Ok to feed bran?

Tiddlypom

Carries on creakily
Joined
17 July 2013
Messages
22,235
Location
In between the Midlands and the North
Visit site
I find myself in possession of a nearly new 20kg sack of bran.

Now, when I was a girl many, many moons ago, we freely fed bran, and those new fangled Spillers horse and pony cubes, to all our horses and ponies.

Bran then fell out of favour big time and I don't know of anyone who feeds it routinely now. It has unbalanced levels of certain minerals, I recall.

I feed my lot (who live out 24/7) two tiny 'hard' feeds a day, currently comprising half a cupful of soaked hi fibre cubes with added salt, micronised linseed and pro hoof. Is there any reason why I can't substitute half a cupful of damped bran for the hi fibre cubes? I can't think of any other way of getting rid of it..
 

Shay

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 August 2008
Messages
7,345
Visit site
You can absolutely feed bran. Dry to tighten loose droppings or wet to loosen them. Or as a good old fashioned Bran mash. Bran has little or no food value - its a bulk agent. It also upsets the calcium balance so if fed long term or to younger stock you have to add Limestone Flour. Your HiFi cubes will have a food value of some form, and vits and mins which Bran won't have. But other than that there is no reason not to feed it. We do - especially as bran mash after hunting.
 

AdorableAlice

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 October 2011
Messages
13,000
Visit site
I always keep a sack of bran in the feed room, it is very useful stuff. For instance, I have a pair of 3 year olds, one needs feeding and one does not. The one that does not has a mug of damp bran spread over the base of a very large flat bottomed feed bowl whilst the other one has a proper feed.

It is useful as a carrier for anything you might need to give them that needs to adhere to food, ie bute etc. It is old fashioned but I feel it still has a place in the feed room.
 

Goldenstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 March 2011
Messages
46,023
Visit site
No reason not to feed bran in sensible qualities .
It's not ' well balanced ' as a horse feed but as long as you are not feeding it in big qualities is not an issue , although I would use it for youngsters .
Bran nowadays is not the quality it was forty years ago as the best broad bran is used in the health food market for humans .
I used to always feed bran after hunting it was traditional , however it makes no sense to feed a horse something only once or twice a week , it does not suit their digestive system which function best when you feed them the same things everyday ,and why we used to give tired possibly dehydrated horses Epsom salts is beyond me it makes me ekkkk when I think about it now .
 

Tiddlypom

Carries on creakily
Joined
17 July 2013
Messages
22,235
Location
In between the Midlands and the North
Visit site
Thanks for the replies, very reassuring. I shall carry on feeding the bran then, it's really only there as a carrier for their supplements, rather than for any food value. It's the Ca and P ratio which is wrong, isn't it.

I'd forgotten how lovely bran smells, when its damped down. The horses agree, they are certainly licking their bowls especially clean!

GS, I'd noticed how small the flakes were, nothing like the broad bran that I remember from years ago.
 

fuzzle

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 April 2012
Messages
350
Visit site
I love bran!!!!! my horses still have bran once a week a real wet bran mash keeps there guts clear from blockage especially my old horse. good on a cold day when you can add warm water too, but there is nothing in bran so you will need to add other feed to bulk it up. Agree with last post , it smells amazing and i have never ever known a horse to not eat it!!!!!!!!! sometimes the good old ways are better!! xxx
 

Tnavas

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 October 2005
Messages
8,480
Location
New Zealand but from UK
Visit site
Modern Bran should be fed with caution as the Phosphorous Calcium balance is way out. Even feeding a Calcium supplement won't work as bran contains Pytayes that block the absorption of Calcium.

With minimum feed value it's really rubbish, only use as a bran mash or in a poultice to draw wounds.

Golden star, the question with regard to the notion that it is not good to feed bran mash weekly because of the change in diet came up at a recent lecture. The lecturer made the comment that any horse being fed will be eating cereal in some form, especially if being fed composit feeds as bran is included in many. Makes sense! Must admit I've never heard of Epsom Salts being added to the feed of a tired dehydrated horse, one that is collicy or suffering from Laminitis or Grass Staggers.

A few years back a friend started feeding bran in more than just handfuls and then found herself with a horse with a fractured Pedal bone.

So love the smell of a cooking bran mash. Yum!
 

Goldenstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 March 2011
Messages
46,023
Visit site
It doesn't! Bran contains phytates that prevent the absorption of calcium.

I do think it's a matter of quantity as well ,bran is very light so a couple of double handfuls does not represent a lot kilo for kilo in the mix of other things horses are eating much of which contains calcium .
 

Tiddlypom

Carries on creakily
Joined
17 July 2013
Messages
22,235
Location
In between the Midlands and the North
Visit site
I have just weighed the bran that I am feeding to my lot, and two mugfuls comes to just 90 grams per day. As others have said, it weighs light.

Whilst feeding a lot of bran is now known to be harmful, I am comfortable that the teeny amount that I am giving them is ok, so I will carry on.

Thanks, people. (When I first came on this forum, I was still feeding pasture mix with additional garlic :eek:, so since then I have learnt a lot from you all.)
 

Rouletterose

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 October 2008
Messages
930
Visit site
Modern Bran should be fed with caution as the Phosphorous Calcium balance is way out. Even feeding a Calcium supplement won't work as bran contains Pytayes that block the absorption of Calcium.

With minimum feed value it's really rubbish, only use as a bran mash or in a poultice to draw wounds.

Golden star, the question with regard to the notion that it is not good to feed bran mash weekly because of the change in diet came up at a recent lecture. The lecturer made the comment that any horse being fed will be eating cereal in some form, especially if being fed composit feeds as bran is included in many. Makes sense! Must admit I've never heard of Epsom Salts being added to the feed of a tired dehydrated horse, one that is collicy or suffering from Laminitis or Grass Staggers.

A few years back a friend started feeding bran in more than just handfuls and then found herself with a horse with a fractured Pedal bone.

So love the smell of a cooking bran mash. Yum!

Are you honestly saying that you think your friends horse ended up with a fractured pedal bone because she fed bran?
 

Goldenstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 March 2011
Messages
46,023
Visit site
Are you honestly saying that you think your friends horse ended up with a fractured pedal bone because she fed bran?

I don't think you could make that correlation easily , I have looked after two horses with broken pedal bones and bran won't have been a factor in either of those.
 

Tnavas

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 October 2005
Messages
8,480
Location
New Zealand but from UK
Visit site
Are you honestly saying that you think your friends horse ended up with a fractured pedal bone because she fed bran?

Yes that was the vets diagnosis - that the amount of bran she had been feeding had caused a serious depletion in the calcium levels in the horse leading to the weakening of the bones and the subsequent fracture of the pedal bone. The legs were also Xrayed and showed signs of depleted calcium levels.
 

JDH01

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 January 2013
Messages
264
Location
Derbyshire
Visit site
Mine always have an old fashioned bran mash on their return from hunting, they love it and I feel it warms them inside and does no harm even if of little nutritional benefit.
 

khalswitz

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 May 2012
Messages
3,496
Location
NE Scotland
Visit site
I agree with Tnavas. Bran is not good!!

In the 'old days', there was much more fibre in the bran, but as the milling process has become more efficient, it really is a waste product with not only a high Phosphorus level but also large amounts of calcium phytate which inhibits both calcium and phosphorus uptake in the gut.

It's been a very long time acknowledged that bran is very bad for young, growing horses, and leads to 'bran disease' or 'big head syndrome', but more recently it has been generally accepted to not be a very good feedstuff for horses.

As far as bran mashes acting as a laxative, the studies have shown any large feed very unlike the horse's usual feed and that their gut is not used to will produce a similar effect - essentially you are stressing the gut, which is what causes the laxative effect.

I used to be very traditional and fed bran up til a few years ago - and my horse's feet and coat have been WAY better since we stopped :)
 

Penny Eater

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 November 2008
Messages
228
Visit site
Is there a difference between modern milled bran and traditional stoneground bran? I think I read the cold stoneground milling is supposed to preserve more of the oils and antioxidants of the bran? You can still get hold of traditionally milled bran from watermills/windmills in the UK.
Most horse and pony/fibre cubes contain wheatfeed which is basically bran I thought.
 

Tnavas

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 October 2005
Messages
8,480
Location
New Zealand but from UK
Visit site
Is there a difference between modern milled bran and traditional stoneground bran? I think I read the cold stoneground milling is supposed to preserve more of the oils and antioxidants of the bran? You can still get hold of traditionally milled bran from watermills/windmills in the UK.
Most horse and pony/fibre cubes contain wheatfeed which is basically bran I thought.

Modern milled bran is even worse for the horse than the old type as the Phytates are in the husk.

Wheat feed could also refer to various levels of bran. The inclusion of wheat feed and also Soy is why I will never feed processed feeds.

I still feed straights.
 

Penny Eater

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 November 2008
Messages
228
Visit site
Interesting Tnavas. I only feed straights too, I wonder if a lot of the current widespread health problems we're witnessing in horses today is due in part to processed feeds/synthetic supplements.
Cereals like oats contain phytates too though, I thought that's why old horsemen used to soak them before feeding. There's a couple of interesting articles on the internet about grains containing phytates also having phytase which neutralises the phytic acid - gut microflora can also produce phytase and as horses use gut bacteria to ferment their feed could they also produce phytase to neutralise the phytic acid? The articles I read are aimed at people but mention some research with ruminants and mice, I don't know if there have been any studies with horses.
Interestingly they say that heating the cereal destroys the phytase that could potentially neutralise the phytates - so micronised horse cereals aren't such a great thing! And modern milled bran is heated by the fast cutting time - so perhaps stoneground bran keeps the phytase intact? Sorry for rambling, just thinking out loud really!
Here's the articles:
http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/living-with-phytic-acid/
http://www.naturalnews.com/031696_phytic_acid_whole_grains.html
 

Tnavas

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 October 2005
Messages
8,480
Location
New Zealand but from UK
Visit site
Interesting Tnavas. I only feed straights too, I wonder if a lot of the current widespread health problems we're witnessing in horses today is due in part to processed feeds/synthetic supplements.
Cereals like oats contain phytates too though, I thought that's why old horsemen used to soak them before feeding. There's a couple of interesting articles on the internet about grains containing phytates also having phytase which neutralises the phytic acid - gut microflora can also produce phytase and as horses use gut bacteria to ferment their feed could they also produce phytase to neutralise the phytic acid? The articles I read are aimed at people but mention some research with ruminants and mice, I don't know if there have been any studies with horses.
Interestingly they say that heating the cereal destroys the phytase that could potentially neutralise the phytates - so micronised horse cereals aren't such a great thing! And modern milled bran is heated by the fast cutting time - so perhaps stoneground bran keeps the phytase intact? Sorry for rambling, just thinking out loud really!
Here's the articles:
http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/living-with-phytic-acid/
http://www.naturalnews.com/031696_phytic_acid_whole_grains.html

Thanks for those links - I shall go and investigate.

I agree with you about the possibility of modern feeds causing so many metabolic problems - something we never used to see.
 

khalswitz

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 May 2012
Messages
3,496
Location
NE Scotland
Visit site
Thanks for those links - I shall go and investigate.

I agree with you about the possibility of modern feeds causing so many metabolic problems - something we never used to see.

I'm going to slightly disagree there... I've been reading literature reviews that show evidence from old and modern studies to suggest that many metabolic problems we see now as having riding incidence in fact seemed to present pretty commonly in the 60's and 70's but there was not the knowledge in diagnosis. There may still be an increase, but it is not nearly so marked as the diagnosis rates suggest, which in my eyes anyway would suggest that the correlation between feed practice change and the causal root are possibly not the same.

For example, 'tying up' showed no real statistically significant difference in incidence between a 1975 study and a 2004 study. However now we have diagnoses of RER, EPSM and various other conditions where tying up is a symptom, as well as problems like stringhalt that used to be misdiagnosed. It would appear that these diseases are on the rise from diagnosis rates - but as the symptoms show similar rates of incidence, the likelihood is that they in fact haven't increased in incidence...
 
Last edited:

Penny Eater

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 November 2008
Messages
228
Visit site
I would imagine tying up was very common back when horses were used for a living, and rarely had access to turnout in cities I'd imagine - worked hard 6 days and had one day off, hence the term 'Monday morning disease', (using what I remember of Black Beauty here!) so that's not a great example if that's the only one the study gives.

Does it mention things like laminitis, cushings, liver disease, and are there any comparisons between studies from longer ago than the 60s/70s? Of course the veterinary world is a lot more knowledgeable now, and as a result better at diagnosing, but there's still a range of illnesses in horses nowadays that weren't, or were rarely, documented pre-WW2, and most horses then were people's livelihoods so I wouldn't have thought they would have been unwilling to get a vet out.

Even in the last ten years or less the incidence of disease in horses appears to have gone up at an incredible rate, just from the anecdotal evidence (which is often dismissed). If the vets are more knowledgeable now, and we know more about our horses' physical and psychological needs, and we have wormers, and vaccinations, balanced vitamin and mineral rations, and know the importance of turnout and fibre for horses, I'd expect the disease rate to have gone down, not gone up or even remained the same.
 

khalswitz

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 May 2012
Messages
3,496
Location
NE Scotland
Visit site
I would imagine tying up was very common back when horses were used for a living, and rarely had access to turnout in cities I'd imagine - worked hard 6 days and had one day off, hence the term 'Monday morning disease', (using what I remember of Black Beauty here!) so that's not a great example if that's the only one the study gives.

Does it mention things like laminitis, cushings, liver disease, and are there any comparisons between studies from longer ago than the 60s/70s? Of course the veterinary world is a lot more knowledgeable now, and as a result better at diagnosing, but there's still a range of illnesses in horses nowadays that weren't, or were rarely, documented pre-WW2, and most horses then were people's livelihoods so I wouldn't have thought they would have been unwilling to get a vet out.

Even in the last ten years or less the incidence of disease in horses appears to have gone up at an incredible rate, just from the anecdotal evidence (which is often dismissed). If the vets are more knowledgeable now, and we know more about our horses' physical and psychological needs, and we have wormers, and vaccinations, balanced vitamin and mineral rations, and know the importance of turnout and fibre for horses, I'd expect the disease rate to have gone down, not gone up or even remained the same.

It was not the only example from that literature review - I used that one as I know Tnavas has used EPSM as an example before of metabolic disorders. Cushings (or, not Cushings but EMS as it's now known not to be the same as actual Cushings) was discussed, although laminitis was not. I will see if I can find it again.

I don't think you can say the disease rate should have stopped - te much reduced amount of exercise modern horses get is probably also important to bear in mind, especially as we have evidence of te effect of the sedentary lifestyle in humans on disease rates. There are probably a lot of influencing factors - hence why saying modern feed is the reason is not only strictly incorrect but also very simplistic. The breeds have changed massively, their use, their management (for example, are leisure horses more likely to get lami than competition horses? Many high level competition horses don't get turnout when in work. Does that mean turnout leads to lami? Far too simplistic), and not always for the better in the same way modern humans don't.

The review I read didn't look back prior to the 70's, but as modern feeds were not in the mainstream at that point I think it's a fairly good comparison - plus, horses were not used for work at that point (although they were ever ally worked harder than now) so it's a good comparison point.
 

Penny Eater

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 November 2008
Messages
228
Visit site
I don't think I stated modern feed is the reason for current metabolic problems in horses, I wrote that I wonder if it was due in part - i.e. a possible contributing factor.
I believe it's down to a combination of things as you say, use of horses now/exercise, and the very grass they are eating for starters.
One reason why I wondered if there were any earlier study comparisons than the 70s, is the huge change in agriculture in the UK post-WW2 - from small-scale farming and traditional grasslands, to widespread pesticide/herbicide/artificial fertiliser use, and monoculture grazing. I'm sure this is a contributing factor too. I think there have been some studies done showing that horses are not good at coping with environmental stresses and changes, including pollution etc. meaning they show signs of toxicity before humans in a similar environment.
However, I think we've gone way off the topic of bran, sorry OP!
 
Top