at a cost and the horse needs to recieve the correct amount for it to work. The horse needs to do a lot of road work and work over various sufaces to stimulate the hoof. At the end of the day, it takes an awful lot more time to keep a horse barefoot successfully. Time is money, a pro doesn't often have excess of either and if the horse is managing fine with shoes (which many do), it's clearly an easier option to keep them shod.

I also should add we recently had a grand prix dressage horse stay with us for a few months on loan. She has been barefoot for a good few years and was more than happy to perform piaffe, passage and extended trot on the stony tracks around the new forest :) Unfortunately I haven't got any photos of her, she had interesting feet. Her owners said that she had an injury a while ago and the feet have grown to accomodate them. It certainly didn't effect her way of going and she was sound as a pound.

I think its a case of each to their own. I've only 'gone to the dark side' because I have exhausted all other options. So far so good with my boy, but only time will tell. I've had great fun reading about how the horse's feet function though I certainly wouldn't hold a grudge against someone with shod horses. It's cheaper, easier and if the horse is coping fine then there's no problem. In the same way that I wouldn't look down on someone who's horse had remedial shoeing, if it works for the horse then great. We have many options when our horses break down, and it's only fair that we do our utmost to make them comfortable and happy again whatever the solution.
 
Santa Paws said:
Originally Posted by whisp&willow
it has no relevance what so ever- i don't think anyone has said it does? i can only speak for myself here, but i don't have someone nail steel to my horses feet because the professionals do.
Click to expand...
NO, my comment was directed at Changes, who wants us to do EXACTLY THAT.

I'm sure you have more sense.
Click to expand...

If you can't sustain your argument, don't go putting words in my mouth again. I have said nothing of the kind. I have said that I don't believe horses can compete at top level without shoes, and that I find it scary that you think you are right and EVERYONE who rides with shoes is wrong.

Did you miss the bit where I said I've no issue whether or not horses are shod or unshod? And it's just that I sincerely believe barefoot to be the Emperor's New Clothes?
 
Changes said:
Did you miss the bit where I said I've no issue whether or not horses are shod or unshod? And it's just that I sincerely believe barefoot to be the Emperor's New Clothes?
Click to expand...

I don't understand this statement, Emperor's clothes was a joke and a fantasy the king wanted to believe, how does that relate to barefoot hooves and you having no issue with them?
 
'So to do a valid study we have to find a number of horses that have always been well shod and well managed / fed that have also been diagnosed with navicular - would you prefer syndrome or disease for this study? We have to do every know diagnosis to be 100% sure that they have the right sort of problem. The we have to take them though conventional treatment, with good shoeing, feeding and management and only after they're not sound can we then try the barefoot route to be 100% sure that they got better from removing the shoes and not poor farriery!
Seriously what planet are you on!!! '

No, you misunderstand. You do the same as a norml study would ie you take x number of horses diagnosed with navicular disease, and from that point rehabilitate them barefoot and discuss your results. You can either use previously published results to discuss the difference between this and shoeing, or have a group you treat with shoes. Ideally you would have a control group you leave untreated to show that time alone does not cure-but that would go into shadey ethical territory. Then you publish it and with 100% success rate who coudl query you then?
 
What i read from the Barefoot Taliban is an alternative to shoeing that can be of great benefit to your horse as long as you take in all the other factors involved in good hoof growth with regards to diet, living conditions etc. I have never once read a BT be negative or unhelpful to anyone that is looking for information.
Click to expand...

Oi....who are you calling Barefoot Taliban :D Terrible expression - can't think where you picked it up :)

People will go on putting all sorts of shoes and wedges on these horses, then killing them because they didn't work. If they do try barefoot as a therapy, it is usually as a last resort and all the others have failed - so it's an even bigger miracle that barefoot still works for these horses.

Sadly the barefoot movement still has a long way to go and until the evidence of barefoot recovery is so overwhelming and widely seen by vets again and again and again as a valid therapy that works - then this kind of entrenched thinking is going to go on.

"Thin soles" - what a lot of obfuscating nonsense - they are thin because they have never had the opportunity to get thick through stimulation, and develop a naturally high P3 position in the hoof capsule. Too many vets have not seen nearly enough barefoot hooves.

Sorry - but I think the insurance industry has a huge responsibility to bear here for the number of horses that suffer ineffective and intrusive interventions in an attempt to manage navicular syndrome because the insurance industry rewards vets and farriers for this interventionist approach, the reward is greatest when it fails and the spend is highest, BUT does not reward the barefoot rehabilitation approach - even though the barefoot rehab approach is by far the more cost effective.
 
SusieT said:
I'll turn taht round-you are desperate not to belief in there being scinetific research because it doesn't fit with your ideas (or it might..but you aren't willing to look at it.)
Click to expand...

I would LOVE to look at a properly conducted study into whether horses with navicular syndrome/disease are best served by remedial shoes or no shoes. Please point me to it and I will read every word.

SusieT said:
I dont follow any blogs as laypeoples potentially biased opinions dont tend to provide treatment changing options.
Click to expand...

what a shame you are so closed minded. The Rockley blog is nothing short of a marvellous resource for anyone with an open mind. Thank goodness the vets who are referring to Rockley are doing so in spite of their reservations adn then finding themselves surprised at the results which they did not expect.

SusieT said:
There is evidence for horses being helped by remedial shoeing i.e. horses being sound long termafter a diagnosis of navicular disease- are you suggesting those horses would have benefitted more from being barefoot?
Click to expand...

No, I am saying that there is no evidence whatsoever that they would not have been. By the way, my experience is that "benefitted" is all that usually happens. "In full work on varied surfaces including rock hard ground, and jumping" is VERY rarely the outcome with remedial shoeing and VERY often the case with barefoot rehabs.

SusieT said:
You are quite happy to say we have to prove our way but won't prove your own?
Click to expand...

No. It is YOU who want us to prove what we are saying with scientific studies, and then you throw your toys out of your prams when we point out that you can do no better.

SusieT said:
There are hundreds and hundreds of sound horses out there too with shoes on you know.
Click to expand...

Yes but why are they wearing them when most of them would also be sound without them? I was FURIOUS when I discovered that I had been paying for shoes for twenty five years for no reason whatsoever.


SusieT said:
Some studies. I am not saying that there could not be further advances in treatment as the results are not 100% satisfactory and as I said- a study with shod, barefoot would be good to see, which is what you would like to see too no?
Click to expand...

of course.

SusieT said:
but in the mean time I'd rather use a validated treatment that has been shown to have some effect rather than a treatment that some people think works, but has had no published research on it.
Click to expand...

Even though it fails 80% of the horses on which it is used. Even though there is a greater and greater number of people whose horses WERE failed by it, including my own, which were subsequently sound after shoe removal. You wouldn't even consider barefoot first and then conventional treatment if barefoot failed?

More fool you.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top