Re: [Fwd: RC: Research at rides]

["Duncan Fletcher" <dfletche@gte.net>]

From: <Tivers@aol.com>

> In a message dated 2/11/00 7:57:23 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dfletche@gte.net
> writes:
>
> << Is bone important for endurance? Do endurance horses suffer from
fractures
>  (or other bone related injuries)  to any great degree?>
>
> Probably far fewer than in even Standardbreds. But some.
>
>  >My understanding of bone measurements is that it also includes some of
the
>  support apparatus and being used as proxy for the potential strength and
>  durability of those structures as much as it is bone strength.>
>
> Don't understand that paragraph.

Endurance horses are more likely to suffer from ligament or tendon damage.
That bone measurement is easily obtained and includes the suspensory
apparatus. It is being used in part to predict potential injury to that. As
another thought, do bigger boned horses have larger joint surfaces that
might reduce potential joint damage?

>  >Which brings me to the question as to whether ultrasound measurements
would
>  a better (albeit more expensive) measurement. And how valid would it be -
is
>  bigger better?>
>
> Ultrasound "whaites out" on bone. However, you can measure bone density
with
> xrays.

The thought of ultrasound was to make soundness predictions of the
suspensory apparatus, not to measure bone.

>
>  Duncan Fletcher >>
>
>
> ti
>


Duncan Fletcher
dfletche@gte.net