Ridecamp: Re: [RC] RC: Vetting procedures

> I'll add, too, Truman, that in well over 250 rides vetted, I've only seen
> one horse crash that truly gave us what I would consider no signs of
pending
> problems at the prior vet check, despite what another poster suggested.


If by chance you're referring to Karen Chaton's general comments regarding
the Chiron research at Tevis and Swanton (which you very well may or may not
be)---then it was never stated or theorized that crashing horses don't give
prior warning.  What we did demonstrate was that horses with a satisfactory
ride completion may concurrently have a biochemical profile that indicates
far more physiological stress than it outwardly apparent, even to
experienced ride vets.  Big difference.  In fact, profiles from the
metabolic pulled horses verified that the vets did a very good job in
weeding out the at-risk horses, usually before there *was* a real crash.
While there were some horses that completed Tevis with abnormal lab values,
it goes more towards arguing that some conventional lab values may not
necessarily apply to endurance horses (ie, CK values).

The point of the project was not to say ride vets can't identify an
impending crash.  The point was to demonstrate that normal endurance
exercise may produce very subtle physiological stress that is *not*
identifiable except through serum/plasma analysis, and to identify potential
parameters that might contribute to cumulative damage or risk.

Susan G



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
 Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=