It seems there must be a shortage of cashed up educated believers & backer's that have seen any true merit during the in house clinical trial's of this treatment. It wreaks of plan B. What is plan B ? lets make a result where there is no real significant scientific scrutiny & a hell of a lot of testimonial dollar making malarkey.
I can see it now. Somebody makes a referral and instead of getting the $75 fee they get a subscription to H&L.
When does the med repair the "basal cell membrane that is disrupted before any clinical signs of laminitis are noted"?
This visual came into my mind regarding the excitement over the new med in the light of Jaye's excellent question. View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C-hKp-xciM
I have read some interesting stuff and heard Dr Ceila Marr speak on the subject. Massive subject and no one cause or treatment. I have chased them downhill before now and fixed them by doing nothing. Jack as usual there is some logic to your thoughts, but short of inducing laminitis which has the ethics committees pulling the plug, its another way of increasing the sample size. There may well be good data gathering protocol, but hey it may be as you suggest.
I did read about preemptive measures for likely candidates in Rossdales New market ( mares toxic laminitics, foaling miss haps etc) where the mare went on to get laminitis but there were little or no capsule consequences as a result of the preemptive treatment. thought it were interesting.
When taking preemptive measures, how do you know if the horse would have gotten laminitis without intervention unless it was deliberately induced?
Horses can have a bout of "under the radar episode" . That is sub-clinical. The "likely candidates" are not in study herds they are in barns and pastures, thus "pre-emptive treatments" are a "day late and a dollar or pound short"
It isnt a perfect world Mr P , I post to give people different things to look at, you arnt telling me anything I dont know
