RE: [RC] catching up regarding beet pulp, pt 1 - Susan E. Garlinghouse, D.V.M.
Yes, I agree on both points. There’s
no such thing as just flinging together an intelligent ration. Consider
all aspects, good and bad, before you add *anything*.
Also agree on too much of a good
thing. I do have horses in the practice without a tooth in their head
that get virtually nothing (forage-wise) except soaked beet pulp and do
well. Certainly better than the alternative. But they’re also
very carefully supplemented to make sure the nutrient balance is adequate.
Susan Garlinghouse, DVM, MS
From:
Tivers@xxxxxxx [mailto:Tivers@xxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005
1:09 PM To: suendavid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: catching up regarding
beet pulp, pt 1
In a message dated 8/10/2005 1:40:12
PM Pacific Daylight Time, suendavid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Anyway, just IMO, but I think you
kind of have to be careful not to throw
the baby out with the bath water here in evaluating the inclusion of beet
pulp in a performance horse's ration. Yes, it has a modest detrimental
effect on mineral absorption. Fine--- so you make sure that there are
sufficient amounts of macro and trace minerals in the ration, especially if
beet pulp is fed in a significant amount. Not a difficult thing to do,
just
add a moderate dose of a top-quality vitamin-mineral supplement, which isn't
a bad idea at any time.
And that was my point. You cannot just dismiss the chelating effect out of
hand. In considering any dietary component, you have to think about how it
affects both the digestibility of the other components and the blood-borne
balances once they are absorbed.
Another thing to keep in mind is the fact that there are very many out there
who, once told that a substance is useful, conclude immediately that more is
better. This is often the case with both beet pulp and bran.
