Sue dysan - made up expert

[ycbm]

Well I guess now we know why she precipitously left the AHT?

 

[tristar]

sue dyson has said that around 50 percent of ridden horses, or comp horses are lame, that she studied some time ago, not sure about that one in the pure sense, something thats crossed my mind in a puzzling way


an unbalanced, incompetent rider heavy or not, can damage a horses back, many horses are damaged by the way way they are trained, i have let people ride my horses who might be called too heavy but they were were quiet and the horses moved well underneath them

there is a lot of factors involved here, the panels of saddles vary so much ,the tree shape, the state of the horses back muscles and how it has been worked, the hardness of the legs and amount of bone the horse has all figure in whether damage may be caused, and how much a rider is riding the horse

 

[Shilasdair]

There are far too many variables in this study to make it valid;
1. Rider weight
2. Saddle fit (and no, the saddle doesn't just have to fit the horse - it also has to fit the rider or it puts them out of balance and creates pressure points).
3. Rider shape - the centre of balance changes in a rider with a long back and short legs compared to long legs and a short back.
4. Subjective analysis - you can easily find what you are looking for in such studies.
5. Horse size - if it's the same horse, then the proportions to the rider change. If it's a different horse, then it's an additional variable.

It's an interesting moral debate though - is a horse better not being exercised at all, or having to carry a human on their back when they really didn't evolve to carry weight above their spine?

All the triumphal short/skinny people on this thread might also consider - you are also too heavy for your horses.

 

[ycbm]

The sad thing is how much this is going to devalue all her other research into pain and lameness What an almighty fool she's been if this is true.

 

[brighteyes]

Just because a saddle is fitted to a horse does not necessarily mean it is the biggest size that could be fitted to a horse. My lad can and has previously been fitted a17.5” saddle. I ride him in a 16.5” as it fits me better.

A bigger rider would be better in the 17.5”

I said correct for the horse, which means no longer than it can accomodate and in balance. And ditto me and my horse/saddle.

 

[Annagain]

17st is plucked from my brains recollection of the study and that could be wrong.

Different horses can carry different weights and every horse will have a different line as to where the No is that they can be asked to carry comfortably but generally speaking there has to be a cut off point somewhere? Again I've seen the horror vids of 20st+ tourist on horses/donkeys and its horrific.

The study https://beva.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eve.13085 (table 2) said the "very heavy" rider was 142kg or 22st including riding gear. The "very heavy" rider was 25% of the largest horse's weight and nearly 30% of the smallest with tack etc. The heaviest horse was 591kg. No wonder the horses showed lameness! Even on a 700kg horse, 22st would be far too heavy and unlikely to fit any saddle.

There was over 8 stone difference between the "heavy" rider and the "very heavy" rider with nothing in between, whereas the "light" rider, "moderate" rider and "heavy" rider were all within 30kgs or about 4 1/2 stone of each other. If that wasn't set up to skew the results, I don't know what would be. The fact the "very heavy" rider was 5 stone heavier than you thought TPO shows how unrepresentative of real life it was. Judging by the gaps in the weights of the other riders (about 15kgs each) they should have had at least two, if not three riders between the "heavy" and "very heavy" riders and should also have used bigger horses that were more capable of carrying that weight and horses of similar weights but different builds (so a 14hh stocky cob and a 15.2 TB type). This would help establish whether it is the weight itself that is the issue or the relationship between the rider's weight and the horse's weight carrying capability. It's not like a 700kg horse is difficult to find or so unrepresentative of real life that you don't find 'normal' riders riding them.

Of course you could argue that beyond a certain point the weight itself is the issue and they should always have accepted that 22 stone was too much and never even tried. 17stone might have given a very different result. I appreciate some of the tests were abandoned due to lameness with the "heavy" rider too but they also were with the "moderate" rider and there were issues observed with the "light" rider as well so you could argue there were other reasons for the lameness and not just the weight they were carrying.

 

[teapot]

One would have to imagine it was a factor in that decision, if what is reported is accurate (please remember the investigation is not completed/published). And you would also have to wonder if it had any bearing of AHT securing funding.

I can't see the RCVS wasting time on hearings if it something wasn't amiss somewhere. That said was scheduled for Feb and postponed.

What interests me most (as someome who's been through university ethics commitees for their own research) is (if it's true) why did it happen. This isn't a baby faced graduate desperate to get published...

 

[ester]

annagain I do remember them having trouble recruiting heavier riders/there were quite a few facebook calls.
I do feel it kind of missed the more usual weight that would be under discussion as a heavy rider which lies in between the heavy and very heavy. Initially when only some of the data came out it was assumed given the fairly even distribution of the first 3 riders that the very heavy would have been around the 16 stone mark. Which for me would be the more 'real life' question that RS etc usually have- ie they actually usually have limits below 16st.

 

[tristar]

a 22 stone person would, i imagine be carrying weight very loosely, flopping around, not in proportion to the skeleton, less able to follow the horse so the movement would be out of control, and not sure if i have ever seen a saddle to accommodate such a weight

 

[ester]

well it depends, probably not if you are weightlifting.

 

[windand rain]

I would be pretty sure the majority of riders in themselves are less than 100kg possibly more with tack but not much which is roughly 20% of a 500kg horse or so. I have always believed that to be as much as a horse should carry anyway and if over 100kgs you should stop and lose weight or get a horse you fit. I also maintain that if the horse is built correctly has the correct muscle developement and older than 7 then the 20% limit is fine. A horse or pony for that matter that has good flat bone, short cannons is fit and the correct weight for its frame it can easily carry up to 100kgs of balanced rider another big isssue is that modern horses often carry 100kgs or more of fat which is a whole different skew to the figures

 

[SatansLittleHelper]

What weight really is too heavy for ANY horse to carry..?? To my mind 22st is a ridiculous weight and not even remotely representative of "real life" riders. Also surely height of the rider plays an important factor in weight distribution on the saddle too..?? For example: I am overweight, 15st 8lbs currently. However, Im also 5ft 11". A friend who rides is 5ft dead on and 14st 10lbs. At nearly a stone lighter than me she sits over the cantle of an 18" saddle and refuses to ride until she has lost more weight. On the other hand I fit into a 17.5" saddle without bother (though I prefer an 18" due to having a 34" inside leg).
So, despite being the heavier person, I'm putting less pressure in the wrong places on the horse. Just a thought really but I do think it makes a difference.
I hasten to add that I'm currently doing my best to lose weight but my medication is a pain and it's slow going. My 15.1 cob doesn't really know I'm there though ??

 

[Tiddlypom]

It would have been more sensible to focus on a range of weights that RS horses are expected to carry.

Even Adventure Clydesdales have a max limit of 16 stone, and that is for their 2 hour or shorter rides. 3 hours upwards the limit is 14.5 stone.

Some hunters have to carry some rather large male riders...

 

[TPO]

What weight really is too heavy for ANY horse to carry..?? To my mind 22st is a ridiculous weight and not even remotely representative of "real life" riders. Also surely height of the rider plays an important factor in weight distribution on the saddle too..?? For example: I am overweight, 15st 8lbs currently. However, Im also 5ft 11". A friend who rides is 5ft dead on and 14st 10lbs. At nearly a stone lighter than me she sits over the cantle of an 18" saddle and refuses to ride until she has lost more weight. On the other hand I fit into a 17.5" saddle without bother (though I prefer an 18" due to having a 34" inside leg).
So, despite being the heavier person, I'm putting less pressure in the wrong places on the horse. Just a thought really but I do think it makes a difference.
I hasten to add that I'm currently doing my best to lose weight but my medication is a pain and it's slow going. My 15.1 cob doesn't really know I'm there though ??

I think the unquantifiable difference with your example is that both you and your friend are aware of your own weight, build and how you fit in a saddle along with the weight your horses can/should carry. I'd put myself in that group too; I absolutely can/should lose weight as while not too heavy for my horses I am overweight. It's something that I'm conscious of and it does factor into what I do i.e. should I want to be doing "more" with them for a clear conscience I would lose weight.

I guess my issue overall is that there are 22st riders. The rider in this study is obviously riding something. So as someone posted above where is the line?

At what weight does horse welfare trump desire/want/right to ride?

Perhaps there are breeds capable of carrying that weight and saddles that would spread the pressure etc does that make it acceptable?

Having mentioned it above it would be interesting to see the weights of some.of the american reiners at WEG. The one I have in mind is very tall as well as heavy, as is his wife and several others team riders. QHs are 14-15hh approx and clearly do carry those weights doing highly athletic movements but is that ok? Or maybe the riders look heavier than they actually are and I've got it all wrong ?

 

[ester]

Actually I don't think she is obviously riding something, I don't think that was a pre-requisite, if I put my jods and boots on people might think I am that but I'm not (and am generally heavier than people would assess me at). Last time I got roped into something the jods were borrowed.

I guess my general impression is that most people err on the side of not riding because of their weight than the other way round but that might be the wrong impression.

 

[Gingerwitch]

Bit that upsets me most, is how many horse owners who took her word that Neddy was lame and PTS are wondering if she told them the truth. Poor bloody owners.

 

[scats]

What a risky little game she has played if this is true. Very odd.

 

[Shilasdair]

a 22 stone person would, i imagine be carrying weight very loosely, flopping around, not in proportion to the skeleton, less able to follow the horse so the movement would be out of control, and not sure if i have ever seen a saddle to accommodate such a weight

I think you are conflating weight with obesity here.
One of the heaviest riders I have ever taught was a professional male ballet dancer. He didn't have an ounce of fat on him - but was incredibly muscled (so much so that the muscles on his inner thighs pushed him up out of the saddle which wasn't a problem I'd dealt with before).
And of course, muscle is heavy.

 

[Shilasdair]

Bit that upsets me most, is how many horse owners who took her word that Neddy was lame and PTS are wondering if she told them the truth. Poor bloody owners.

To be fair, I'd still trust every orthopaedic diagnosis made - her real area of expertise.
I think perhaps vets shouldn't stray into the equitation side of things unless they really know what they are doing (there's already a growing field in equine/rider biomechanics/performance which some might say is outwith her real sphere of expertise).

 

[tristar]

I think you are conflating weight with obesity here.
One of the heaviest riders I have ever taught was a professional male ballet dancer. He didn't have an ounce of fat on him - but was incredibly muscled (so much so that the muscles on his inner thighs pushed him up out of the saddle which wasn't a problem I'd dealt with before).
And of course, muscle is heavy.

well of course, we know that , but male ballet dancers of 22 st who ride are not that common, hopefully

 

[Christmascinnamoncookie]

I'm clearly a moron and need it explained even in simpler terms...sorry ?

The saddle did fit the horses in the study. It still fitted with other riders of various height, builds, leg lengths and weights. It only didnt fit (or more to the point caused increased pressure/pressure points) when it was an overweight rider on it.


Is there not some onus on riders to be fit to ride?

Another thing I've never understood is the "a heavy good rider is better" argument. Surely gravity means that 17st is 17st? I understand the basics of force = mass x acceleration so an 8st rider could exhort a higher force if they were thumping about out of balance but surely a 17st rider is never going to be anything less than 17st on the horse's back and quite possibly a fair bit more with general movement

Surely the saddle needs to fit both? It’s pointless having a master saddler out then not ride in what he’s trying to fit? I know m8me was interested in me and the horse fitting the saddle.

17st cannot be anything but! I understand the whole better an experienced heavier rider than someone riding like a sack of potatoes, but there is no way to minimise having 17st plonked on an animal not designed to be ridden. I think my sil’s father who used to hunt is a lot more than that.

 

[tristar]

To be fair, I'd still trust every orthopaedic diagnosis made - her real area of expertise.
I think perhaps vets shouldn't stray into the equitation side of things unless they really know what they are doing (there's already a growing field in equine/rider biomechanics/performance which some might say is outwith her real sphere of expertise).

my feeling is being a full time vet confines one to a different experience to being a fulltime trainer for example, each brings something of their own to the table

 

[bouncing_ball]

To be fair, I'd still trust every orthopaedic diagnosis made - her real area of expertise.
I think perhaps vets shouldn't stray into the equitation side of things unless they really know what they are doing (there's already a growing field in equine/rider biomechanics/performance which some might say is outwith her real sphere of expertise).

I’m sure she was good at diagnosing. But very bleak at prognosis and know a number of horses she advised PTS that came right.

 

[Roxylola]

To be fair, I'd still trust every orthopaedic diagnosis made - her real area of expertise.
I think perhaps vets shouldn't stray into the equitation side of things unless they really know what they are doing (there's already a growing field in equine/rider biomechanics/performance which some might say is outwith her real sphere of expertise).

I sort of agree with you in principle. But if I were an owner in the situation where I'd pts as I couldn't nail an issue down but she'd confirmed there was definitely pain the fact that her professionalism has been called in to question in this way - that shes prepared to falsify information to push her own agenda - I'd be second guessing myself right now.

 

[ycbm]

I sort of agree with you in principle. But if I were an owner in the situation where I'd pts as I couldn't nail an issue down but she'd confirmed there was definitely pain the fact that her professionalism has been called in to question in this way - that shes prepared to falsify information to push her own agenda - I'd be second guessing myself right now.

I think it's a real issue. It's how human psychology works, many people will find it very difficult to divorce this kind of unprofessional behaviour in their minds from her ability as an orthopaedic vet.
.

 

[Littlewills]

Actually I don't think she is obviously riding something, I don't think that was a pre-requisite, if I put my jods and boots on people might think I am that but I'm not (and am generally heavier than people would assess me at). Last time I got roped into something the jods were borrowed.

I guess my general impression is that most people err on the side of not riding because of their weight than the other way round but that might be the wrong impression.

You had to consider yourself a good balancer rider and be riding regularly to apply to do it. Whether they dropped that in the end when they couldn't find people, I dont know

 

[ester]

Ah yes you are right, thanks for reminding! I'm not sure if they did when they were struggling. I know people said they didn't want to do it who would have been between the heavy and very heavy because they didn't want to ride horses that weren't up to their weight.

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

It's a saddle that is correct for the horse? So therefore anyone who doesn't fit the saddle has no business ON the horse. Call it fat-shaming if you must. I call it physics and welfare.

I agree but there other horses which would be able to accommodate a heavier rider in a well-fitting saddle. The study should have included weight carrying horses. FWIW, I very much doubt that the VH rider in those photos is 17st

ETA, Having just read that VH rider weighed 22st, I am speechless, on all counts.

 

[conniegirl]

Just thought of a better way to judge the effect of weight alone. You use the same rider throughout and then add weights to the rider. A weight jacket/belt so not just dead weight like a saddle cloth weight.

 

[TPO]

I agree but there other horses which would be able to accommodate a heavier rider in a well-fitting saddle. The study should have included weight carrying horses. FWIW, I very much doubt that the VH rider in those photos is 17st

Sorry, the 17st was me just making things up/remembering wrongly. The VH rider is 22st as a previous poster pointed out (sorry, username escapes me)