What are your thoughts on this story (horse prosthetics)

That is vile and IMO the vet has crossed a huge line into unethical experimentation. They’re clearly not doing with the welfare of the horse as their guiding principle.


TheHairyOne said:
Utterly not with how thats fitted.

However, there is some intersting work with small animals implanting titanium rods into the bone to remove the pressure sore and fitting issues. Maybe that will one day benefit people.
Click to expand...
This already happens with people! It’s called osteointegration, Google ‘Ossur’ for the main company, and is life changing for the people that it works for. The NHS don’t offer it (which is another rant) but it’s definitely the way forward to improve the life of some amputees.
 
paddy555 said:
I felt like that and I wouldn't have chemo for myself therefore it seemed logical for me to refuse for my animals. I worked on the basis that the side effects they would have would be exactly the ones I would suffer.

Then push came to shove and vet advised that in his opinion it was very likely my horse was going to require chemo. I was unhappy and he explained in detail and it wasn't going to produce the side effects that it would have done in humans. I should not extrapolate humans to my horse. The lab report came back and to everyone's amazement chemo was not required. However if it had been required I would have gone ahead.

I think there are very few horses that would mentally cope with the prothesis, most likely pure bred arabs. At the same time I don't think we should transfer human thoughts and feelings to horses.

There are comments about mental stress and prey animals. What about people who keep their horses stabled 24/7 in winter. Those who stable and turnout is a tiny paddock with individual turn out. The horse cannot indulge it's instincts to be able to gallop if frightened, nor it's instincts for horse company.

What I find far more distressing, since FL brought them up, are animals in zoos. That sort of captivity is no place for wild animals. They are not pets yet it is OK to restrict them. I remember the last zoo I went to (I would never go again) had Colybus monkeys in a tiny cage.

It is difficult to say this should not be allowed, made illegal as many seem to want yet so much else goes on apparently quite happily.
Click to expand...

In my opinion, using chemotherapy to prolong the life of a terminally ill animal is unethical and not in the animal's best interest. Chemo is not given to animals in the dose ratio it is given to humans, but it still results in common side effects of gastrointestinal problems, and again, I would not consider it fair to put an animal through gastric pain, sickness, diarrhoea, loss of appetite and the accompanying distress, just to make it last a bit longer for my benefit.

I'm not sure what's anthropomorphic about that.
 
paddy555 said:
I felt like that and I wouldn't have chemo for myself therefore it seemed logical for me to refuse for my animals. I worked on the basis that the side effects they would have would be exactly the ones I would suffer.

Then push came to shove and vet advised that in his opinion it was very likely my horse was going to require chemo. I was unhappy and he explained in detail and it wasn't going to produce the side effects that it would have done in humans. I should not extrapolate humans to my horse. The lab report came back and to everyone's amazement chemo was not required. However if it had been required I would have gone ahead.

I think there are very few horses that would mentally cope with the prothesis, most likely pure bred arabs. At the same time I don't think we should transfer human thoughts and feelings to horses.

There are comments about mental stress and prey animals. What about people who keep their horses stabled 24/7 in winter. Those who stable and turnout is a tiny paddock with individual turn out. The horse cannot indulge it's instincts to be able to gallop if frightened, nor it's instincts for horse company.

What I find far more distressing, since FL brought them up, are animals in zoos. That sort of captivity is no place for wild animals. They are not pets yet it is OK to restrict them. I remember the last zoo I went to (I would never go again) had Colybus monkeys in a tiny cage.

It is difficult to say this should not be allowed, made illegal as many seem to want yet so much else goes on apparently quite happily.
Click to expand...


I don't accept that any other wrong done to horses or other animals precludes saying that this one is completely wrong and should not happen to a horse.

I wonder if the vet and owner have ever spoken to human amputees about the pain they are in?
.
 
TheHairyOne said:
Utterly not with how thats fitted.

However, there is some intersting work with small animals implanting titanium rods into the bone to remove the pressure sore and fitting issues. Maybe that will one day benefit people.
Click to expand...


I saw a dog with both hind legs with this done, tied up outside a shop. I was horrified, until his owner arrived. At that point he jumped up onto his two back pins and bounced around without any apparent concern in the world.
.
 
Amymay said:
Just wrong. He’ll be pts within six months, so will have been put through all of this for absolutely no benefit at all.
Click to expand...

You can only hope but it doesnt seem like he has an owner who will make that call given the lengths that she has gone to already.

I dont know why some horses end up with the owners that they do ?
 
paddy555 said:
you mean when the rider gets off all is well but is that really the case? I would suggest that if you say have an overweight/unbalanced rider flopping around on a poorly fitting saddle for long periods of time (let's say a day's hunting) repeating this exercise they are going to cause underlying pain and damage. You may not be able to see it, you may assume that once they dismount it is going and problem solved but is that really the case? The only damage you may see is the broken skin and the white hair when it has healed. You cannot see the internal bruising yet the horse may continually feel this each time it is saddled and ridden.

`I am not saying the prothesis is right or wrong just that whilst everyone is instantly condemning it there are lots of other things the horse suffers which are apparently acceptable even though they may be in daily pain.
Click to expand...

I think that you can condemn the prosthetic AND the other things that you have mentioned.

Bad is bad no matter how you want to rank it in comparison to another bad practise or situation.

On one yard where I used to be there were horses being neglected (& beaten up) and not seeing vets, dentists or farriers. In one case one of families shod the horse (very badly) themselves and in the other the horse saw a farrier once a year at the most and *never* saw a vet or dentist.

Several of us complained to horse owning YO and she wouldn't take any of it onboard because "they are looked after better than those horses in Egypt".

Comparison rarely helps the animal
 
Last edited:
I don't think prosthetics are at a stage where it is ethical to use them on a horse & I'm not sure they ever will be. Even if the stump is well managed & kept free of sores somehow that horse has got to have some significant compensations going on in most of the rest of the body.

As for small animals I also find some of the work involving the use of metal rods into the bone to attach a prosthetic leg / foot onto really interesting & can see how that would work well in dogs for certain situations.

I also have observed that cats & most medium sized & smaller dogs do very well on 3 legs due to their lighter weight. They still have an altered gait of course & will be at greater risk of arthritis & injuries due to their abnormal movement.

I had a 3 legged cat for several years (HL) & he could do anything a regular cat could do. He climbed fences, hunted, climbed the Xmas tree etc. His whole spine & his shoulders were unbelievably well muscled , I presume because his front end had to work harder than normal when he was climbing & stalking things. But there's a world of difference in how a cat & a horse are put together!
 
Rowreach said:
In my opinion, using chemotherapy to prolong the life of a terminally ill animal is unethical and not in the animal's best interest. Chemo is not given to animals in the dose ratio it is given to humans, but it still results in common side effects of gastrointestinal problems, and again, I would not consider it fair to put an animal through gastric pain, sickness, diarrhoea, loss of appetite and the accompanying distress, just to make it last a bit longer for my benefit.

I'm not sure what's anthropomorphic about that.
Click to expand...

well if that is aimed at me I don't remember saying anything about terminally ill. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course but when it comes to my horse I go by the opinion of my horse vet.



I don't know where the anthropomorphic bit comes into it.
 
If the technology of prosthetics was more advanced for heavier-weight animals, then id be more open to it.
That guy who murdered his gf, had prosthetic ankles and they were like springs to aid walking. The technology exists, but probably would be hugely expensive to fit to an animal the size of a horse.

That horse has only recently had it fitted so its gait will be weird and 3 legged, mainly due to the prosthetic not mimicking knee movement as its a fixed limb.
Unless the horse, itself, weights itselt into the prosthetic evenly, i can see laminitis as the main risk with a horse in this.

So with current prosthetics i wouldnt choose that route.

Regarding pain, if pain is constant, un-ending, most animals lay down and ‘wait to die’...they give up, generally. They try initially but there comes a point the will to live is less than the will to lay down, give up and die, due to pain.
If a horse with a prosthetic is in constant pain, it’s not a fair road to go down. Assessing the pain levels probably vary depending on individual cases.

I hope the lass who owns this horse is prepared to pts should this not turn out to work for the horse.
 
paddy555 said:
you mean when the rider gets off all is well but is that really the case? I would suggest that if you say have an overweight/unbalanced rider flopping around on a poorly fitting saddle for long periods of time (let's say a day's hunting) repeating this exercise they are going to cause underlying pain and damage. You may not be able to see it, you may assume that once they dismount it is going and problem solved but is that really the case? The only damage you may see is the broken skin and the white hair when it has healed. You cannot see the internal bruising yet the horse may continually feel this each time it is saddled and ridden.

`I am not saying the prothesis is right or wrong just that whilst everyone is instantly condemning it there are lots of other things the horse suffers which are apparently acceptable even though they may be in daily pain.
Click to expand...


I am not sure why a horse's physical response to having a leg amputated wouldn't be exactly the same as a human's - their nervous systems seem to be comparable.

What I meant by not premanent was that, yes, an ill-fitting saddle can be removed but also could be swapped for a well-fitting one. Not that I feel that many people deliberately use ill-fitting saddles on their horses, although some are very careless. However the horse with the prosthetic cannot ever have the protheseis taken off to give it a break - goodness knows how the vet/owner deals with pressure sores.
I have never been of the opinion that 2 wrongs make a right, so regardless of what else happens to horses, I would *never* want to see a horse with a prosthetic leg.


ETA, I know someone who had a small dog with bladder cancer, the dog was insured and owner consented to chemotherapy to give the dog approximately another 6 months of life - not a cure. The dog had been used to visiting her mum in the car and used to happily jump in whenever the car door was opened. The poor creature got so that she hated getting in the car and really did not enjoy the vet visits for the infusions. We told the vet prior to diagnosis that under no circumstances would we consent to our Rott being given chemo. IMO it is for the owner's benefit, not the dog's.
 
paddy555 said:
well if that is aimed at me I don't remember saying anything about terminally ill. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course but when it comes to my horse I go by the opinion of my horse vet.



I don't know where the anthropomorphic bit comes into it.
Click to expand...

Well it was in direct reply to your comment quoting my post. Both bits in fact.

Anthropomorphic is what you accused me of being. I just used a big word for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TPO
PurBee said:
If the technology of prosthetics was more advanced for heavier-weight animals, then id be more open to it.
That guy who murdered his gf, had prosthetic ankles and they were like springs to aid walking. The technology exists, but probably would be hugely expensive to fit to an animal the size of a horse.
Click to expand...
I guess the difference is, no matter how advanced prosthetics may become - for the human they can decide to take them off, give the stump a rest, sit in a chair or use a wheelchair for a bit, and so on - it is likely still fraught with difficulties but you can make a decision whether or not to use it according to how or what you are doing.

a horse can't decide that, and they don't generally spend long periods resting on the floor anyway as their bodies don't work well like that, so again it's a difference even to a dog, say. I really feel that there's a very very long way to go before it would be ethically acceptable for me.
 
Rowreach said:
Well it was in direct reply to your comment quoting my post. Both bits in fact.

Anthropomorphic is what you accused me of being. I just used a big word for it.
Click to expand...

well my understanding of the "big word" is that it means ascribing human characteristics to non human things and I'm not really sure how it comes into it
 
Last edited:
Pearlsasinger said:
ETA, I know someone who had a small dog with bladder cancer, the dog was insured and owner consented to chemotherapy to give the dog approximately another 6 months of life - not a cure. The dog had been used to visiting her mum in the car and used to happily jump in whenever the car door was opened. The poor creature got so that she hated getting in the car and really did not enjoy the vet visits for the infusions. We told the vet prior to diagnosis that under no circumstances would we consent to our Rott being given chemo. IMO it is for the owner's benefit, not the dog's.
Click to expand...

but every case is different. I too didn't give my dog with a tumour on the jaw chemo. as the extra time it gave as far as quality of life was concerned was minimal. For my horse, if it had been necessary and had worked, we were probably talking about very many extra years.
 
milliepops said:
I guess the difference is, no matter how advanced prosthetics may become - for the human they can decide to take them off, give the stump a rest, sit in a chair or use a wheelchair for a bit, and so on - it is likely still fraught with difficulties but you can make a decision whether or not to use it according to how or what you are doing.

a horse can't decide that, and they don't generally spend long periods resting on the floor anyway as their bodies don't work well like that, so again it's a difference even to a dog, say. I really feel that there's a very very long way to go before it would be ethically acceptable for me.
Click to expand...

Its those very valid points you raise that make me really question whether for heavier animals, they should be used at all.

If the stump of the limb is always, without a doubt, going to pose pain problems/soreness, due to having to be worn 24/7/365 then its not possible to consider it. If the nerves in the affected limb are not signalling, pain may not be an issue. I expect it comes down to the individual case whether nerve function is retained or severed, whether the stump end into the prosthetic would be painful or not. I’ve not delved into statistics on this issue regarding amputee pain.
Due to this is why i reserve judgement, remain open-minded about its possibilities, if pain is NOT an issue.
It would be ridiculous for a horse to be on daily pain meds with a prosthetic.

It does all rest on the stump/prosthetic pain issue. Mild pain a horse would tolerate, but it shouldnt have to. Its hard to tell if a horse has mild pain, with them being so stoic.
I have pain in my gait with every step but no-one would know by looking at me walk as i ‘accomodate’ it with very subtle muscular/ligament adjustments.

Medical science is always evolving so what at first may look/sound ridiculous is then embraced and seen to be quite the life-changing breakthrough.
Im sure at one point to use human endocrine medications for animals that got similar conditions , at the cusp of that happening many would have said its ridiculous, there’s side-effects etc, just put the animal out of its misery. But now we’re taking on the side-effects of prascend, insulin for dogs/cats etc and they have a quality of life. Not full, ideal, healthy life, but a life relatively good considering the health problems.
So if pain isnt an issue with prosthetics in ‘some’ cases, they could be considered. But from what others have posted here, pain seems to be a side-effect with prosthetics in most cases.
 
Interestingly dogs do not seem to have the same side effects as humans from chemo. Have never had to have this treatment for any of mine, but I don't think I would be totally against it without learning more.

A prosthetic for a horse feels totally wrong to me, I cannot imagine ever allowing my horses to have this treatment, and can only hope that the owners in this case know something that I do not.
 
Hard pass from me. I don’t agree with it at all! Some of the videos I’ve seen on Facebook (mostly miniature horses in America), just look so damn miserable with the prosthetics. They don’t look comfortable at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top