Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

> Doc, you are not solving the problem "here and now," your have just
> started a  concern with a therorectical. A concern with "one sample"
> with no data except  with the one tested conclusion in which a
> "respected"  statement creates  fervor. As a new and  respected vet and
> or so called scientist the responsibility  of fact lies with you. Again,
> within the total population of "equids" within  this country the
> percentage of Cushinoids/IR horses is minute. Within the  endurance
> discipline, as a whole, the percentage drop is considerable.
>
>
>  >>---rather than wait a year to establish statistical data.<<
>
> One year is not enough as you know, per "customary and usual" academic
> or  empirical study. But "one sample" to conclude your concern to owners
> is not  practical. I could pronounce a theoretical, in analogy, like
> shoeing horses "with a  3/8" rim pad on the front feet to help a stifle
> problem." A "one rat study."
>    The essence of the debate is creditability of fact without
> statistical or
> peer review.
Oh good grief, Jaye.  If, as a competent farrier, you found ONE horse with
a stifle problem that responded to the shoeing regimen above, you'd use it
on that one horse, wouldn't you?  (And if you didn't because it hadn't yet
been subjected to "statistical or peer review" then you ought to be
horsewhipped and hang up your shoeing tools.)

Veterinary medicine (and I daresay horse shoeing) is about treating
individuals.  Pure science is about the overall view of things.  Part of
BEING a veterinarian HAS to involve the ability to recognize the case that
is the exception from the accepted scientific norms, and the willingness
to delve into WHY that case is an exception.  Seems to me that that is all
Susan is doing here--being a good doc and looking out for the interests of
a few specific patients.

I saw NOTHING in her post to indicate that beet pulp has changed its
personality from the wonderful non-simple-sugar hindgut sort of feed that
it is.  Only a caution that on rare occasions it may be possible that the
industry doesn't squeeze out all the sugar before we get it, and that if
we have one of those rare individuals who has a problem with that, we
might want to take some precautionary steps.

I doubt that we need a peer review to establish the fact that the sugar
beet is chock-full of sugar before it goes to the factory--it wouldn't be
a useful commodity if it weren't.  And given the margin of error in just
about ANY processing scenario, it would be statistically amazing if what
she has found in her one-rat situation DOESN'T happen on at least rare
occasions.  How rare?  She admits she doesn't know.

And again, it is an insult to the intelligence of the readers here to
suggest that we are not capable of discerning the difference between a
one-rat scenario which is likely pretty rare and a bunch of peer-reviewed
statistically significant data.

Meanwhile, if I had one of those rare IR horses (which, according to
material printed in THE HORSE are perhaps not as rare as we once
thought--or perhaps that data doesn't pass your scrutiny either), it would
be worth my time to check my beet pulp source rather than jeopardize that
ONE horse the ONE time the stuff didn't get properly refined, dontcha
think??

Heidi


============================================================
They're athletes! This is a partnership between horse and rider - we don't
have any jockeys out there, just pals and partners. We'd allow a rider with
a broken foot, a sore back and a nasty cold to compete - but we would never
let a horse in a similiar condition hit the trail.
~ Dr. Barney Flemming DVM

ridecamp.net information: http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/

============================================================