Should Rescue Horses blood be used for transfusions?

S

SusieT

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 September 2009
Messages
5,967
Visit site
Here's a question for you, there is a similar thing in dogs, where blood is taken and food/medical supplies donated to the charity to help care for them.
Where there is a need should similar be done in horses? See above news item.
Or is it wrong because they have no owner to say no? Or right because they have no owner to say no?
 
I can't see why not. That foal's life was saved by another horse who'd also been "saved" although in a different way. And that horse was loaned by a vet so I guess he had the say so on it...
As long as they're fit and healthy and another animals life can be saved, I think it's all well and good.
 
Why shouldn't they be used? Just because they might have had a difficult past doesn't make them any less useful to helping other horses (e.g. 4 month old foal) in need.

Also, they are not using it as an organ donor to harvest kidneys etc. It is a simple blood tranfusion. Blood cells only last 3 months so in 3 months time they will have their own completely new blood system! Doesn't do them any harm!
 
They DO have owners - the charities. Good, genuine charities would only allow this to happen if there would be no negative effects on the donor horse.
 
So would you all let your horses be used?
Would you support a horse charity exchanging the blood from healthy horses for food/supplies?
I am not falling on either side but interested to see views on this as know there are varying ones ethically.
 
SusieT said:
So would you all let your horses be used?
Would you support a horse charity exchanging the blood from healthy horses for food/supplies?
I am not falling on either side but interested to see views on this as know there are varying ones ethically.
Click to expand...

Yes, I would let my horse be used, provided he was healthy and fit. I wanted to register my dog as a blood donor, but he is too small.

Would I support a charity doing this? Yes. In exchange for feed etc? I'd wonder about their long-term viability if such measures were necessary (I don't think there's any suggestion that the Blue Cross took payment of any kind for the use of their horse?) but I wouldn't feel that it was unethical.
 
There use to be a retirement place for horses that would take them on the condition that they could take blood from them to help other horses that need it. The horses where well cared for and blood was only taken if they where healthy. Not sure where the place is and if it is still running but thought it was a great idea. I would happily let my horses donate blood apart from my TB mare as she is a bit of a stress head :-/
 
ah yes-Another dimension and I can recall many people on this forum saying they would never send their horse there. Surely that is a similar thing? Horse with no other option exchanges blood for future keep?

For the record, I wouldn't do it with some of mine, and others only if they were greedy heffalumps who would be too busy eating to notice the needle. I also give blood regularly. I would be very hesitant to do it with a dog as I believe they are sedated (but stand to be corrected) and none of mine would be happy to lie on a table for an hour or so.
Ethically I think it would be an excellent idea for rescue horses e.g. youngsters or lame but healthy ones to give back to the centre/other horses for the care they getso long as it is not overly stressfull for them
 
SusieT said:
So would you all let your horses be used?
Would you support a horse charity exchanging the blood from healthy horses for food/supplies?
I am not falling on either side but interested to see views on this as know there are varying ones ethically.
Click to expand...

I would, no issues with it at all! Hell i would have given that foal some of my blood if it would work!!!:D
 
Spudlet said:
They DO have owners - the charities. Good, genuine charities would only allow this to happen if there would be no negative effects on the donor horse.
Click to expand...

may have got the wrong end of the stick here (not the pointy punctuation one, I hope ;) ) but that sound like a bit of a query about the genuineness (pointy spelling stick??) of the charity. Having given over 50pints of my own blood in the past I don't think there have been any negative effects. (though am open to debate on that! :D)
 
I have no problem with the concept, although at the moment know nothing about the procedure in horses or dogs. Neither my dog nor myself are healthy enough to donate, which irks me as I've always wanted to do it.

However, someone once put an ethical question to me, which really made me think. It was:

We have a choice to become donors, and know all the risks etc. What gives us the right to force our animals to be donors?

I have no problem with animal donors, but hadn't looked at this point of view, which is a very good one. I believe in giving my animals the opportunity to make some decisions for themselves, up to a point, except where they are in danger and I believe I know best. Making them donate is not their choice and they cannot protest. If they feel lousy afterwards they cannot stop us from doing it again (people might say' yes my horse was a bit low for a few days after, but that was it, so I wouldn't mind doing it again, even if rarely)

Don't know if I'm getting my point across clearly, hope you see what I mean. Not intended to be offensive, just thought provoking :)
 
Why on earth would you debate on helping an ill animal by using a well one? Anyone with any morality would as long as they knew their animal was healthy enough to do so.
One of our dogs became a donor, he was done on my knee and told not to fidget as he wasn't sedated; ten minutes later, as right as rain hooning around with the others and feeling very pleased with himself; recipient dog went on to make a good recovery too. Don't regret it one iota, would do it again and with the horses too. If something else needs their help, it's only right and fair that you give that help if you can. I want to give blood myself but can't as have a history of anaemia, was pig sick to find that out after I had screwed up the courage to volunteer as I hate needles!
 
Three of our horses at different times have been used as blood donors. Our yard is close to a veterinary hospital and we have been only too pleased to help..one day it could be my horse or your horse in literally a life or death situation.
Our donors were happy, did not need sedation, were not stressed or did not suffer any ill effects afterwards. No veterinary surgeon would take blood from a sick, aged or underweight horse.
The first recipient had suffered massive blood loss and would have died. That horse is alive and well today, 12 years later.
The second had suffered a catastrophic accident and sadly died before the blood was given.
The third, a tiny shetland foal, was not expected to live but she made a full recovery.
It still makes me proud and happy to think that we were able to help.
 
stroppymare153 said:
may have got the wrong end of the stick here (not the pointy punctuation one, I hope ;) ) but that sound like a bit of a query about the genuineness (pointy spelling stick??) of the charity. Having given over 50pints of my own blood in the past I don't think there have been any negative effects. (though am open to debate on that! :D)
Click to expand...

No, not at all - I have no problem with this, hope I was clear about that in my last post;) That said, not everyone that calls themself a 'rescue' is necessarily totally above board and kosher (although in my personal opinion the ones that are proper charities are generally ok). Hence the qualification in my reply:)

I'm an ex-civil servant, I don't like to commit myself too definitely to anything:p:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top