--- In ECHoof@..., "Ute" <ute@...> wrote:
...... My horses whole hindend alignment changed after he was taken
barefoot. I always thought he was slightly sickle hocked - he was not.
He assumed this stance to compensate for the instability his shoes
created. I have pictures to proof it. Can you imagine what
musculo-skeletal compensation your horse's shoes might actually
create?......

Ute Miethe - LMT/LAMT NCTMB

Are you implying that every shod horse is unbalanced & unstable?
If your horses were unstable & unbalanced while in shoes, it would
seem to me that the trim itself was unbalanced. Unless, of course the
shoes themselves were inferior and not of uniform quality.
I have been a barefoot advocate for eight years now, but I have also
learned that there are always exceptions to the rule. There are some
situations where a horse would benefit from well-applied shoes.
Situations were those shoes could actually lessen wear & tear (or
torque) to joints damaged by DJD, ringbone and conformational
deformities. Assuming of course that the horse has been trimmed
correctly and balanced first. This could be accomplished by a
competent farrier specializing in therapeutic shoeing.

I don't know if you are aware of this but some of your generalizations
make you appear very narrow-minded and unflexible. At least to me.

I for one would like to see you answer the questions Abby posed in
post #589 "All about respect"
Claire from AZ

Ute,

I watched both videos. I have serious questions about them and I
question if you can compare the two as "proof" that the shod horse
has greater instability.

1. It appears that there were two different horses used in this
video. Why is that? Is that because by using different horses, they
can more easily *prove* that shoes are bad?
2. The position of the horse's pasterns were at a different angle in
the video with the shoes. Is that because the horse was a breed that
has a more *flexy* conformation? Or is that because of the shoes?
The angle of the lower leg looked a lot more like a peruvian paso or
other gaited horse that gives a smoother ride. One of the reasons
that they give a smoother ride is because their joints absorb more
shock.
3. The horse with shoes has a little *wobble* before heel strike
even occurred. Yet the unshod horse does not. Why is that? Is that
because the horse that was shod was doing an extended trot? Was it
that that horse was moving at a higher rate of speed? Higher rates
of speed alone will give that sort of difference. A difference in
gait will give that sort of difference.
4. In the video of the unshod horse, why is there a positional break
in the video at the end of the phase? It appears that *something*
was edited out. After heel strike, the hoof is traveling from left
to right across my screen. Then all of a sudden, it *jumped* to the
right again. It didn't just "end" after absorbing the energy. It
stopped absorbing energy and *jumped* into a different position. I
doubt that would be the camera moving, since a camera moving would
not be able to make such a rapid re-position.
5. Why did the shod horse have the tip of his hoof clearly *flipped
up* (hyperextended at the p2-p3 junction) before landing, when the
unshod horse did not?

As I watched these two videos, I find myself asking too many
questions about them. I cannot tell anything about the circumstance
under which these videos were shot. Although you obviously think
this is "proof", I am not convinced, due to the above questions.

Ute, yesterday I did a post in which I commented that one of the
problems I see with farriers was that they shut down new ideas
because they hold on to their old ideas. You wholeheartedly agreed.
I wasn't just referring to the old "shoes" vs "barefoot" argument,
where the "shoes" group poo-poo the ideas of the "barefoot" crowd. I
was also referring to ANYONE who has closed down to listening about
new information, new products, new ways of doing things and INSISTS
that their way is the best.

You commented on *feet that are falling apart* was due to high nsc.
Dr. Kellon clearly clarified which items have not been shown to have
a correlation to hoof integrity. You have clearly ignored her input
with your sweeping generalizations.

I personally do not believe that high nsc in the foods is the cause
for all or even most hoof dysfunctions. And, I do not believe that
high nsc's alone are what causes most abscesses. From what I've read
and experienced, I think there can be a number of things that cause
these hoof conditions. And I think that it becomes critical to
identify what might have been a trigger in order to correct the
situation. Then it becomes critical to identify secondary triggers
in the compromised hoof. There is no *one size fits all* or in this
case *one diagnosis fits all*.

When you read about the insulin values of quarterhorses and
thoroughbreds, you find that they are not as likely to have insulin
resistance as arabs or morgans. A horse that is not insulin
resistant will not have the same insulin spike as one who is insulin
resistant. It will appear in those horses that nsc's have *little to
no effect* on their metabolism. In my mind, if I see abscesses in a
horse that is NOT insulin resistant, I have to ask, "What else could
be going on?" In the case of one of our quarterhorses at the barn,
he suffered from abscess after abscess for a year, then grew a long
shaggy coat. Ahha! They tested for Cushings. He was positive. They
put him on pergolide and his abscesses cleared up.

FWIW, I have suffered from plantar fasciitis. I couldn't even walk.
I have found the greatest relief from a Donjoy Walkabout Walker
orthopedic boot. Funny. It's a rocker boot. It was the only thing
that gave me pain relief and mobility. It does not flex. If I
attached a metal shoe to the bottom of it, it would not have changed
the relief I got, since it does not flex. It gave me stability.
Perhaps you've not had the opportunity to appreciate first hand,
what a great product a rocker boot is, especially when it comes to
plantar fasciitis. It is my sincere hope that you never have to as
it was painful and debilitating.

I clearly don't have any answers in this on-going thread. I'm open
and willing to listen to the ideas.

Joan and Dazzle



--- In ECHoof@..., "Ute" <ute@...> wrote:

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying! Shoes create instability on

smooth surfaces and too much torque on soft ground. Plus they
increase the concussive forces and here is the video to proof it,
which I am now posting for the 3rd time here:
http://www.naturhov.dk/prod/Clips/Hovnedslag_med_beslag.mpg - note
the concussive forces traveling up the leg and then the wobble and
slide of the foot until it stabilizes. How can this possibly be
beneficial to a horse with ringbone when the condition is usually
created by uneven loading and trauma to begin with? How would
already compromised joints benefit from an increase in concussion?
This logically simply makes no sense to me. And I have yet to see a
barefoot horse wear their hooves to bloody stumps, because movement
actually encourages hoof growth as well. Feet that are falling apart
are weakened by internal factors and the most likely culprit is
usually a diet too high in NSCs.

In comparison here is a video of a bare foot stepping :

http://www.naturhov.dk/prod/Clips/hovnedslag_uden_beslag.mpg

I do not see how this makes me narrow minded at all. I have done a

lot of research when it comes to metal shoes and so far I have seen
really mostly cons. Every reason given for shoes really does not
stand up when it is critically analyzed. I can see synthetic shoes
as an alternative, but I can no longer justify using metal shoes on
horse's hoof as they tend to do more harm than good.

BALANCED STEP
Ute Miethe - LMT/LAMT NCTMB
Nationally Certified Massage Therapist & Natural Performance

Barefoot Trimmer

www.balancedstep.com