vetting, is it really reliable?

Daisychain

Daisychain

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 June 2007
Messages
3,592
Location
Worcs.
Visit site
Most of us have our horses vetted, but how many people have turned down a good horse just because it has failed the vet? My fantastic horse was failed by a previous vet for another purchaser on a heart murmer, i took a chance at a good price, had his heart re looked at and it is perfect!! good for me but not the seller... I personally think they are far to cautious, flexion tests being another one and cataracts.. Just wondered if you would really trust your vets opinion unless he has real concrete evidence, i also remember selling a horse which had previously raced and sold to go eventing, when the vet came out to vet her after asking me if she had raced, promptly declared she had pulled both her tendons!! SHE HAD NEVER had a problem with her legs!! but the intersting thing in that case is that he carried on to say it wouldnt affect her for eventing, interesting as not many people i no would recommend a horse with dodgy tendons to go eventing, by the way her legs were clean and the purchaser bought her and loves her to bits! Sorry i just have no faith in vetting!
smirk.gif
 
Vettings are a snapshot of a horses apparent health at one particular point in time. Vets are not clairvoyants, they can only report back their findings and enable the buyer to make an informed decision about a purchase.

With that in mind I don't really see how they could be described as 'unreliable' in the context you refer to as they aren't meant to be any kind of guarantee.

I think that anything that allows people to make a decision based on as many facts as possible is a good thing, and well worth a few hundred £
smile.gif


If you mistrust the opinion of a particular vet, then that is a seperate issue IMO, and doesn't really have much to do with the vetting process itself- more with the perceived unreliability of said vet!
 
i'm in a bit of a quandary here... i've just had two lovely horses fail the vet. however, it is my vet, who i trust absolutely to have my best interests at heart, and i am paying for his expert opinion, so i have to stand by it and take the advice, however unpalatable.
a friend had a lovely mare vetted 2 weeks ago... it failed on both hind leg flexion tests. the owner couldn't believe it, so my friend paid for 2 more different vettings, it passed both, so she bought it. however, it is to do RC level, maybe a bit of Intro/PN eventually.
the higher you're aiming, the sounder the horse needs to be. when we hear about these top horses that have failed a vetting (iirc The Psephologist was one?), although he was brilliant, he didn't stay sound for long at that level... a lot of work and then a LOT of heartache and disappointment.
my vet has passed horses with slight problems - one had a heart murmur, which never ever affected him (vetted at 4 yrs, got to 2* level), another had sarcoids, but my very sane vet said that i'd never have been able to afford her if she didn't have them (he was right!) and that they'd cause a problem eventually, but were manageable. he was right.
i do believe that if a vet doesn't like a horse and wants to fail it, but can't quite put his finger on why, then a hard enough flexion test will make any horse lame for a few strides. it would me, too!
 
When we had Murph vetted (by our own vet who I trust ) he was slightly lame for a couple of strides after a hind leg flexion. Repeated the test and he was fine. Vet told me in his opinion there was not a problem and horse would be fine for what we wanted. That was 4 years ago and have never had a problem with lameness (touch wood)!
 
The thing is i have seen so many horses fail on flexion tests recently and they have all been fine, and the opinions can vary so much from vet to vet!
 
I think it is still very important to get horses vetted. If the horse fails on something you can still buy it, but at least your are awear that there is an issue to keep an eye on. My mare failed on laminitis so we treated her and waited for her to improve then re veted her. So at least I could put steps in place to stop her getting it again.

Also for people who don't know much about horses its even more important. I've lost count of the number of times inexperiences first time owners I know have not had the horses vetted and there have been big vet bills before they can do anything with the horse. I know someone who bought a horse from a dealers that was totally lame, but the dealer told them that is just how the horse goes!! They sold the pony at a big loss and bought another, didn't get that one vetted and it ended up being put down within a month of them having it. They spent a lot of money and ended up with nothing!
 
I am guided by a vetting (when I have one) but it is not the only thing I will base a decision upon. I don't see them as a pass or fail, I see them as a comment on the horse presented to them on that day. Obviously when you are looking at vastly more expensive horses things like scans and bloods are necessary and vetting results might have more impact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top