Illustrating Two Approaches to Equine Sports Welfare Research
A sharp proverb highlights the difference between rigorous equine welfare research and flawed, agenda-driven studies.| Horses and People
This letter, declined by the Equine Veterinary Journal, responds to MacKechnie-Guire et al.’s defence of their noseband pressure study. It clarifies key methodological and interpretive issues that remain unresolved and highlights why transparent discussion is vital to the integrity of equine welfare science. The post A Reply to Response to Comments on ‘Noseband type and tightness level affect pressure on the horse’s face at trot’ appeared first on Horses and People.| Horses and People
In academic publishing, critique and reply are essential to scientific progress. This letter—declined by the Equine Veterinary Journal—is published here to complete the public record. It clarifies key methodological issues in a study of noseband pressures and highlights the importance of open discourse for equine welfare policy. The post A Reply to Response to Comments on ‘Facial pressure beneath a cavesson noseband adjusted to different tightness levels during standing and chewing” a...| Horses and People
Unlike most reports quoting only veterinarians, this analysis comes from Dr James Cooling—a medical doctor, qualified bit-fitter, and rider. He explains why blue tongues in elite horses are not cosmetic, but clear evidence of pressure, pain, and compromised welfare. The post Think Blue Tongues may be Harmless in Elite Sport Horses? Think Again. appeared first on Horses and People.| Horses and People
A sharp proverb highlights the difference between rigorous equine welfare research and flawed, agenda-driven studies.| Horses and People
