The club foot argument.

[Tsavo]

Khall, I think you would agree that nobody has ruled out that clubfoot might be just like idiopathic scoliosis in humans.

Chisamba made a series of truly excellent points. Maybe she has research training.

Also, I do not think any researcher would claim what you are claiming. This is probably more complex than what you think is happening.

Equally, I am not sure how Pete Ramey can suspect shoulder neuropathy as the major cause. I would like to know why he thinks that.

Last, if you look at enough horses with clubfoot and high/low and matched, I think you will agree that there is no correlation to shoulder morphology. I have seen some large mismatches in shoulders on horses with matched front feet. This is very complex and nobody is really working in this field to advance it. We are all flying blind.

[khall]

Chisamba read more thoroughly, read Dr. Ridgeway, do a google search the information is out there. It is the extreme split legged grazing stance as pictured in the foal in one of my posts. Some foals adopt this extreme stance which leads to the club foot. It is usually with the RF back and LF forward, but not always. They do not alter this stance while grazing, they never have the other foot forward, ever. This one sided stance puts great forces on the muscular skeletal system of the foal, causing the muscle of the back forelimb to contract which pulls the boney column out of alignment. That is why either a glue on shoe with wedge is used to release the tension on that muscle allowing it to relax and the boney column to go back into alignment and to change their grazing stance or the check ligament is cut to allow the drop of the boney column. But then you have to protect the toe of that hoof to keep it from breaking off so a toe cap is used or the glue on cuff without the wedge is used to protect that toe. Is this the ONLY reason for club foot in horses? No some are born with them. But this is what is called acquired club foot in foals. Just google it, the information is out there even if you have never heard of it before. Also take a look as I asked Tsavo at the grazing stance of any horse with either Hi/Lo issue or club foot (singular) That hi foot will ALWAYS be back in the grazing stance.

Tsavo I never said shoulder mismatch is ONLY with a club foot or hi/lo horse I did say a club footed horse or one with Hi/LO will ALWAYS have mismatched shoulders because of their grazing stance. I do not care if you believe me or not, you obviously have not looked at that many horses with hi/lo that closely, neither has chisamba. I have, my farrier has, my holistic vet has, she actually owns one. Ridgeway did.

[kande50]

kande I get where you are coming from as far as hoof shape being different. Both of mine are too, with the boxier hoof on the side that would have been the club foot. Thankfully though mine 2 do not practice the one sided grazing stance anymore so those forces have been negated with the glue on shoe and with the surgery.

That's good to know, because I've wondered about that but never met enough owners with club footed horses (that had had had the surgery) to have the opportunity to ask if they still scissored. A neighbor of mine had her filly at the same clinic at the same time my colt was there to have the same surgery (we hadn't met at the time). Her filly had both check ligaments cut, yet she still scissors (makes me wonder if the less clubby one even needed to be done), so my sample of two were both still scissoring after the surgery. My horse probably scissors even more often, and with a wider stance, than hers. It seems to be very convenient for him to get that right front back underneath himself whenever he wants to get his nose on the ground.

[kande50]

They do not alter this stance while grazing, they never have the other foot forward, ever.

Mine did, but he never left the right front forward for very long before he brought it back again.

When he was still a foal I also saw him try to bend down and eat grass with both fronts forward and his head between them, but that didn't work very well.

But to bring this back around to contact: I've started thinking about how to go about trying to develop a more even contact in both reins, and am thinking that maybe counterbent to the right is straighter for my horse and I should quit obsessing about trying to get him more flexible on the left side so that he feels like he's bending equally on both sides? Because if his left diagonal is functionally shorter because of the club, then "straight" for him may be more bent to the right and less bent to the left?

[khall]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17228580

summary of above research: http://www.horsesinsideout.com/BHSMagazine.pdf

[Tsavo]

I would have to look at that article in detail and maybe consult with an expert in that field to comment. Then it would have to be repeated under other circumstances by other researchers. As one article standing alone, it is hard to ascribe much to it.

Here is another abstract that tried to tease out the genetics.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19418741

I am not sure you are fully appreciating the idiopathic scoliosis in humans example. There we have a period of about 12 years after birth before the spine begins to curve in most cases. And that has been proven to be genetic and complex I might add with possibly separate genetic control over the incidence of the curvature and the severity of the curvature. People thought that scoliosis was acquired not genetic because of this huge time delay.

Now jump to clubfoot and your conclusion that because foals don't have it at birth but only develop it months (not years!) later it must be acquired. Do you see the flaw in your logic? Essentially we know as a matter of fact that your logic can't be used. Biology is more complex than we can know.

I will post some pictures later in the week on shoulder asymmetry that address your claim that, " I did say a club footed horse or one with Hi/LO will ALWAYS have mismatched shoulders because of their grazing stance."

[kande50]

I will post some pictures later in the week on shoulder asymmetry that address your claim that, " I did say a club footed horse or one with Hi/LO will ALWAYS have mismatched shoulders because of their grazing stance."

Something I've noticed about shoulders, and especially when we're trying to see small differences, is that the horse has to be standing absolutely square with all 4 evenly loaded and the spine straight to have any chance of being able to accurately discern if the differences we think we're seeing are actually there. Because as soon as we load one quarter more than the other, or any other part is out of alignment, it affects the shape of the other quarters.

It's the reason I've never tried to assess the degree of my horse's asymmetry by looking at his shoulders, because I'd need more sophisticated equipment than my eyes to have any confidence in what I thought I might be seeing.

That, and I think the asymmetry may be as much a functional asymmetry as an absolute one.

[khall]

Tsavo and I do not think you have the appreciation of the forces that are applied to the foal when they adopt the one sided grazing stance. The link between one sided grazing stance and acquired club foot is pretty well set in the horse world, what is not so set is the reason why these foals adopt this stance. There are lots of theories out there from OCD in the shoulder to epiphysitis to some sort of pain relation, also conformation. What I liked about the Dutch study is that it measured the foals and found a correlation between head/neck and leg length and the one sided grazing stance and if you read more closely when the foals were brought in as a group and fed off the ground and were regularly trimmed the uneven development was arrested and corrected, much like chi samba's postulation that the unevenness could be corrected by feeding off the ground instead of grazing in a field. Why some vets suggest putting the foals out in rolling hills with long grass (less high sugar in more mature grass too).


Anyway I look forward to your pictures Tsavo.

[Srhorselady]

I'm finding this discussion and the quoted research on club feet fascinating due to my current situation. I have a 19 year old halter bred quarter horse mare who looks like her doublebred Impressive (she is negative negative for HYPP) breeding. I acquired her as an unhandled yearling after she was being raised in not wonderful neglected circumstances at my boarding barn. I was moving to my own place at the time. She was never on pasture and was raised in a fairly small pen with her mother until she was 9 months. I never noticed any signs of a club foot until after a laminitis attack resulted in a 1% rotation in her right front at 5 years old. It is a slight club noticeable mainly to me and my farrier. She has been a difficult training project mostly due to her temperament and conformation. Work ethic is NOT part of her outlook on life. During her training she had a slight barely noticeable short stride on the right front. It was only visible at the walk and few people saw it. After several years I started her with a dressage trainer. The dressage trainer also found her unbalanced at the canter. After 1 to 2 years of training the short stride and unbalance at the walk disappeared. Then after 11 years she had another acute laminitis attack. She has now been in Soft Ride boots for 10 months and we have been trying to transition her back to working. There has been no additional rotation and she has sole depth of 1.7cm on the right foot and 2.0 cm on the left. But every attempt has failed and we go backwards. I know there are other contributory factors also. However she just recently tested positive to pain in the right heel and right shoulder. My farrier has always said he thought her right leg is shorter. She is acutely lame on the right front when the boots are removed but not with the boots on. Our current working assumption is that the club foot leg is shorter and she is currently trimmed to match the coffin bone and not the club. Also she is of course unfit and the result is the heel and shoulder pain. We are still working on a solution.

[Tsavo]

Khall, how can anyone know that the stance is causing the club rather than the forming club (due to genetics) is forcing the stance as the foal searches to get comfortable?

Similarly, you would say the poor posture of kids with a growing spinal curve is causing an increase in the curve. We know that is not the case with scoliosis so I am not sure how you can know this is the case with club. The curve drives the posture, not the other way around. Similarly the club may be driving the stance, not the other way around.

If someone has shown the stance drives the club and not the other way around then I would like to see that study.

[khall]

Tsavo except when the grazing stance is disrupted by the cuff/wedge shoe or by cutting the check ligament or as in the Dutch study by feeding foals higher the unevenness is corrected EXCEPT when the conformation of the horse does not allow for the grazing stance to be corrected, i.e. the foal still has too long of legs and too short of neck/head, high set neck. These foals do NOT have a club foot before the stance is adopted, it takes time for the club foot to form. If you have ever raised a foal you would know they start grazing fairly early, even though it is not their main source of nutrition. This is when their conformation is especially suited to the split legged grazing stance. Those long spidery legs and relative short neck leads to this stance or the knee buckled stance. It is as time goes on and the foal becomes one sided (not all, but the ones who are predisposed to such stance with excessive long legs, quick growth, high set neck) that the forces of such stance keep the muscle tendon unit in the back foreleg in tension, they do not load the heel and the boney column is pulled out of alignment. So rads of foals early on will show normal boney column alignment, rads show after the acquired club foot a much different boney column. My Luso filly ended up with a grade 4 club, take a look at her 2 week foal pic, those hooves were perfect. She ended up lame and almost with P3 coming out the bottom. That is why she had to have check ligament surgery. Now there is no one sided grazing stance and only a boxy foot but angles the same. I knew it was going to happen because of her grazing stance as a foal, it took a good bit of time 4-5 months before it actually did and this was with my farrier closely monitoring her. Not unusual for this to happen suddenly.

As for scoliosis, I have no comment, not my area of expertise. Foals and feet and grazing stance are something I have been observing for many years, it started with my TB mare who is grand dam of Luso filly, she had a one sided grazing stance with a mild club RF. BTW I bought my TB mare in '84, that is how long this has been in my thought process. Raised 5 foals out of that mare, none of them had hi/lo or club foot, but she was bred to old line Han (4) and Conn (1), who had much shorter legs than the TB did (she was 16.3). Her last foal is dam of Luso filly, totally matched front feet in fact had issues with too low of heel with her and she wore frog pressure pad to help correct this. Luso filly was born all legs, had to be pulled by my DH. She adopted the one sided grazing stance pretty early on with her long legs, but her hooves stayed beautiful until they did not. It was about a 2 week period that the club foot occurred.

See Grass Foot in this article:http://www.farriery.eu/articles/007-2008.htm

[kande50]

when the foals were brought in as a group and fed off the ground and were regularly trimmed the uneven development was arrested and corrected, much like chi samba's postulation that the unevenness could be corrected by feeding off the ground instead of grazing in a field.

I think that eating off the ground has the same problems as grazing off the ground, because they still scissors to do it. So I think getting them off pasture would have to be coupled with some kind of feeder that prevented them from scissoring? I used a big box that he had to stand close to to reach into, which effectively prevented it for all but the hay he pulled out and then backed up so he had room to scissor to eat it. A hay net up higher would help too, although there would be the same problem with the dropped hay.

Why some vets suggest putting the foals out in rolling hills with long grass (less high sugar in more mature grass too).

I thought the reason for the long grass was so they didn't have to scissor to reach the ground to eat, although that didn't work for mine, because he preferred to scissor and eat the shorter grass.

[kande50]

She is acutely lame on the right front when the boots are removed but not with the boots on. Our current working assumption is that the club foot leg is shorter and she is currently trimmed to match the coffin bone and not the club. Also she is of course unfit and the result is the heel and shoulder pain. We are still working on a solution.

Interesting. Sounds like a bottom of the hoof issue (thin soles/weak frogs/deep thrush) rather than a hoof wall/coffin bone issue. Maybe the bottom of her hoof is now very undeveloped from being in boots for so long, because club footed horses are usually sound on their club foot, and the down hoof often goes bad before the club.

Laminitic, rotated horses however, are almost always sore because the tip of the coffin bone is jammed into the sole, while it's not with a club because the hoof capsule rotates with it (and provides a lot more resistance to rotation), so protects the coffin bone more.

Laminitic and club feet tend to look similar, but the difference is that the coffin bone rotates in a laminitic hoof and pulls away from the wall because the laminae let go. A club foot, OTOH, has a well attached hoof wall and much healthier laminae, so pulls the hoof wall around with the rotating coffin bone. So a club foot deforms, but it doesn't detach to the degree that a laminitic one will.

A laminitic hoof, because the wall attachment is poor, doesn't wear the toe much so the toe will ski jump if not kept trimmed back, while a club hoof is more likely to over wear the wall at the toe because the wall is well attached to the coffin bone.

Club footed horses on soft ground won't necessarily wear the toe enough to prevent it from ski jumping, but laminitic horses are even less likely to wear the wall at the toe on any ground.

Our current working assumption is that the club foot leg is shorter and she is currently trimmed to match the coffin bone and not the club. Also she is of course unfit and the result is the heel and shoulder pain. We are still working on a solution.

So do you think the hoof is a club and is also laminitic, or is it just shaped like a club because of the laminitis?

[kande50]

My Luso filly ended up with a grade 4 club, take a look at her 2 week foal pic, those hooves were perfect. She ended up lame and almost with P3 coming out the bottom. That is why she had to have check ligament surgery. Now there is no one sided grazing stance and only a boxy foot but angles the same.

Wow, grade 4 and she came back that well? You must have caught it early because we certainly didn't get those kinds of results.

[khall]

kande, yes grade 4. Literally happened over 2 week period. I left she had the wedge/cuff on trying to calm the clubby foot down (was not grade 4), came back she still had the cuff but no wedge and she was lame (grade 4). It rotated that much in 10 days. She had the surgery within a week or so, she was 5/5.5 months old at the time of surgery. She was stalled for 2 months after surgery with pressure wrap on. Hay was fed off the ground but I did not have any issues with her scissoring after surgery. By that time her neck was getting long enough she did not have to once the club foot was addressed.

Yes long grass to keep them from grazing stance, the long grass/less sugar is just an aside. Since these fast growing foals are the ones with most of the issues.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =3&theater
This is my filly after the surgery, she was 8 months old or so here. I weaned her finally at 9 months with all she had to go through I left her on her dam and had no issues.

re what Kande was talking about club feet and footing. Last year I had to put shoes on my filly because with our drought and hard ground she was breaking off her toe on the boxy foot. Knew that would be bad so shoes on to protect her feet. They look great now.

[kande50]

By that time her neck was getting long enough she did not have to once the club foot was addressed.

Maybe that accounts for the difference in outcomes: that her neck grew long enough and my horse's never did?

[khall]

Both of my fillies slowed their growth down by the time they hit 1 yr. My older mare who wore the cuff is only 15.2 hh. My filly is that tall now at 3, but her legs are not so long in comparison to her neck length now. What I found interesting is I have two full siblings, both WBs, the one who wore the cuff (Gaila) and my gelding Rip. Gaila has a higher set neck than Rip does Rip is a hand taller than Gaila, Rip never showed any indication of one-sided grazing, has matching front feet, Gaila had one sided grazing until she wore the cuff, then she did not and still does not, but by then her neck had grown longer and she was not as growthy. Had to cut her dam's feed back because of the physitis she was having issues with along the same time she wore the cuff. I think it is so crucial to watch the growth of these youngsters and try to catch the issues before they get too far. I know I dropped the ball with my Luso filly, that is how quickly she changed.

[Tsavo]

Tsavo except when the grazing stance is disrupted by the cuff/wedge shoe or by cutting the check ligament or as in the Dutch study by feeding foals higher the unevenness is corrected EXCEPT when the conformation of the horse does not allow for the grazing stance to be corrected, i.e. the foal still has too long of legs and too short of neck/head, high set neck. These foals do NOT have a club foot before the stance is adopted, it takes time for the club foot to form.

Again, the analogy with scoliosis holds because the curvature can be arrested and in some cases corrected with treatment (bracing, stapling, tethering, etc.). So the outcome is changed with treatment in scoliosis EVEN THOUGH it is known to be genetic.

Similarly, the outcome with clubfoot is changed with treatment. Thus genetics is NOT ruled out as the driver and the behavior (stance) could be purely a response to the clubfoot forming.

[khall]

Tsavo but the foals do not have a club foot when they first start the grazing stance, that is the point I have made and you have ignored. My filly's club developed in about 2 weeks when she was almost 5 months old. She went from nothing to grade 4 club in about 2 weeks. Yet she had the grazing stance from very early on (why I knew there would be a problem) That is the point so many have made it is the grazing stance that causes the club foot, not the club foot causing the stance. Because these foals early on develop the stance when they begin to eat grass. Did you see the photo I posted of the foal with split legged stance? Did you see how young he was? I don't have photos of my filly in this stance but she adopted it and my other filly did too early on. Neither had a club foot or even boxy foot when they developed the grazing stance. My WB showed hers earlier than my Luso and it was not as pronounced.

The genetics of it is that these foals are leggy, shorter/higher neck/ short head and growthy (fast growing) not that they have a club foot and then develop the stance. They develop the stance and then the club foot happens.

[Tsavo]

It sounds like whatever the genetic driver is for the stance which seems to be orthopedic is also driving foot morphology. Again, in perfect analogy with scoliosis, the curvature is one of several symptoms of this genetic condition.

The timeline you report strikes me as straight genetic but I would want to consult a medical geneticist. Also I wonder if that timeline is typical or an outlier.

Last if the stance precedes the clubfoot, it argues for some orthopedic issue up the leg which brings us back to shoulder but not injury-related unless the problem predisposes to injury. But the bottom line is nobody has shown that the foot morphology is not genetically controlled like whatever is causing the stance. It could be the conformation you note or it could be the genetics that control that conformation also control club foot development. Or it could be a confluence like in all greys will develop melanoma.

But the bottom line is that nothing you have reported rules out direct genetic control on clubfoot formation and much of what you report supports straight genetic control.

[Tsavo]

Also you don't know what is going on inside the foot that is preceding the outward appearance of the club so again genetics controlling foot development rather than stance cannot be ruled out as the driver.

[khall]

Tsavo your remarks show your distinct lack of understanding in what happens with a club foot and the hoof/leg mechanics. In a club foot P3 rotates, there are several degrees or grades of club feet, 1 being mild, 4 being severe. There are only 2 reasons P3 rotates, founder where the lamina attachment fails, allowing P3 to rotate and sometime sink. Or in a club foot where the musulartendonous unit tightens, drawing the boney column (P3) out of alignment. Tendons themselves cannot tighten, the bones do not change, the boney column does change due to the forces applied from the musculartendonous unit. Now why does this occur? It is genetic when a foal is born with it, no forces have been applied in untero, but the foal is born with a club foot. Sometimes unilateral sometimes bilateral. Then there is aquired club foot in foals (can also be found in adult horses when there has been an injury that causes the horse to not load the heel allowing for the muscular tendonous unit to pull the column out of alignment) where P3 rotates. Now again why does P3 rotate in these foals? What forces are applied that causes these foals to develop uneven hooves? What is seen is that these foals will have a one sided grazing stance. If it was genetic and a growth issue then the foal should show a club foot in both feet, but that is not what happens. Aquired club foot is singular, unilateral where the retracted hoof is always the club foot. They show a one sided stance. Why do they show a one sided stance? There are many theories, from pain to OCD to shoulder injuries and some may be appropriate but in the main these foals that show this stance have similar conformational traits, long legged with short necks. Hmm what happens when these long legged foals try to graze? They contort themselves in all sorts of grazing stance with the ones who end up with a club foot showing a preference for one sided grazing stance. Tsavo, you are making things way more complicated than it is. The genetics is that we are now breeding for long legged high neck horses (look at Arabians and the new style of WBs) that cannot graze in a normal manner as a foal and often as an adult, leading to hi/lo issues or even club foot.

[khall]

As for foal hooves, yeah you can see what happens pretty quickly in them. There is not much to a tiny foal foot and they show what happens pretty quickly. I once observed a neonate that had come in for septic issues, he walked right out of one of his tiny hooves. The saddest thing to see. Needless to say he did not make it. That hoof was tiny, not much to the structure.

[Tsavo]

If it was genetic and a growth issue then the foal should show a club foot in both feet, but that is not what happens.

What is your evidence for this statement? Why are most clubs on the right? Why do most cases of idiopathic scoliosis entail a right thoracic curve?

Do you see the pattern of every time you suggest a "common sense" explanation it can be shown to be wrong? It's time to abandon the comforting idea that this is necessarily simple.

Tsavo, you are making things way more complicated than it is.

That's what they use to say about idiopathic scoliosis when they blamed it on poor posture. Here is a list of hypotheses put forward on scoliosis etiology... https://scoliosisjournal.biomedcentral. ... -7161-6-26

Some hypotheses and concepts of AIS etiopathogenesis[2, 6, 192]
(1)
Genetics [2, 4, 5, 92, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199].

(2)
Biomechanical spinal growth modulation [181, 182].

(3)
Relative anterior spinal overgrowth (RASO) [200, 201, 202, 203].

(4)
Dorsal shear forces and axial rotation instability [204, 205].

(5)
Asynchronous spinal neuro-osseous growth [206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211].

(6)
Postural abnormalities including vestibular and CNS dysfunction [2, 212, 213].

(7)
Motor control problem [214, 215, 216, 217].

(8)
Body-spatial orientation concept [218].

(9)
Neurodevelopmental concept [219].

(10)
Thoracospinal concept [79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 220, 221].

(11)
Deforming three joint complex hypothesis [222].

(12)
Systemic melatonin deficiency [223, 224, 225, 226].

(13)
Systemic melatonin-signaling pathway dysfunction [173, 174, 177, 227, 228, 229, 230].

(14)
Relative osteopenia [113, 114, 231, 232].

(15)
Systemic platelet calmodulin dysfunction [233, 234, 235, 236].

(16)
Developmental instability & symmetry control dysfunction [85, 86, 87, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241].

(17)
Intrinsic growth plate asymmetry hypothesis [74, 75, 188, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241].

(18)
Collective and escalator models [192].

(19)
Leptin-hypothalamic-sympathetic nervous system (LHS) dysfunction with disharmony between somatic and autonomic nervous systems in the spine and trunk [[6], see [3, 242]].

There is no a priori reason to assume as you constantly do that club foot is so much simpler than idiopathic scoliosis. It may be more complicated. The main difference may be the degree to which each condition has been studied. Then there is the whole universe of epigenetics. There is no a priori reason to suspect it is not operative in horses also.

There is no doubt in my mind that you would make the wrong conclusion just observing idiopathic scoliosis. You would use the same logic you are using now and arrive at the wrong conclusion. I am not sure you are not making the same mistake w.r.t. club foot.

The genetics is that we are now breeding for long legged high neck horses (look at Arabians and the new style of WBs) that cannot graze in a normal manner as a foal and often as an adult, leading to hi/lo issues or even club foot.

Then why isn't it 50-50 R-L? Why is there a preponderance of club on the right foot? That argues fairly forcefully for a genetic control/driver just like there is a preponderance for right thoracic curves in idiopathic scoliosis.

[khall]

Because if it was genetic and due to bone growth then both front feet would be impacted. That means the bones grow faster than the muscular tendonous unit which would cause bilateral club foot (which BTW I have seen with one of my WBs but it was at 18 months not the suckling years like the acquired club foot) Aquired club foot though is unilateral and shows up after the foal has shown a one sided grazing stance.

I do not know what the L-R club foot ratio is, you do see acquired club foot in either front hoof unilaterally. In fact the photo I sited showed a foal with the LF back and the RF forward which would lead to LF being clubby. But if you think in riding which way the horse is stiffer and the horse bends "easier" most of the horses I have ridden are stiff L and hollow R. Which means they put more weight on the L shoulder, just what you see when the foal adopts a one sided grazing stance with RF back, LF forward. So could it be because we handle them more off the L side? Do we make horses one sided? Could foals be influenced that easily and early? Or are the horses born with a distinct sidedness? Could that be from how they are situated in the womb? Irregardless of their sidedness, the club foot does not show up until after this grazing stance has been established.

Really give the scoliosis a rest. Humans are not bred for certain traits like horses are. Like I have said before. WB breeding has changed drastically and with that change the WBs are now exhibiting a distinct issue with hi/lo that was not a problem with the old lines. So what is different in the conformation of old vs new lines? The long legs. I owned an old style Han stallion, Gixibar. He had gorgeous big round even front feet. He had shorter legs than what is being bred now. In fact I have one of his daughters, took her to GOV inspections. One of their comments was to breed to a more modern stallion that throws leggier horses. Did not really work! Those old line genetics are pretty strong and she had 2 foals that exhibited the shorter legs of the old style.

Old line Hanoverian: https://hanoverian.org/news/hanoverian- ... pedigrees/

Lauries Crusador is just one Thoroughbred with a huge influence on modern sport horse breeding
http://d3smcx1ckyjfrg.cloudfront.net/wp ... 48x200.jpg

What I found interesting about WB lines though is that in the last Olympics Donnerhall was in the breeding lines of many of the dressage horses. Donnerhall is older style (which I tend to prefer:)

[Tsavo]

Really give the scoliosis a rest. Humans are not bred for certain traits like horses are.

Okay I am just pointing this out because I do not think you are aware of what you are doing here.

Your claim here is that club foot in horses can't be like idiopathic scoliosis in humans because horses are bred for certain traits and humans are not.

But there are any number of conditions where focused breeding results in genetic issues in horses (e.g., HYPP in Impressives).

In fact the usual argument is the exact OPPOSITE of what you state, i.e., conditions that reduce the fitness of a horse will weed out those members and leave more robust individuals. But when humans take over control of breeding, these traits that would normally be bred out naturally are retained. Maybe clubfoot is one of them. Who knows.

Anyway I am not dwelling on any specific point any more. I bring up scoliosis because it is a near-perfect analogy to your claims about clubfoot. My point is to get you to see that you are using logic that can be reliably shown to lead to the wrong conclusion. The biggest problem is that you are assuming this is simple just like people assumed scoliosis was simple. If someone studied clubfoot like they studied scoliosis things might get to the hot mess stage pretty quickly. Both are probably anything but simple.

I will look at those links you posted.

[Tsavo]

If I can show that there is a preponderance of acquired clubfoot in one versus the other foot would you agree it is not the stance?

[khall]

Tsavo only if you can prove that horses are not one sided when riding, which we know is false. Horses are born with a distinct sidedness. Is it genetic, is it from the womb? Who knows. Really Tsavo, you have not proven a thing in anyway with your analogy to scoliosis to club foot in horses. Only in your head is there a near perfect analogy. How can it be? Humans are bipedal, horses are quadrupeds with distinct anatomical differences from humans (biggie is that they do not have a collar bone). Humans are prey animals with binocular vision, horses are prey animals with monocular vision. There is so many differences between the two species there is no way you can compare the issues between them.

I do have to say one thing, since you want to emphasize genetics. Genetics are just part of the picture when dealing with animals. How they are raised, how they are influenced with breeding traits/conformational traits, how they are fed nutritionally (this if big when raising foals OCD issues), how they are kept, even to the ground they run around on. All influence the horse both as they grow and as they are adults.

I do agree that more research should be done but is not likely to be done with this issue in horses.

[khall]

You are deflecting by using HYPP which is a genetic issue, where conformational traits that is being bred for in WBs today are also genetics but leads to WHY the grazing stance is adopted, the long legs. Could the sidedness be genetic predisposed? I don't know, but I do know most horses want to carry more weight on the LF and be stiff going left, hollow right. Is that bred into them? I don't know.

Tsavo do you agree that it is the tension from the contracted musculartendonous unit that leads to the club foot in foals with acquired club foot?

[Tsavo]

This is University of Minnesota. They do NOT mention grazing stance in re acquired clubfoot. They say it is a genetic condition affecting the rate of bone growth compared the rate of tendon growth... http://www.extension.umn.edu/agricultur ... club-feet/

Acquired flexural deformities are those that develop after birth. In these cases, the bone grows at a faster rate than the tendon. Foals are more susceptible if they are nursed by heavily lactating mares, have a genetic tendency to grow quickly and/or are supplemented excessively with concentrates (proteins, carbohydrates, minerals or vitamins).

[Tsavo]

You are deflecting by using HYPP which is a genetic issue, where conformational traits that is being bred for in WBs today are also genetics but leads to WHY the grazing stance is adopted, the long legs. Could the sidedness be genetic predisposed? I don't know, but I do know most horses want to carry more weight on the LF and be stiff going left, hollow right. Is that bred into them? I don't know.

I am just pointing out that most people use the intentional breeding argument to say the OPPOSITE of what you are saying.

Tsavo do you agree that it is the tension from the contracted musculartendonous unit that leads to the club foot in foals with acquired club foot?

That's what that U if Minn link says.

[Tsavo]

This DVM does mention stance os "postulated" but only AFTER stating a bunch of other things as the cause... http://www.bendequine.com/documents/TheClubFoot.pdf

Most club feet develop their abnormal conformation between 1 and 6 months
of age and are the result of an acquired flexural deformity. Flexural deformities develop
most frequently secondary to pain. Limb pain reduces weight bearing causing a
functional shortening of a musculotendinous unit and flexion at a joint – in the case of
club feet, shortening of the deep digital flexor tendon causes flexion at the distal
interphalangeal joint (coffin joint) (Figure 2). Pain can arise from a number of sources
including physitis, osteochondrosis (OCD), infected joints, soft tissue wounds, hoof
infections and other injuries. Physitis and OCD of the shoulder joint have been associated
commonly with flexural deformities. Other causes have been and incriminated including
overfeeding and imbalanced rations. Stance has also been postulated as a cause of
flexural deformity and club foot conformation. It has been frequently observed that
young horses place one foot forward and one foot back while eating from the ground.
The club foot is consistently the foot that is placed forward, presumably to avoid
stretching the shortened tendon.

Note how he says the club is the forward foot. That is directly OPPOSITE of what most horses do. I think he misspoke?

[Tsavo]

Here is Dr. Redden who is a DVM and farrier. No mention of stance. He says there is "enough" evidence that acquired clubfoot in foals is congenital with a strong genetic influence.

Radiographs of foals only a few days old suggest that bone angles certainly do not always match, nor does the overall stereotype shape of the bones match. Feet with higher bone angles are prone to grade 2 or higher clubs, however those with relatively matching bone angles can progress to various grades of club that are noticeable within weeks or months of birth. This syndrome has been previously referred to as an acquired syndrome, however the author is very satisfied that there is enough clinical evidence to support the theory that the club syndrome is congenital with very strong genetic influence.

[khall]

So what causes that tension leading to the acquired club foot? How would genetics predisposition cause the horse to tighten that unit without outside forces being applied? I could see your point if there was not the issue of the grazing stance, but there is the stance and the one sidedness from that stance. Those horses that adopt this stance end up hi/lo or club foot in the protracted limb.

Yes he misspoke. The forward hoof is the lower angle sometimes to the point of neg palmer angle and the retracted leg has the hi or club hoof/foot. Any one who has observed many hi/lo or club footed horses knows that the protracted where the heel is not loaded ends up with the high foot. That is why I read carefully the studies and research, I would throw that particular one out because of the incorrect wording. That is sloppy.

I know who Rick Redding is, don't think much of him or his conclusions.

[Tsavo]

These authors are specifically throwing out the lateralized behavior (stance) as the cause and show a highly significant sidedness...

The ratio of right RF UCF to LF UCF was 5%:14% of the population and as a percentage of UCF 75%:25%. This was a highly significant result (²1 16.0556, P < 0.001). The authors do not conclude that lateralised behaviour causes UCF. It could be possible that an AFDdipj may cause flexor tendon tension in both front legs but then lateralised behaviour affects the dominant (greater weight-bearing) leg while protecting the protracted (lesser-weight-bearing) foot and the foal then becomes UCF. This is an area for further study.

The Incidence of Acquired Flexural Deformity and Unilateral Club Foot (uneven feet) in Thoroughbred Foals (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... bred_Foals [accessed May 3, 2017].

[Tsavo]

So what causes that tension leading to the acquired club foot? How would genetics predisposition cause the horse to tighten that unit without outside forces being applied? I could see your point if there was not the issue of the grazing stance, but there is the stance and the one sidedness from that stance. Those horses that adopt this stance end up hi/lo or club foot in the protracted limb.

Perhaps in a similar way that scoliosis develops without outside forces and YEARS after birth? I think you are wildly underestimating the possible consequences of genetics. You don't need outside forces to severely deform an animal, human or non-human.

[Tsavo]

By the way I am NOT cherry picking articles. I am picking every article I see that addressed the issue. I have not come across a reputable source that claims stance is causing acquired clubfoot. Maybe you can find one.

[Tsavo]

Here is Rooney claiming genetics AND a tendency for affect the right foot. It is much easier to accept genetics rather than stance to explain RF preponderance (cf. scoliosis preponderance for right thoracic curves and that is genetic). And the environmental fact or he includes is NOT stance but rather weight gain. http://www.anvilmag.com/farrier/910f1.htm

The cause of bilateral tendon shortening before a year of age is due to the fact that the immature hoof is unable to maintain a steady hoof angle while there is a rapid gain in weight. There are, therefore, both genetic and environmental factors. The genetic factor is the rate of maturation of the hoof wall; the environmental factor is rapid weight gain. The latter, of course, also has a genetic component.

Unilateral or Deep Flexor (Stumpy Hoof/Club Foot) Shortening

These clinical observations are largely anecdotal from personal observation and discussions with farriers and veterinarians.

1. The right fore foot is more often affected, about 70-80%. Both fore feet are rarely affected. Since this condition develops in an insidious manner over time, the age of onset has been difficult to determine, either for specific cases or in general. Most cases probably begin during the first year of life while others may not appear until the horse is an adult. This will be further addressed below.

[Tsavo]

Rooney also states this...

It must be emphasized that much of what is presented here is hypothetical and based on gleaned experience and mechanical principles. There is no experimental data available directly relevant to the questions examined, and it is difficult to conceive of experiments which could reasonably be done.

[Tsavo]

Tsavo only if you can prove that horses are not one sided when riding, which we know is false. Horses are born with a distinct sidedness.

If sidedness is causing the stance and stance causes the clubfoot then why don't most horses have clubfoot since all horses exhibit sidedness??

You are assuming that sidedness must be related and explain unilateral clubfoot in foals but what is the evidence for that assumption? Given that all horse exhibit sidedness and most don't develop clubfoot, that is fairly good evidence they might not be related or at least that sidedness can't possibly explain clubfoot in isolation.

[khall]

I found not only a source but an actual study (none of your sited works are studies but anecdotal beliefs) The Dutch study looking at 24 WB foals. You summarily dismissed said study because it was "only one". Yet they actually observed foals and MEASURED them to come to their conclusions.

I NEVER said sidedness is causing the stance, sidedness causes the PREFERENCE in the stance. It is the conformational traits that are being bred for in some horses that leads to the split legged or scissored grazing stance. You should remember, I just said that the long legs, high neck/short heads like the WBs are breeding for these days. I have only had 2 foals out of all that I have raised that had the acquired club foo. They exhibited the one sided grazing stance from early on. All of my other foals developed fairly even front feet and never showed the one sided grazing stance.

I have observed more than one adult horse with a one sided grazing stance. They all had various degrees of hi/lo or club foot. My farrier and my holistic vet both from all their years of practice feel exactly the same as I do about acquired club foot, so their and my and Dr. Ridgeway's conclusions have been backed up by the one actual study that has been sited here. My farrier is the one who expanded my knowledge and enhanced my understanding of the mechanics of the boney column. He has been putting glue on cuffs with wedges on many foals over the years, not all correct with just the cuff, some like my Luso filly have to have surgery because they are too advanced that the cuff won't help. I also postulate that if a horse's conformation is such that even if the club foot is addressed early yet his traits of high neck, short head, long legs are such that do not allow for him to graze normally (in a walking pattern) then even addressing the club will not be much help because of the forces that the one sided grazing stance puts on their boney column. Like kande's Sting. I just read on COTH where a member had worked over the winter to get her hi/lo horse's feet much more even and had succeeded. Only to have him go back upon grazing to the one sided stance and the foot become clubby again.

[Rosie B]

Here's a question: other than for cosmetic reasons, why would you want a club footed horse's front feet to look the same? What impact does evenness of the foot shape have on biomechanics?

[Tsavo]

I found not only a source but an actual study (none of your sited works are studies but anecdotal beliefs) The Dutch study looking at 24 WB foals. You summarily dismissed said study because it was "only one". Yet they actually observed foals and MEASURED them to come to their conclusions.

Have you read the whole article or just the abstract? If I had the whole article I could comment more. I am very sure there would be many points that are arguable en route to their conclusion. You should understand that one article with a small n has a reasonably high chance of being wrong especially in light of the other material I have posted. Similarly, only a handful of about 60 "landmark" cancer studies were reproducible. When you map that onto something like a small n horse study, it makes is very plausible the work is not correct.

I NEVER said sidedness is causing the stance, sidedness causes the PREFERENCE in the stance. It is the conformational traits that are being bred for in some horses that leads to the split legged or scissored grazing stance.

Why do only a small percentage of horses with this conformation develop clubfoot?

my holistic vet

I think this is related to why you make some of your arguments. Only evidence matters.

[Tsavo]

Here's a question: other than for cosmetic reasons, why would you want a club footed horse's front feet to look the same? What impact does evenness of the foot shape have on biomechanics?

I think there is an empirical argument that the horse stays sounder if you don't try to make the hooves match.

[khall]

"Why do only a small percentage of horses with this conformation develop clubfoot?"

Tsavo how do you know this? You don't. In fact what I have read was with the modern breeding of warmbloods where the emphasis has gone from a rectangular horse to a square horse, hi/lo issues have become more prevalent with these horses. It is function following form.

All of the "other material" you have shared has not had a basis in actual studies, this is just their conclusions with no actual study just from talking to vets and farriers. The one article that did have percentages of L to R with club foot actually did not dismiss laterality grazing stance as causing the club foot but just said they could not conclude at that time and it needed more study.

Not only did I site the Dutch study but also a pretty thorough summary of the study with quotes from the vet that did the study. So the one study that has actually looked at foals as a group and measured these foals for their conformation and uneven hoof development is being dismissed by you.


Rosie these words by Manola Mendez who worked with Dr. Ridgeway might help you understand the issues with hi/lo or club foot issues: https://www.facebook.com/ManoloMendezDr ... 1794785002 Of course Tsavo does not think much of Dr. Ridgeway, not sure how he/she feels about Manola Mendez.

Tsavo here is a much bigger sampling looking at uneven hoof development in Dutch Warmbloods: http://www.thehorse.com/articles/23485/ ... ion-traits Here is your evidence. So quit being snarky about me using a holistic vet. Such close-minded ness.

More on conformation and it's role in uneven hoof development: http://www.thehorse.com/articles/38495/ ... horse-hoof

[Ryeissa]

Tsavo umm horses usually have a stiffer side and a "easier" side. See above re gallop etc talking about evenness in rein etc. Much like humans are right or left handed. Makes sense that the horse would put most of their weight on the left shoulder when choosing a grazing stance. Now not all foals will do this and horses who do not have the high neck long legged conformation will not have this issue. [snip...]

Okay if club is mostly found in foals with the conformation you mention then I think that would be good evidence for your suggestion.

Also if foals that don't develop club rarely graze in a split stance then that would support it also.

Is this the case? Has anyone actually looked at this in a rigorous fashion?

If club is ever traced to a hereditary orthopedic issue then that would blow any behavior argument out of the water. Is it heritable?

of course it's heritable--It's well known that it's inherited in the arab breed. It's not selected against.

[khall]

Rye there are two forms of club foot found in foals, congenital ( present at birth, inherited) and acquired which develops over time when the foal is suckling/weanling. The acquired has not been shown to be inherited and in fact a two studies done by the Dutch that I have sited in the this have shown the acquired club foot is not inherited but due to the certain traits bred (hi neck, short neck, short head, long legs) that leads to one sided grazing stance and results in club foot or uneven growth patterns that persist into adulthood if not addressed as a foal.

I do know clubby feet are found in the Arabian breed, not as familiar with the lines as I am with the WBs and their breeding practices.

[Tsavo]

I NEVER said sidedness is causing the stance, sidedness causes the PREFERENCE in the stance.

What causes the stance?

[khall]

Tsavo do you read the studies? From the Dutch study looking at almost 45,000 Dutch warmbloods competing at the top level of dressage and jumping:
"There was a correlation between uneven feet, the height of the withers, and the neck length; uneven feet were more often associated with tall horses with short necks."

So again for the umpteenth time: it is the long legs, short neck/head, high set neck that leads the foal to the split legged stance or scissor stance. It is the sidedness or laterality why a foal develops the one sided grazing stance leading to the uneven hoof development. So these conformational traits that are now being bred for in the WBs of a square horse with long legs has led to more problems with uneven hoof development than when the ideal WB was rectangular like was found in the older lines. Much shorter leg length.

[Tsavo]

I scanned a study of 24 horses. I have to find time do a thorough review but with only 24 horses, it is hard to justify the time. Which is the study where they looked at 45,000 horses?

Also, is HI/lo the same etiology as acquired clubfoot? It may be unrelated. Stranger things have happened.

These are still correlational studies. They do not show causation. Let me make this point in no uncertain terms.... do you remember that large list of proposed etiologies I posted for idiopathic scoliosis? All of those showed correlations with scoliosis development. And yet none of them appear to be correct... very recently a very convincing paper that went way further that any of those studies is pointing to a defect in movement of cerebrospinal fluid as the actual cause. I think this one stands a very good chance of being correct and might win the Nobel if so. And this despite all the correlational studies pointing to a million other things.

The chance of one correlational study with a small n pointing to the actual cause in something like clubfoot is very low. I am not sure how to get this across to you other than the scoliosis example.