Rider "obesity" makes it on the Beeb

Theocat said:
I'm sorry, Dukey, but unless she's pure muscle that's well into the obese range :( http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/healthy-living/Documents/Adult_height_weight_chart_110411.pdf

I'm sorry to pick on your post, but this does illustrate the change in attitudes in this country. Perhaps you could use the incident to encourage your sister to get to a healthy weight? :)

ETA: overweight riders need to think about their own health and wellbeing as well, not just whether the horse can carry them.
Click to expand...

No she isn't fat or too fat to ride. She's a size 12/14 and has always been slightly bigger than me. She is possibly fitter than me as she goes to the gym 3/4 Times a week and probably eats less than me. Some people are built in a certain way. My sister has a flat belly but curvy hip and boobs! So for her she is healthy, other than stop eating what else can be done? I would also stress are two horses are big boys with good bone, if they can't carry my sister who is the size of an average uk woman if not below then who can they carry?
Oh shock horror a man of about 6foot and good build helped me with my 6yo xc last year,he possibly weighs more than my sister...! Does that mean unless a person is under 12stone I shouldn't let them ride my 16.1 ID or my 17h Welsh DXTB
 
'In the UK an estimated 60.8 per cent of adults and 31.1 per cent of children are overweight. According to figures from 2009, almost a quarter of adults (22 per cent of men and 24 per cent of women) in England were classified as obese (BMI 30kg/m² or over).' -BBC

Our horses must be carrying more than they used to. It makes sense to consider what effect this will have and to have some idea of what is safe for them to carry. Prevention is so much better than cure.

Modern leisure horses will be nowhere near as fit as horses were in the 'Olden Days', will be carrying heavier adults and doing so at a greater age.

There are far too many variables for an accurate figure to be reached, but some guide would be useful. At least something that makes you think about it.
 
alainax said:
Where is big Ben and her 30% rule when you need her.... :D


*hides*:eek:
Click to expand...

PMSL :D

I was pondering this morning whether insurance companies will start to pick up on this and start refusing claims on horses with back problems that have big saddles/obese riders (I do mean very obese not just a few pounds over) it wouldnt be hard for them to ask the vet if in their opnion the horse has been subject to excess weight or poor weight distribution.
 
I do think a limit of 10% is too low. But, if the general view was to change to 10% being ideal, 15% completely fine, & in a small number of cases 15-20% being ok, then imo it would be a lot better than some peoples current thinking that 20% is always fine, & up to 25% completely fine for short bursts, or if you are very overweight & want to play the 'fat bashing' card.
 
Someone better tell those mongolians to step away from their ponies and do away with 1000's of years of work and their livelihoods

pony_zps636ba637.png


Think this kids probably ok though

pony2_zps9f6ab4f1.png
 
Stencilface said:
Someone better tell those mongolians to step away from their ponies and do away with 1000's of years of work and their livelihoods

pony_zps636ba637.png


Think this kids probably ok though

pony2_zps9f6ab4f1.png
Click to expand...

Haha I wish there was a like button! Brilliant post! Someone better have a word with old Fox-pitt too....
_AF38620__890__William_FoxPitt__Lionheartweb.jpg


I'm guessing a man of his height isn't under the 10% yet he's very very fit ;)
 
As mentioned on another thread in the older days of Badminton (until late 80s) horses had to carry 11st 10 lb (75kg). Did we see any 750kg horses going around then. This was in the days of the long course ie roads, tracks steeplechase as well. All seemed to manage quite well. Who would like to tell the greatest 3 day eventer of all time that he was too heavy for Charisma?
 
I don't get why 10% is optimal surely 0% is optimal for the horse unless he feels or performs better with extra weight? Bad piece of research, bad reporting or both who knows?!
 
I'm one of the few people I know who has a horse they're not far off being top weight for, IME most people have horses much bigger and stronger than they need (and sometimes, can manage).

Isn't this obsessing about everyone being too heavy just going to make more people over-horse themselves? :confused:

ETA and is the rider being 10% of the horse's weight optimal for the horse's comfort or performance? I'd argue neither, 0% would be optimal for comfort, and a rider the right size, strength and fitness is optimal for performance.
 
Last edited:
Flame_ said:
I
Isn't this obsessing about everyone being too heavy just going to make more people over-horse themselves?
Click to expand...

So many people totally over-horse themselves already. I know far too many people in my area who are led merry dances because they think they look good on a big horse they have neither the strength or ability to control. They then spend all their time riding in the arena, (if they aren't making excuses why they aren't riding) because they are afraid to either compete or hack out.
 
gwniver said:
?????
Click to expand...

OK, look. The 20% mark has been around for years as a safe limit, not a thou shalt never ever exceed this limit on pain of being blasted by bolts of lightning.
I assume your pony has never appeared to have any trouble or you'd have wondered before. Other people would have commented.

Don't stop riding, this is the latest hysteria, like the link I've posted a couple of times that says that women should not pick up more than 7Kg in weight from floor to hip height!!! Where would that leave us:eek:

If you and the pony were perfectly happy until you read this thread then carry on as before:) My little old Welsh would agree. I'm a teensy bit heavier than you but shorter and he's a whole hand smaller but he has plenty of bone and we used to have a whale of a time. I asked various different instructors - including BE coaches - as well as a couple of equine vets and they were all of the opinion that whilst he was fit and well and we were both happy there was absolutely nothing wrong with my riding him - and doing 3' XC on him as well.
 
WelshD said:
PMSL :D

I was pondering this morning whether insurance companies will start to pick up on this and start refusing claims on horses with back problems that have big saddles/obese riders (I do mean very obese not just a few pounds over) it wouldnt be hard for them to ask the vet if in their opnion the horse has been subject to excess weight or poor weight distribution.
Click to expand...

Poor weight distribution and bad back could more easily be caused by a badly fitting saddle.I have SEEN the damage a badly fitting saddle can do to a horse but of course, even though our only concern is the horses welfare, this is never discussed is it? How many people pay a properly trained saddle fitter to fit their saddles, have the fit checked reasonably regulary,i.e at least once a year if there are no problems and have a regular physio/chiropracter check? I do.Not many people do though.They may have an unpleasant suprise if they did whatever their weight.Another thing is harsh and incorrect schooling.Did you know that many insurance companies consider dressage above, from memory elementary or novice a high risk activity? No, not for the rider but for the horse.
 
alainax said:
Where is big Ben and her 30% rule when you need her.... :D


*hides*:eek:
Click to expand...

Be careful what you invoke by saying the name.

Seeing as this was posted over this side of the Atlantic, I thought I would make the trip and see how it was going down over here.

First, It isn't MY 30% rule, I was simply sharing research that said up to 30% was OK, larger sample size, 2 studies done at the Tevis Cup. Ridiculous, maybe, but maybe this is the other side of ridiculous.

BUT

As others have said earlier on, all I have read is a media report of a study, and we all know how good the media are at getting things right and printing all the facts.

My comments on the subject on the other board,

10% sounds a very very light ratio, and would remove swarths of riders from the population.

For arguments sake, lets take the 10% as new cutting edge research and the new reality is that no horse will carry more than 10%, what would be the law of unintended consequences here?

Lots and lots of riders would now be unable to ride their horses, a % of them may successfully lose weight and maintain that loss, so they will be good to go. But there are a whole bunch of us who will never be able to sustain a weight that is 10% of our current mounts so what happens to them? I presume that the purchase price of draft crosses would shoot up, but lighter horses what would be the welfare considerations there?

I am assuming that horses all suffer some sort of wear and tear damage from most anything that we do to them, be it chasing cans, cutting cows, jumping fences, being a dressage star, each discipline must have some degree of damage, it is probably a question how much we are comfortable with.
 
Big Ben said:
Be careful what you invoke by saying the name.

Seeing as this was posted over this side of the Atlantic, I thought I would make the trip and see how it was going down over here.

First, It isn't MY 30% rule, I was simply sharing research that said up to 30% was OK, larger sample size, 2 studies done at the Tevis Cup. Ridiculous, maybe, but maybe this is the other side of ridiculous.

BUT

As others have said earlier on, all I have read is a media report of a study, and we all know how good the media are at getting things right and printing all the facts.

My comments on the subject on the other board,

10% sounds a very very light ratio, and would remove swarths of riders from the population.

For arguments sake, lets take the 10% as new cutting edge research and the new reality is that no horse will carry more than 10%, what would be the law of unintended consequences here?

Lots and lots of riders would now be unable to ride their horses, a % of them may successfully lose weight and maintain that loss, so they will be good to go. But there are a whole bunch of us who will never be able to sustain a weight that is 10% of our current mounts so what happens to them? I presume that the purchase price of draft crosses would shoot up, but lighter horses what would be the welfare considerations there?

I am assuming that horses all suffer some sort of wear and tear damage from most anything that we do to them, be it chasing cans, cutting cows, jumping fences, being a dressage star, each discipline must have some degree of damage, it is probably a question how much we are comfortable with.
Click to expand...

Oh don't worry Big Ben.They will all go to a nice retirement home called Spindles.All the staff from the many closing riding schools/trecking centres will all find lovely new jobs and the owners lovely new businesses I am sure.
 
Native Pony said:
Here's some research which looks like it is a bit more robust.

http://www.horsesciencenews.com/horseback-riding/how-much-weight-can-a-horse-carry.php

If the 10% suggested at the weekend is actually true, then most people shouldn't be riding at all. What about cowboys who tend to ride smaller horses/ponies?
Click to expand...

The trouble with the study quoted there, and often used is that it had a sample size of 7 horses, and they had been turned out to pasture for a couple of months, then brought up and ridden at walk trot and canter with up to 30% weight. I'm not denying their findings but it does appear to be seriously flawed, or at least limited to me.
 
eahotson said:
Oh don't worry Big Ben.They will all go to a nice retirement home called Spindles.All the staff from the many closing riding schools/trecking centres will all find lovely new jobs and the owners lovely new businesses I am sure.
Click to expand...

Ah, good, glad they will be happy at Spindles, the one that is called FindUs Meats Your Needs I found very worrying.:D
 
Seems to me this whole thing was started by an 'industry practitioner' coming up with an arbitrary 'optimum' figure and putting out statistics relating to handful of riders in Cornwall and Devon that were picked as the sample. There's nothing more to it than that, surely?

I myself am an industry practitioner (as I have a horse and practise riding on her quite a lot) and I suggest that the optimum weight is actually 1%. This would be enough for a small robot to be mounted in order to give aids to the horse, but not heavy enough to cause discomfort in their back.

So, who fits in to this new optimum category? Anyone?
 
:) 1%. I like it!

Seems more actually scientific, validated, peer reviewed research is needed. Nevertheless, as others have said, it must depend on the type of equine you are riding in any case.

Lies, damned, lies and statistics.......
 
Big Ben said:
The trouble with the study quoted there, and often used is that it had a sample size of 7 horses, and they had been turned out to pasture for a couple of months, then brought up and ridden at walk trot and canter with up to 30% weight. I'm not denying their findings but it does appear to be seriously flawed, or at least limited to me.
Click to expand...

I think this is a very flawed study too. It would be better if it said how long the horses were ridden for and also included some in the study that were fit and regularly ridden rather than just brought in from being turned away.

I find it interesting that the studies find that bone and loin widthare a good indication of the weight carrying ability of a horse. We have a 13hh Fell pony here who has more bone and wider loins than my friend's 16.2 TB cross, yet he only weighs 340kg and the horse 200kg more.
 
JenJ said:
I myself am an industry practitioner (as I have a horse and practise riding on her quite a lot) and I suggest that the optimum weight is actually 1%.

So, who fits in to this new optimum category? Anyone?
Click to expand...

Just thought, I might now that I have gone back to being a 'foal' on account of having to register again as a new user. I must therefore have lost weight too maybe?
 
I think it may be important to note a few things about this article in the papers;
1. It was written by a journalist! read the abstract published by Journal of Veterinary Behaviour, I think you will find that the authors were less dramatic! a full paper is yet to be published.
2. This is a preliminary investigation into the current state of the bodyweight relationship between horse and rider in the UK Leisure riding community. Further research has included comparison to Olympic riders.
3. The authors do not deny that bodyweight is only one aspect of the suitability of horse and rider. But there are no current methods based on scientific principals for riders to select suitable horses. Other aspects of suitability are more commonly subjective methods.
4. The sample size of 152 is good if you compare to other studies where n = often far less than 50
5. The authors measured riders with and without their saddles and riding hats to see the weight difference for each horse and rider combination.
6. This a basis so that other researchers can build upon to see whether or not different % have on the performance of the horse.
7. This research is not new! it was presented at the International Society of Equitation Science conference in 2011, if you go on the website the abstract is available.
8. Horses have the ability to feel pain too! we cannot all live a life of denial sometimes we have to be honest with ourselves and some of us are too heavy for our horses!
 
to do list said:
I think it may be important to note a few things about this article in the papers;
1. It was written by a journalist! read the abstract published by Journal of Veterinary Behaviour, I think you will find that the authors were less dramatic! a full paper is yet to be published.
2. This is a preliminary investigation into the current state of the bodyweight relationship between horse and rider in the UK Leisure riding community. Further research has included comparison to Olympic riders.
3. The authors do not deny that bodyweight is only one aspect of the suitability of horse and rider. But there are no current methods based on scientific principals for riders to select suitable horses. Other aspects of suitability are more commonly subjective methods.
4. The sample size of 152 is good if you compare to other studies where n = often far less than 50
5. The authors measured riders with and without their saddles and riding hats to see the weight difference for each horse and rider combination.
6. This a basis so that other researchers can build upon to see whether or not different % have on the performance of the horse.
7. This research is not new! it was presented at the International Society of Equitation Science conference in 2011, if you go on the website the abstract is available.
8. Horses have the ability to feel pain too! we cannot all live a life of denial sometimes we have to be honest with ourselves and some of us are too heavy for our horses!
Click to expand...

Good points there.

I think, as with everything, research is there to guide us. I rely a lot on my experience and instinct with horses. I have always believed that around 15% is the maximum that most horses shoud be asked to carry, and that 15% is of their IDEAL weight. Some horse may be able to safely carry more. These horses are not necesarily the bigger horses in terms of height. There is undoubtably a variation between breeds and some will be able to carry more than others.

We owe it to our horses to be as light as we possibly can be.
 
Jesstickle said:
Because I am a mug I bought the abstract. I can't get the full paper so no idea what it says, how good the methods are or who came up with the 10% rule

What it says is 'an industry practitioner' proposes a 10% rider to horse weight ratio for optimal performance. It then says they weigh taped because it is more useful to the lay man (which is true but I would argue it is not good science ) and that 10% is probably completely unrealistic anyway.

So as far as I can tell, the full piece of research has not actually been published (merely the abstract) and so can not be properly peer reviewed. Which personally makes me think it should not be used by the press until it is complete.
Click to expand...

Jesstickle said:
Because of the way the press have, as always, completely hijacked something. The way the articles read makes it sound like if you are over 10% you are a welfare concern to your horse.
I don't think this study actually says anything of any use whatsoever in deciding if you are too heavy for your horse or not.

Hence my assertions it is best to ignore it! All it says is the percentage of people who are more than 10%, more than 15% and more than 20% and what the percentage of human weight to horse weight was for people with a health BMI

Unless there is somewhere in the full text (not published) a reference to an absolutely amazing piece of data from the 'industry practitioner' on how they proved what is a welfare concern and what isn't I am not terribly interested.
Click to expand...

to do list said:
I think it may be important to note a few things about this article in the papers;
1. It was written by a journalist! read the abstract published by Journal of Veterinary Behaviour, I think you will find that the authors were less dramatic! a full paper is yet to be published.
2. This is a preliminary investigation into the current state of the bodyweight relationship between horse and rider in the UK Leisure riding community. Further research has included comparison to Olympic riders.
3. The authors do not deny that bodyweight is only one aspect of the suitability of horse and rider. But there are no current methods based on scientific principals for riders to select suitable horses. Other aspects of suitability are more commonly subjective methods.
4. The sample size of 152 is good if you compare to other studies where n = often far less than 50
5. The authors measured riders with and without their saddles and riding hats to see the weight difference for each horse and rider combination.
6. This a basis so that other researchers can build upon to see whether or not different % have on the performance of the horse.
7. This research is not new! it was presented at the International Society of Equitation Science conference in 2011, if you go on the website the abstract is available.
8. Horses have the ability to feel pain too! we cannot all live a life of denial sometimes we have to be honest with ourselves and some of us are too heavy for our horses!
Click to expand...

I don't want to sound like a know it all but as you can see above I have clearly said all of that already!
 
Wagtail said:
Good points there.

I think, as with everything, research is there to guide us. I rely a lot on my experience and instinct with horses. I have always believed that around 15% is the maximum that most horses shoud be asked to carry, and that 15% is of their IDEAL weight. Some horse may be able to safely carry more. These horses are not necesarily the bigger horses in terms of height. There is undoubtably a variation between breeds and some will be able to carry more than others.

We owe it to our horses to be as light as we possibly can be.
Click to expand...

We also owe it to our horses to learn to ride and school correctly, have properly fitting saddles, make sure they are shod and fed correctly, have vetinary attention as necessary, are wormed regularly and correctly, have regular decent amounts of turnout etc.Or is only the riders weight important? Incidently as regards weight sythetic saddles are often lighter than leather ones.
 
JenJ said:
Seems to me this whole thing was started by an 'industry practitioner' coming up with an arbitrary 'optimum' figure and putting out statistics relating to handful of riders in Cornwall and Devon that were picked as the sample. There's nothing more to it than that, surely?

I myself am an industry practitioner (as I have a horse and practise riding on her quite a lot) and I suggest that the optimum weight is actually 1%. This would be enough for a small robot to be mounted in order to give aids to the horse, but not heavy enough to cause discomfort in their back.

So, who fits in to this new optimum category? Anyone?
Click to expand...

Love this too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top