RE: Bibliographies on Barefoot Info for Sue, Truman, etc.

["Tracey Ritter" <Tracey_Ritter@yahoo.com>]

Susan,

WHOA, Girl!  First of all, I'm extremely glad that you were able to peruse
those, as the two years of French I took didn't do me a whole lot of good in
that respect!  I have tried using various translating programs, but unless
you really know what it *should* be, there's a lot lost in these verbatim
translations.  And, as this forum is for, you were able to come back and
say:

>Well, thanks for the citations, but as far as I can see (my German is
>limited but passable for this), all the citations are either very general
>articles (here's a drawing of a horse, this thingy here is the hoof...), or
>editorial opinion type articles published in non peer reviewed journals.

and I chuckled to myself when I read what you had to say about:

>Believe me, if high protein in and of itself was a
>problem for equine kidneys, I'd be on that band wagon in a flash.

because I had a great mental picture of "Just Say NO to Alfalfa" signs on
that bandwagon!

But Susan, I have to disagree here in this respect:  this is not a case of
science being "wildly extrapolated", at least not by me.  All I have done is
compare and contrast the things I've learned and the things I've read with
what I was taught in school.  I only have a degree in Biology, and worked in
a research lab at the NCSU School of Vet. Med., so I do not have the DVM
that I suppose could only provide me the knowledge to truly determine if
what I am reading is viable or not.  A lot of it does make sense based upon
the 300 and 400 level courses I had taken, but my expertise ends there!  I
have taken great pains to be objective in what I've read, and am not a
Strasser-devotee by any means.  Which is why this forum is here;  I provide
the sources of what I've read and from where I receive information, and I
toss it out here, knowing that I will hear back from folks with experience
and/or more advanced degrees in that particular field!  That's how we learn;
this is why Ridecamp is here.  

>Sorry, I nearly hurt myself laughing last night when I read that.  I
_really_ get bent out of    shape when those theories are used to
potentially recommend using their dogma as the
>solution for virtually every ill, including colic, laminitis and a poor
fashion sense.  

Susan, I can certainly understand the source of your exasperation here, but
let's leave the drama and exaggerations out; no one benefits from that.
Let's try to keep this as educational as you usually do.

>Good lord, I can just see some naive horseowner reading
>these wonderful promises, noticing impending colic or laminitis in their
>horse and thinking they need to get a rasp instead of a vet.  Speaking only
>of colic, there are a thousand different causes of colic (since colic is a
>symptom, not a unique disease in and of itself) and of those thousand
>causes, 99.9% don't have a damn thing to do with feet, so let's not pretend
>that merely taking shoes off your horse will miraculously solve every
>problem.

As I took great pains to maintain impartiality earlier, I did include in
that same post, 
"But, it is good to see where and how Dr. Strasser is basing her findings.
People need to be able to make informed choices in times of stress or need,
and these things help them feel better about having made a truly educated
decision."

>If this method works for you, great.  I sure get twitchy when it starts
>evolving into a religion, though.  JMO.

How did what I say evolve into religion? From the very beginning of this
discourse, I have encouraged people to just read what I've read and come
back with their take on it.  Citing one's sources is *not* the same as
saying it's the "end all, be all" of a certain pathology.  I do that so that
people can know where I'm coming from, and never once did I imply that what
I have been studying was indisputable.  I wouldn't learn very much that way,
would I?  As it is, alot of folks tend to believe everything they hear and
spout it as verbatim without having even checked it out or researched it
further, and *that's* what I have a problem with.  Give me numbers, facts
that I can chase down, sources to research.  I think you and I are saying
similar things;  people need to educate themselves as much as they can, and
then do it a little bit more.  Then bring it up for discussion.  That's what
civilized people do.  That's how people truly learn.

Gee, all I want is to be able to ride my horse without shoes (if that's what
makes sense at the time) at rides and not get discriminated against.  If
people bring up questions regarding what they've heard about this method, I
provide things I've experienced myself and researched extensively.  Have I
ever said - or even implied - that anyone who has shoes on their horse's
feet are nuts?  Or that this is the only "right" way?  Not that I can recall
from reading my previous posts.  I have mentioned *repeatedly* that not
everyone has the time or resources to effectively follow her method, and
that we all do in the end what we feel is right for our horses, as nobody
knows our own horses better than we do. I've also insisted that the best way
for folks to come to whatever determinations they do come to is through
their own research and educated banter that this forum provides.

The only extremist gleanings you've gotten are those you've reached for.
And I do mean *reached*. 

Can we please get back to the more educated banter we were having earlier?
If you have facts to share (like you did at first), then I embrace and
encourage them... your particular "buckets of knowledge" (as I refer to
them) differ from mine, and I both value and respect that.  Let's leave the
exaggerations and generalizations to those that prefer to dabble in them, as
I don't believe either of us here do. 

Kindest Regards,

Tracey Ritter 
Portland, OR

winmail.dat