# Sue dysan - made up expert



## Gingerwitch (24 November 2020)

😳
I hope it's not true !


----------



## ihatework (24 November 2020)

What do you mean?
I assume you are talking about Sue DysOn?


----------



## Gingerwitch (24 November 2020)

ihatework said:



			What do you mean?
I assume you are talking about Sue DysOn?
		
Click to expand...

Sorry yes, flipping phone.
She's up in front of a disciplinary panel to explain where the expert is for a letter supporting her heavy rider claims 
I hope it's untrue


----------



## Bernster (24 November 2020)

Can’t get the full story as it’s behind pay walls for news but yes can see there is a disciplinary charge related to the heavy rider/horse study.


----------



## Goldenstar (24 November 2020)

Where is the story .


----------



## Goldenstar (24 November 2020)

Just found it it’s in the Daily Telegraph .
Oh dear is all I can say .


----------



## ihatework (24 November 2020)

Yes just googled, can’t get any detail without paying.

I hope it’s not true. But what an utterly stupid woman if it is, will just discredit years of achievement


----------



## Littlebear (24 November 2020)

She must have felt so strongly about the subject and the impact to have gone to that length if that is the case (not defending) just seeing her POV from the position she’s been in.


----------



## Tiddlypom (24 November 2020)

Oh heck . This is not good.

Can read this much without going beyond the Telegraph paywall.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...ng-expert-greenlight-heavy-horse-rider-study/

*Vet accused of inventing expert to greenlight heavy horse rider study*
_Sue Dyson will appear before a disciplinary panel at the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons after allegedly forging a letter_

This is a very serious accusation. The heavy rider study has been much quoted and referred to since it came out.


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

The times have run the story too but also behind paywall 
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...-about-dangers-of-heavy-horseriders-n207lks55


----------



## LEC (24 November 2020)

I have read the article on The Telegraph
Allegedly wrote a letter from Dr JC Butler insisting there was no need for the normal Home Office licence on the project. There is no surgeon with that name. 
Accusations are about undermining a govt system designed to promote animal welfare and research ethics.


----------



## Tiddlypom (24 November 2020)

According to The Times Sue Dyson is charged with ‘Disgraceful conduct in a professional respect’.


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

That confirms my impression from the readable bit of the Times thanks LEC.

You can't really do a welfare based project, and then skirt round getting a welfare licence.


----------



## shortstuff99 (24 November 2020)

That is very naughty if true! Also means it can't be published either as the journals also have to conform to all of the ethics rules and licenses etc.


----------



## Goldenstar (24 November 2020)

ester said:



			That confirms my impression from the readable bit of the Times thanks LEC.

You can't really do a welfare based project, and then skirt round getting a welfare licence.
		
Click to expand...


Quite .


----------



## Tiddlypom (24 November 2020)

ester said:



			You can't really do a welfare based project, and then skirt round getting a welfare licence.
		
Click to expand...

This. A very, very silly thing to do if it is proven. She would surely have got approval if she’d jumped through the right hoops, but you can’t start forging permissions.


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

It always was a bit of weird one iirc with the weights chosen, and the saddles used but because it had her name before it the prelim results were given more weight than they would have been otherwise.


----------



## 9tails (24 November 2020)

ester said:



			It always was a bit of weird one iirc with the weights chosen, and the saddles used but because it had her name before it the prelim results were given more weight than they would have been otherwise.
		
Click to expand...

Wasn't it heavy riders with saddles that didn't fit?


----------



## Goldenstar (24 November 2020)

Yes the heaviest rider rode in an saddle that did not fit her .


----------



## Tiddlypom (24 November 2020)




----------



## conniegirl (24 November 2020)

Goldenstar said:



			Yes the heaviest rider rode in an saddle that did not fit her .
		
Click to expand...

Surely though if you are a very heavy rider and aware that you are, you would get a saddle to fit both your horse and your arse.

I’m on the heavy end for my pony (though not over recommended), im very careful to makesure my saddle fits both of us!


----------



## Goldenstar (24 November 2020)

Yes , but the tests where done in same saddles for all the riders now I am not rubbishing the results but to me it’s obvious that saddles unsuitable for riders will make horses sore .


----------



## shortstuff99 (24 November 2020)

Goldenstar said:



			Yes , but the tests where done in same saddles for all the riders now I am not rubbishing the results but to me it’s obvious that saddles unsuitable for riders will make horses sore .
		
Click to expand...

I haven't ever actually read her study, but this would be a variable within her results which she should have accounted for by either stating that it could increase the issues shown or having an experiment where she accounted for saddle fit to make it purely about weight.


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

It was a pretty small prelim experiment, from which rather a lot of significance has been taken.


----------



## Annagain (24 November 2020)

Goldenstar said:



			Yes , but the tests where done in same saddles for all the riders now I am not rubbishing the results but to me it’s obvious that saddles unsuitable for riders will make horses sore .
		
Click to expand...

I understand the need for the same saddle to be used so you don't have too many variables but surely the best option in that situation is a saddle that fits the horse and the heaviest rider and is potentially too big for the other riders rather than one that fits the lighter riders and is too small for the heavier ones. That is less likely to a) do damage to the horse and b) change the way the rider sits. Given a choice between a saddle that's too big for me or one that's too small I know I'd be more comfortable and more effective a rider in one that was too big.


----------



## windand rain (24 November 2020)

It was totally flawed in every way. Sample too small, ill fitting tack, lame horse ans several other significant defects in reasoning I am not certain why anyone would have paid it much attention but they did


----------



## 9tails (24 November 2020)

Those images show a saddle that only fits a light or medium rider, so effectively a fat shaming exercise, no?


----------



## Amymay (24 November 2020)

9tails said:



			so effectively a fat shaming exercise, no?
		
Click to expand...

Well yes, wasn’t that the point?


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

windand rain said:



			It was totally flawed in every way. Sample too small, ill fitting tack, lame horse ans several other significant defects in reasoning I am not certain why anyone would have paid it much attention but they did
		
Click to expand...

Being desperate for some rider weight data because it comes up *all the time*. The same reason people hang onto the 20%/15%/whichever one is in vogue currently. 
And the name, the name stood for a lot.


----------



## dorsetladette (24 November 2020)

Do we think this is why she retired last year?


----------



## windand rain (24 November 2020)

Perhaps a degree disertation or phd research idea then and get more data


----------



## ihatework (24 November 2020)

dorsetladette said:



			Do we think this is why she retired last year?
		
Click to expand...

One would have to imagine it was a factor in that decision, if what is reported is accurate (please remember the investigation is not completed/published). And you would also have to wonder if it had any bearing of AHT securing funding.


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

windand rain said:



			It was totally flawed in every way. Sample too small, ill fitting tack, lame horse ans several other significant defects in reasoning I am not certain why anyone would have paid it much attention but they did
		
Click to expand...

The horses were sound initially and only presented as lame under the heavier riders iirc? (I may also be recalling incorrectly!). 

I *think* it was loosely based on an RS model therefore horses have their own fitting tack and different riders in that tack. 

I'd presume if you were a horse owner you would be expected to have tack to fit your horse and you.

It will be a shame if the take away message is lost because of whatever she is accused of doing. So many riders, of all weights, appear to be unaware of the impact we all have riding horses and of the need for correctly fitting tack. 

Last year, as haven't been anywhere this year(!), I saw so many riders where their seat went beyond the cantle and negatively affected the horse and saddle fit. The worse one what at a western show where a poor cob had a synthetic saddle on that was almost bent in two. 

I remember some of the vitriol about this paper at the time and people saying it was "fat shaming" rather than animal welfare. It will be a real shame if because of this the whole lesson is lost.


----------



## ozpoz (24 November 2020)

If you read the study, it explains that it was designed to reflect everyday situations, for example at riding schools. It is such a complex subject. The study was very well received when presented to an audience of people who are actively involved in, work with, or understand the complexities of research.
 It was anything but a fat shaming exercise, or flawed, and was a pilot study.


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

Pretty good at research complexity myself, hence why all the issues concerned me. I don't think the communication of the science to the general public was great, it came out in dribs and drabs to start with, presumably to attract interest.


----------



## Annagain (24 November 2020)

TPO said:



			I remember some of the vitriol about this paper at the time and people saying it was "fat shaming" rather than animal welfare. It will be a real shame if because of this the whole lesson is lost.
		
Click to expand...

I think I remember discussing it at the time and my issue was they didn't really use any proper weight carrying horses. I think the heaviest horse was about 550kg and quite a fine horse so of course the heavier riders weren't going to be suited to those horses - or be likely to ride them normally. Had they included a 700kg ID type horse or even a 600kg cob type it might have produced very different results.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (24 November 2020)

TPO said:



			It will be a real shame if because of this the whole lesson is lost.
		
Click to expand...


But if the research is flawed the whole exercise is pointless.  I don't get the RS aspect, either.  It is the responsibility of the RS manager/owner to ensure that horses are only expected to carry riders who can fit into their tack.


----------



## ihatework (24 November 2020)

Pearlsasinger said:



			But if the research is flawed the whole exercise is pointless.  I don't get the RS aspect, either.  It is the responsibility of the RS manager/owner to ensure that horses are only expected to carry riders who can fit into their tack.
		
Click to expand...

For me it’s an infuriating study. Because I think the hypothesis has real merit and deserves a good study. But the study done as someone said was a pilot, and sufficiently flawed that the significance given to it was blown out of proportion based on who did it. It needed to be refined and done better.


----------



## ozpoz (24 November 2020)

I would love to know why you think it was flawed - it is clearly explains the  hows and whys, and is free to read.
Re the saddle fit - that doesn't happen, either in riding schools or with owners. Ask any saddle fitter, vet or physio.


----------



## DirectorFury (24 November 2020)

Archive full version of the Telegraph article for those that couldn’t get past the paywall: https://archive.is/hBrLZ


----------



## conniegirl (24 November 2020)

ozpoz said:



			I would love to know why you think it was flawed - it is clearly explains the  hows and whys, and is free to read.
Re the saddle fit - that doesn't happen, either in riding schools or with owners. Ask any saddle fitter, vet or physio.
		
Click to expand...

It introduces bias, it is known that saddle fit can cause soundness issues and rider weight affects saddle fit.. That is well studied. To study the effect of weight alone you need a level playing field. 
If you put a rider on a saddle that is too small for them they don’t ride as well and sit on the back of the saddle causing a pressure point regardless of the riders weight.


As mentioned before, using a saddle that fit the larger riders would have lessened the bias.
An ideal would have been to have 4 of the same saddle all fitted to the horse and riders.

As it is you cannot separate the damage caused by weight and the damaged caused by an ill fitting saddle.


----------



## Shilasdair (24 November 2020)

It was a pretty terrible study, anyway, so no loss there.
And I say that as someone who used to supervise dissertations on similar themes.

It did fit beautifully into a fat shaming narrative though - where we can vilify 'heavy' and 'very heavy' riders in ill fitting saddles, rather than actually thinking about the real question which is 'What weight is beneficial for a horse to carry'.   I suggest the answer is 'None'.


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

Pearlsasinger said:



			But if the research is flawed the whole exercise is pointless.  I don't get the RS aspect, either.  It is the responsibility of the RS manager/owner to ensure that horses are only expected to carry riders who can fit into their tack.
		
Click to expand...

Well it did for a minute appear to make some people aware of the weight limitations of horses and the negative affects (e.g. presenting lame) when ridden by heavier/too heavy riders.

Obesity is a big problem in the UK and that will affect industries like RS. I'm pretty sure we've all seen some horror show videos of too big riders in the USA.

An RS can only do their best to have fitting tack for each horse (as in by legislation every horse should have its own fitted tack) but it would be impossible to accommodate every weight and build of rider. There are often discussions on here about RS weight limits and there is never a unanimous agreement about it. 

There are single horse owners riding in saddles they don't fit into and that are negatively affecting the horse. My personal opinion is that Sue's name added some gravitas to the study more than if it had been an unknown, that made it harder to be dismissed. I think it's a shame if the allegations are true that it's possible the while point of the study (animal welfare) could be dismissed as codswallop when I believe there is merit in the results


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

conniegirl said:



			It introduces bias, it is known that saddle fit can cause soundness issues and rider weight affects saddle fit.. That is well studied. To study the effect of weight alone you need a level playing field.
If you put a rider on a saddle that is too small for them they don’t ride as well and sit on the back of the saddle causing a pressure point regardless of the riders weight.


As mentioned before, using a saddle that fit the larger riders would have lessened the bias.
An ideal would have been to have 4 of the same saddle all fitted to the horse and riders.

As it is you cannot separate the damage caused by weight and the damaged caused by an ill fitting saddle.
		
Click to expand...

I'm clearly a moron and need it explained even in simpler terms...sorry 😬

The saddle did fit the horses in the study. It still fitted with other riders of various height, builds, leg lengths and weights. It only didnt fit (or more to the point caused increased pressure/pressure points) when it was an overweight rider on it.

Looking in the photos above of the riders sat in the saddles I wouldn't have thought that even an 18 or 19" saddle would have accommodated the larger rider? Where is the line drawn in regards to saddle fitting/seat sizes?

Is there not some onus on riders to be fit to ride? 

Another thing I've never understood is the "a heavy good rider is better" argument. Surely gravity means that 17st is 17st? I understand the basics of force = mass x acceleration so an 8st rider could exhort a higher force if they were thumping about out of balance but surely a 17st rider is never going to be anything less than 17st on the horse's back and quite possibly a fair bit more with general movement? 

*plucked 17st out of my head because I vaguely thought that was roundabout thr weight of the heaviest rider in the study


----------



## PurBee (24 November 2020)

9tails said:



			Those images show a saddle that only fits a light or medium rider, so effectively a fat shaming exercise, no?
		
Click to expand...

i read that study recently and thought it odd they didnt use different sized saddles to actually fit all the riders. So the ‘results’ are effectively useless as the fit wasn’t ideal in the first place. 
Studies should be performed without bias - the author clearly was biased. These kinds of studies, aswell as others with invested funding sources, aren’t fit for publishing.


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

I also don't get the "fat shaming" narrative.

Saying that someone is too heavy to do X isn't shaming them. Someone can have a low body fat and still be too heavy e.g. a body builder.

If someone is too heavy they are too heavy. Should animal welfare be compromised because someone feels entitled to do X regardless?


----------



## Not_so_brave_anymore (24 November 2020)

TPO said:



			I'm clearly a moron and need it explained even in simpler terms...sorry 😬

The saddle did fit the horses in the study. It still fitted with other riders of various height, builds, leg lengths and weights. It only didnt fit (or more to the point caused increased pressure/pressure points) when it was an overweight rider on it.

Looking in the photos above of the riders sat in the saddles I wouldn't have thought that even an 18 or 19" saddle would have accommodated the larger rider? Where is the line drawn in regards to saddle fitting/seat sizes?

Is there not some onus on riders to be fit to ride?

Another thing I've never understood is the "a heavy good rider is better" argument. Surely gravity means that 17st is 17st? I understand the basics of force = mass x acceleration so an 8st rider could exhort a higher force if they were thumping about out of balance but surely a 17st rider is never going to be anything less than 17st on the horse's back and quite possibly a fair bit more with general movement?

*plucked 17st out of my head because I vaguely thought that was roundabout thr weight of the heaviest rider in the study
		
Click to expand...

Yes, I've always thought it should be presented more as "weak/unbalanced rider = worse" rather than "well balanced rider = better". You can fling your weight around to make it seem more than it is, but you can't literally "carry" yourself so the horse doesn't have to.


----------



## Mule (24 November 2020)

TPO said:



			I'm clearly a moron and need it explained even in simpler terms...sorry 😬

The saddle did fit the horses in the study. It still fitted with other riders of various height, builds, leg lengths and weights. It only didnt fit (or more to the point caused increased pressure/pressure points) when it was an overweight rider on it.

Looking in the photos above of the riders sat in the saddles I wouldn't have thought that even an 18 or 19" saddle would have accommodated the larger rider? Where is the line drawn in regards to saddle fitting/seat sizes?

Is there not some onus on riders to be fit to ride?

Another thing I've never understood is the "a heavy good rider is better" argument. Surely gravity means that 17st is 17st? I understand the basics of force = mass x acceleration so an 8st rider could exhort a higher force if they were thumping about out of balance but surely a 17st rider is never going to be anything less than 17st on the horse's back and quite possibly a fair bit more with general movement?

*plucked 17st out of my head because I vaguely thought that was roundabout thr weight of the heaviest rider in the study
		
Click to expand...

The thing about 'a heavy good rider' being easier to carry than a heavy mediocre rider is because the good rider uses their balance and strength to hold their own weight. Think of lifting a child who becomes floppy (a dead weight) compared to holding him/herself normally. 'Going floppy' is an old tactic that protestors use to make it more difficult for the police to remove them.


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

mule said:



			The thing about 'a heavy good rider' being easier to carry than a heavy mediocre rider is because the good rider uses their balance and strength to carry themselves. Think of lifting a child who becomes floppy (a dead weight) compared to holding him/herself normally.
		
Click to expand...

I do understand the concept but if I was 17st and rode like CDJ I would still be 17st on the horse's back. 

As a horse I'd prefer an average 11st rider than a brilliant 17st rider iykwim?


----------



## brighteyes (24 November 2020)

windand rain said:



			It was totally flawed in every way. Sample too small, ill fitting tack, lame horse ans several other significant defects in reasoning I am not certain why anyone would have paid it much attention but they did
		
Click to expand...

I think it's a welfare issue COMPOUNDED by an ill-fitting saddle. It should be fast-tracked as a study and done correctly.  

It would be interesting to find out why Sue tried to circumvent the protocols. What a shame. The issue needs addressing, though I'm at a complete loss as to why anyone would inflict themselves on a horse's back in anything except a fair proportion and suitable equipment.


----------



## Mule (24 November 2020)

TPO said:



			I do understand the concept but if I was 17st and rode like CDJ I would still be 17st on the horse's back.

As a horse I'd prefer an average 11st rider than a brilliant 17st rider iykwim?
		
Click to expand...

I'd also prefer an 11 stone rider. The comparison is just between the two seventeen stone riders.


----------



## brighteyes (24 November 2020)

Goldenstar said:



			Yes the heaviest rider rode in an saddle that did not fit her .
		
Click to expand...




9tails said:



			Those images show a saddle that only fits a light or medium rider, so effectively a fat shaming exercise, no?
		
Click to expand...

It's a saddle that is correct for the horse? So therefore anyone who doesn't fit the saddle has no business ON the horse. Call it fat-shaming if you must. I call it physics and welfare.


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

mule said:



			I'd also prefer an 11 stone rider. The comparison is just between the two seventeen stone riders.
		
Click to expand...

Gotcha, sorry. The comparisons I was meaning was the often quoted in here "I'd rather a good heavier/heavy rider than a novice lighter rider". Of two the same weight I'd want the CDJ-esque one too!


----------



## brighteyes (24 November 2020)

TPO said:



			The horses were sound initially and only presented as lame under the heavier riders iirc? (I may also be recalling incorrectly!).

I *think* it was loosely based on an RS model therefore horses have their own fitting tack and different riders in that tack.

I'd presume if you were a horse owner you would be expected to have tack to fit your horse and you.

It will be a shame if the take away message is lost because of whatever she is accused of doing. So many riders, of all weights, appear to be unaware of the impact we all have riding horses and of the need for correctly fitting tack.

Last year, as haven't been anywhere this year(!), I saw so many riders where their seat went beyond the cantle and negatively affected the horse and saddle fit. The worse one what at a western show where a poor cob had a synthetic saddle on that was almost bent in two.

*I remember some of the vitriol about this paper at the time and people saying it was "fat shaming" rather than animal welfare. It will be a real shame if because of this the whole lesson is lost.*

Click to expand...

Yes.


----------



## honetpot (24 November 2020)

I have always like the analogy of carrying someone piggy back. If you have ever carried a larger child, if they do not sit still, it's almost as difficult as carrying someone who is a lot heavier and is cooperative. Also, dead weight is can not be redistributed, to suit an activity, like the groom and driver ins carriage driving, where the groom can be used as ballast and 'carriage mover'. When you ride you can use your core muscles and body weight to affect the speed of the animal, and also shift your weight to change direction, so you can more subtle aids, are not reliant on the use of your hands. It's not often you see children taught this
 I want to know why they always use women as examples, men can weigh more than women but often do not look heavier due to the distribution of muscle and body fat. I would also like to know what top male riders weigh, and the size and body weight of their rides. Let's face it in racing the riders weights are declared.


----------



## conniegirl (24 November 2020)

If you put a lightweight adult rider on a 15” saddle that was fitted to the horse they would be unlikely to be able to balance as well as normal and would be sitting on the cantle causing pressure points.

My lad can take a 17.5” saddle comfortably,  i ride him in a 16.5” because that is what fits me best. 

If my backside were bigger, a 17.5” would be better for him as my theoretically bigger bum wouldn’t be on the cantle of the saddle driving it into his back and causing damage. 

My saddle is also fitted such that it fits correctly with my weight in it, it would sit higher with a lighter rider i believe and that would run the risk of it not fitting correctly.

As for the heavy good rider vs the lighter naff rider argument. It doesnt stand up for huge weight differences but if you have a well balanced 12st rider,  they are normally better for the horse than say an 10 stone beginner that crashes down onto the saddle every stride in trot or canter.


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

honetpot said:



			I have always like the analogy of carrying someone piggy back. If you have ever carried a larger child, if they do not sit still, it's almost as difficult as carrying someone who is a lot heavier and is cooperative. Also, dead weight is can not be redistributed, to suit an activity, like the groom and driver ins carriage driving, where the groom can be used as ballast and 'carriage mover'. When you ride you can use your core muscles and body weight to affect the speed of the animal, and also shift your weight to change direction, so you can more subtle aids, are not reliant on the use of your hands. It's not often you see children taught this
I want to know why they always use women as examples, men can weigh more than women but often do not look heavier due to the distribution of muscle and body fat. I would also like to know what top male riders weigh, and the size and body weight of their rides. Let's face it in racing the riders weights are declared.
		
Click to expand...

"Heavy" rider, second from right, in this study is male

I think heights and weights used to be on FEI site for all "top" riders. It was possibly an Olympic site now that I'm thinking about it ot maybe I was right initially and it was FEI site for WEG 🤔 but yeah heights and weights are out there so to speak


----------



## conniegirl (24 November 2020)

brighteyes said:



			It's a saddle that is correct for the horse? So therefore anyone who doesn't fit the saddle has no business ON the horse. Call it fat-shaming if you must. I call it physics and welfare.
		
Click to expand...

Just because a saddle is fitted to a horse does not necessarily mean it is the biggest size that could be fitted to a horse. My lad can and has previously been fitted a17.5” saddle. I ride him in a 16.5” as it fits me better.

A bigger rider would be better in the 17.5”


----------



## windand rain (24 November 2020)

I have seen thermal imaging that makes me think I would prefer a heavy balanced rider to an 8 stone beginner. The research needs to be done properly with thousands of riders and horses for it to have any value. Not cheap but important for animal welfare 6 riders is no sample


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

conniegirl said:



			If you put a lightweight adult rider on a 15” saddle that was fitted to the horse they would be unlikely to be able to balance as well as normal and would be sitting on the cantle causing pressure points.

My lad can take a 17.5” saddle comfortably,  i ride him in a 16.5” because that is what fits me best.

If my backside were bigger, a 17.5” would be better for him as my theoretically bigger bum wouldn’t be on the cantle of the saddle driving it into his back and causing damage.

My saddle is also fitted such that it fits correctly with my weight in it, it would sit higher with a lighter rider i believe and that would run the risk of it not fitting correctly.

As for the heavy good rider vs the lighter naff rider argument. It doesnt stand up for huge weight differences but if you have a well balanced 12st rider,  they are normally better for the horse than say an 11stone beginner that crashes down onto the saddle every stride in trot or canter.
		
Click to expand...

Not good at multi quote...

First point re 15" saddle. The assumption is that if it's the lightweight adult mentioned then "damage" is minimal especially compared to putting a heavy rider on the same horse/saddle set up.

The ideal of course is that a saddle fits both horse and rider. 

The example of you and your horse works because you fit into your saddle and your horses back can accommodate his saddle.

The problem is when, even if a horse *could* carry it, 17st+ simply doesnt fit into any saddle.

Then you could throw in the argument that a longer equine back can be weaker. So you are putting a 19" saddle that does fit onto an already weaker structure then adding 17st+

Again 17st is plucked from my brains recollection of the study and that could be wrong. 

Different horses can carry different weights and every horse will have a different line as to where the No is that they can be asked to carry comfortably but generally speaking there has to be a cut off point somewhere? Again I've seen the horror vids of 20st+ tourist on horses/donkeys and its horrific.


----------



## ycbm (24 November 2020)

Well I guess now we know why she precipitously left the AHT?


----------



## tristar (24 November 2020)

sue dyson has said that around 50 percent of  ridden horses, or comp horses are lame, that she studied some time ago, not sure about that one in the pure sense, something thats crossed my mind in  a puzzling way 


an unbalanced, incompetent rider heavy or not, can damage a horses back, many horses are damaged by the way way they are trained, i have let people ride my horses who might be called too heavy but they were were quiet and the horses moved well underneath them

there is a lot of factors involved here, the panels of saddles vary so much ,the tree shape, the state of the horses back muscles and how it has been worked, the hardness of the legs and amount of bone the horse has all figure in whether damage may be caused, and how much a rider is riding the horse


----------



## Shilasdair (24 November 2020)

There are far too many variables in this study to make it valid;
1. Rider weight
2. Saddle fit (and no, the saddle doesn't just have to fit the horse - it also has to fit the rider or it puts them out of balance and creates pressure points).
3. Rider shape - the centre of balance changes in a rider with a long back and short legs compared to long legs and a short back.
4. Subjective analysis - you can easily find what you are looking for in such studies.
5. Horse size - if it's the same horse, then the proportions to the rider change.  If it's a different horse, then it's an additional variable.

It's an interesting moral debate though - is a horse better not being exercised at all, or having to carry a human on their back when they really didn't evolve to carry weight above their spine?

All the triumphal short/skinny people on this thread might also consider - you are also too heavy for your horses.


----------



## ycbm (24 November 2020)

The sad thing is how much this is going to devalue all her other research into pain and lameness      What an almighty fool she's been if this is true.


----------



## brighteyes (24 November 2020)

conniegirl said:



			Just because a saddle is fitted to a horse does not necessarily mean it is the biggest size that could be fitted to a horse. My lad can and has previously been fitted a17.5” saddle. I ride him in a 16.5” as it fits me better.

A bigger rider would be better in the 17.5”
		
Click to expand...

I said correct for the horse, which means no longer than it can accomodate and in balance. And ditto me and my horse/saddle.


----------



## Annagain (24 November 2020)

TPO said:



			17st is plucked from my brains recollection of the study and that could be wrong.

Different horses can carry different weights and every horse will have a different line as to where the No is that they can be asked to carry comfortably but generally speaking there has to be a cut off point somewhere? Again I've seen the horror vids of 20st+ tourist on horses/donkeys and its horrific.
		
Click to expand...

The study https://beva.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eve.13085 (table 2) said the "very heavy" rider was 142kg or 22st including riding gear. The "very heavy" rider was 25% of the largest horse's weight and nearly 30% of the smallest with tack etc. The heaviest horse was 591kg. No wonder the horses showed lameness! Even on a 700kg horse, 22st would be far too heavy and unlikely to fit any saddle.

There was over 8 stone difference between the "heavy" rider and the "very heavy" rider with nothing in between, whereas the "light" rider, "moderate" rider and "heavy" rider were all within 30kgs or about 4 1/2 stone of each other. If that wasn't set up to skew the results, I don't know what would be. The fact the "very heavy" rider was 5 stone heavier than you thought TPO shows how unrepresentative of real life it was. Judging by the gaps in the weights of the other riders (about 15kgs each) they should have had at least two, if not three riders between the "heavy" and "very heavy" riders and should also have used bigger horses that were more capable of carrying that weight and horses of similar weights but different builds (so a 14hh stocky cob and a 15.2 TB type). This would help establish whether it is the weight itself that is the issue or the relationship between the rider's weight and the horse's weight carrying capability.  It's not like a 700kg horse is difficult to find or so unrepresentative of real life that you don't find 'normal' riders riding them.

Of course you could argue that beyond a certain point the weight itself is the issue and they should always have accepted that 22 stone was too much and never even tried. 17stone might have given a very different result. I appreciate some of the tests were abandoned due to lameness with the "heavy" rider too but they also were with the "moderate" rider and there were issues observed with the "light" rider as well so you could argue there were other reasons for the lameness and not just the weight they were carrying.


----------



## teapot (24 November 2020)

ihatework said:



			One would have to imagine it was a factor in that decision, if what is reported is accurate (please remember the investigation is not completed/published). And you would also have to wonder if it had any bearing of AHT securing funding.
		
Click to expand...

I can't see the RCVS wasting time on hearings if it something wasn't amiss somewhere. That said was scheduled for Feb and postponed.

What interests me most (as someome who's been through university ethics commitees for their own research) is (if it's true) why did it happen. This isn't a baby faced graduate desperate to get published...


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

annagain I do remember them having trouble recruiting heavier riders/there were quite a few facebook calls. 
I do feel it kind of missed the more usual weight that would be under discussion as a heavy rider which lies in between the heavy and very heavy. Initially when only some of the data came out it was assumed given the fairly even distribution of the first 3 riders that the very heavy would have been around the 16 stone mark. Which for me would be the more 'real life' question that RS etc usually have- ie they actually usually have limits below 16st.


----------



## tristar (24 November 2020)

a 22 stone person would,  i  imagine be carrying weight very loosely, flopping around, not in proportion to the skeleton, less able to follow the horse  so the movement would be out of control, and not sure if i have ever seen a saddle to accommodate such a weight


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

well it depends, probably not if you are weightlifting.


----------



## windand rain (24 November 2020)

I would be pretty sure the majority of riders in themselves are less than 100kg possibly more with tack but not much which is roughly 20% of a 500kg horse or so. I have always believed that to be as much as a horse should carry anyway and if over 100kgs you should stop and lose weight or get a horse you fit. I also maintain that if the horse is built correctly has the correct muscle developement and older than 7 then the 20% limit is fine. A horse or pony for that matter that has good flat bone, short cannons is fit and the correct weight for its frame it can easily carry up to 100kgs of balanced rider another big isssue is that modern horses often carry 100kgs or more of fat which is a whole different skew to the figures


----------



## SatansLittleHelper (24 November 2020)

What weight really is too heavy for ANY horse to carry..?? To my mind 22st is a ridiculous weight and not even remotely representative of "real life" riders. Also surely height of the rider plays an important factor in weight distribution on the saddle too..?? For example: I am overweight, 15st 8lbs currently.  However, Im also 5ft 11". A friend who rides is 5ft dead on and 14st 10lbs. At nearly a stone lighter than me she sits over the cantle of an 18" saddle and refuses to ride until she has lost more weight. On the other hand I fit into a 17.5" saddle without bother (though I prefer an 18" due to having a 34" inside leg).
So, despite being the heavier person, I'm putting less pressure in the wrong places on the horse. Just a thought really but I do think it makes a difference. 
I hasten to add that I'm currently doing my best to lose weight but my medication is a pain and it's slow going. My 15.1 cob doesn't really know I'm there though 🙄🙄


----------



## Tiddlypom (24 November 2020)

It would have been more sensible to focus on a range of weights that RS horses are expected to carry.

Even Adventure Clydesdales have a max limit of 16 stone, and that is for their 2 hour or shorter rides. 3 hours upwards the limit is 14.5 stone.

Some hunters have to carry some rather large male riders...


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

SatansLittleHelper said:



			What weight really is too heavy for ANY horse to carry..?? To my mind 22st is a ridiculous weight and not even remotely representative of "real life" riders. Also surely height of the rider plays an important factor in weight distribution on the saddle too..?? For example: I am overweight, 15st 8lbs currently.  However, Im also 5ft 11". A friend who rides is 5ft dead on and 14st 10lbs. At nearly a stone lighter than me she sits over the cantle of an 18" saddle and refuses to ride until she has lost more weight. On the other hand I fit into a 17.5" saddle without bother (though I prefer an 18" due to having a 34" inside leg).
So, despite being the heavier person, I'm putting less pressure in the wrong places on the horse. Just a thought really but I do think it makes a difference.
I hasten to add that I'm currently doing my best to lose weight but my medication is a pain and it's slow going. My 15.1 cob doesn't really know I'm there though 🙄🙄
		
Click to expand...

I think the unquantifiable difference with your example is that both you and your friend are aware  of your own weight, build and how you fit in a saddle along with the weight your horses can/should carry. I'd put myself in that group too; I absolutely can/should lose weight as while not too heavy for my horses I am overweight. It's something that I'm conscious of and it does factor into what I do i.e. should I want to be doing "more" with them for a clear conscience I would lose weight.

I guess my issue overall is that there are 22st riders. The rider in this study is obviously riding something. So as someone posted above where is the line?

At what weight does horse welfare trump desire/want/right to ride? 

Perhaps there are breeds capable of carrying that weight and saddles that would spread the pressure etc does that make it acceptable? 

Having mentioned it above it would be interesting to see the weights of some.of the american reiners at WEG. The one I have in mind is very tall as well as heavy, as is his wife and several others team riders. QHs are 14-15hh approx and clearly do carry those weights doing highly athletic movements but is that ok? Or maybe the riders look heavier than they actually are and I've got it all wrong 😬


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

Actually I don't think she is obviously riding something, I don't think that was a pre-requisite, if I put my jods and boots on people might think I am that but I'm not (and am generally heavier than people would assess me at). Last time I got roped into something the jods were borrowed. 

I guess my general impression is that most people err on the side of not riding because of their weight than the other way round but that might be the wrong impression.


----------



## Gingerwitch (24 November 2020)

Bit that upsets me most, is how many horse owners who took her word that Neddy was lame and PTS are wondering if she told them the truth. Poor bloody owners.


----------



## scats (24 November 2020)

What a risky little game she has played if this is true.  Very odd.


----------



## Shilasdair (24 November 2020)

tristar said:



			a 22 stone person would,  i  imagine be carrying weight very loosely, flopping around, not in proportion to the skeleton, less able to follow the horse  so the movement would be out of control, and not sure if i have ever seen a saddle to accommodate such a weight
		
Click to expand...

I think you are conflating weight with obesity here.  
One of the heaviest riders I have ever taught was a professional male ballet dancer.  He didn't have an ounce of fat on him - but was incredibly muscled (so much so that the muscles on his inner thighs pushed him up out of the saddle which wasn't a problem I'd dealt with before). 
 And of course, muscle is heavy.


----------



## Shilasdair (24 November 2020)

Gingerwitch said:



			Bit that upsets me most, is how many horse owners who took her word that Neddy was lame and PTS are wondering if she told them the truth. Poor bloody owners.
		
Click to expand...

To be fair, I'd still trust every orthopaedic diagnosis made - her real area of expertise.
I think perhaps vets shouldn't stray into the equitation side of things unless they really know what they are doing (there's already a growing field in equine/rider biomechanics/performance which some might say is outwith her real sphere of expertise).


----------



## tristar (24 November 2020)

Shilasdair said:



			I think you are conflating weight with obesity here.  
One of the heaviest riders I have ever taught was a professional male ballet dancer.  He didn't have an ounce of fat on him - but was incredibly muscled (so much so that the muscles on his inner thighs pushed him up out of the saddle which wasn't a problem I'd dealt with before). 
 And of course, muscle is heavy.
		
Click to expand...


well of course, we know that ,  but male ballet dancers  of 22 st who ride are not that common,  hopefully


----------



## Cinnamontoast (24 November 2020)

TPO said:



			I'm clearly a moron and need it explained even in simpler terms...sorry 😬

The saddle did fit the horses in the study. It still fitted with other riders of various height, builds, leg lengths and weights. It only didnt fit (or more to the point caused increased pressure/pressure points) when it was an overweight rider on it.


Is there not some onus on riders to be fit to ride?

Another thing I've never understood is the "a heavy good rider is better" argument. Surely gravity means that 17st is 17st? I understand the basics of force = mass x acceleration so an 8st rider could exhort a higher force if they were thumping about out of balance but surely a 17st rider is never going to be anything less than 17st on the horse's back and quite possibly a fair bit more with general movement
		
Click to expand...

Surely the saddle needs to fit both? It’s pointless having a master saddler out then not ride in what he’s trying to fit? I know m8me was interested in me and the horse fitting the saddle.

17st cannot be anything but! I understand the whole better an experienced heavier rider than someone riding like a sack of potatoes, but there is no way to minimise having 17st plonked on an animal not designed to be ridden. I think my sil’s father who used to hunt is a lot more than that.


----------



## tristar (24 November 2020)

Shilasdair said:



			To be fair, I'd still trust every orthopaedic diagnosis made - her real area of expertise.
I think perhaps vets shouldn't stray into the equitation side of things unless they really know what they are doing (there's already a growing field in equine/rider biomechanics/performance which some might say is outwith her real sphere of expertise).
		
Click to expand...


my feeling is being a full time vet confines one to a different experience to being a fulltime trainer for example, each brings something of their own to the table


----------



## bouncing_ball (24 November 2020)

Shilasdair said:



			To be fair, I'd still trust every orthopaedic diagnosis made - her real area of expertise.
I think perhaps vets shouldn't stray into the equitation side of things unless they really know what they are doing (there's already a growing field in equine/rider biomechanics/performance which some might say is outwith her real sphere of expertise).
		
Click to expand...

I’m sure she was good at diagnosing. But very bleak at prognosis and know a number of horses she advised PTS that came right.


----------



## Roxylola (24 November 2020)

Shilasdair said:



			To be fair, I'd still trust every orthopaedic diagnosis made - her real area of expertise.
I think perhaps vets shouldn't stray into the equitation side of things unless they really know what they are doing (there's already a growing field in equine/rider biomechanics/performance which some might say is outwith her real sphere of expertise).
		
Click to expand...

I sort of agree with you in principle. But if I were an owner in the situation where I'd pts as I couldn't nail an issue down but she'd confirmed there was definitely pain the fact that her professionalism has been called in to question in this way - that shes prepared to falsify information to push her own agenda - I'd be second guessing myself right now.


----------



## ycbm (24 November 2020)

Roxylola said:



			I sort of agree with you in principle. But if I were an owner in the situation where I'd pts as I couldn't nail an issue down but she'd confirmed there was definitely pain the fact that her professionalism has been called in to question in this way - that shes prepared to falsify information to push her own agenda - I'd be second guessing myself right now.
		
Click to expand...

I think it's a real issue.  It's how human psychology works,  many people will find it very difficult to divorce this kind of unprofessional behaviour in their minds from her ability as an orthopaedic vet. 
.


----------



## Littlewills (24 November 2020)

ester said:



			Actually I don't think she is obviously riding something, I don't think that was a pre-requisite, if I put my jods and boots on people might think I am that but I'm not (and am generally heavier than people would assess me at). Last time I got roped into something the jods were borrowed.

I guess my general impression is that most people err on the side of not riding because of their weight than the other way round but that might be the wrong impression.
		
Click to expand...

You had to consider yourself a good balancer rider and be riding regularly to apply to do it. Whether they dropped that in the end when they couldn't find people, I dont know


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

Ah yes you are right, thanks for reminding! I'm not sure if they did when they were struggling. I know people said they didn't want to do it who would have been between the heavy and very heavy because they didn't want to ride horses that weren't up to their weight.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (24 November 2020)

brighteyes said:



			It's a saddle that is correct for the horse? So therefore anyone who doesn't fit the saddle has no business ON the horse. Call it fat-shaming if you must. I call it physics and welfare.
		
Click to expand...


I agree but there other horses which would be able to accommodate a heavier rider in a well-fitting saddle.  The study should have included weight carrying horses.  FWIW, I very much doubt that the VH rider in those photos is 17st

ETA, Having just read that VH rider weighed 22st, I am speechless, on all counts.


----------



## conniegirl (24 November 2020)

Just thought of a better way to judge the effect of weight alone. You use the same rider throughout and then add weights to the rider. A weight jacket/belt so not just dead weight like a saddle cloth weight.


----------



## TPO (24 November 2020)

Pearlsasinger said:



			I agree but there other horses which would be able to accommodate a heavier rider in a well-fitting saddle.  The study should have included weight carrying horses.  FWIW, I very much doubt that the VH rider in those photos is 17st
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, the 17st was me just making things up/remembering wrongly. The VH rider is 22st as a previous poster pointed out (sorry, username escapes me)


----------



## ester (24 November 2020)

conniegirl said:



			Just thought of a better way to judge the effect of weight alone. You use the same rider throughout and then add weights to the rider. A weight jacket/belt so not just dead weight like a saddle cloth weight.
		
Click to expand...

They might have to be pretty fit to carry it though!


----------



## Fred66 (24 November 2020)

I wonder whether her research has contributed to some equine colleges changing their student entry requirements. One near us has changed their policy such that anyone over 13 stone with tack can no longer ride. The weight limit reduces based on height, so they are informing teenage girls that are 5.8 and over 12 stone with tack that they are too heavy to ride. If they are borderline they have two weeks to lose the weight before they are asked to choose an alternate non riding course. Whilst animal welfare is important the limits they have set are well under the normal accepted guidelines for riding, to my mind this is highly irresponsible and could lead more people into developing eating disorders.


----------



## ozpoz (24 November 2020)

Goodness some knee jerk reactions. Being accused of something means just that. Who knows if it is true or false, or whether there is something else that we know nothing about. 
As someone who was once falsely accused in a workplace setting it is a terrible experience and in my case took a couple of years, and a police arrest before the truth came out.  
Re college weights, 40 years ago this was perfectly normal, as it was in any professional yard. It didn’t result in mass eating disorders and as far as I’m aware, horses haven’t changed.


----------



## Sossigpoker (24 November 2020)

Her alleged offence won't have affected the outcome of the study. What is alleged is that she forged a letter of support from an official that would allow the study to commence.  Before any study involving humans or animals you need to satisfy some ethical criteria,  and that's what the allegedly forged letter was for. It won't have had any impact on the findings of the study


----------



## windand rain (24 November 2020)

It does affect the trial though as it wasn't cleared by the ethics committee so could be said to be unethical to even try to put a 22 stone rider on an ill fitting saddle on a lighter weight breed of horse. Personally I would have been surprised if it hadn't quickly shown signs of pain.
Bearing in mind this woman also maintains that most ridden horses are lame it is not a good starting point. It also calls into question her other experiments and diagnoses


----------



## honetpot (24 November 2020)

Sossigpoker said:



			Her alleged offence won't have affected the outcome of the study. What is alleged is that she forged a letter of support from an official that would allow the study to commence.  Before any study involving humans or animals you need to satisfy some ethical criteria,  and that's what the allegedly forged letter was for. It won't have had any impact on the findings of the study
		
Click to expand...

 Most studies  should be peer reviewed before they are published, this is so the methodology and the data is reviewed. If it is true she 'made up' an expert it does call in to question the validity of the source data, my big question would be why?


----------



## Gingerwitch (25 November 2020)

ozpoz said:



			Goodness some knee jerk reactions. Being accused of something means just that. Who knows if it is true or false, or whether there is something else that we know nothing about.
As someone who was once falsely accused in a workplace setting it is a terrible experience and in my case took a couple of years, and a police arrest before the truth came out. 
Re college weights, 40 years ago this was perfectly normal, as it was in any professional yard. It didn’t result in mass eating disorders and as far as I’m aware, horses haven’t changed.
		
Click to expand...

If you look at my opening post it does say I so hope this is not true.


----------



## hollyandivy123 (25 November 2020)

I  think this is mostly about the fact that this expect said there was no need to apply to the home office to carry out the experiments on the horses. ......This has major implications in breach of the legislation in the UK. ....also is a major issue for the vetinarary arena


----------



## maya2008 (25 November 2020)

Imagine we were to do this study with humans and weight in a backpack.... now if you were to choose a variety of average height women with a desk job, who perhaps walk the dog for exercise, using an average sized backpack, you would find very different results from if you used a proper backpack designed to carry weight, or if you used men, or men who are muscled to carry weight (e.g. in army training). Even within those groups (excluding the army one!), you get some people who can carry huge amounts (my husband is one, used to carry huge meat carcasses when unloading for the shop), and those who cannot (my friend’s husband or my dad). Musculature has a massive impact, as anyone who does weights or carries for their job will know. My husband no longer carries half a cow regularly and would no longer be able to do so, he has lost a huge amount of muscle and that equates to carrying power. He, at 5ft6, used to be easily able to pick me up as a joke and carry me some distance. I weighed 69% of his body weight at the time! The cow carcasses were even heavier, he used to get skin damage from carrying those. 

A proper study would be incredibly valuable, but it would need to be done correctly and in sufficient depth.


----------



## Apercrumbie (25 November 2020)

Fred66 said:



			I wonder whether her research has contributed to some equine colleges changing their student entry requirements. One near us has changed their policy such that anyone over 13 stone with tack can no longer ride. The weight limit reduces based on height, so they are informing teenage girls that are 5.8 and over 12 stone with tack that they are too heavy to ride. If they are borderline they have two weeks to lose the weight before they are asked to choose an alternate non riding course. Whilst animal welfare is important the limits they have set are well under the normal accepted guidelines for riding, to my mind this is highly irresponsible and could lead more people into developing eating disorders.
		
Click to expand...

God that's awful.


----------



## TPO (25 November 2020)

Apercrumbie said:



			God that's awful.
		
Click to expand...

Why is having a weight limit as to what horses can carry awful?

There are lots of careers/activities that have height and/or weight restrictions and sometimes that is because of the equipment used. 

Obviously I'm not referring to ED; that's a seperate thing completely. 

I have  no idea about heights/weights so read a few different websites and they all have 13st as overweight for 5ft8 (nhs, BMI and a couple of other random websites supplied by google). Not saying that is correct but that is the information available. Obviously in reality there are different factors like muscle mass. 

It's not a discussion about what people weigh or should weigh but what we ask horses to carry. It's about the horses not the people. Even more so if we assume that the majority at an equine college arent experienced and it circles back to the often touted on here about "bad"/unbalanced riders becoming a heavier weight. 

There appears to be some trouble separating human body issues/weight/health from what horses should ethically be asked to carry. 

We negatively impact them every time we ride. All we can do is try to keep them as fit, strong and supple to negate the effects of what we choose to do with them.


----------



## hollyandivy123 (25 November 2020)

as the average height of the world population has increased over the last 70 years and in conjunction with this the increase in body weight (not talking obesity here), may be it is time that we consider that we need to breed different style of horse to account for this................................


----------



## Roxylola (25 November 2020)

12 stone with tack though, and I'm assuming also therefore including boots and riding wear, so probably more like 10.5 or 11 stone which is a fair bit away from 13 stone really


----------



## shortstuff99 (25 November 2020)

Unfortunately it doesn't really matter how good the study was, not having the correct paper work renders it void. If that is found to be the case then the work will have to be redacted. Journals and funders etc are very hot on this.

I had to have a FCO license to gather samples from Antarctica, it didn't take long to get (about a week), which I have to show proof of in all of my work or it can't be published.

I know of someone who gathered some interesting tardigrades from the Galapagos, they didn't have a license though and so nothing can be published about it.

So I am not sure why she needed to forge a letter (if she did) as it wouldn't have taken that long to get, unless she knew it wouldn't be granted for some reason.


----------



## tristar (25 November 2020)

Roxylola said:



			I sort of agree with you in principle. But if I were an owner in the situation where I'd pts as I couldn't nail an issue down but she'd confirmed there was definitely pain the fact that her professionalism has been called in to question in this way - that shes prepared to falsify information to push her own agenda - I'd be second guessing myself right now.
		
Click to expand...



this is where the 50 per cent or so of horses comp or ridden  are lame claim, gives me a warning bell, a very large one, as i keep thinking about it, well,  i suppose if you were convinced by someone a horse was in pain you might well follow their advice, as you are paying for it and they are considered to be the expert in their field.

there are so many  components in lameness diagnostics, farriery being the first that springs to mind

i have no doubt many horses have been pts over the years because of things simple yet undiscovered issues


----------



## Shilasdair (25 November 2020)

Fred66 said:



			I wonder whether her research has contributed to some equine colleges changing their student entry requirements. One near us has changed their policy such that anyone over 13 stone with tack can no longer ride. The weight limit reduces based on height, so they are informing teenage girls that are 5.8 and over 12 stone with tack that they are too heavy to ride. If they are borderline they have two weeks to lose the weight before they are asked to choose an alternate non riding course. Whilst animal welfare is important the limits they have set are well under the normal accepted guidelines for riding, to my mind this is highly irresponsible and could lead more people into developing eating disorders.
		
Click to expand...

That's an idiotic rule.
Tack can often weigh a couple of stone - so leaving 11 stone.    
And does it mean that if you are 13 stone with tack, you are fine to ride anything from a 13.2hh to a 17.2hh?  
It's probably also discriminatory - as many men will be over that weight limit, without being overweight at all.  My late father was 6ft tall, and without being overweight weighted 14 stone...
Of course we'll have people bleating on that it's all about horse welfare - but as there's no good weight for a horse's health this is just another sneaky fat-shaming attempt by short to average height female riders.

If we accept that horses should have an upper weight limit, then it needs to be as a proportion to the animal's weight, height and 'bone'.


----------



## Shilasdair (25 November 2020)

And we are back into that subjective definition territory again;

Novice - anyone who rides worse than I do
Expert - anyone who rides better than I do

The right weight - me*
The wrong weight - anyone heavier than me.

*Disclaimer - I don't believe this, I'm resplendent in my lockdown lard.


----------



## tristar (25 November 2020)

shortstuff99 said:



			Unfortunately it doesn't really matter how good the study was, not having the correct paper work renders it void. If that is found to be the case then the work will have to be redacted. Journals and funders etc are very hot on this.

I had to have a FCO license to gather samples from Antarctica, it didn't take long to get (about a week), which I have to show proof of in all of my work or it can't be published.

I know of someone who gathered some interesting tardigrades from the Galapagos, they didn't have a license though and so nothing can be published about it.

So I am not sure why she needed to forge a letter (if she did) as it wouldn't have taken that long to get, unless she knew it wouldn't be granted for some reason.
		
Click to expand...




 perhaps that i where i get these reaction of what???  when someone announces broad sweeping conclusions at  that level of expertise,  and it sounds as if its not really taking into account all the possibilities ,especially with animals as they have no vocal input


----------



## shortstuff99 (25 November 2020)

tristar said:



			perhaps that i where i get these reaction of what???  when someone announces broad sweeping conclusions at  that level of expertise,  and it sounds as if its not really taking into account all the possibilities ,especially with animals as they have no vocal input
		
Click to expand...

This should also be where the peer review system comes into play. I don't know what journal she published in, but they should be looking at whether she could draw the conclusions she did from the data she has got. They should also look at the experimental system and whether it is repeatable etc.


----------



## Keira 8888 (25 November 2020)

Shilasdair said:



			And we are back into that subjective definition territory again;

Novice - anyone who rides worse than I do
Expert - anyone who rides better than I do

The right weight - me*
The wrong weight - anyone heavier than me.

*Disclaimer - I don't believe this, I'm resplendent in my lockdown lard.

Click to expand...

😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆 That last line just made me spit my tea out!!!!!!! Love the word “resplendent” 💪 I must find a way to use it in conversation myself today......... 🧐


----------



## Apercrumbie (25 November 2020)

TPO said:



			Why is having a weight limit as to what horses can carry awful?

There are lots of careers/activities that have height and/or weight restrictions and sometimes that is because of the equipment used.

Obviously I'm not referring to ED; that's a seperate thing completely.

I have  no idea about heights/weights so read a few different websites and they all have 13st as overweight for 5ft8 (nhs, BMI and a couple of other random websites supplied by google). Not saying that is correct but that is the information available. Obviously in reality there are different factors like muscle mass.

It's not a discussion about what people weigh or should weigh but what we ask horses to carry. It's about the horses not the people. Even more so if we assume that the majority at an equine college arent experienced and it circles back to the often touted on here about "bad"/unbalanced riders becoming a heavier weight.

There appears to be some trouble separating human body issues/weight/health from what horses should ethically be asked to carry.

We negatively impact them every time we ride. All we can do is try to keep them as fit, strong and supple to negate the effects of what we choose to do with them.
		
Click to expand...

Because once you take tack away from 12 or 13 stone, you're left with a lot less, and almost certainly within a healthy weight range. I really don't think telling young women that aren't particularly overweight in the first place that they need to lose weight is a great idea, particularly when those same women probably still weigh significantly less than the 6' bloke on their course. Are we saying that men shouldn't be able to ride? Or are we just fat-shaming women who aren't a size 8? Why are the latter being demonised and the former not?

To be clear, I am not talking about obesity here - I think we would all agree that 22 stone is just too heavy for a horse to carry and it wouldn't be fair to ask them to do so. Once you're above 13/14 stone as a rider, you would definitely need to think even more carefully about the animal you want to ride and whether it is appropriate. But to write off any rider over 12 stone is just bonkers. My issue is that the weight limit quoted above is unnecessarily low and implementing it is likely to cause harm to healthy men and women. 

TPO - in your opinion what should horses ethically be asked to carry?


----------



## McFluff (25 November 2020)

I do think there is value in studying the impact of carrying weight on a horse - and there is real value in providing evidence based research on the maximum % that a horse can carry without pain/lameness (assuming correct saddle fit, correct horse weight, fit/healthy horse to start with).  This sort of information can then help people decide whether a particular horse is right for them, and it helps establishments decide what weight limits they have and why.
I'm not sure that the original study referred to here achieved that - perhaps because it was just a pilot, but it also didn't really seem to control enough of the variables to reach any useful conclusion (and elements are ethically questionable in my opinion).  I suspect that the best type of study would be impractical - i.e. a longer term, mass participation study.

However, we do as a society need to get better at discussing weight (human and pet).  And I say this as someone who batlles with my weight (with varying success!).  The BMI scale has issues (e.g. top athletes and body builders are outliers) but for the majority of the population, it is a useful indicator of healthy weight. At my work, we are having to support more and more children who are obese - very obese - this is not good for the future.  We either stop riding altogether or we start to address the issues of weight in society.  As an observation, to put the heaviest rider into context, they would need to be well over 6' tall for 22st not to be clinically obese...  (so beyond overweight, and beyond obese).


----------



## Tiddlypom (25 November 2020)

Apercrumbie said:



			TPO - in your opinion what should horses ethically be asked to carry?
		
Click to expand...

I’m not TPO, but this brings us back full circle to the study that Sue Dyson carried out. It may well have been flawed, probably it was seriously flawed, but it was looking into rider weights.

I have weighed all my tack and riding clothing and equipment, and it added 2.5 stone to my nekked weight. Dressed in summer gear as per in my avatar pic. That was a shock.

At 5’10” tall and with a rugby player type muscly build I am never going to be a size 8, but I can consider what type of horse should be expected to carry me.

ETA I can do 11 stone 2lbs at a push. That puts me just over the mid point of the NHS ‘healthy‘ weight range. At that weight, my ribs and vertebrae protrude out and my boobs shrink to a AA cup size . I’ll still be 13 stone 9lbs on the horse inc tack, though.


----------



## TPO (25 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			I’m not TPO, but this brings us back full circle to the study that Sue Dyson carried out. It may well have been flawed, probably it was seriously flawed, but it was looking into rider weights.

I have weighed all my tack and riding clothing and equipment, and it added 2.5 stone to my nekked weight. Dressed in summer gear as per in my avatar pic. That was a shock.

At 5’10” tall and with a rugby player type muscly build I am never going to be a size 8, but I can consider what type of horse should be expected to carry me.
		
Click to expand...

I was pretty much going to reply this but TP beat me to it.

I dont have an exact answer as horses have different capacities. The upper limit for a fine 15.2hh TB will be different from a cob type 15.2hh that is fit and has substantial bone.

That is why I think there is a need for a (proper/approved/legal) study into the impact of rider weights.

Generally speaking I think once you're into the 16-17st bracket it's in the too heavy territory for even bigger animals with more bone.That's in general because I'm sure someone will reply about a tank of a 17hh who could hunt all day carrying 25st with no detrimental effects at all 🙄

There are other factors regarding weight as a highland can carry the dead weight of a stag with relative ease but I personally wouldn't think it acceptable for an 18st rider to ride the same height/build of highland. 

Then there are people with their "solid weight carrying" horses when the horses are actually overweight and therefore should be carrying less rider weight. Their carrying abilities should be calculated against their fit/healthy weight. Just because a fat cob weighs 700kgs it doesnt mean it can take a 20% rider (if that's the chosen method to work out capacity).

I dont know how some posters are so happy to dismiss the animal welfare to blast on about fat shaming instead. 

Even if you want to use the examples getting banded about of fit, tall men who are heavy why should anyone have a right to ride if it is detrimental* to the animal? 

If someone is too heavy they are too heavy. It's a suspension bridge structure, that isnt designed to carry weight, that you are loading onto. 

I appreciate the difficulty is classifying what too heavy actually is for bone/height/build/weight of all the different types and breeds of horse. 

I don't understand the denial and reluctance to address the issue of people being too heavy to be on a horses back. 

No where has it been said that to ride a horse you need to be 5ft4 and 8st. As demonstrated above the upper weights are unhealthy weights for people to actually be never mind the horse carrying it. 

No one has been able to answer about the saddle fitting issues for larger people and I'd imagine because at a certain point it's impossible. The Very Heavy rider in the SD study isnt a rare sight. It's not about shaming anyone for being X weight but it is about considering the horse?

I honestly couldn't care less what weight anyone is but it does concern me when I see horses with too heavy [for them] riders who also dont fit in the saddle.


----------



## pedilia (25 November 2020)

windand rain said:



			It was totally flawed in every way. Sample too small, ill fitting tack, lame horse ans several other significant defects in reasoning I am not certain why anyone would have paid it much attention but they did
		
Click to expand...

Not sure where you have got this information from, my horses was one of the horses that took part and that is simply not the case, all horses had a saddle check by a qualified saddle fitter and a lameness check, many horses were discounted prior to the study for lameness


----------



## Tiddlypom (25 November 2020)

Thanks for joining the thread, pedilia, 

The main beef about the saddle is that it patently did not fit the very heavy rider, though it may well have fitted the horse.

I have seen too large riders being sold too small brand new saddles by ‘well known name’ saddle fitting companies, with the rider’s arse squidging out over the back of the cantle. This messes up the whole weight distribution thing.


----------



## tristar (25 November 2020)

pedilia said:



			Not sure where you have got this information from, my horses was one of the horses that took part and that is simply not the case, all horses had a saddle check by a qualified saddle fitter and a lameness check, many horses were discounted prior to the study for lameness
		
Click to expand...


do you mind me asking what size was the saddle, and make please


----------



## Apercrumbie (25 November 2020)

TPO said:



			I was pretty much going to reply this but TP beat me to it.

I dont have an exact answer as horses have different capacities. The upper limit for a fine 15.2hh TB will be different from a cob type 15.2hh that is fit and has substantial bone.

That is why I think there is a need for a (proper/approved/legal) study into the impact of rider weights.

Generally speaking I think once you're into the 16-17st bracket it's in the too heavy territory for even bigger animals with more bone.That's in general because I'm sure someone will reply about a tank of a 17hh who could hunt all day carrying 25st with no detrimental effects at all 🙄

There are other factors regarding weight as a highland can carry the dead weight of a stag with relative ease but I personally wouldn't think it acceptable for an 18st rider to ride the same height/build of highland.

Then there are people with their "solid weight carrying" horses when the horses are actually overweight and therefore should be carrying less rider weight. Their carrying abilities should be calculated against their fit/healthy weight. Just because a fat cob weighs 700kgs it doesnt mean it can take a 20% rider (if that's the chosen method to work out capacity).

I dont know how some posters are so happy to dismiss the animal welfare to blast on about fat shaming instead.

Even if you want to use the examples getting banded about of fit, tall men who are heavy why should anyone have a right to ride if it is detrimental* to the animal?

If someone is too heavy they are too heavy. It's a suspension bridge structure, that isnt designed to carry weight, that you are loading onto.

I appreciate the difficulty is classifying what too heavy actually is for bone/height/build/weight of all the different types and breeds of horse.

I don't understand the denial and reluctance to address the issue of people being too heavy to be on a horses back.

No where has it been said that to ride a horse you need to be 5ft4 and 8st. As demonstrated above the upper weights are unhealthy weights for people to actually be never mind the horse carrying it.

No one has been able to answer about the saddle fitting issues for larger people and I'd imagine because at a certain point it's impossible. The Very Heavy rider in the SD study isnt a rare sight. It's not about shaming anyone for being X weight but it is about considering the horse?

I honestly couldn't care less what weight anyone is but it does concern me when I see horses with too heavy [for them] riders who also dont fit in the saddle.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for responding. But do you think that a 12 or 13 stone weight limit including tack is realistic or acceptable? I think we all agree that having weight limits in place is reasonable, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't criticise stupid ones.


----------



## TPO (25 November 2020)

Apercrumbie said:



			Thank you for responding. But do you think that a 12 or 13 stone weight limit including tack is realistic or acceptable? I think we all agree that having weight limits in place is reasonable, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't criticise stupid ones.
		
Click to expand...

For a college type set up then yes I think a 13-14st limit is sensible. 

In general riding school could possibly be able to accommodate heavier riders if they have appropriate horses.

In my mind the difference is that I believe many colleges dont own the horses and take in horses sent to them. With an RS you can schedule the work load of horses carrying the odd heavier rider and buy appropriate horses. 

In a college it might be harder to accommodate one, or more, heavier riders due to lack of that type of horse and/or scheduling restraints if a small number of weight carriers were available. So then do you say we can take four riders over 14st but everyone else under 13? A blanket weight limit seems more appropriate?

Surely there is an onus on each person to be fit for function as we expect horses to be? My function is walk hacks up around a loop so I'm fit for that but not for fast work. If I wanted to up the anti then I should get me fitter and lighter first to make things easier for my horses.

Horse riding is still a sport/physical activity so, while there will always be medical exceptions, surely riders have to take some responsibility for their personal fitness and health? Or do we just let anyone at any weight ride because otherwise you get told you're a "fat shamer"?


----------



## honetpot (25 November 2020)

hollyandivy123 said:



			as the average height of the world population has increased over the last 70 years and in conjunction with this the increase in body weight (not talking obesity here), may be it is time that we consider that we need to breed different style of horse to account for this................................

View attachment 59699

Click to expand...

 This is a bit in jest, but some countries people in general are just a lot taller, my MIL was Dutch and that side of the family are nearly all over six foot men and women, my daughter is five eight, with my short genes.
https://ourworldindata.org/human-height
 Breeding a horse that is taller will not really make it stronger, when you look at the world's oldest breeds that were often multi-purpose animals, where I would imagine selection would be if its ill it goes in the stew, they are nearly all under 14hands. The tall horse is a relatively modern invention.


----------



## conniegirl (25 November 2020)

TPO said:



			For a college type set up then yes I think a 13-14st limit is sensible. 

In general riding school could possibly be able to accommodate heavier riders if they have appropriate horses.

In my mind the difference is that I believe many colleges dont own the horses and take in horses sent to them. With an RS you can schedule the work load of horses carrying the odd heavier rider and buy appropriate horses. 

In a college it might be harder to accommodate one, or more, heavier riders due to lack of that type of horse and/or scheduling restraints if a small number of weight carriers were available. So then do you say we can take four riders over 14st but everyone else under 13? A blanket weight limit seems more appropriate?

Surely there is an onus on each person to be fit for function as we expect horses to be? My function is walk hacks up around a loop so I'm fit for that but not for fast work. If I wanted to up the anti then I should get me fitter and lighter first to make things easier for my horses.

Horse riding is still a sport/physical activity so, while there will always be medical exceptions, surely riders have to take some responsibility for their personal fitness and health? Or do we just let anyone at any weight ride because otherwise you get told you're a "fat shamer"?
		
Click to expand...

13 stone INCLUDING tack will exclude most tall girls and most guys. That means a weight limit of 10.5st without tack.
I can get behind a weight limit of 12ish stone without tack but 10.5stone is to low and will promote unhealthy habits/eating.


----------



## ester (25 November 2020)

I wonder if there is some location bias contributing to people's responses, For me the very large rider is a very rare sight. In all my years of riding I can only think of one person I have seen.


----------



## AandK (25 November 2020)

Apercrumbie said:



			Thank you for responding. But do you think that a 12 or 13 stone weight limit including tack is realistic or acceptable? I think we all agree that having weight limits in place is reasonable, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't criticise stupid ones.
		
Click to expand...

That would depend entirely on the horses at that college, wouldn't it. If they don't have any capable of carrying a rider over 13st (incl tack) then there isn't much they can do, other than offer a non-riding course for anyone over that limit.


----------



## maya2008 (25 November 2020)

honetpot said:



			This is a bit in jest, but some countries people in general are just a lot taller, my MIL was Dutch and that side of the family are nearly all over six foot men and women, my daughter is five eight, with my short genes.
https://ourworldindata.org/human-height
 Breeding a horse that is taller will not really make it stronger, when you look at the world's oldest breeds that were often multi-purpose animals, where I would imagine selection would be if its ill it goes in the stew, they are nearly all under 14hands. The tall horse is a relatively modern invention.
		
Click to expand...

I read a really interesting article a few years ago, discussing lameness in horses over 17hh and how the structure of a horse is really not designed to ever be that big. Ponies are well engineered so can cope with more without damage (conditions, lack of perfect warming up, % rider weight, type of work etc). The article was discussing all rounder/sports horse types, but I do know that Shires etc that worked the land rarely worked to an old age.


----------



## Apercrumbie (25 November 2020)

AandK said:



			That would depend entirely on the horses at that college, wouldn't it. If they don't have any capable of carrying a rider over 13st (incl tack) then there isn't much they can do, other than offer a non-riding course for anyone over that limit.
		
Click to expand...

Of course. My assumption is that as a college, they would make sure to have horses suitable for carrying adults. IMO if the horse can't carry 13 stone including tack, then there either are physical problems, or it's just unsuitable as a riding school horse aimed entirely at adults.


----------



## sherry90 (25 November 2020)

Surely we don’t need a study to tell us that if you can’t find a saddle to fit you or your horse, you don’t ride 🤷🏻‍♀️


----------



## windand rain (25 November 2020)

pedilia said:



			Not sure where you have got this information from, my horses was one of the horses that took part and that is simply not the case, all horses had a saddle check by a qualified saddle fitter and a lameness check, many horses were discounted prior to the study for lameness
		
Click to expand...

I take it you considered it safe for a 22 stone person to ride your horse on a saddle fitted to the horse but not the rider. I have always ridden big chunky horses but have never even thought of letting anyone over 100kgs to ride one of them
and although I have always been fat I have never been over 85kgs


----------



## TPO (25 November 2020)

ester said:



			I wonder if there is some location bias contributing to people's responses, For me the very large rider is a very rare sight. In all my years of riding I can only think of one person I have seen.
		
Click to expand...

Are you insinuating that the land of the deep fried Mars bar may be producing more "very heavy" riders? 😜

I was on livery with a very heavy rider. She did have very big horses and they didnt appear to struggle with her but I didnt pay any attention to her riding. It was however obvious seeing her ride through the yard that she didnt at all fit the saddle.

There was an awful example at a show when a too heavy rider & too big for horse/synthetic western saddle (trees only for (very) light people) was competing. The saddle practically bent in two and the skirts were lifted off the horse's back. The horse was visibly uncomfortable and displaying pain faces (the link is often posted on here) as well as other visuals of a sore and unhappy horse. There was lots of whispering amongst show organisers but no on dared say anything in case they were accused of bullying or "fat shaming". That poor wee horse was definitely suffering 😔

Without thinking too hard I could easily list 10 other examples (all the fingers I have to check them off) of riders who were too heavy and/or too big for their saddles that I've either been on yards with or seen out competing. 

Not all were what I would have classed as "too heavy to ride full stop" but were too heavy for the horses that they chose to ride and/or too big for their saddles.


----------



## ester (25 November 2020)

lol, no  . I just sort of realised that I'd consider a 22st rider more theoretical than being a frequent real life situation and that maybe others didn't.


----------



## honetpot (25 November 2020)

If you hunt there are plenty of men who look fairly heavy, the traditional wool hunt coat must weigh a few kilo's.


----------



## Tiddlypom (25 November 2020)

honetpot said:



			If you hunt there are plenty of men who look fairly heavy, the traditional wool hunt coat must weigh a few kilo's.
		
Click to expand...

And *ahem* many of them are not the most balanced or skilful of riders.


----------



## Shilasdair (25 November 2020)

The bottom line is that WE ARE ALL TOO HEAVY FOR OUR HORSES.

There is nothing beneficial to a horse at all, nothing that improves welfare, in being ridden.


----------



## rabatsa (25 November 2020)

I wonder how much a knight in full armour weighed?  How many hours were their horses expected to carry them?


----------



## Annagain (25 November 2020)

honetpot said:



			If you hunt there are plenty of men who look fairly heavy, the traditional wool hunt coat must weigh a few kilo's.
		
Click to expand...

At my heaviest (I've lost 3 1/2 stone recently - aiming for 4) I was as heavy as I would want to put on any of my (past and present) horses - 2 ID types (unregistered breeding but I suspect both at least 3/4 ID if not 100%) and one Shire x Sec D x TB all approx 17hh.  Knowing what my OH (rugby player type, pretty fit*) weighs (he's never been on the back of a horse and won't ever get on one!) I wouldn't be surprised if some of the hunting men  I've seen are 22st. My boys are exactly the sorts they are riding so maybe I wasn't too bad, or maybe they are *really *bad for them and the poor horses are really struggling. Other than that, yes ester, I'd agree it's not that common. Having said that, from the (limited, granted) photos of the VH rider in this study I would not have put her at 22 stone so maybe my judgement on these things is flawed. It doesn't change the fact that they should have had a more gradual increase from the 14st rider to the 22st rider.  

*in the traditional sense of the word.


----------



## ihatework (25 November 2020)

ester said:



			lol, no  . I just sort of realised that I'd consider a 22st rider more theoretical than being a frequent real life situation and that maybe others didn't.
		
Click to expand...

The thing is I wouldn’t actually know what other people weigh unless they admit to it, honestly. I weigh far more than I must look as I often have people telling me I’m fine to ride their horses, yet I know I’m not.

The picture of the very heavy rider, if 22st, I’ve seen quite a number of people that size and bigger riding.


----------



## Pearlsasinger (25 November 2020)

shortstuff99 said:



			Unfortunately it doesn't really matter how good the study was, not having the correct paper work renders it void. If that is found to be the case then the work will have to be redacted. Journals and funders etc are very hot on this.

I had to have a FCO license to gather samples from Antarctica, it didn't take long to get (about a week), which I have to show proof of in all of my work or it can't be published.

I know of someone who gathered some interesting tardigrades from the Galapagos, they didn't have a license though and so nothing can be published about it.

So I am not sure why she needed to forge a letter (if she did) as it wouldn't have taken that long to get, unless she knew it wouldn't be granted for some reason.
		
Click to expand...



How could it possibly be considered ethical to put a 22st rider on a 15.2 horse, of any build, for any length of time?  I am not surprised that SD felt the need to avoid an ethics committee.


----------



## ester (25 November 2020)

honetpot said:



			If you hunt there are plenty of men who look fairly heavy, the traditional wool hunt coat must weigh a few kilo's.
		
Click to expand...

been out with 3 packs in 3 different areas and haven't seen it though I'm sure some exist/I've just totally forgotten about them/was probably going off the pic of the 22st rider and thinking who I had seen that looked simiar. 

IHW I weigh more than I look too, so anything (mostly hhoers) I have ridden in the last couple of years I have been open about my weight, currently on a self imposed ban but working on it


----------



## Annagain (25 November 2020)

rabatsa said:



			I wonder how much a knight in full armour weighed?  How many hours were their horses expected to carry them?
		
Click to expand...

I imagine quite a bit less than we think given humans in general are much taller and heavier now than even 100 years ago, take it back another 500 years and we were probably pretty small -  but horses probably were too.


----------



## DiNozzo (25 November 2020)

I remember when I was a kid, the YO at the stables I learnt at chucked all of us on a set of scales to see if we were where we all were in this discussion.

I was 5inches taller than everyone else at 14, 5'8 and weighed 9 stone 3. Everyone else weighed 7 stone something. I felt hugely obese and dieted dangerously for several months until I was told to knock it off because obviously they weigh less they're smaller. But that's not what you think about when you're 14.

100% yes there should be weight limits, but they need to be imposed sensibly. For example, we should never have been weighed together.


----------



## HashRouge (25 November 2020)

Shilasdair said:



			The bottom line is that WE ARE ALL TOO HEAVY FOR OUR HORSES.

There is nothing beneficial to a horse at all, nothing that improves welfare, in being ridden.
		
Click to expand...

Well yes, but unless we are all going to stop riding we still need to have a conversation about what is a reasonable weight to expect a horse to carry.


----------



## honetpot (25 November 2020)

Henry VIII weighed from 70-90kg+ from estimates from his armour, and depending on the armour that could have weighed well over 20kg
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/23936
 I would imagine the cheaper less bespoke stuff would have weighed a lot more.


----------



## thefarsideofthefield (25 November 2020)

Apercrumbie said:



			Of course. My assumption is that as a college, they would make sure to have horses suitable for carrying adults. IMO if the horse can't carry 13 stone including tack, then there either are physical problems, or it's just unsuitable as a riding school horse aimed entirely at adults.
		
Click to expand...


So , before anyone jumps down my throat , I am talking about college students here ie people attendingequine colleges who expect to be provided with horses to ride that are not their own .
No such thing as Equine Colleges in my day so I freely admit that I have little idea of the courses on offer ( feel free to put me right ) , but I assume that the students spending time and money attending these establishments are hoping to pursue a career with horses when they leave ? I understand that there are non-riding horse related courses available ( nutritionist , managerial etc ) but surely , if you are hoping to be able to ride as part of your chosen career , you would understand the need for your weight to be under reasonable limit . I trained for my BHSAI ( 40+ years ago ) as a working pupil at a large equestrian centre and was , as part of my training ,  expected to ride a wide variety of horses of different shapes , sizes types and abilities in different disciplines ,and I had to demonstrate that I could do that in the exam . We rode 2 horses on the flat and 2 different ones for the jumping . It may sound harsh but what use is the rider , to an employer ,who can only ride one/two massive weight carrying horse(s) ? And how can any ' career ' rider gain experience if they can only ride the one ( or two ) horses available to them ? I once worked for a hunting family where the father was 6'6" and the son 6'2" and they had 17hh+ horses , but his wife and daughter were both @ 5'4" and I had to exercise their 15.2" hunters too ( no - you can't ride and lead every time ) . I have since worked with eventers , hunters , showjumpers , both in the UK and abroad , and without a doubt , if my prospective employers thought I was too heavy to do the job required ( ie ride their horses ) well , then I'm going to struggle to find work  . It's up to me to make myself employable , not their responsibility to provide me with weight carriers . Even just as an instructor it's extremely helpful to be able to hop on a horse when required .
 I have worked hard to maintain a sensible weight and keep myself fit (  not just for riding but because any job involving horses is going to be both demanding and physical ) and , despite being 5'10" and no stick insect , I have managed to do that without developing an eating disorder ( but I am now very knowledgeble about human fitness and nutrition !) . I take responsibility for myself because a) I want to be healthy b) I care about the welfare of the horses in my care and c ) I want(ed) to work !
So , just to reiterate , I am talking about colleges here . Where does the 14st student expect to find employment that includes RIDING on completing their course ?


----------



## ycbm (25 November 2020)

honetpot said:



			Henry VIII weighed from 70-90kg+ from estimates from his armour, and depending on the armour that could have weighed well over 20kg
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/23936
 I would imagine the cheaper less bespoke stuff would have weighed a lot more.
		
Click to expand...

I think horses back then were considered old at 9, possibly partly because nobody cared how much weight they carried as long as they were still on their feet.  
.


----------



## ycbm (25 November 2020)

thefarsideofthefield said:



			So , before anyone jumps down my throat , I am talking about college students here ie people attendingequine colleges who expect to be provided with horses to ride that are not their own .
No such thing as Equine Colleges in my day so I freely admit that I have little idea of the courses on offer ( feel free to put me right ) , but I assume that the students spending time and money attending these establishments are hoping to pursue a career with horses when they leave ? I understand that there are non-riding horse related courses available ( nutritionist , managerial etc ) but surely , if you are hoping to be able to ride as part of your chosen career , you would understand the need for your weight to be under reasonable limit . I trained for my BHSAI ( 40+ years ago ) as a working pupil at a large equestrian centre and was , as part of my training ,  expected to ride a wide variety of horses of different shapes , sizes types and abilities in different disciplines ,and I had to demonstrate that I could do that in the exam . We rode 2 horses on the flat and 2 different ones for the jumping . It may sound harsh but what use is the rider , to an employer ,who can only ride one/two massive weight carrying horse(s) ? And how can any ' career ' rider gain experience if they can only ride the one ( or two ) horses available to them ? I once worked for a hunting family where the father was 6'6" and the son 6'2" and they had 17hh+ horses , but his wife and daughter were both @ 5'4" and I had to exercise their 15.2" hunters too ( no - you can't ride and lead every time ) . I have since worked with eventers , hunters , showjumpers , both in the UK and abroad , and without a doubt , if my prospective employers thought I was too heavy to do the job required ( ie ride their horses ) well , then I'm going to struggle to find work  . It's up to me to make myself employable , not their responsibility to provide me with weight carriers . Even just as an instructor it's extremely helpful to be able to hop on a horse when required .
 I have worked hard to maintain a sensible weight and keep myself fit (  not just for riding but because any job involving horses is going to be both demanding and physical ) and , despite being 5'10" and no stick insect , I have managed to do that without developing an eating disorder ( but I am now very knowledgeble about human fitness and nutrition !) . I take responsibility for myself because a) I want to be healthy b) I care about the welfare of the horses in my care and c ) I want(ed) to work !
So , just to reiterate , I am talking about colleges here . Where does the 14st student expect to find employment that includes RIDING on completing their course ?
		
Click to expand...

I've been struggling to word this all afternoon.  Excellent post tFSotF


----------



## AandK (25 November 2020)

ycbm said:



			I've been struggling to word this all afternoon.  Excellent post tFSotF
		
Click to expand...

Agreed. Colleges are not riding schools, and therefore they should not need to have a wide range of horses to cater for all heights and weights and ages, and their horses are often loaned, not owned. The vast majority will be students in the 17-21 ish age bracket and probably mostly female (going on my own experience there, as I went to an equine college years ago, although that may have changed in the last 20yrs!).


----------



## Apercrumbie (25 November 2020)

thefarsideofthefield said:



			So , before anyone jumps down my throat , I am talking about college students here ie people attendingequine colleges who expect to be provided with horses to ride that are not their own .
No such thing as Equine Colleges in my day so I freely admit that I have little idea of the courses on offer ( feel free to put me right ) , but I assume that the students spending time and money attending these establishments are hoping to pursue a career with horses when they leave ? I understand that there are non-riding horse related courses available ( nutritionist , managerial etc ) but surely , if you are hoping to be able to ride as part of your chosen career , you would understand the need for your weight to be under reasonable limit . I trained for my BHSAI ( 40+ years ago ) as a working pupil at a large equestrian centre and was , as part of my training ,  expected to ride a wide variety of horses of different shapes , sizes types and abilities in different disciplines ,and I had to demonstrate that I could do that in the exam . We rode 2 horses on the flat and 2 different ones for the jumping . It may sound harsh but what use is the rider , to an employer ,who can only ride one/two massive weight carrying horse(s) ? And how can any ' career ' rider gain experience if they can only ride the one ( or two ) horses available to them ? I once worked for a hunting family where the father was 6'6" and the son 6'2" and they had 17hh+ horses , but his wife and daughter were both @ 5'4" and I had to exercise their 15.2" hunters too ( no - you can't ride and lead every time ) . I have since worked with eventers , hunters , showjumpers , both in the UK and abroad , and without a doubt , if my prospective employers thought I was too heavy to do the job required ( ie ride their horses ) well , then I'm going to struggle to find work  . It's up to me to make myself employable , not their responsibility to provide me with weight carriers . Even just as an instructor it's extremely helpful to be able to hop on a horse when required .
I have worked hard to maintain a sensible weight and keep myself fit (  not just for riding but because any job involving horses is going to be both demanding and physical ) and , despite being 5'10" and no stick insect , I have managed to do that without developing an eating disorder ( but I am now very knowledgeble about human fitness and nutrition !) . I take responsibility for myself because a) I want to be healthy b) I care about the welfare of the horses in my care and c ) I want(ed) to work !
So , just to reiterate , I am talking about colleges here . Where does the 14st student expect to find employment that includes RIDING on completing their course ?
		
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but as I have repeatedly stated, the limit of 12/13 stone including tack is just silly for adults! A sound horse should easily carry more than that. This isn't about having no limits on weight, but on having sensible ones.


----------



## ozpoz (25 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			Thanks for joining the thread, pedilia,

The main beef about the saddle is that it patently did not fit the very heavy rider, though it may well have fitted the horse.

I have seen too large riders being sold too small brand new saddles by ‘well known name’ saddle fitting companies, with the rider’s arse squidging out over the back of the cantle. This messes up the whole weight distribution thing.
		
Click to expand...

This is pointed out in the study, and the reason for it was to reflect and address real life situations where the saddle is fitted to the horse but not the rider. 
It is a common sight and still sadly a not uncommon issue.  Hopefully, awareness has increased since the study was published.


----------



## McGrools (25 November 2020)

TPO said:



			I was pretty much going to reply this but TP beat me to it.
I dont know how some posters are so happy to dismiss the animal welfare to blast on about fat shaming instead. 

I don't understand the denial and reluctance to address the issue of people being too heavy to be on a horses back.

well said TPO

I teach at a riding school and its very obvious in the horses general demeanor and way of going when they have to carry a rider too heavy for them. Some will look obviously lame, others wont move forward and their way of going is nowhere near as good as when a lighter rider is up.
We have had to introduce a 13 stone weight limit because we can’t source enough safe weight carrying riding school horses and those we have are struggling with the workload. They all have to use the same saddle for every type of rider, so saddle fit does play a big part.
It is upsetting as a teacher seeing a genuine soul of a horse being asked to carry more than it is comfortable with.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Shilasdair (25 November 2020)

HashRouge said:



			Well yes, but unless we are all going to stop riding we still need to have a conversation about what is a reasonable weight to expect a horse to carry.
		
Click to expand...

Clearly subjective definition applies here - too heavy is heavier than me - but I'm fine, and a great rider.   Horsey people like to use themselves as the benchmark for 'reasonable weight' and 'reasonable ability'.


----------



## ApolloStorm (25 November 2020)

Having recently had a conversation with a friend, she was saying that anyone over 18stone shouldn’t be riding. And someone that heavy is “ in worlds strongest man territory”. As someone who has never been light and in my adult life has never been under 13st (not for want of trying, for a brief period I was eating like a nutritionist and having Personal training 5x per week, but I’m 5’8 and built like a cob. But as it turns out I have a health issue which causes me to hold onto fat) 
I generally find that people misjudge how much people weigh, and are to quick to condemn. At 20%, an 18stone rider + tack would need a horse of 635kg- which to a lot of horses with some substance and bone is more than a reasonable weight, I’ve certainly owned horses of 600-650kg who were not fat! But I suppose that 20% rule was the aim of this study, though if there has been misconduct then it could invalidate study as someone above has said. I think some more research does need doing into this area, as it’d be nice to have some “ industry guidelines”


----------



## conniegirl (25 November 2020)

ApolloStorm said:



			Having recently had a conversation with a friend, she was saying that anyone over 18stone shouldn’t be riding. And someone that heavy is “ in worlds strongest man territory”. As someone who has never been light and in my adult life has never been under 13st (not for want of trying, for a brief period I was eating like a nutritionist and having Personal training 5x per week, but I’m 5’8 and built like a cob. But as it turns out I have a health issue which causes me to hold onto fat) 
I generally find that people misjudge how much people weigh, and are to quick to condemn. At 20%, an 18stone rider + tack would need a horse of 635kg- which to a lot of horses with some substance and bone is more than a reasonable weight, I’ve certainly owned horses of 600-650kg who were not fat! But I suppose that 20% rule was the aim of this study, though if there has been misconduct then it could invalidate study as someone above has said. I think some more research does need doing into this area, as it’d be nice to have some “ industry guidelines”
		
Click to expand...

Lol! WSM the lightest tends to be around 22 stone, Eddie hall when he won WSM was 206kg which is just a smidge over 32stone. that is definitely too heavy to get on a horse though he could probably pick mine up and carry him!


----------



## ApolloStorm (25 November 2020)

conniegirl said:



			Lol! WSM the lightest tends to be around 22 stone, Eddie hall when he won WSM was 206kg which is just a smidge over 32stone. that is definitely too heavy to get on a horse though he could probably pick mine up and carry him!
		
Click to expand...

Quite!! But demonstrates the point that some people have really skewed views on how heavy people are.


----------



## rabatsa (25 November 2020)

ycbm said:



			I think horses back then were considered old at 9, possibly partly because nobody cared how much weight they carried as long as they were still on their feet. 
.
		
Click to expand...

I would also think that lack of internal parasite control played a part in short livespans.  I think that probably horses were a lot tougher, just look at racehorses and how they have altered.


----------



## maya2008 (25 November 2020)

Shilasdair said:



			The bottom line is that WE ARE ALL TOO HEAVY FOR OUR HORSES.

There is nothing beneficial to a horse at all, nothing that improves welfare, in being ridden.
		
Click to expand...

Now that...my pssm mare would disagree with, as would the vet in regards to her. Left in the field to recover from a field injury for 9 months, she wasted away to almost nothing. When we brought her in again, the saddle fitter was astounded as there was ‘no muscle anywhere’ - obviously some, but a horse of otherwise good weight had enormous muscle wastage due to her condition. I got back on, bareback it turned out as no saddle would fit even with pads etc and flocking adjustments. A few minutes a day built gradually and 18 months later I had the pleasure of lending her to a friend for a hack - watching that mare gallop up the hill beside me, muscles rippling, clearly fit and healthy, made all the hard work and endless patience worth it. She won’t live as long as she might because it would be cruel to retire her,  but she has latched onto my little girl and is being the first ridden of her dreams. I still need to ride as she needs to be worked correctly to keep certain muscles, but she is a happy, healthy looking horse now, where out of work she was not.

My TB would also disagree - before her retirement she had freer movement behind and her locking stifles bothered her less/not at all. I worked hard to keep the muscles around those ligaments built up and strong, so everything moved correctly. Now they are more of a problem and I absolutely could not put anything feisty in with her as she would not be able to defend herself. 

My youngsters fight at the gate to be ridden first, shove their heads in each others’ headcollars and generally are eager to go out and explore. We have no stables, being caught only ever means work. Interestingly, if they have hurt themselves, they hang back and stay away. Then I know something is wrong! 

For my herd, where work mostly means a fun hack, they love their work for the variety it provides. For some of them, it provides health benefits also.

I am sure though for a healthy horse in the wild, riding would provide no benefit at all...


----------



## horsimous (26 November 2020)

I thought something was a bit amiss with some of her articles as she almost seemed to decide the outcome and then skew the write up to fit it.


----------



## HashRouge (26 November 2020)

Shilasdair said:



			Clearly subjective definition applies here - too heavy is heavier than me - but I'm fine, and a great rider.   Horsey people like to use themselves as the benchmark for 'reasonable weight' and 'reasonable ability'.
		
Click to expand...

I do get your point, but I'm not sure it's hugely helpful. Yes, we all like to think we don't do any damage to our horses by riding them and yes, they aren't designed to be ridden so probably that's not true BUT unless we are going to call for an outright ban on any riding, at all, we need to talk about what constitutes *too *much. You can come back at me and say "well, any weight is too much", but that doesn't help anyone - unless we are going to ban riding completely. Perhaps the question should be rephrased - what weight can a horse be expected to carry without it risking long-lasting harm to their physical health? And we know this is possible, because there are plenty of retired horses enjoying their old age with a bit of arthritis, yes, but otherwise seemingly unharmed by their ridden careers (I've certainly got one).


----------



## sbloom (26 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			Thanks for joining the thread, pedilia,

The main beef about the saddle is that it patently did not fit the very heavy rider, though it may well have fitted the horse.

I have seen too large riders being sold too small brand new saddles by ‘well known name’ saddle fitting companies, with the rider’s arse squidging out over the back of the cantle. This messes up the whole weight distribution thing.
		
Click to expand...

I applaud any discussion about saddle fit for larger riders and the realities of it, but it always seems to fall to saddle fitters to sort this.  We have a fixed length ribcage, and unless we're working with alternative styles of saddles, I firmly believe that 99% rider's weight should be on, and not beyond, the ribcage.  Some believe the panel can extend beyond the back rib but the tree must be up to the back rib only.  I believe that's a difficult judgement call, and that some horses don't even like a saddle TO the back rib, fitting beyond it will always be higher risk.  And not all horses can take wider seats and rear panels either.  

Do I turn the customer away (and I have done!) for them to find another saddle fitter who will fit them something (to whatever standard), or do I find the best compromise, with remedial padding to help absorb shock and spread pressure, knowing at least I'm doing my best by them?  Recommending they ride less and do more in hand work to build those rider carrying muscles and improve posture?

When, as riders, will we even THINK about can a horse take a big enough saddle for us, when we buy them, perhaps asking the vet when we have them vetted? Do vets know enough about this?  When will we ask our equinebodyworkers to tell us whether we really ARE a bit too big for the "saddle platform", and ask why there are dents under the back of the saddle under what looks like a really well fitting saddle?  Do bodyworkers know enough about this?

I think this is a massively difficult topic, but I do resent that after a vet and bodyworker have seen the horse, which is the case before we see most recently purchased horses, that it's down to us to tell the rider they've bought the wrong horse?


----------



## LadyGascoyne (26 November 2020)

I am actually quite shocked at 22 stone.

I’m not riding until I shift the 5kg I’ve put on over the last few months, and that is more than double my weight.

I’m hugely disappointed not to be in the saddle right now but I’ve made a call based on wanting Mim to still be going for a potter down the lanes at 30 +.

I’m sure Mim could carry me now, and I’m sure she wouldn’t even notice the difference. But carrying something every day is wearing, and her soundness in 20 years time is as important to me as her soundness tomorrow.

I totally understand Shils point re “we are all too heavy”. To me it’s about mitigating the degree of damage we inevitably cause. I know I’m heavier than I can be at this weight, so I’ll be as light as I can be. I appreciate that’s a different number for everyone but at some point common sense has to say that you know you are going to cause long term pain.


----------



## windand rain (26 November 2020)

I still think in it all we have to recognise the damaged caused by the horse being obese itself lower joint problems must be exacerbated by the horse carrying 100kgs of fat itself even if it might cause fewer back issues


----------



## tristar (26 November 2020)

rabatsa said:



			I would also think that lack of internal parasite control played a part in short livespans.  I think that probably horses were a lot tougher, just look at racehorses and how they have altered.
		
Click to expand...


i have  books from many years ago,  a lot of the tb horses who won at the highest levels are recorded as living to 25 to 30 years, the true lifespan of a horse

its debatable whether horse management was worse or better then or whether horses were tougher


----------



## TPO (26 November 2020)

windand rain said:



			I still think in it all we have to recognise the damaged caused by the horse being obese itself lower joint problems must be exacerbated by the horse carrying 100kgs of fat itself even if it might cause fewer back issues
		
Click to expand...

Yip and like I said before many see this big (fat) horse that is 200kgs overweight and say "I'm less than 20% of 700kgs" when really, if calculating by %, it should be a % of the IDEAL 500kg bodyweight.

Figures made up for illustrative purposes only 😬

Then you are down the rabbit hole of people not recognising fat horses...

100% agree with @sbloom post. One of many reasons that I didnt last long as EBW/saddle fitter was that exact scenario. I went to see one older wee welsh C where the owner was far too big. Weight aside she was far too tall (5ft10 I think she said) to ever fit into the 17" she had and my judgement was that horse would be better in a 16.5" max. The lady was also heavy built and over the back of the saddle due to that and long thighs.

The pony has a sore back with raised bruising, it was lame hand walking and had zero topline. It physically struggled carrying her.

I advised getting a vet for the lameness. I suspected hocks and arthritis, but I'm not a vet.

I let her feel the raised swollen areas on her horses back and advised a rest from ridden work and to look I to physio/massage after the vet had okayed it. She told me physio for horses was nonsense and her horse didnt need it before proceeding to tell me how much she got out of sport massages for her back and shoulders 😏 this was a clever well educated woman who couldn't equate her niggles to the horse who carried her possibly needing similar attention.

As @sbloom said there were things I tried to advise to make life better for the horse. As she was insisting on carrying on riding there were saddle set ups that would make things slightly better for the pony. Owner said she wasnt spending money on an older horse, would be keeping that saddle and just wanted the standard reflock. I gave in hand exercises to help the ponys core strength and advised cutting down on ridden time until vet had seen the horse but it all fell on deaf ears.

Owner continuously told me how much they loved the pony and how amazing a pony she was 🙄

She clearly thought she was fine to ride that wee pony regardless.

If there was a proper (authorised!) study done then maybe vets, trainers, saddles, physios, etc would feel empowered to speak up on behalf of the horse and have more than common sense as back up?


----------



## Not_so_brave_anymore (26 November 2020)

I would find it much more useful for someone to compile a comprehensive list of early "warning signs" to look out for in a ridden horse. There's too many variables to even try and come up with any sort of rule of thumb really. 

You can't do right for doing wrong sometimes. It's really easy to dismiss pain responses as behavioural problems. But it's equally easy to throw money at "diagnosing" a tricky horse when actually in some instances they DO just need a firmer hand and more exercise. 

Oh ignore me, I'm rambling - I'm just having an anxious pony day!


----------



## tristar (26 November 2020)

maya2008 said:



			Now that...my pssm mare would disagree with, as would the vet in regards to her. Left in the field to recover from a field injury for 9 months, she wasted away to almost nothing. When we brought her in again, the saddle fitter was astounded as there was ‘no muscle anywhere’ - obviously some, but a horse of otherwise good weight had enormous muscle wastage due to her condition. I got back on, bareback it turned out as no saddle would fit even with pads etc and flocking adjustments. A few minutes a day built gradually and 18 months later I had the pleasure of lending her to a friend for a hack - watching that mare gallop up the hill beside me, muscles rippling, clearly fit and healthy, made all the hard work and endless patience worth it. She won’t live as long as she might because it would be cruel to retire her,  but she has latched onto my little girl and is being the first ridden of her dreams. I still need to ride as she needs to be worked correctly to keep certain muscles, but she is a happy, healthy looking horse now, where out of work she was not.

My TB would also disagree - before her retirement she had freer movement behind and her locking stifles bothered her less/not at all. I worked hard to keep the muscles around those ligaments built up and strong, so everything moved correctly. Now they are more of a problem and I absolutely could not put anything feisty in with her as she would not be able to defend herself. 

My youngsters fight at the gate to be ridden first, shove their heads in each others’ headcollars and generally are eager to go out and explore. We have no stables, being caught only ever means work. Interestingly, if they have hurt themselves, they hang back and stay away. Then I know something is wrong! 

For my herd, where work mostly means a fun hack, they love their work for the variety it provides. For some of them, it provides health benefits also.

I am sure though for a healthy horse in the wild, riding would provide no benefit at all...
		
Click to expand...


no one will ever convince me that riding a horse correctly is bad for it, the time and effort taken to produce a properly schooled horse is a passage of joy in itself, and to see an animal grow and change in posture and self esteem beats winning  rosettes any day

if you have never gone down that road   don`t tell others it does not exist, if you are not knowledgeable enough to travel it why try to tell others it can`t be done

horses are like people in the way they can enjoy movement and mental stimulation and have the intelligence to learn and to feel the benefits of regular gymnastics, and generally taking part in life thats what its for, not sitting on the sidelines or in a stable 23 hours a day or hanging around in the mud bored stiff, and when man and horse come together something wonderful happens and both rise above the everyday

of course if you are too lazy to make the effort l don`t try to drag others down with you


----------



## Annagain (26 November 2020)

TPO said:



			Yip and like I said before many see this big (fat) horse that is 200kgs overweight and say "I'm less than 20% of 700kgs" when really, if calculating by %, it should be a % of the IDEAL 500kg bodyweight.

Figures made up for illustrative purposes only 😬

Then you are down the rabbit hole of people not recognising fat horses...

100% agree with @sbloom post. One of many reasons that I didnt last long as EBW/saddle fitter was that exact scenario. I went to see one older wee welsh C where the owner was far too big. Weight aside she was far too tall (5ft10 I think she said) to ever fit into the 17" she had and my judgement was that horse would be better in a 16.5" max. The lady was also heavy built and over the back of the saddle due to that and long thighs.

The pony has a sore back with raised bruising, it was lame hand walking and had zero topline. It physically struggled carrying her.

I advised getting a vet for the lameness. I suspected hocks and arthritis, but I'm not a vet.

I let her feel the raised swollen areas on her horses back and advised a rest from ridden work and to look I to physio/massage after the vet had okayed it. She told me physio for horses was nonsense and her horse didnt need it before proceeding to tell me how much she got out of sport massages for her back and shoulders 😏 this was a clever well educated woman who couldn't equate her niggles to the horse who carried her possibly needing similar attention.

As @sbloom said there were things I tried to advise to make life better for the horse. As she was insisting on carrying on riding there were saddle set ups that would make things slightly better for the pony. Owner said she wasnt spending money on an older horse, would be keeping that saddle and just wanted the standard reflock. I gave in hand exercises to help the ponys core strength and advised cutting down on ridden time until vet had seen the horse but it all fell on deaf ears.

Owner continuously told me how much they loved the pony and how amazing a pony she was 🙄

She clearly thought she was fine to ride that wee pony regardless.

If there was a proper (authorised!) study done then maybe vets, trainers, saddles, physios, etc would feel empowered to speak up on behalf of the horse and have more than common sense as back up?
		
Click to expand...

That's so sad, I don't understand why anybody would treat any horse like that, let alone an "amazing" pony she had clearly had for years. I tend to mix with people very like myself, who care for their horses in the same way so am a bit naïve, I suppose, when it comes to things like this - or I probably choose not to see it as it's more comfortable for me to think everyone is as good to their horses as my friends and I are. You must have to develop such a thick skin as someone who sees the whole range, knowing you can't help them all.


----------



## Annagain (26 November 2020)

tristar said:



			no one will ever convince me that riding a horse correctly is bad for it, the time and effort taken to produce a properly schooled horse is a passage of joy in itself, and to see an animal grow and change in posture and self esteem beats winning  rosettes any day

if you have never gone down that road   don`t tell others it does not exist, if you are not knowledgeable enough to travel it why try to tell others it can`t be done

horses are like people in the way they can enjoy movement and mental stimulation and have the intelligence to learn and to feel the benefits of regular gymnastics, and generally taking part in life thats what its for, not sitting on the sidelines or in a stable 23 hours a day or hanging around in the mud bored stiff, and when man and horse come together something wonderful happens and both rise above the everyday

of course if you are too lazy to make the effort l don`t try to drag others down with you
		
Click to expand...

To be fair  I don't think Shils was advocating leaving horses in stables instead of riding them, she was simply taking the argument to the extreme to prove a point  i.e. until (wo)man domesticated the horse for his/her purposes they did not carry any weight and were therefore never 'designed' to carrry weight. Of course, thousands of years of domestication, selective breeding and scientific advances mean horses are better evolved to carry weight now than they were and many enjoy that interaction with humans but that still isn't their biological raison d'etre.


----------



## tristar (26 November 2020)

and i am taking it to the middle point.


----------



## tristar (26 November 2020)

annagain said:



			To be fair  I don't think Shils was advocating leaving horses in stables instead of riding them, she was simply taking the argument to the extreme to prove a point  i.e. until (wo)man domesticated the horse for his/her purposes they did not carry any weight and were therefore never 'designed' to carrry weight. Of course, thousands of years of domestication, selective breeding and scientific advances mean horses are better evolved to carry weight now than they were and many enjoy that interaction with humans but that still isn't their biological raison d'etre.
		
Click to expand...

try reading what they actually said


----------



## TPO (26 November 2020)

annagain said:



			To be fair  I don't think Shils was advocating leaving horses in stables instead of riding them, she was simply taking the argument to the extreme to prove a point  i.e. until (wo)man domesticated the horse for his/her purposes they did not carry any weight and were therefore never 'designed' to carrry weight. Of course, thousands of years of domestication, selective breeding and scientific advances mean horses are better evolved to carry weight now than they were and many enjoy that interaction with humans but that still isn't their biological raison d'etre.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly; to say otherwise is to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding and knowledge about literally everything equine related from anatomy to training. 

Ignorance is bliss I guess 🙄😏


----------



## Shilasdair (26 November 2020)

annagain said:



			To be fair  I don't think Shils was advocating leaving horses in stables instead of riding them, she was simply taking the argument to the extreme to prove a point  i.e. until (wo)man domesticated the horse for his/her purposes they did not carry any weight and were therefore never 'designed' to carrry weight. Of course, thousands of years of domestication, selective breeding and scientific advances mean horses are better evolved to carry weight now than they were and many enjoy that interaction with humans but that still isn't their biological raison d'etre.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly.   
And while you can argue that exercise/movement is beneficial for the horse (and mimics their natural lifestyle) you can't really argue that carrying a human on their back is physically beneficial for them in itself.  

I'm pointing out that we need to have a more intelligent conversation about harm mitigation than a blanket '22 stone is too heavy' and '11 stone is fine' (what, for a Shetland?).

I find it interesting that people are saying more people are too heavy for ponies (it's true - human height and therefore weight has shot up in the last century) but at the same time I remember a thread where I argued that Highland pony breed standards should be modernised to allow a larger, but still proportionate type (and was shouted down ).    So as a society, do only short light women ride - and we exclude taller women, and men?  

My feeling is that the best way of protecting horse welfare if we insist on riding, is to calculate it as a proportion of the horse's bodyweight (using ideal condition scores).

Incidentally, Tristar, I don't ride at the moment (my two are field ornaments) but have ridden/taught riding in the past.


----------



## Willow1306 (26 November 2020)

Not_so_brave_anymore said:



			I would find it much more useful for someone to compile a comprehensive list of early "warning signs" to look out for in a ridden horse. There's too many variables to even try and come up with any sort of rule of thumb really.
		
Click to expand...

This has been done: The Ridden Horse Pain Ethogram. It was developed by the very same vet, who has done so much for equine welfare over the course of her career, that so many people on this thread are so quick to vilify.

Here is a quick link:https://www.eurodressage.com/index....longer-how-ridden-horse-pain-ethogram-evolved


----------



## tristar (26 November 2020)

ignorance is never bliss, if you live in the real world


----------



## Shilasdair (26 November 2020)

Perhaps this is also a good place to share this video again 'Recognising subtle lameness'






One of a very helpful series.
(Although - I've yet to hear an instructor say 'use a stronger bit/use more spurs/use more leg or ride him through it' so Devil knows who they are training with!


----------



## tristar (26 November 2020)

Shilasdair said:



			Exactly.   
And while you can argue that exercise/movement is beneficial for the horse (and mimics their natural lifestyle) you can't really argue that carrying a human on their back is physically beneficial for them in itself.  

I'm pointing out that we need to have a more intelligent conversation about harm mitigation than a blanket '22 stone is too heavy' and '11 stone is fine' (what, for a Shetland?).

I find it interesting that people are saying more people are too heavy for ponies (it's true - human height and therefore weight has shot up in the last century) but at the same time I remember a thread where I argued that Highland pony breed standards should be modernised to allow a larger, but still proportionate type (and was shouted down ).    So as a society, do only short light women ride - and we exclude taller women, and men?  

My feeling is that the best way of protecting horse welfare if we insist on riding, is to calculate it as a proportion of the horse's bodyweight (using ideal condition scores).

Incidentally, Tristar, I don't ride at the moment (my two are field ornaments) but have ridden/taught riding in the past.
		
Click to expand...


but people will continue to ride so you are right we need a conversation, but its not just about weight the whole interaction of farriery, training methods, husbandry and weight and our expectations of what we hope to get from riding and what the horse can get from it, when i had an interest in saddlery i would sell about 20 saddles a week and learned a lot, that was many years ago, many saddle makers had never been near a horse. vets who never rode a horse, dubious farriers, trainers who had no idea about straightness etc

to gain a true pic they all need to work together, saddlers, farriers, vets, trainers from different areas and not in isolation, weight is only one issue, a fuller pic of how working a horse  can be beneficial to horses lives because they are here and are going to be ridden


----------



## ihatework (26 November 2020)

annagain said:



			That's so sad, I don't understand why anybody would treat any horse like that, let alone an "amazing" pony she had clearly had for years. I tend to mix with people very like myself, who care for their horses in the same way so am a bit naïve, I suppose, when it comes to things like this - or I probably choose not to see it as it's more comfortable for me to think everyone is as good to their horses as my friends and I are. You must have to develop such a thick skin as someone who sees the whole range, knowing you can't help them all.
		
Click to expand...

And I’d imagine that is very similar to what Sue Dyson has seen in her long and very well respected career. 
Probably many many lame horses that are ‘loved and adored’ by their owners who are either very bad riders or too heavy for their horses (or both). And very upsetting and frustrating having to try and treat these horses where owners are blind to reality. So I can see why she might be passionate enough about it to get to the point of doing the study, however poor that study was, and if the ethics regulations were forged as is alleged.

Seeing how it has come about doesn’t mean it’s right or condoned btw. Which is why, if this is proven, it’s so so saddening and super frustrating.


----------



## Shilasdair (26 November 2020)

tristar said:



			but people will continue to ride so you are right we need a conversation, but its not just about weight the whole interaction of farriery, training methods, husbandry and weight and our expectations of what we hope to get from riding and what the horse can get from it, when i had an interest in saddlery i would sell about 20 saddles a week and learned a lot, that was many years ago, many saddle makers had never been near a horse. vets who never rode a horse, dubious farriers, trainers who had no idea about straightness etc

to gain a true pic they all need to work together, saddlers, farriers, vets, trainers from different areas and not in isolation, weight is only one issue, a fuller pic of how working a horse  can be beneficial to horses lives because they are here and are going to be ridden
		
Click to expand...

Agreed - but one step at a time!  

One thing I don't understand - why are saddles so blooming heavy and uncomfortable?  And why are so many of them still designed for a male pelvis?
Anyway, I digress.


----------



## Lillian_paddington (26 November 2020)

Regarding the equestrian college weight limit - I think 15% including tack is more realistic than 20%. I’d be a little over 10% on mine with tack and he definitely couldn’t take twice my weight comfortably. 15% of a 550kg horse is 13 stone. Very few of their horses are likely to be 600kg+ weight carriers and it’s also worth bearing in mind they have to work a lot more hours than the average leisure horse. No it’s not convenient but there you go, it was a decision made for the welfare of the horses so good on them.


----------



## sbloom (26 November 2020)

The first of two blog posts about saddle platform length, study it and take a tape measure when going to view a horse to purchase! https://www.ahsaddles.com/post/2019/04/30/horse-shopping-saddle-length-part-1



Shilasdair said:



			One thing I don't understand - why are saddles so blooming heavy and uncomfortable?  And why are so many of them still designed for a male pelvis?
Anyway, I digress.
		
Click to expand...

Trees are designed to fit horses first and foremost, there is more variation between different female pelvises, than there are on average between male and female.  It's a very individual thing, and the marketing hype behind "female friendly saddles" is just that. And the materials that go into them are on the heavy side, and that heft can also help stability.  Plastic treed saddles can be lighter but they also often cant sit down and around the horse.  You should only worry about weight of saddle being a factor if you struggle to lift it yourself, or if you're at the limit of what the horse can carry,  The difference, with stirrups and pad etc, between the heaviest and lightest regular saddles is less than most people's weight can fluctuate in a year.  A good fit is WAY more important.


----------



## Tiddlypom (26 November 2020)

sbloom said:



			I think this is a massively difficult topic, but I do resent that after a vet and bodyworker have seen the horse, which is the case before we see most recently purchased horses, that it's down to us to tell the rider they've bought the wrong horse?
		
Click to expand...

You are coming at it from a different angle, though? The vet and bodyworker may be unaware that it will be difficult to fit a saddle to the horse that will fit the rider.

The saddle fitter that I now use works in conjunction  with a chiro vet - if there is a mismatch between what the horse can take and what the rider needs, the rider will be told.

The ‘big name’ saddle selling and fitting company that I mentioned upthread wouldn’t know a correctly fitting saddle if it bit them up the bum. They also sold a brand new 18” saddle to a petite rider with a long backed horse, the rider was swimming in it from the start.


----------



## tristar (26 November 2020)

to be honest i have two saddles i use mainly thorowgood T6 and a crosby dressage and  i find them both comfortable, they fit well as can be expected, i have other gp saddles, but don`t use them a lot, i am 5ft 6 and 10 stone my shape is athletic medium build so probably it should make it easier for me to suit many saddles, however i hate them to ride on, cumbersome and interfering is how i find a lot of them, 

i find if the saddle fits the horse the horse moves efficiently under the rider, me, this makes it possible for me to follow the horse without undue  movement and stay in balance, it helps the horse to flow under me unrestricted and lets me sit where i can be most effective to give subtle aids and feel the horse through my seat

it comes back to the holistic thing always fit. skill, farriery, training , conformation all the things that need be present to bring it all together.for me anyway

the worst saddle i ever had was made by a master saddler and cost a fortune,  i always give the last word to the horse on saddle fit  

hopefully as new materials come through lighter more shock absorbing panels will emerge, although i have had many leather  saddles that were very  light years ago, and rode on just about every make going then just to try them out, i did not find them comfortable


----------



## tristar (26 November 2020)

sbloom said:



			The first of two blog posts about saddle platform length, study it and take a tape measure when going to view a horse to purchase! https://www.ahsaddles.com/post/2019/04/30/horse-shopping-saddle-length-part-1



Trees are designed to fit horses first and foremost, there is more variation between different female pelvises, than there are on average between male and female.  It's a very individual thing, and the marketing hype behind "female friendly saddles" is just that. And the materials that go into them are on the heavy side, and that heft can also help stability.  Plastic treed saddles can be lighter but they also often cant sit down and around the horse.  You should only worry about weight of saddle being a factor if you struggle to lift it yourself, or if you're at the limit of what the horse can carry,  The difference, with stirrups and pad etc, between the heaviest and lightest regular saddles is less than most people's weight can fluctuate in a year.  A good fit is WAY more important.
		
Click to expand...


about 5 mins ago i sold a treed race exercise saddle to a race horse trainer, two weeks ago i sold a treeless one to another trainer,


what do you think about  the use  of treeless as opposed to treed race ex saddles, if you don`t mind please


----------



## honetpot (26 November 2020)

tristar said:



			no one will ever convince me that riding a horse correctly is bad for it, the time and effort taken to produce a properly schooled horse is a passage of joy in itself, and to see an animal grow and change in posture and self esteem beats winning  rosettes any day

if you have never gone down that road   don`t tell others it does not exist, if you are not knowledgeable enough to travel it why try to tell others it can`t be done

horses are like people in the way they can enjoy movement and mental stimulation and have the intelligence to learn and to feel the benefits of regular gymnastics, and generally taking part in life thats what its for, not sitting on the sidelines or in a stable 23 hours a day or hanging around in the mud bored stiff, and when man and horse come together something wonderful happens and both rise above the everyday

of course if you are too lazy to make the effort l don`t try to drag others down with you
		
Click to expand...

 I think its a bit like a ballerina dancing in point shoes, if it was natural that is how we all would walk. As a child I used to want to do ballet, so of course I would balance on my toes, but not for long. Of course a trained ballet dancer has had many years of exercise and training, before they go en pointe, but their feet are often a battle ground of injury to achieve that outward looking perfection.
https://humankinetics.me/2018/09/25/starting-pointe-work/
  To a degree their, ' way of going' although looking good on stage, they often waddle like ducks with open hips in real life.

 As children we scramble on a ponies back, and the pony lopes along in a way that is most comfortable, usually with its nose stuck out, unless you use gadgets a child has little chance of changing its shape, and the weight is negligible.
 When we want the horse to 'perform' and add extra weight, it either has to develop muscles to cope with that extra burden, or if it can not, it will hurt and it will object. I think there is an attitude now it's the horses fault and not that the human who is in control has either picked the wrong horse for the job it's supposed to do, or they have not spent enough time conditioning it with exercise to enable it to do that job. 
  Hunting is perhaps the closest in to days world where a horse does a full days work. To work one day a week, it has perhaps three months of increased exercise, a bit like couch to 20km , six days a week. How many people drag a horse out a field give it a brush, and then expect it to perform to the standard they want, that may be carrying 13st for 10miles or a forty-five minutes lesson, most of the time they are just asking too much too quickly.
The ONS said the average man in England was 5ft 9in (175.3cm) tall and weighed 13.16 stone (83.6kg).
The average woman in England weighed 11 stone (70.2kg) and was 5ft 3in tall (161.6cm).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11534042
  I do not know if being ridden is detrimental to horses, there is no real large scale researched evidence, most studies are based on TB's and the racing industry. What I do know is asking any animal to do something that stresses it body, and sometimes its mind, comes with a responsibility for its welfare, and the end result the rider is wanting, may not be in its best welfare interests, no matter how much the rider weighs or what task they want it to complete.


----------



## Tiddlypom (27 November 2020)

I can’t see an update on Sue Dyson’s hearing, but by chance the rider weight study was linked to by a poster on my FB feed.

Now, I have no problems with the very heavy rider coming forward for the study. But a 27.5% match should never have been allowed to happen, even very briefly . The rider will have done as she was instructed, by a very well respected equine vet.


----------



## TPO (27 November 2020)

If my maths is right (and every chance it's not!) that indicates that Very Heavy Rider could/should only be riding horses that are (when fit and healthy) in excess of 700kg?

I guess that's possible? I still dont think there would ever be a saddle to fit a rider of the proportions in the photo.


----------



## conniegirl (27 November 2020)

TPO said:



			If my maths is right (and every chance it's not!) that indicates that Very Heavy Rider could/should only be riding horses that are (when fit and healthy) in excess of 700kg?

I guess that's possible? I still dont think there would ever be a saddle to fit a rider of the proportions in the photo.
		
Click to expand...

A horse over 700kg (fit not fat) would be quite easy to find. My 15.2hh small hunter was nearly 600kg fully fit, i would think a 16.2hh or 17hh version of him would be around 700kg
A saddle to fit both horse and rider, i very much doubt it.


----------



## Annagain (27 November 2020)

TPO said:



			If my maths is right (and every chance it's not!) that indicates that Very Heavy Rider could/should only be riding horses that are (when fit and healthy) in excess of 700kg?

I guess that's possible? I still dont think there would ever be a saddle to fit a rider of the proportions in the photo.
		
Click to expand...

It is possible, all three of mine (only ride the one now but the other two are still around) are between 650 and 700 at their ideal weight and while they're big boys, they're definitely not the biggest horses I've seen. This is Archie, 16.3 ID type (unrecorded breeding). In 15 years, his weight has never really changed (6kg difference at most!)  so he's always around his ideal weight, which is between 668 and 674. He's hardly a giant, so there are big strong horses out there. Whether they should be carrying quite that much weight (and as you say, whether a saddle could be found to fit) is another question. He wore (now retired at 25) a 17.5" saddle. He's quite short backed so I doubt he'd have taken a much bigger one. 






Monty (17hh) is more of a famine and feast beast, He's weighed in between 652kg and 720kg. 652kg was coming out of winter when he looked a bit poor, 720kg was Sept when we like him a bit heavier to cope with losing the weight we know he will over the winter. His fighting fit eventing weight was around 690kg. He also wears a 17.5" saddle but could probably go to 18". I always felt Archie to be the stronger of the two though. Having said that M is 24 and still jumping so he's not fared too badly (although never carried more than about 110kgs max.) This is him at 720kg.


----------



## honetpot (27 November 2020)

My 16hand maxi cob could easily carry a 18inch saddle, he was some sort of Belgium Draft cross, and was about 650kg on grass and no hard feed. This is on a weigh tape but I think he could have weighed 25-50kg more. 
  I was astonished when my then three year old Highland was weighed at a show, I like them on the slim side, and he weighed 465kg, at around 13.2. Both these breeds have relatively short thick cannon bones in comparison to their size.
For cattle, they can do body scans to determine how much fat to muscle they have. I would be interesting to scan some horses and see which ones are actually fat, as opposed to well muscled.


----------



## brighteyes (27 November 2020)

Poor bloody horse on the far right... even momentarily, for comparison only.


----------



## brighteyes (27 November 2020)

honetpot said:



			My 16hand maxi cob could easily carry a 18inch saddle, he was some sort of Belgium Draft cross, and was about 650kg on grass and no hard feed. This is on a weigh tape but I think he could have weighed 25-50kg more.
  I was astonished when my then three year old Highland was weighed at a show, I like them on the slim side, and he weighed 465kg, at around 13.2. Both these breeds have relatively short thick cannon bones in comparison to their size.
For cattle, they can do body scans to determine how much fat to muscle they have. *It would be interesting to scan some horses and see which ones are actually fat, as opposed to well muscled.*

Click to expand...

Oh boy, would it!


----------



## BronsonNutter (27 November 2020)

TPO said:



			If my maths is right (and every chance it's not!) that indicates that Very Heavy Rider could/should only be riding horses that are (when fit and healthy) in excess of 700kg?
		
Click to expand...

700kg would still put them in between the 'heavy' and 'very heavy' category in this study though - ~20% body weight... without allowing for tack. To get nearer 15% you're talking 950kg horse - how many of those exist and are rideable? 

I'm really hoping this whole thing is some sort of mistake and there's an honest explanation for it, otherwise it will tarnish her whole career and discredit some research (admittedly pilot research) which we do actually need for animal welfare.


----------



## sbloom (28 November 2020)

Tiddlypom said:



			You are coming at it from a different angle, though? The vet and bodyworker may be unaware that it will be difficult to fit a saddle to the horse that will fit the rider.
		
Click to expand...

Of course, but things need to change, because our current way of doing things isn't working.  I see horses recently purchased that haven't a chance in hell of carrying the saddle ideal for the rider, and I see long term issues caused by heavy riders, the bodyworker finds the issues but, just like me, is left to decide whether to tell the rider they are part of the problem.  And we all HATE shaming riders, that is never what we want to do, I hope I have found the right ways to talk about this to customers, but I still choose very carefully how. when and if.



tristar said:



			about 5 mins ago i sold a treed race exercise saddle to a race horse trainer, two weeks ago i sold a treeless one to another trainer,
what do you think about  the use  of treeless as opposed to treed race ex saddles, if you don`t mind please
		
Click to expand...

I'm not the biggest fan of treeless, they can work, I have no experience whatsoever of them for racing, the racing industry is almost entirely separate in terms of saddle fitting, to what we do as regular saddle fitters.



TPO said:



			If my maths is right (and every chance it's not!) that indicates that Very Heavy Rider could/should only be riding horses that are (when fit and healthy) in excess of 700kg?

I guess that's possible? I still dont think there would ever be a saddle to fit a rider of the proportions in the photo.
		
Click to expand...

And yet the larger horses aren't bred to take riders, they're drafts, and built to pull, not to carry.  I'm sure we could change that, but look at all the issues that the 17hh+ warmbloods can have, and ultimately their lineage goes back to these crosses.



honetpot said:



			My 16hand maxi cob could easily carry a 18inch saddle, he was some sort of Belgium Draft cross, and was about 650kg on grass and no hard feed. This is on a weigh tape but I think he could have weighed 25-50kg more.
		
Click to expand...

And of course 18" saddles vary massively, an 18" Fylde Haydon with a thin foam panel is A tiny and B not suitable for carrying a heavy rider especially outside of the show ring.  So really "an 18" saddle" is almost meaningless, sadly.  And why saddle fitting is complicated, some riders have a brilliant instinct for it and can DIY but mostly it's a complex job for people who really understand horses, saddles and riders.


----------



## teapot (28 November 2020)

thefarsideofthefield said:



			So , just to reiterate , I am talking about colleges here . Where does the 14st student expect to find employment that includes RIDING on completing their course ?
		
Click to expand...

In my experience of sifting applicants pre interview for job roles, they will struggle. It's not just about the weight, it's about their fitness, and general health too. That's assuming they get on their college course in the first place and don't lose three stone in the process of doing the course when they realise what working with horses is actually like 

Weight limits are also one of the reasons why exam centres are dropping in number - they don't want unknown riders on their horses, at all levels.


----------



## Tiddlypom (28 November 2020)

https://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-vi...mittee-to-hold-two-hearings-in-november-2020/

_*Update: *The hearing in respect of Sue Dyson has been adjourned until further notice due to a member of the Disciplinary Committee being taken ill and it was not considered appropriate to continue the hearing virtually. A notification will be issued ahead of the adjourned hearing taking place. _


----------



## ozpoz (29 November 2020)

brighteyes said:



			Poor bloody horse on the far right... even momentarily, for comparison only.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Shilasdair (29 November 2020)

Just saying that my Shire X Tb will vary between 750 and 800kg at any point.  
She's around 16.2 to 16.3hh and to look at her, you'd not think she was so heavy as she's proportionate but she takes a 7ft 3" rug and XL headcollars etc.   
She's not overweight just solid.


----------



## windand rain (29 November 2020)

How many times do you see a rider that heavy ride a horse that lightweight. I would suggest not often although I have seen endurance arabs carrying far more than was reasonable


----------



## Steerpike (29 November 2020)

For FEI 3*160km endurance rides horses no matter what size have to carry minimum 75kg, saddle and rider together, the riders are all weighed before the ride and sometimes spot checked during, and at the end if placed.


----------



## windand rain (29 November 2020)

no maximum though is there steerpike


Steerpike said:



			For FEI 3*160km endurance rides horses no matter what size have to carry minimum 75kg, saddle and rider together, the riders are all weighed before the ride and sometimes spot checked during, and at the end if placed.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Steerpike (29 November 2020)

No no maximum but if you are on a 14h fine Arab and others are on 16h Arabs it's not a fair playing field. And they have now brought in a minimum weight for junior FEI rides. The whole weight and horses is a massive can of worms.


----------



## Malindaba (5 February 2021)

Goldenstar said:



			Yes the heaviest rider rode in an saddle that did not fit her .
		
Click to expand...

I've watched the webinar about this study, the problem is that yes the heaviest rider was in a saddle that didn't fit her, but it fitted the horse, you can't just put a bigger saddle on the horse if it means its going to be sitting beyond the last rib, that won't make it any better for the horse. The saddle must fit the horse!


----------



## Gingerwitch (5 February 2021)

Has anyone heard anymore about the outcome?


----------



## Malindaba (5 February 2021)

I've watched the webinar on: 




The horse only becomes lame during the study and the tack fits the horse, a bigger saddle that fitted the rider but not the horse wouldn't have made it any better!



ester said:



			Being desperate for some rider weight data because it comes up *all the time*. The same reason people hang onto the 20%/15%/whichever one is in vogue currently.
And the name, the name stood for a lot.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Tiddlypom (5 February 2021)

Gingerwitch said:



			Has anyone heard anymore about the outcome?
		
Click to expand...

Reconvened hearing due later this month. ETA Whoops, no, that was another hearing from 2020.


----------



## teapot (5 February 2021)

Gingerwitch said:



			Has anyone heard anymore about the outcome?
		
Click to expand...

Not sure it's happened yet? 

I notice she's down as one of the speakers for the PC Coaching Conference tonight.


----------



## Chuffy99 (5 February 2021)

I do hope this works out well for Sue Dyson, she was the vet we were sent to as a last resort by our local but very good practice after they ran out of ideas. 
She basically diagnosed the problem watching him walk into the clinic, confirmed by MRI. 
And yes basically if you’re asking if you’re too big to ride you probably are.


----------



## Goldenstar (6 February 2021)

Malindaba said:



			I've watched the webinar about this study, the problem is that yes the heaviest rider was in a saddle that didn't fit her, but it fitted the horse, you can't just put a bigger saddle on the horse if it means its going to be sitting beyond the last rib, that won't make it any better for the horse. The saddle must fit the horse!
		
Click to expand...

Of course the saddle must fit the horse .
It must also fit the rider , saddles that don’t fit the rider especially if the rider is heavy make horses sore .
The rider must be in balance or it’s detrimental to the horse .
If ( and it was not case in this example ) the rider needs a longer saddle than the horse can carry this is usually when a rider is tall and a horse is short backed then the flaps and blocking  of the saddle can usually be made to accommodate them both if it can’t then that rider is not the rider for that horse .
But that was not the case in the study .


----------



## sbloom (8 February 2021)

Goldenstar said:



			Of course the saddle must fit the horse .
It must also fit the rider , saddles that don’t fit the rider especially if the rider is heavy make horses sore .
The rider must be in balance or it’s detrimental to the horse .
If ( and it was not case in this example ) the rider needs a longer saddle than the horse can carry this is usually when a rider is tall and a horse is short backed then the flaps and blocking  of the saddle can usually be made to accommodate them both if it can’t then that rider is not the rider for that horse .
But that was not the case in the study .
		
Click to expand...

Yep, you can't always get a saddle that completely fits the rider, but you can usually correct the basic balance issues that crop up with a heavier and/or taller rider - a short heavy rider often compresses the front of the saddle, needing more lift there, easily corrected with a thicker pad in some cases.  A taller rider is more likely to sit too far back pushing the back of the saddle down, again can often be corrected with shims.  However the latter case can be tricky because if the rider's heavy a more shock absorbing pad is ideal, one that spreads pressure and bounces back, and often those a thicker, I prefer sheepskin overall.  This will tip a saddle back MORE, and so shimming must be done very carefully, a random rear riser, even if the balance looks good, may cause bridging and pressure points.

However I would argue that taller riders are the ones that need the bigger saddles, there is a more direct relationship with hip measurement in my experience, whatever the TG website might say, a slim hip measurement is best with a seat size that suits, and a bigger/more forwards (more often the latter) flap to suit, with, as you cay, block placement to allow space for the long femur.  It's never as simple as measuring your thigh length and that being your biggest determinant in seat size selection.

Long term then rider weight or height could be a deal breaker, but for a one-off study corrections could be made in order to make better assessments/conclusions.


----------



## ester (12 July 2021)

Update TL;DR she faked her ethics approval letter from the home office 
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/document-li...RVRivAiGXGgn8xigyQcUKs0Zwfdvq-seK9VgfLkJ0puXc

ETA details of said letter on pg 6.


----------



## hollyandivy123 (12 July 2021)

ester said:



			Update TL;DR she faked her ethics approval letter from the home office
https://www.rcvs.org.uk/document-li...RVRivAiGXGgn8xigyQcUKs0Zwfdvq-seK9VgfLkJ0puXc

ETA details of said letter on pg 6.
		
Click to expand...

All I can say is stupid stupid ...I best not finish the sentence


----------



## ester (12 July 2021)

Her defence seems to centre around her writing the letter in some sort of memory haze so that she no longer can remember writing it, or using an address from her address book (of an ex employee) while attending international conferences as speaker. 
And how a senior clinician was taking maternity leave for the fourth time.


----------



## Tiddlypom (12 July 2021)

She's been struck off .

It was the only option after she did what she did. What a sad and ignominious end to such a distinguished career.


----------



## teapot (12 July 2021)

It's well worth reading to the end.


----------



## Sossigpoker (12 July 2021)

I understand the reasons why she was struck off. I just can't understand why she did it.


----------



## ihatework (12 July 2021)

What a sad sad state of affairs.
I think the whole proceeding has been conducted well though, kept relatively quiet and private but without sweeping it under the carpet - difficult to do with such a big name.


----------



## teapot (12 July 2021)

ihatework said:



			What a sad sad state of affairs.
I think the whole proceeding has been conducted well though, kept relatively quiet and private but without sweeping it under the carpet - difficult to do with such a big name.
		
Click to expand...

Some big name character witnesses too.


----------



## shortstuff99 (12 July 2021)

One unfathomable action, basically makes all of her research on shaky ground. Now everyone will be wondering if she cut corners in other areas.

I wonder why she made it up though? Did she know it wouldn't pass?


----------



## TPO (12 July 2021)

Probably a stupid question but when have I ever let that stop me 😬

Does the fact that the reviewers considered that the project needed Home Office licensed "prove" that those who know a lot of stuff consider heavier riders an ethical issue because of pain that could be inflicted? Or is it solely because of rectal temperatures being taken?


----------



## Frumpoon (12 July 2021)

And yet there is a vet near me who regularly commits acts of fraud, financial dishonesty and terrible clinical practice and the RCVS refuse to take complaints seriously at all...not to mention the lovely David Smith in Kent who has been barred more times than a ballerina but still turns up doing clinical work one way or another


----------



## teapot (12 July 2021)

TPO said:



			Probably a stupid question but when have I ever let that stop me 😬

Does the fact that the reviewers considered that the project needed Home Office licensed "prove" that those who know a lot of stuff consider heavier riders an ethical issue because of pain that could be inflicted? Or is it solely because of rectal temperatures being taken?
		
Click to expand...

It's more basic than that - I believe any research relating to animals must be approved, regardless of topic. 

Academic research papers even for the Arts have quite tight rules too. A friend of mine was working on a 1920s history based paper and because there could be direct people still alive, it became a bit more complicated.


----------



## TPO (12 July 2021)

teapot said:



			It's more basic than that - I believe any research relating to animals must be approved, regardless of topic.

Academic research papers even for the Arts have quite tight rules too. A friend of mine was working on a 1920s history based paper and because there could be direct people still alive, it became a bit more complicated.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you, I didnt know that.

I had assumed that someone of Dr Dyson's experience would have known that from the very outset so why even try to wing it if it would always be a no-go. She had published numerous papers prior to this so a numpty like me would assume she therefore needed HOL for every one of them? Seems strange to even consider a letter saying "it's fine, you dont need approval" would fly with the reviewers?


----------



## teapot (12 July 2021)

TPO said:



			Thank you, I didnt know that.

I had assumed that someone of Dr Dyson's experience would have known that from the very outset so why even try to wing it if it would always be a no-go. She had published numerous papers prior to this so a numpty like me would assume she therefore needed HOL for every one of them? Seems strange to even consider a letter saying "it's fine, you dont need approval" would fly with the reviewers?
		
Click to expand...

I think you may have hit the nail on the head. She would of course known, and no doubt something she would have hammered into her students. But do as I say, not as I do...

Research ethics isn't a long winded process either, just something you do as part of the journey to getting published, it's so standard these days.


----------



## bouncing_ball (12 July 2021)

TPO said:



			Probably a stupid question but when have I ever let that stop me 😬

Does the fact that the reviewers considered that the project needed Home Office licensed "prove" that those who know a lot of stuff consider heavier riders an ethical issue because of pain that could be inflicted? Or is it solely because of rectal temperatures being taken?
		
Click to expand...

I read it as both factors and mainly the heavier riders. I didn’t read it that every study needs HOL.


----------



## ycbm (12 July 2021)

What a terrible end to a stellar career.  Did it also bring down the AHT because they folded just after she left when she knew she'd been found out?

I fear there will now be people dismissing the possibility that their horse is in pain and/or lame.  "Oh but that was just Sue Dyson".


.


----------



## Frumpoon (12 July 2021)

ycbm said:



			What a terrible end to a stellar career.  Did it also bring down the AHT because they folded just after she left when she knew she'd been found out?

I fear there will now be people dismissing the possibility that their horse is in pain and/or lame.  "Oh but that was just Sue Dysan".


.
		
Click to expand...

Even without this we have users on here boasting about riding ponies at 85-90kg like it’s some kind of achievement


----------



## ester (12 July 2021)

Certainly in my time research institutions usually have a home office licence to do a certain amount without specific individual project approval but it is not my area of expertise (all of mine were dead). I need to read it again but only saw referenced to the taking of temperatures.

Given some of what was written it gives the impression that she thought the reviewer who brought it up was being ridiculous, she was annoyed/frustrated about that (ergo the you'll never believe it but. . . ) - I get that, reviewers are there to be annoying and thought she could just fob them off and it not be questioned?


----------



## brighteyes (12 July 2021)

TPO said:



			Probably a stupid question but when have I ever let that stop me 😬

Does the fact that the reviewers considered that the project needed Home Office licensed "prove" that those who know a lot of stuff consider heavier riders an ethical issue because of pain that could be inflicted? *Or is it solely because of rectal temperatures being taken?*

Click to expand...

This is the only thing I could glean and thought wtaf, they deliberately inflict laminitis on horses and ponies and other sorts of research where the horse or pony is euthanised to find the effects of xyz.

What a dreadful shame, is all I can say and I hope she doesn't 'do' anything in her remorse.


----------



## windand rain (12 July 2021)

I think the result was because she showed no remorse and it was a planned act of deception but maybe I mis understood that, however her crimes were rather more a crime against society as apposed to a crime against the animal welfare but sadly in criminal court too those crimes often carry the heaviest penalties. I am sure she did not falsify any research even though it was badly flawed but it does call into question that all her research was equally flawed


----------



## ester (13 July 2021)

The trouble is researchers are somewhat relied on to be trustworthy with regards to the data they publish. This scuppers that completely.


----------



## hollyandivy123 (13 July 2021)

research using animals is very controlled within the UK/EU,

to take a rectal temp as part of veterinary treatment is part of welfare, to take it as part of research study requires ethical assessment both from the internal review panel and the home office inspector.

for an owner/rider to put a saddle on with a pressure panel and use this to ascertain whether the saddle fits etc does not require permission from the home office

for a researcher to do the same does require permission from the home office under UK/EU legislation as the procedure needs to be assessed etc etc. to make up a letter saying its ok is so wrong on so many levels and unfortunately does start though doubt into  her research............

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2014.0210#d3e590

this is a paper which asks the question whether mice in the wild will use a running wheel...the researchers in this paper had to fulfil an internal ethical assessment, it was decided that as they were free range it did not need a permit.

"All our experiments are evaluated by the Animal Experiment Committee of Leiden University Medical Centre and performed only after receiving their explicit permission. Since these experiments consisted solely of passive registration of the behaviour of free-living animals in the wild, no permits were required."


This type of assessment should have occurred at the AHT for Sue Dysons study and her study should have been sent for scrutiny by the home office...............it is surprising it didn't, did the AHT  know about the study?


----------



## Tiddlypom (13 July 2021)

windand rain said:



			I am sure she did not falsify any research even though it was badly flawed but it does call into question that all her research was equally flawed
		
Click to expand...

How can anyone now be sure that she has not falsified details/results previously? We can't.

What a mess.


----------



## shortstuff99 (13 July 2021)

I had to have numerous FCO licenses for my work in Antarctica (and I work on inverts so easier then vertebrates). I have to list them and prove them when I publish. How did she get away with publishing without a proper license?

Mind boggles


----------



## TPO (13 July 2021)

shortstuff99 said:



			I had to have numerous FCO licenses for my work in Antarctica (and I work on inverts so easier then vertebrates). I have to list them and prove them when I publish. How did she get away with publishing without a proper license?

Mind boggles
		
Click to expand...

Yeah good point, how was this paper published and in the public domain? Someone other than her must have agreed something at some point surely?


----------



## SEL (13 July 2021)

I don't think I was expecting 'struck off', but then when you read all the details you realise that that was the only option they really had. I could sort of understand starting a project without the right licence, but once that had been flagged by a reviewer then falsifying an email is unforgiveable. 



shortstuff99 said:



			I had to have numerous FCO licenses for my work in Antarctica (and I work on inverts so easier then vertebrates). I have to list them and prove them when I publish. How did she get away with publishing without a proper license?
		
Click to expand...

 By falsifying an email saying she didn't need a licence for this particular project!


----------



## Goldenstar (13 July 2021)

Tiddlypom said:



			How can anyone now be sure that she has not falsified details/results previously? We can't.

What a mess.
		
Click to expand...

That sums it up .


----------



## Somewhat Off The Way (13 July 2021)

She was proven to have impersonated a Home Office Inspector. That's an incredibly serious form of misconduct and she's probably fortunate not to be facing criminal charges.


----------



## ester (13 July 2021)

I know it mentions other people at AHT and their ethics background also thinking they didn’t need a licence.

But if they did need one it was too late to do anything about it as all the data had been collected (and it would be a bit pointlessness granting licenses retrospectively)

So they either had to get confirmation they didn’t need one (prob best option), not publish,or submit it to another journal and hope their reviewers weren’t different and didn’t notice.

Saying she already had a letter means option A would have been tricky because any confirmation letter wouldnt have been backdated


----------



## shortstuff99 (13 July 2021)

SEL said:



			I don't think I was expecting 'struck off', but then when you read all the details you realise that that was the only option they really had. I could sort of understand starting a project without the right licence, but once that had been flagged by a reviewer then falsifying an email is unforgiveable.

By falsifying an email saying she didn't need a licence for this particular project!
		
Click to expand...

Then she has been very very bad, and struck off probably was the only option. I still can't understand why she did it all though. She could have asked for a licence and started it again, her sample size was tiny the first time so it wouldn't have taken her years to have done it again.


----------



## brighteyes (13 July 2021)

So, she gets struck off and all the questionably ratioed riders:their horses heave (no pun) a sigh of relief. Their horses, however...


----------



## Fransurrey (13 July 2021)

Tiddlypom said:



			She's been struck off .

It was the only option after she did what she did. What a sad and ignominious end to such a distinguished career.
		
Click to expand...

Agree. What a stupid, stupid thing to do.



Sossigpoker said:



			I understand the reasons why she was struck off. I just can't understand why she did it.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone will. Arrogance, maybe? Hoping a letter would not be questioned on account of her name? Most reviewers wouldn't question it - I bet he locks his windows...!



TPO said:



			Probably a stupid question but when have I ever let that stop me 😬

Does the fact that the reviewers considered that the project needed Home Office licensed "prove" that those who know a lot of stuff consider heavier riders an ethical issue because of pain that could be inflicted? Or is it solely because of rectal temperatures being taken?
		
Click to expand...

Anything invasive, including rectal, that is not performed under the Veterinary Surgeons Act, requires input from the HOI. I had a study approved a couple of years ago involving a similar technique. Definitely not ASPA in our opinion, but we had to have official clearance from the HO as something entered the body. 



ester said:



			The trouble is researchers are somewhat relied on to be trustworthy with regards to the data they publish. This scuppers that completely.
		
Click to expand...

This is what makes me annoyed. There's a lot of scientist bashing about anyway and this won't help. I agree they had no option but to strike her off. It's fraud at the end of the day, even if it didn't affect the study outcome. I feel sorry for her colleagues, being tainted with the same scandal.


----------



## DabDab (13 July 2021)

Wow, that's a whopper of a lie, and in writing 😱. Not like a little fib blurted out in the heat of the moment.

Unfortunately like a lot of others no doubt, I would be dubious about the honesty of her other work now. To jump straight from being whiter than white to a deception like that would be unusual...

Silly silly woman


----------



## ester (13 July 2021)

shortstuff99 said:



			Then she has been very very bad, and struck off probably was the only option. I still can't understand why she did it all though. She could have asked for a licence and started it again, her sample size was tiny the first time so it wouldn't have taken her years to have done it again.
		
Click to expand...

It was cited as the intern’s project so I guess redoing it might not have been possible for her but yes.


----------



## windand rain (13 July 2021)

brighteyes said:



			So, she gets struck off and all the questionably ratioed riders:their horses heave (no pun) a sigh of relief. Their horses, however...
		
Click to expand...

The experiment was hugely flawed from the start was unethical and the results were dubious at best. I hope it doesn't make horses suffer but it wont make anything based on her judgement valid which is a shame. The weight to horse ratio is fairly clear from the original thought I believe instigated by the army of 20% as a max including tack and equipment. I also think it was appallingly badly done caused injury to the horses and did not have a control. Time for a clean research programme with thousands of examples to work from preferrably pressure points on an anatomically correct artificial horse


----------



## ozpoz (13 July 2021)

windand rain said:



			The experiment was hugely flawed from the start was unethical and the results were dubious at best. I hope it doesn't make horses suffer but it wont make anything based on her judgement valid which is a shame. The weight to horse ratio is fairly clear from the original thought I believe instigated by the army of 20% as a max including tack and equipment. I also think it was appallingly badly done caused injury to the sorry horses and did not have a control. Time for a clean research programme with thousands of examples to work from preferrably pressure points on an anatomically correct artificial horse
		
Click to expand...




windand rain said:



			The experiment was hugely flawed from the start was unethical and the results were dubious at best. 

Sorry, that is simply not true. The study replicated what is seen everyday on yards,riding schools and Facebook, apart from the horses being dismounted as soon as they showed signs of discomfort or momentary lameness. None of them suffered any long term effects or lameness at the end of the study and they results were clear with huge potential to move on from the ancient history of 20%.
It was also passed by the AHT Ethics Committee. 
Exhaustion, stress, overwork, ridiculous workload, who knows?
I think the result is very harsh, for someone who has literally devoted their life to horse welfare. Very sad news.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## conniegirl (13 July 2021)

If you have any sort of science background it is very easy to see that the study was hugely flawed.
For a start the riders were all different heights, so would have sat differently in the saddle. How do you tell if the discomfort/lameness was from the weight or from the position of the rider? A rider of a good weight for the horse can still cause issues for a horse if they are sat on the cantle due to the length of their thigh.


----------



## ozpoz (13 July 2021)

Yes, I believe that was described in the study. Have you actually read it?


----------



## Shilasdair (13 July 2021)

The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blessed:
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
'Tis mightiest in the mightiest. It becomes
The thronèd monarch better than his crown.


----------



## ycbm (13 July 2021)

Shilasdair said:



			The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blessed:
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
'Tis mightiest in the mightiest. It becomes
The thronèd monarch better than his crown.
		
Click to expand...


Do you need some of my prosecco?


----------



## brighteyes (13 July 2021)

windand rain said:



			I think the result was because she showed no remorse and it was a planned act of deception but maybe I mis understood that, however her crimes were rather more a crime against society as apposed to a crime against the animal welfare but sadly in criminal court too those crimes often carry the heaviest penalties. I am sure she did not falsify any research even though it was badly flawed but it does call into question that all her research was equally flawed
		
Click to expand...

And yet, the 'crimes against animal welfare' she might have prevented, continue.  A cynical part of me wonders if there's some 'adversely weighted' person wanted to discredit this study and sabotaged it.


----------



## MuddyMonster (13 July 2021)

A very sad end to a career that saw her achieve so much and undoubtedly help so many. 

From what I've read, it sounds as though her mental health may have had played a part. If that's the case, I hope she's able to seek some help.


----------



## Illusion100 (13 July 2021)

Sue has been struck off.


----------



## hollyandivy123 (13 July 2021)

brighteyes said:



			And yet, the 'crimes against animal welfare' she might have prevented, continue.  A cynical part of me wonders if there's some 'adversely weighted' person wanted to discredit this study and sabotaged it.
		
Click to expand...

Impersonating a home office inspector is not an acceptable. ......


----------



## MuddyMonster (13 July 2021)

hollyandivy123 said:



			Impersonating a home office inspector is not an acceptable. ......
		
Click to expand...

This, 100% 

That's very different from potential career rivalry or having upset someone else in the field. 

Terribly sad enf of her career, but very little other option left but to strike her off in the circumstances.


----------



## Tiddlypom (13 July 2021)

brighteyes said:



			A cynical part of me wonders if there's some 'adversely weighted' person wanted to discredit this study and sabotaged it.
		
Click to expand...

Have you read the full report?

The 'sabotage' was entirely by SD. She had a very fair hearing.


----------



## PurBee (13 July 2021)

Its intriguing in the report, she stated she had/has no memory at all writing the ‘fake’ letter, citing a fake inspector with a real address which was actually an address of an old collegue from years back.

Most other info pertaining to her personal life is redacted, yet what small info is printed tells of her under enormous stress, both work and personal life.

Stress can reach high levels relatable to trauma in which the person then experiences what’s akin to depersonalisation/de-realisation and borders into disassociative episodes. Disassociation is often coupled with memory loss for the person.
During disassociative episodes the only thing the person is ’running’ on is memory - so perhaps thats why an old yet real address was used, and her ‘solution’ to her research licence problem was to lie, which to her real personality was absolutely abhorrent to even consoder - yet these elements, when trauma states are experienced, become a soup of personality shift/memory alterations etc. 


I’m wondering if she experienced such a degree of stress that these other personality-changing co-morbidities attributable to trauma/high stress episodes, well documented by the psych industry, was the cause of her apparent out of character behaviour.

Im inclined to believe she suffered from the above because most (professional) people who intend to lie about anything, eventually, when caught, and up against the law, to gain a lenient sentence admit remorse and wholly to doing wrong and lying with intent…certainly people of good previous character/behaviour. 
She continued to protest no memory of writing the letter, and never intending to lie, aswell as constantly stating she’s extremely truthful in all her dealings. 
This tallies even moreso she is being honest. We all eventually ‘give it up’ when caught - especially when under pressure. 
Common lying criminals easily give it up (if theyre scared of jail time) despite trying to lie their way out of it….but when their backs are against the wall, they give it up hoping honesty and remorse at the 11th hour will garner some sympathy from judgement and a lenient sentence.

It was noted in the report her ‘offensive manner’ when it was suggested she intended to lie. It was noted she showed no remorse. This was obviously outrageous to the committee who are understandably ignorant of dissociative psych episodes. 
For someone with an impeccable career of high regard, confirmed by notable persons in her field for her integrity, to suddenly turn criminal, without their being mitigating circumstance, which i am inclined to think were psychological - the chance of her being intentionally dishonest, is extraordinarily slim.
Surely, in her right mind, under normal circumstances, she would have postponed progress of the study, had the relevent licenses granted and proceeded, allbeit delayed.


Unfortunately, all other people giving evidence were her professional peers - and if personal allies of hers had given evidence of her changed behaviour during that time of ‘extraordinary stress’, im sure a very different outcome would have occurred, rather than being struck off after such a career.

Many ‘high functioning’ professionals who do experience these psychotic breaks rarely recognise the severity of the stress they’re under and try with all their might to plough on, creating more stress. It’s unusual for them therefore to seek psychotherapy of any kind as their perceived workload stress wont recognise the mental stress process that’s occurring, as often its slow, insidious and isn’t just one day wake up in psychosis! 
In these states many actions can be taken by a person that’s completely inaccessible to their conscious memory. 
Its very similar to memory wipe that abise victims experience. 
Stress can become so abusive to us we wont recall all actions. We think our personal mentality is robust until overwhelming stress gnaws at it. It’s more common than we know, modern day stress, accumulating day by day, can turn even the most robust mentality inside out, if there’s no reprieve. 

Many are fortunate not to have life circumstance stress bordering onto trauma spilled-over into depersonalisation/disassociation episode but be grateful you haven’t, and not judge so harshly, the ’apparently’ insane actions of those that are experiencing such deep, overwhelming stress. 
Should a mistake made during such an episode be able to wipe out and taint a person’s previous impeccable career?

It often does, and that’s a shame…whoever it happens to.


----------



## Illusion100 (13 July 2021)

Sue was doing independent lameness work ups in the Essex area at least recently. 

https://www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.amp...-letter-Home-Office-inspector-struck-off.html

This was published today stating she has been struck off. 

I guess time will tell whether she follows the rules or not.


----------



## PurBee (13 July 2021)

brighteyes said:



			And yet, the 'crimes against animal welfare' she might have prevented, continue.  A cynical part of me wonders if there's some 'adversely weighted' person wanted to discredit this study and sabotaged it.
		
Click to expand...

Admittedly, its a highly controversial and sensitive subject matter she was proposing to study - and studies are the start of the ball-rolling eventually towards laws being made.
Imagine if there were weight limits % to ride horses imposed by law? How would that impact the whole industry? Hugely, i imagine.

Do many studies get published without correct licensing? Is this a rare one-off for her to be brought to disciplinary action due to this? If yes, then i’d be cynical too.


----------



## ester (13 July 2021)

Illusion100 said:



			Sue has been struck off.
		
Click to expand...

yeah, we already said that 😂


----------



## ester (13 July 2021)

Tiddlypom said:



			Have you read the full report?

The 'sabotage' was entirely by SD. She had a very fair hearing.
		
Click to expand...

I think the suggestion of sabotage is pretty unfair on the reviewer! They didn't do anything wrong.


----------



## ester (13 July 2021)

How do we know the committee was unaware that dissociative psych episodes exist? I'm sure if she wished she could have made a robust case for that psych wise  that might have been looked on more favourably but I didn't see anything to suggest that she had done so albeit I probably do need to read it again.


----------



## BronsonNutter (13 July 2021)

PurBee said:



			Its intriguing in the report, she stated she had/has no memory at all writing the ‘fake’ letter, citing a fake inspector with a real address which was actually an address of an old collegue from years back.
Most other info pertaining to her personal life is redacted, yet what small info is printed tells of her under enormous stress, both work and personal life.
Stress can reach high levels relatable to trauma in which the person then experiences what’s akin to depersonalisation/de-realisation and borders into disassociative episodes. Disassociation is often coupled with memory loss for the person.
During disassociative episodes the only thing the person is ’running’ on is memory - so perhaps thats why an old yet real address was used, and her ‘solution’ to her research licence problem was to lie, which to her real personality was absolutely abhorrent to even consoder - yet these elements, when trauma states are experienced, become a soup of personality shift/memory alterations etc.
I’m wondering if she experienced such a degree of stress that these other personality-changing co-morbidities attributable to trauma/high stress episodes, well documented by the psych industry, was the cause of her apparent out of character behaviour.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for posting this regarding the potential mental health issues that may be related/involved in this wrongdoing. Blanking out sections in the disciplinary committee reports is not common (usually it is to protect a third party's anominity) so there must be some sort of medical involvement. Sue Dyson must have been under immense stress at the time; the AHT was going under and for many years it has probably only been kept afloat on the equine side due to her status and research published. Imagine the turmoil at not having obtained the supposedly required licenses (as at the time no one thought they were required) potentially putting the hospital to which you have dedicated so much of your life's work to, and all your colleagues jobs, livelihoods etc, on the line. They had to rehome all of the research ponies! You'd try to correct it. She did wrong but is not a bad person, and this does not mean that all of her previous years of research and devotion to equine health should be discredited. I hope wherever she is now she has some support at this time.


----------



## Tiddlypom (13 July 2021)

Pages 2 and 3. Part of the hearing was held in private.



_Application for some of the hearing to be in private
4. Before hearing from Dr Dyson and the two expert medical witnesses relied on in this case Mr Edis QC made an application for the medical evidence and those parts of Dr Dyson’s evidence that related to her health and/or personal life to be heard in private. Mr Bradly did not oppose the application. The members of the press present were given the opportunity to make representations and one did raise some initial objections. However, after hearing the application in greater detail the member of the press indicated that he no longer opposed the application_


----------



## ester (13 July 2021)

Thanks bronson and TP


----------



## shortstuff99 (13 July 2021)

PurBee said:



			Admittedly, its a highly controversial and sensitive subject matter she was proposing to study - and studies are the start of the ball-rolling eventually towards laws being made.
Imagine if there were weight limits % to ride horses imposed by law? How would that impact the whole industry? Hugely, i imagine.

Do many studies get published without correct licensing? Is this a rare one-off for her to be brought to disciplinary action due to this? If yes, then i’d be cynical too.
		
Click to expand...

No 99% of studies won't even get to a review without the correct licenses .


----------



## shortstuff99 (13 July 2021)

Unfortunately whether she meant well and her previous work was stellar, there is always going to be suspicions about it now.


----------



## PurBee (13 July 2021)

ester said:



			How do we know the committee was unaware that dissociative psych episodes exist? I'm sure if she wished she could have made a robust case for that psych wise  that might have been looked on more favourably but I didn't see anything to suggest that she had done so albeit I probably do need to read it again.
		
Click to expand...

Due to the redacted personal info we cant know for sure what personal mitigating circumstances were present, and if official psych counsel were advising.
 The fact that the committee don’t mention something along the lines of ‘taking into account mrs D’s psychological state…and evidence of altered behaviour…etc’ 
All that is mentioned is ‘in light of the stress she was experiencing…’

I do question if she ever got professional help during this time, as she could have used those sessions and resulting diagnosis of (temporary)state of mind to aid her case, and the fact that there’s very little redacted in the committee’s conclusions kf the ‘evidence’ suggests she never sought professional psych help, or put forward their findings, as evidence for herself ‘not acting herself’.

Like i said, high-functioning folk really are able to take high stress anyway….and plough through remarkably with stress levels that would flatten most, but the risk is, at any time - it can peak and break them, causing temporary episodes of weeks/months of altered behaviour/perception etc. The shame associated with these things stops most professionals from seeking help too. They’re the ones who normally help others, and rarely ask for help, even when they really need it.

Its a possibility is all im saying. She may have intentionally lied etc…but knowing it wouldnt pass through the channels it needed to, why would she self-sabotage like that? 
Especially considering her reputation. People only gain a glowing reputation career-long like that due to being so ‘good and straight’. To suddenly become evasive of protocol by lying and then defensive attitude to the committee, doesnt make sense at all.


----------



## ester (13 July 2021)

I skipped over the redacted bits too quick I think 

I've spent enough time in academia to observe it in action if that makes sense.


----------



## Renvers (13 July 2021)

Terrible end to a distinguished career it seems like one seemingly little lie can just snowball.

To any researchers here, is the paperwork etc for a Home Office licence really onerous? Would filling it in, or accepting they had made a mistake and just starting again have been so terrible?

I think of how many times HHO posts referred to her other research as a benchmark for improving some aspect of horse welfare. If that work is now tainted by association it will be really sad just because they couldn't/wouldn't do one step in the process.


----------



## shortstuff99 (13 July 2021)

Renvers said:



			Terrible end to a distinguished career it seems like one seemingly little lie can just snowball.

To any researchers here, is the paperwork etc for a Home Office licence really onerous? Would filling it in, or accepting they had made a mistake and just starting again have been so terrible?

I think of how many times HHO posts referred to her other research as a benchmark for improving some aspect of horse welfare. If that work is now tainted by association it will be really sad just because they couldn't/wouldn't do one step in the process.
		
Click to expand...

It can be onerous as you have to deal with government departments which is always annoying! You also have to show why you need that animal, why you need to do it, risk assessment etc etc


----------



## Renvers (13 July 2021)

shortstuff99 said:



			It can be onerous as you have to deal with government departments which is always annoying! You also have to show why you need that animal, why you need to do it, risk assessment etc etc
		
Click to expand...

Thanks, it was hard to assess why a experienced researcher wouldn't try to address the problem with trying to negotiate getting the approval rather than asking the HO to overlook it (as I think was quoted) and then impersonating them. Just seems a trivial step to end her career over after so much success.


----------



## Illusion100 (13 July 2021)

ester said:



			yeah, we already said that 😂
		
Click to expand...

My bad


----------



## Boulty (14 July 2021)

I know someone who used to work with her years ago.  Apparently she’s always been quite a rude person & a bit of a bully & empathy has never been her strong point. (& from sounds of it she probably was arrogant enough to think the rules shouldn’t apply / that she could blag it)

I don’t think there’s been any sort of conspiracy here & can’t see that RCVS had any option but to strike her off with the lengths she went to with her fabrications.

Also just because she was generally thought of as an ok vet does not automatically make her a nice person... I’ve met plenty of very good vets who can tantrum like you wouldn’t believe at relatively minor inconveniences / generally lacking in people skills


----------



## AUB (14 July 2021)

What a stupid and sad way to end a career. I do health research ethics approvals for a living (for research on humans) and really, it’s not that complicated getting the approval (or a statement that approval is not needed, which you then send in with the article when you’re ready to publish). It just takes a while but you of course plan for that.
Even with country differences and all I can’t imagine it being more difficult to obtain approval when the subjects are animals. After all you dont really need to worry about informed consent etc… 

Of course she has faked her approval or the letter stating she didn’t need approval knowingly, but with what I know of her as a scientist - I was a vet student for 5 years before law school and my old study buddy did her ph.D under Sue - I’m more thinking that this is a case of “not one more vet”. She must have cracked under the pressure or something and I hope she gets the help she needs and doesn’t do something that can never be undone…


----------



## brighteyes (14 July 2021)

Well said @AUB  I hear a lot of condemnation and not a lot of support here. Yes, rules were broken and that needed addressing on the wider front of rules being broken, but I feel this is a very out of character occurrence. Not once have I heard - and about time, she's been cavalier for donkeys' years.


----------



## Tiddlypom (14 July 2021)

The whole episode is very sad. The committee found that Sue Dyson did not seem to show genuine remorse for what she had done wrt its impact on the veterinary profession as a whole. Had she done so, and been seen to do so, just maybe she may have escaped being struck off.
_
'Furthermore, Dr Dyson has failed, in the Committee’s view, to demonstrate adequate insight into her disgraceful conduct. It was clear from her correspondence with individuals in the months following the discovery of her fraudulent letter that she recognised the seriousness of what she had done in relation to creating the letter and the impact it was having on her. However, she appeared to have limited genuine insight into the wider impact her actions were likely to have on public confidence in veterinary surgeons and the profession as a whole. In addition, the Committee took into account Dr Dyson’s failure to demonstrate genuine remorse for her disgraceful conduct.'_


----------



## Renvers (14 July 2021)

Could we consider her removal from the list considered final? 

I remember a local vet to me John Williams was struck off for falsifying documents for SJ's to travel and he has been reinstated. His reputation around here was never great beforehand and his contribution to the Veterinary profession has not been as widely influential as Sue Dyson's has. 

Maybe she can redeem herself?


----------



## Frumpoon (14 July 2021)

Renvers said:



			Could we consider her removal from the list considered final?

I remember a local vet to me John Williams was struck off for falsifying documents for SJ's to travel and he has been reinstated. His reputation around here was never great beforehand and his contribution to the Veterinary profession has not been as widely influential as Sue Dyson's has.

Maybe she can redeem herself?
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely this

As I posted above there are quite a few terrible vets who never even face infractions, then there are those that do and are treated very leniently despite deliberately harming animals and knowingly putting people at risk of injury or death. 

Sue has never done any of these things. We know animal studies are flawed for many more reasons [sample size, randomisation, measure of impact etc etc etc] than simply whether there was permission to stick a thermometer up a bottom or not.

I'd very much support this being a temp measure.

Stress induced psychosis is a real possibility - you can only be the very best in any profession for so long before the pressure takes it's toll


----------



## MuddyMonster (14 July 2021)

brighteyes said:



			Well said @AUB  I hear a lot of condemnation and not a lot of support here. Yes, rules were broken and that needed addressing on the wider front of rules being broken, but I feel this is a very out of character occurrence. Not once have I heard - and about time, she's been cavalier for donkeys' years.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I've seen pure condemnation here.

I posted saying how sad it was & that MH sounded like it was likely a factor, that I hoped she had support & seen other posts in a similiar vein.

But, she still impersonated a HO official and there has to be consequences to that regardless of the reasons why. Because otherwise, where does one draw the line?

There's no winners here - the industry has lost a great leading vet and a great facility has been lost - and SD has lost personally.

I hope there's a way she can still be involved in some capacity in the future (perhaps as some kind of independent, non veterinary role) as losing her knowledge would be a huge shame. Whether that's allowed or not (or even wants to), is another question.


----------



## Fransurrey (14 July 2021)

Renvers said:



			Terrible end to a distinguished career it seems like one seemingly little lie can just snowball.

To any researchers here, is the paperwork etc for a Home Office licence really onerous? Would filling it in, or accepting they had made a mistake and just starting again have been so terrible?

I think of how many times HHO posts referred to her other research as a benchmark for improving some aspect of horse welfare. If that work is now tainted by association it will be really sad just because they couldn't/wouldn't do one step in the process.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, it is, but you can't get round it if the AWERB at your institution has any doubts or if there's a clear cut requirement for an ASPA licence. For someone working with animals routinely in research, though and as a vet, too, I'm very surprised she wasn't on first name terms with the HOI!


----------



## Shilasdair (14 July 2021)

No condemnation from me.  
I make plenty of mistakes in life myself - being struck off seems a harsh penalty for an error of judgement regarding procedures.
Having read the report it seems to comment a lot on personality attributes - her 'attitude' etc which reminded me of the age old complaints of men against strong women.  
I am starting to wonder if there were elements of both misogyny and professional jealousy from colleagues.


----------



## teapot (14 July 2021)

Think it depends on what you hear/who you talk to - I have heard many stories regarding her that had an element of 'don't you know who I am', and she made a mistake an undergrad student could/would be hung, drawn and quartered for, she should know better. There are mistakes, and there are faking letters from the Home Office/Govt official mistakes.

Her character witnesses are not just John and Bob from the pub either, if having Richard Davison and Roly Owers behind you isn't enough...


----------



## Renvers (14 July 2021)

Shilasdair said:



			No condemnation from me. 
I make plenty of mistakes in life myself - being struck off seems a harsh penalty for an error of judgement regarding procedures.
Having read the report it seems to comment a lot on personality attributes - her 'attitude' etc which reminded me of the age old complaints of men against strong women. 
I am starting to wonder if there were elements of both misogyny and professional jealousy from colleagues.
		
Click to expand...

I suspect that whatever your mistakes you possibly haven't yet impersonated a Home Office Official? 

I wonder if the possible pressure from HO to RVC if they didn't punish that action might get very political and so she had to be made an example of. Although not without there own problems, HO also has a strong woman in charge, I wonder how much of her bad reputation is being a bolshy woman is a 100 times worst than some of her male predecessors who were "tough on crime" etc.


----------



## Shilasdair (14 July 2021)

Renvers said:



			I suspect that whatever your mistakes you possibly haven't yet impersonated a Home Office Official? 

Click to expand...

I've not needed to impersonate a Home Office official yet...but there's still time!


----------



## Ambers Echo (14 July 2021)

Oh what a tangled web we weave...

I actually feel sorry for her. As far as I can tell, the original ethics committee felt a licence from the Home Office would not be needed. So she went ahead and did the study in good faith. Only for a peer reviewer to then say the licence might be needed after all.

What then? Abandon the project, or invent some conversation some time ago that 'oh this wasn't needed in this situation'. I think she probably felt and still feels that there was never any need for a licence as the ethics committee had said.

Having been stuck myself between different panels involved in NHS research and being told AFTER completing research that some steps had not been taken, which another panel had said were not needed, I can feel my blood pressure rising in sympathy already! 

When the reviewer asked for a letter though she needed to then stop. Forging letters is obviously a few dozen steps too far. But I don't think she should have been in that position in the first place and that this is not a case of falsifying research - but of doing what it took to get that research published in the end. 

It can't be totally clear cut that a licence would have been needed as the initial ethical panel did not think it would and the letter raised no eyebrows which it would have done had it said something clearly wrong.


----------



## SusieT (14 July 2021)

There's making a mistake, in a 3 day mental health crisis.
And there is making a mistake, then covering it up for months, then showing no remorse when you are caught and blaming mental health.


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (14 July 2021)

I see someone decided to be petty and report my post 🙄 reposted with an a sweet treat instead of a star since the star was so offensive 😉 the sentiment is still the same 😉


Having read that report from start to finish she pretty much left them with no option.

She fudged up royally, lied, deceived then came out with some story to try and get off with it. Requested it be over looked, and really did herself no favours.

Regardless of all the good that was done by her previously she undid it all with this one stupid arrogant act.

I am another who believes the paper was flawed.


----------



## Annagain (14 July 2021)

Renvers said:



			I suspect that whatever your mistakes you possibly haven't yet impersonated a Home Office Official? 

I wonder if the possible pressure from HO to RVC if they didn't punish that action might get very political and so she had to be made an example of. Although not without there own problems, HO also has a strong woman in charge, I wonder how much of her bad reputation is being a bolshy woman is a 100 times worst than some of her male predecessors who were "tough on crime" etc.
		
Click to expand...

I have close friends who work at the HO. Her behaviour is far far more than being a 'bolshy woman'. She's an out and out bully.


----------

