ridecamp@endurance.net: Re: MSM

Re: MSM

Duncan Fletcher (dfletche@gte.net)
Tue, 2 Sep 1997 09:49:49 -0700

No need to get any more esoteric. I agree with you now.

Duncan Fletcher
dfletche@gte.net

----------
From: CMikeT@aol.com

Duncan,

In my attempt to be brief on a weekend morning when my mind was elsewhere,
I
seem to have left out a few items.

Horses, as you probably already have found, when on any hay other than
straight grass with no supplementation, are not deficient in Sulfur. What
I
meant in my note was the amount that is needed to supplement the average
horse which is receiving an already adequate supply, is very close to zero.
I did not mean 1000x 10g (what I have as the amount needed for the average
endurance horse), I meant 1000x the microgram or so that is reasonably
deficient when calculating the deficiency possible with various feeds.

Endurance horses tend to require more calories than the average horse and
the
requirement for Sulfur does not change with exercise. As such, it is quite
unrealistic that endurance horses are deficient in Sulfur and thereby
require
MSM. Sulfur deficiency in horses has not been described.

MSM, as you well know, is a primary metabolite of DMSO, a potent
anti-inflammatory. It has been discussed that MSM is one of the primary
molecules of action of this effect. I highly doubt that there are any new
studies on this. There is no money to fund such research. I show nothing
new since the early 1980's.

I do not believe that Sulfur needs to be a particularly hot topic with
endurance riders. I suggest any further, more esoteric discussions go
direct.

I brought it to RideCamp simply make people aware that they should
understand
why they are feeding each supplement to their horses. Too often the hype
of
the glossy advertising is the reason.

Sincerely,
Mike

C. Mike Tomlinson DVM
CMikeT@AOL.com

Home Events Groups Rider Directory Market RideCamp Stuff