Ridecamp: [RC] pullcodes/stats

Ed said:
"The desire is to collect data that can be analyzed and used to improve our 
sport. The present system does not produce any useful data."

	This is more or less what some of us (Bob, Heidi, and myself) are saying, 
but with a different conclusion.  We believe this data *could* be useful, 
if it were accurate.
	Talk of lameness, does indeed cloud the issue.  I don't believe that 
gathering data on lameness will result in any positive changes in the way 
the sport is run; there are too many factors involved.  What IS important, 
IMO tho, is that we have a reasonably accurate assessment of what 
proportions of pulls are due to lameness as opposed to metabolic.  We can't 
do that if RO is used incorrectly for both causes.  When we know more about 
the numbers of metabolic pulls, and can look at the stats with regards to 
various factors, we should indeed be able to start to identify ways in 
which we can make the sport safer and more humane for our equine 
partners.  To begin with, geographical analysis alone might very well 
provide useful information--we all assume that we know the conditions that 
lead to metabolic stress--but what if the numbers prove us wrong? We may 
not *know* as much as we think we do.
	AERC/Vet committee has been trying to find a format that allows for 
follow-up of horses pulled for metabolic reasons, and also a way to 
encourage riders to report problems that occur at home within a few days of 
the ride.  So far, they haven't come up with an efficient venue, but the 
attempt is being made.  A brief report to be submitted by the rider 
(including perhaps things such as feeding/electrolyting protocol, metabolic 
problems occurring in training, length and difficulty of haul, etc) might 
help identify predetermining factors.
	This will require, obviously, honesty and commitment on the part of the 
riders.  The question is--do we really have that? or are we just paying lip 
service to the concept of equine welfare?
	I DO take your point about the value of the nature of statistical data 
gathered, but we need a large volume of data in order to see true patterns 
and trends--in depth analysis of a few rides at random won't, initially, 
give us this although it may very well be a valuable tool for the future.
	Your bg is in engineering--mine is in health care, specifically blood 
transfusion medicine.  My facility has just recently gone thru a 2 year 
project (called AER --adverse event reporting) aimed at improving the 
reporting of "transfusion reactions" with a goal towards decreasing their 
number and severity.  Some of the results were predictable.  But 
significantly, some were not.  A kind of "adverse reaction" was identified 
that had previously not been considered part of the battery of 'transfusion 
reactions' (to be specific, it was headaches).  The reports were linked to 
one particular fractionated product.  Initally, the number crunchers 
shrugged these reports off (geez, you ask for 'transfusion reactions' and 
some wingnut reports a headache!), but as the number of incidents 
increased, they began to seriously look at the situation, did literature 
reviews, contacted the manufacturers and neurologists, etc.  The end 
results was that they have identified a previously unknown contraindication 
for a commonly used product.  This is a VERY valuable thing!  If we could 
find something like this in our own backyards, we could actually make a 
difference.  But lacking accurate reporting, there is no hope.

terre


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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

If you are an AERC member - PLEASE VOTE in the Director at Large 
and By Laws Elections.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=