Firstly Gismo, not meaning to come across as 'attacking' you or anything, just debating some of your points that I disagree with. Trying to be rational & objective about specifics I see differently to you. Hope this time I succeed without your angst. Cheers!
the only way of knowing how much the horse rotated would be to get x-rays but the damage has already been done so if someone wouldn't be able to afford expensive x-rays the point would be mute. But if she wants to see how much the horse is rotated then she should get them done. But without further sings of founder then the rotation has stopped and the damage is already done.
Whether or not the horse has already done the damage or not is not really relevant IMO, so it's that point, not value of xrays that I see as 'moot'. I think there are generally enough indications on the outside that actually give you a pretty good idea of what's going on inside, without xrays. It is the surety & precision of measurements(eg. being able to know exactly how much sole, whether/how far frog & lateral cartilages have dropped, etc...) that xrays can be helpful for, to know precisely how far you may be able to trim, where breakover should be, etc, rather than taking educated guesses & erring on the side of caution without them. I also question your comment about the rotation having 'stopped'. I don't understand what would lead you to this assumption?
Well maybe if you didn't take what I said out of context it would make sense to you. Because I did say with time and "proper management" like a "healthy diet". She could get back to normal within a year or a year and a half.
Didn't take it out of context & actually said I agree with you *generally* on that. But what you said was "there is no reason
they can't go back to normal." That is what I disagree with, the definite nature of the comment because horses can indeed suffer damage serious enough to be beyond rehab - it is unrealistic to think that every horse is recoverable IMO. I agree with what you said above that "She *could* get back to normal". Sorry if that's being too pedantic
When founder happens there is something obviously wrong. In the video the horse was trotting, so she obviously isn't in a lot of pain. So the founder was most likely older and she is recovering or it wasn't a severe founder.
Firstly, the horse shod/padded in such a way may be continuing to do serious damage without feeling it(much, she's obviously not quite right either). Secondly, even horses in pain, foundered or otherwise, can often trot, so that doesn't tell us anything IMO. So I think it's an unfounded(pardon the pun!) assumption that she is recovering or not severe. She may well be, for all we know, but need far more info.
Actually corrective shoeing with wedges help a horse who has foundered.
I disagree actually, if we're talking rehab. They can indeed 'help' a horse palliatively - make them more comfortable, relieve pain, short term at least. Pads & wedges can help in that way because it is common for the rear of the foot to be sensitive & weak. But IME they don't help rehab - & generally exacerbate the actual problems, leading to continuing or worsening damage. 'Navicular' for eg, is another issue that is thought to be largely due to toe-first impacts, which are largely unavoidable when wedges are used.
horse should have had her feet done four weeks after the founder happened and obviously it hasn't been done in a while. I don't what professionals you deal with but the ones I deal with are professional,
I too obviously disagree with how this horse has obviously been (mis)managed, but how can you know that it's feet haven't been attended to in a long time?? That's not in the least obvious to me from these few pics. As for '4 weeks after founder' I don't get how you came to that idea. It also sounds like you're being condescending & presumptive with your 'professionals' comment. Perhaps that's just because you're feeling defensive about my differences of opinion tho.
my farrier told me what was happening to my horse without even seeing him. And has helped and guided me with his quick recovery and well as stopping the rotation to begin with.
Most 'professionals' should have a good idea as to what's likely going on in this sort of case, if you describe the symptoms well enough. Not presuming to know what happened to your horse specifically, but what you have told about symptoms & also treatment doesn't add up to me - no rotation in the first place, but 2"(!!) wedges used, 'really good feet' but I thought you said he'd foundered, etc... I gather that your horse must be now completely sound without shoes, pads or high heels?
Proffesionals, such as vets are that for a reason they have gone through 8-10 years of school to learn what they need to. It is true that some have different opinions and everything.
Not necessarily. Yes, vets do a lot of schooling, not necessarily specific to horses, let alone their hooves though. Farriers may or may not have had a year or few's training, but their education is not necessarily comprehensive either. There is also a LOT of new information come to light from recent studies that vets & farriers may not also have learned, especially if they did their formal schooling many years ago. All that is aside from differences of opinion and the 'expert's' level of skill & savvy & experience. So just because someone is a professional doesn't make them automatically worth heeding. That is why I think it is so important for owners to educate themselves on the principles & factors of hoof function & health, so they can better analyse the skill & knowledge of their 'expert' of choice & make *informed* choices on what 'expert' & approach they try, rather than just blindly trusting any 'professional' because they're a 'professional'.
But founder in itself is something of a mystery. There still is no reason why certain things cause it and there is no sure treatment or medication to treat it either.
True, to a degree. Up until quite recently it & laminitis were a whole lot more so, but there is a heap of good science out there now, that have removed most of the 'mystery' from it.
P.S. "Lami" is spelled laminae.
PS. IME, 'lami' is generally short for laminitis.
Ok, now that I have defended myself and my opinions and knowledge of what I know is right.
We're all entitled to our opinions, be they 'right' or otherwise. Like I said, wasn't meaning to attack - so don't feel the need to 'defend' - but rather my intention was a rational debate. I too am reasonably firm in my opinions - as you've no doubt guessed
. They are based on many years of continual study(actually doing another formal course this year) and lots of experience with successfully rehabbing horses. But I do personally think that a lot of specifics are but *opinion* not hard & fast facts, so I do think it's always important to keep an open mind & keep learning & considering other's opinions, whether you ultimately come to think they're acceptable or not.
I don't like it when people don't like other people's opinions and actually facts and think they know ALL there is to know about EVERYTHING. Just trying to tell you what I have had experience with is all.
Each to their own, but if you're not open to other's opinions, you're not open to learning either. Also if you only ever want to hear your own opinions confirmed, I don't get what you think these forums are for? I never proclaimed to know even MOST about ANYTHING either, by the way, just giving my own opinions based on far more than one experience. IMO there is always a HEAP more to be learned. Sorry that I came across contrary to you. Actually what prompted me to feel the need to address points of your post specifically was because your post came across precisely that way to me. It seemed you were stating your opinions as facts & being rather definite & pedantic about specifics you seem to have little understanding of. Was trying to point out that 'it ain't necessarily so'. So hope that I've now got across the right messages(I know I'm not the best communicator in the world), but perhaps you should consider how your own posts come across & how they may be taken too.
Anyway OP & others here, I hope this debate is helpful to your further understanding of factors & different approaches & opinions, as that was why I started it in the first place. Cheers!