We ALL want barefoot research except the BEVA?

'just as you consider it irrelevant that there are so many barefoot rehab successes when we cannot point to properly conducted studies with control groups' I've never said that.. that's what you have said. I have said I want scientific evidence not anecdote-anecdotally the oldest person in the world is 122 in japan. Realistically-they were found dead and had been for several years!
 
Susie, I would also be interested in a copy, if you wouldn't mind emailing it to me - I've only found the abstract not the full criteria.

Also for info, the majority of the horses in my abstract had been previously treated (unsuccessfully) with a variety of conventional remedies: 18 had remedial farriery (inc bar shoes, wedges, pads, imprints etc), 11 had had box rest, 3 had had Tildren or Navilox, 5 had had IRAP or cortisone injections. This was included as a table added to the abstract.

FWIW, I don't for a minute imagine there is an anti-barefoot conspiracy at BEVA but before I spend any more time, effort and money collecting data, I could do with knowing what it is that makes the research unacceptable!
 
nicbarker said:
FWIW, I don't for a minute imagine there is an anti-barefoot conspiracy at BEVA but before I spend any more time, effort and money collecting data, I could do with knowing what it is that makes the research unacceptable!
Click to expand...

Have you approached academics at one of the vet colleges and asked for their input about the quality of data etc? I don't know what your professional associations are, but I would be inclined to buddy up with an academic institution and co-author under their guidance.
 
my sister is a vet and she has presented at BEVA. BEVA have not rejected the research, just decided that this year's BEVA presentations will be on something else. This could reflect lots of things, from what was presented last year, to what else has been submitted, to the fact that it was only preliminary research, number of horses in the study etc. honestly, lots of perfectly reasonable topics get rejected. i think it is unreasonable in the extreme to infer from this that BEVA as a body has decided it is completely anti barefoot or does not encourage research in the area.
 
I feel we are still insisting on putting human thinking before what horses are 'saying' (by their response to different rehabs methods) in waiting for supposed acceptable science to prove the value of horses opinions. :(

I am in total agreement with this quote on your blog Nic.

"If you want to think about what progress really means, then you need to imagine what it was like to have become so accustomed to the screams of patients that they seemed perfectly natural and normal...you must first understand what stands in the way of progress."

So much of 'traditional' is so normal no one actually sees it clearly or questions it. That is the truly sad and often devastating thing in all this for horses. :(
 
SusieT said:
again-synopsis reading, I have sent you the full thing as it addresses many of the issues you raise. 'not being worth the paper its written on' is rather strong-it adds to clinical evidence. If you read the study you will see that much of the material is actually s imilar with regards to rebalancing feet as barefoot is trying to do.. Nic is treating horses with caudal hoof pain of varying diagnosis unless I'm incorrect-so similar. It also doesn't consider navicular disease irreverisble-same as nowadays. OR is that not worth reading either?
Click to expand...



I have skimmed the whole thing. Thankyou for sending it to me.

To my astonishment I found that you are paying serious credence to a study where of the 82 horses who were selected, 27 were shot without being included in the study as too difficult to help. Of the rest, 55, these included

" early cases of navicular disease where lameness was not obvious"


Not only that, but the results are not quantified by the severity of the lameness first presented!

The whole 29 successes could have been the ones who were not presenting as obviously lame.


We do not know.


Honestly Susie, on what grounds do you EVER dare to challenge me and our anecdotal evidence when you rely on studies like that?




....
 
Last edited:
imr said:
my sister is a vet and she has presented at BEVA. BEVA have not rejected the research, just decided that this year's BEVA presentations will be on something else. This could reflect lots of things, from what was presented last year, to what else has been submitted, to the fact that it was only preliminary research, number of horses in the study etc. honestly, lots of perfectly reasonable topics get rejected. i think it is unreasonable in the extreme to infer from this that BEVA as a body has decided it is completely anti barefoot or does not encourage research in the area.
Click to expand...

Ah, I didn't realise the conference would run on a particular subject area, I imagined (a dangerous thing!) that it would be a run of current research ongoing.

SusieT, would you mind sending me the study too, have found an abstract but it doesn't give an awful lot of info away lol!
 
Nic, I concur with JFTD. You mention Peter Clegg, but the panel who will have reviewed your paper will be more than one person. I would either approach the selection panel again for feedback, or if you have done it several times already see if there is another way to access those people who read your abstract. As someone stated before, the easiest way for you to go forward is perhaps to fund a Phd.

Cptrays you are coming across oddly today :) hooves are particularly difficult to measure scientifically, and in reviewing available literature in any field it may be hard to find a study done exactly the way you want it doing. Doesn't mean you should necessarily dismiss it all together.

May I also be really boring and point out the full articles are usually available if you pay for them. I have distributed things I have access to, to others on this forum before, but for goodness sake be careful about doing so, it is against copyright law. :o
 
ThePony said:
Ah, I didn't realise the conference would run on a particular subject area, I imagined (a dangerous thing!) that it would be a run of current research ongoing.

SusieT, would you mind sending me the study too, have found an abstract but it doesn't give an awful lot of info away lol!
Click to expand...

it does have specific themes each year, but there is always a large section of the clinical research section that is dedicated to lameness
 
SusieT it means you are allowed access to it but should not distribute it.

As I say, I'm a fine one to talk :o but do be aware, especially if openly saying on a public domain that you are doing so.

... Annoyingly I have just tried to access it via my subscription but can't :D probably some type of karma! :D

I am adding making a review of the literature to my "to do before my subscription runs out" list. Sad or what!
 
I wouldn't take the rejection personally, or as a reflection of BEVA's opinion on barefoot rehab. A huge amount of abstracts get submitted every year and there are a limited number of slots available, so unfortunately, even for very valid research, it is a bit of a lottery. i know of a several preliminary studies rejected for no apparent reason by BEVA that have gone on to be easily accepted for publication by major journals.

Equally, they are intended as short communication sessions and they receive stacks of abstracts, so i don't consider it unreasonable that they are unable to give feedback, it's just the way it is with this type of submission unfortunately.
 
GreedyGuts said:
I wouldn't take the rejection personally, or as a reflection of BEVA's opinion on barefoot rehab. A huge amount of abstracts get submitted every year and there are a limited number of slots available, so unfortunately, even for very valid research, it is a bit of a lottery. i know of a several preliminary studies rejected for no apparent reason by BEVA that have gone on to be easily accepted for publication by major journals.

Equally, they are intended as short communication sessions and they receive stacks of abstracts, so i don't consider it unreasonable that they are unable to give feedback, it's just the way it is with this type of submission unfortunately.
Click to expand...

^ Agree ^

I honestly don't think that this 'rejection' if that is how it is perceived, is really a rejection of the work done by Nic and Co. to date. There is a phlegmatic, attitude to barefoot rehabilitation by the veterinary profession as a whole, as it just doesn't fit with the current model of diagnosis and treatment.

I follow the blogs with interest and am always overjoyed by the evidence of spectacular results, which although described as anecdotal in the strickest sense, is far from that to the owners involved.

Attempting to generate interest in 'formal' scientific research in the field of Barefoot Rehabilitation, will I fear be an uphill struggle. The simple fact, is that there is no real benefit for those who usually sponser this sort of research, there is no profitable wonder drug or similar at the end of it.

Barefoot Rehabilitation will I feel, remain at the grass roots level for some considerable time yet. Owners frustrated with the failure of coventional treatments, unwilling to call it a day will still turn to this treatment. It will be pressure from the bottom up that will eventually cause serious research into this as it will become impossible to ignore or debase the obvious positive outcomes.
 
Pale Rider said:
^ Agree ^

I honestly don't think that this 'rejection' if that is how it is perceived, is really a rejection of the work done by Nic and Co. to date. There is a phlegmatic, attitude to barefoot rehabilitation by the veterinary profession as a whole, as it just doesn't fit with the current model of diagnosis and treatment.

I follow the blogs with interest and am always overjoyed by the evidence of spectacular results, which although described as anecdotal in the strickest sense, is far from that to the owners involved.

Attempting to generate interest in 'formal' scientific research in the field of Barefoot Rehabilitation, will I fear be an uphill struggle. The simple fact, is that there is no real benefit for those who usually sponser this sort of research, there is no profitable wonder drug or similar at the end of it.

Barefoot Rehabilitation will I feel, remain at the grass roots level for some considerable time yet. Owners frustrated with the failure of coventional treatments, unwilling to call it a day will still turn to this treatment. It will be pressure from the bottom up that will eventually cause serious research into this as it will become impossible to ignore or debase the obvious positive outcomes.
Click to expand...

I really aggree with this it will be a movement from the bottom up as more owners manage their horse this way vets will gradually change.
The power of the Internet search means the route to alternative treatments is much easier for individuals to find the vet is no longer a gate keeper to knowledge in the way they where.
Vets are trained for a long time to think how they do it will take time to change views.
 
Silly question alert: how come AANHCP/UKNHCP/UKAEP/AAEP not offered a helping hand? Really sorry if I have missed something and they have and therefore I am forever humbled.
 
Pale rider - I'm not sure this statement is true 'There is a phlegmatic, attitude to barefoot rehabilitation by the veterinary profession as a whole, as it just doesn't fit with the current model of diagnosis and treatment' None of the vets at the practice I use are against BF although as with any treatment they believe it depends on the prognosis.

I've investigated BF more since seeing info on here from CPTrayes, Oberon and others although rightly or wrongly and I'm not looking for an argument, it sometimes comes across that BF fans believe BF is the answer for everything and I don't think there's sufficient evidence to support that.

People talk about the horses that come sound but there are also horses who don't respond so well. Same as with a horse with shoes.

Having said that, I for one would like to see money being made available for more BF research.
 
I have to say I'm really sorry to hear that the paper Nic and dreams579 put together didn't get any further. My horse is one of the many Nic has taken in and worked with to gain positive results.

Realistically Nic can only rehab so many horses at a time so it's frustrating that what is seen as too few results to obtain successful funding and support has taken so many years for Nic and her team to do.

Ultimately I believe this to be a short term setback. The positive results given by Nic's rehab methods are becoming known at there and I'm sure that more and more people will turn to barefoot as a solution for problems like navicular, collateral ligament damage and others.

I, for one, am happy to say that my horse is much improved thanks to Nic and I will continue to spread the word so that others can benefit from her work.
 
BF is not an answer to everything it's a management system for horses in work that allows them with varying degrees of difficultly and imput and effort from owner to work without shoes.
Taking off shoes and providing movement to help with foot pain is an old idea I met old horse people when I was a teenager who talked about this.
When it's used for horses with pain in the heels I am not sure I would be brave enough without support but I am thrilled for those that do and also for those who are lucky enough to get their horse to Rockley.
 
Rocket is at 85% of SELECTED cases. I would suggest that the paper may not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Not every research paper is worth the paper it is written on. I haven't read the paper in question. Secondly you say about horses treated by vets often having restrictions. It is unite clear from every post about "barefoot" that most of those horses require keep on bare pasture/ stabling and extremely careful duet restrictions to control the sensitivity of their feet- these are far more restricting to the average horse owner than those you mention we're recommended in SoME of the vet cases.

Please note I have nothing against unshod horses ( mine all currently are) but do not like the " barefoot mafia".
 
glenruby said:
Rocket is at 85% of SELECTED cases. I would suggest that the paper may not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Not every research paper is worth the paper it is written on. I haven't read the paper in question. Secondly you say about horses treated by vets often having restrictions. It is unite clear from every post about "barefoot" that most of those horses require keep on bare pasture/ stabling and extremely careful duet restrictions to control the sensitivity of their feet- these are far more restricting to the average horse owner than those you mention we're recommended in SoME of the vet cases.

Please note I have nothing against unshod horses ( mine all currently are) but do not like the " barefoot mafia".
Click to expand...

I completely agree, not every research paper is worth the material it is written on. Equally true is that posts on this forum do not constitute a representative sample of the horse universe, let alone the unshod/barefoot universe.

Most of the unshod horses I meet are kept conventionally, although they may have a lower sugar/starch 'bucket' feed than many, they still turn out and come in pretty much as average.

The ones that don't were typically not sound in shoes, usually because of some degree of laminitis and dietary changes may be implemented to help with this. I am sure we would all expect any horse with laminitis, whether shod or otherwise to be given the help/dietary changes it needs to recover.
 
glenruby said:
Rocket is at 85% of SELECTED cases. I would suggest that the paper may not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Not every research paper is worth the paper it is written on. I haven't read the paper in question. Secondly you say about horses treated by vets often having restrictions. It is unite clear from every post about "barefoot" that most of those horses require keep on bare pasture/ stabling and extremely careful duet restrictions to control the sensitivity of their feet- these are far more restricting to the average horse owner than those you mention we're recommended in SoME of the vet cases.

Please note I have nothing against unshod horses ( mine all currently are) but do not like the " barefoot mafia".
Click to expand...

Is it? Is it really all to do with barefoot that management is "changed"? Not about the underlying metabolic issues??
 
Tiffany said:
Pale rider - I'm not sure this statement is true 'There is a phlegmatic, attitude to barefoot rehabilitation by the veterinary profession as a whole, as it just doesn't fit with the current model of diagnosis and treatment' None of the vets at the practice I use are against BF although as with any treatment they believe it depends on the prognosis.

I've investigated BF more since seeing info on here from CPTrayes, Oberon and others although rightly or wrongly and I'm not looking for an argument, it sometimes comes across that BF fans believe BF is the answer for everything and I don't think there's sufficient evidence to support that.

People talk about the horses that come sound but there are also horses who don't respond so well. Same as with a horse with shoes.

Having said that, I for one would like to see money being made available for more BF research.
Click to expand...


Well, it may or may not be true what I have said, it's just my opinion, lol.

Having said that, it is based on the reaction of numerous vets, from numerous areas, fairly anecdotal maybe, but probably supported by most people who mention barefoot rehabilitation to many vets.

My interest in BF rehabilitation came when one of our horses developed laminitis. The first vet on the scene wanted him shod remedial shoes, massive doses of bute, box rest all the usual. We made it clear, politely, that this was not the treatment we wanted to follow. Exit vet.

After quite a few phone calls we found a vet who stated that he'd help, but we were on our own when things went wrong and he would take no responsibility for anything that happened. (fair enough, I thought).

Cut a long story short, we only used the vet for x rays to assess the damage initially, and to see how things had changed 6 months later. (Obviously he recovered).

We did everything almost opposite to conventional wisdom, our horse made a rapid recovery and the severe rotation in the pedal bones was reversed. We now frequently get phone calls from this vet asking us to talk people through a barefoot recovery, and quite a few horses have benefitted.

Apart from a few doses of bute, used very sparingly, the x rays was the only chargeable item on our vets bill. Not much incentive for things to change for the majority of vets.

The worse thing is that people get in touch with us when things are as bad as they can be and conventional treatment, such as it is, is heading only one way.

I am a BF fan, because of the results that I have seen myself. I am not nieve enough to think it is a cure for every lamanitic, lame or navicular horse on the planet, but I am a pragmatic person. I am not really interested in the research for research sake, but, it seems to me most of these problems our horses suffer from are brought on by our treatment of them, shoeing and feeding mostly. I want to see them cured, and BF works more often than not, that will do for me.
 
Last edited:
for BEVA do they allocate whether you get a talk or a poster, or can you opt for one or other (though appreciate its probably too late now for this year). A poster may be easier to get through and a good opportunity to mix with vets.

agree with whoever said that many abstracts will have been rejected, science is competitive. also, there are many many conditions in horses that have no research money or nowhere near enough already. for those owners who want to make a difference, support those charities that support equine research and state what you'd like to see funded to them. if you see a case for barefoot rehab warranting research funding then make yourselves heard!
 
Pale Rider said:
Well, it may or may not be true what I have said, it's just my opinion, lol.

Having said that, it is based on the reaction of numerous vets, from numerous areas, fairly anecdotal maybe, but probably supported by most people who mention barefoot rehabilitation to many vets.

My interest in BF rehabilitation came when one of our horses developed laminitis. The first vet on the scene wanted him shod remedial shoes, massive doses of bute, box rest all the usual. We made it clear, politely, that this was not the treatment we wanted to follow. Exit vet.

After quite a few phone calls we found a vet who stated that he'd help, but we were on our own when things went wrong and he would take no responsibility for anything that happened. (fair enough, I thought).

Cut a long story short, we only used the vet for x rays to assess the damage initially, and to see how things had changed 6 months later. (Obviously he recovered).

We did everything almost opposite to conventional wisdom, our horse made a rapid recovery and the severe rotation in the pedal bones was reversed. We now frequently get phone calls from this vet asking us to talk people through a barefoot recovery, and quite a few horses have benefitted.

Apart from a few doses of bute, used very sparingly, the x rays was the only chargeable item on our vets bill. Not much incentive for things to change for the majority of vets.

The worse thing is that people get in touch with us when things are as bad as they can be and conventional treatment, such as it is, is heading only one way.

I am a BF fan, because of the results that I have seen myself. I am not nieve enough to think it is a cure for every lamanitic, lame or navicular horse on the planet, but I am a pragmatic person. I am not really interested in the research for research sake, but, it seems to me most of these problems our horses suffer from are brought on by our treatment of them, shoeing and feeding mostly. I want to see them cured, and BF works more often than not, that will do for me.
Click to expand...

Excellent post!
 
peteralfred said:
for BEVA do they allocate whether you get a talk or a poster, or can you opt for one or other (though appreciate its probably too late now for this year). A poster may be easier to get through and a good opportunity to mix with vets.

agree with whoever said that many abstracts will have been rejected, science is competitive. also, there are many many conditions in horses that have no research money or nowhere near enough already. for those owners who want to make a difference, support those charities that support equine research and state what you'd like to see funded to them. if you see a case for barefoot rehab warranting research funding then make yourselves heard!
Click to expand...

BEVA only offer presentations; there isn't a poster session there, as yes, I'd definitely agree a poster session would be easier to get normally.
 
Tiffany said:
People talk about the horses that come sound but there are also horses who don't respond so well. Same as with a horse with shoes.
.
Click to expand...


I know that I am picking on grammar here, and I apologise for doing it, but it matters.

Tiffany it is not the same as a horse with shoes, sorry. Most of the horses which have recovered with a barefoot rehab have already failed to recover in shoes. Admittedly anecdotally, the number which recover in shoes is far lower as a percentage than the number that recover without them. In addition, the recovery in shoes has some tendency to be temporary and the disease often progresses to make the horse lame again later, (or at least restrict work on hard ground/jumping etc) whereas the same does not, at the moment, appear to be true of a barefoot rehab for which we now have a few repeat xrays and MRIs that suggest it is a genuine cure.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top