Top spec balancer vs supplement

N

NooNoo59

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 December 2011
Messages
1,170
Location
kent
Visit site
My boy is currently on fast fibre with 365 complete and linseed oil. My old boy used to be on top spec lite and looked fab. Wondered people's opinions on balancer vs supplement
 
What imbalance are you trying to address? Both your 365 and Top Spec are defined as balencers - designed to fill in general nutritional gaps for a horse on forage only or fed below the manufactures recommended amount. Supplements are more to address a specific issue.
 
I put two of mine on top spec lite last year after they stopped eating their vits and mins that I gave individually . I must say I was very impressed by it and have continued to feed it . Coats are fab, not fizzy at all and generally very happy.
 
Shay said:
What imbalance are you trying to address? Both your 365 and Top Spec are defined as balencers - designed to fill in general nutritional gaps for a horse on forage only or fed below the manufactures recommended amount. Supplements are more to address a specific issue.
Click to expand...
h

My understanding is that they address deficiencies typically seen in many uk soils, such as a lack of zinc or copper as well as containing a broad spectrum of other vitamins and minerals a horse might be deficient in.
 
Last edited:
Yes - but blanket feeding without knowing what imbalance you are trying to address is at best a waste of money and at worst potentially dangerous. Overfeeding some minerals which are beneficial in trace - for example selenium - is poisonous. Obviously you can test your grass and hay to determine what the mineral content is. But unless you own enough land that all you hay / forage is sourced from that same land you will end up testing every batch which could be a bit expensive. Some supplements are designed to support a particular function - glucosamine or MSM for joint health for example. Some contain herbs or other substances to support particular elements of health - for breathing, for skin etc.

I'm not against either. I don't use balancers at the moment as the horses are all fed to manufacturers spec of suitable feed. (Allen & page if it matters) But I have done in the past where I have had a retired one on forage only. (I have competition horses and hunters so even the good do-ers get hard feed.) I do use a joint supplement and a general immune support. I also use a specific immune boost intermittently as needed. Oh - and pretty much everything gets micronised linseed.

There are a massive number of supplements and balancers available on the UK market now. Its very easy to get sucked in to feeding things that you don't need and which just cost you money. To return to OP's question - which is better a supplement or a balancer? A balancer is better if you want general nutritional support for a diet which would otherwise fall short. And a supplement is better if you have a specific issue or deficiency you want to address. A balancer on top of the recommended amount of a hard feed is a waste of money....
 
Shay, there's not many who feed the manufacturers recommended amount of hard feed. If we did, our horses would look like elephants. Mine get no hard feed as they don't need it. I do, however feed a balancer in case of any deficiencies in my forage as I buy that in from varied sources if I don't cut enough one year.
Blanket feeding of supplements I don't think is as harmful as you claim, especially in the small amounts provided by a balancer ..... My belief is that balancers are a good safety measure if you haven't had your forage or soil analysed. Providing a varied enough forage diet to cover every single vitamin and mineral a horse needs is not always possible, with limited land or land that is owned by someone else. You will know that there are even specific balancers to supplement specific types of issues, such as joint care in veterans or increased protein for horses in hard work.
 
Last edited:
Follysmum said:
I put two of mine on top spec lite last year after they stopped eating their vits and mins that I gave individually . I must say I was very impressed by it and have continued to feed it . Coats are fab, not fizzy at all and generally very happy.
Click to expand...

I use this too. OP, I don't think there is much difference in powder supplement vs pelleted balancer, apart from a few more fillers in the balancer. I feed the balancer rather than powdered supplement as I like giving food in a bowl and my horses look forward to their bowl and enjoy noshing from one, especially as they don't get hard feed. I mix it with grass chaff in winter if grass is poor, btw.
 
I wouldn't feed TopSpec as they don't list the ingredients. You can't know if it has e.g. wheat middlings or molasses in it (if you wanted to avoid things like that ;) )

Whether you choose an all round balancer or a specific supplement IMHO it is better if you can truly make an informed decision, compare the levels of vitamins and minerals in the balancer/supplement.

Pelleted balancers always contain some kind of filler and a binding agent; powdered balancers generally don't (or use linseed/similar to provide bulk).
 
TopSpec will send you the ingredients analysis info if you email them.

I fed TopSpec Lite to my lot for years and they were all in lovely condition, hooves fine (all unshod and in medium work).
 
In the days of the internet I think no reason for companies not to make their ingredients list easily found and it not being would be enough reason for me not to use them as plenty that do.

365 has a section that says nutritional information with essentially no nutritional info at all, just a list of 'benefits'! And a before and after where I prefer the before
 
Casey76 said:
Whether you choose an all round balancer or a specific supplement IMHO it is better if you can truly make an informed decision, compare the levels of vitamins and minerals in the balancer/supplement.
.
Click to expand...


Comparing feed balancers can be useful when trying to decide which balancer to use, but horses can only absorb a certain level of various vitamins and minerals and if you provide excess they will just be excreted, so comparing levels isn't always useful ..... some product seem better if they have a higher level of a certain vitamin or mineral, but if it is above the level a horse can absorb, it will just get flushed out the other end! Some manufacturers fill their products with high levels of certain vitamins or minerals to look more impressive on the statutory label declaration, but this is of no benefit.
 
Casey didn't say she was looking for higher levels though? I am specifically looking for lower levels for a couple of minerals.
 
Casey76 said:
I wouldn't feed TopSpec as they don't list the ingredients. You can't know if it has e.g. wheat middlings or molasses in it (if you wanted to avoid things like that ;).... )
Click to expand...

ester said:
In the days of the internet I think no reason for companies not to make their ingredients list easily found and it not being would be enough reason for me not to use them as plenty that do....
Click to expand...

This is why I don't use Top Spec - I shouldn't have to contact a company to get the ingredients or basic analysis of vits/mins. However, the last couple of times there has been this information on the bags (and even the anti-lam has stuff in that my boy can't have).

I prefer a powder, personally. Means I can feed less and if necessary it is easier to tailor what is needed to the horse over a pre-mixed and pelleted form. While I know there is a certain amount of filler in a powder form, in my mind there is less filler than in a pelleted/compound feed as so powder makes better value for money.

OP if what your horse is on is working for him, why change? All horses are different so you could find that changing to a different balancer might not have the same effect as you've seen in another horse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top