digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Why are Broken Bones Lethal to Horses?

livescience.com — After a four-race winning streak, Eight Belles galloped past the Kentucky Derby's finish line to snag second place. The glory was shattered as the racehorse collapsed on the track. She had broken bones in both front ankles — a lethal injury for a horse.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • sbader, on 05/07/2008, -4/+43Nice article, yesterday I saw a lot of people wondering why a broken leg was lethal for a horse.
    • Waiting2awake, on 05/07/2008, -12/+18I still am. From what I can see the reason it is lethal is because of the circulatory problems. That is it. I am fairly sure we have the technology to deal with circulatory problems - it may be cost prohibited for the average horse, but one that has made it's owners millions ...?

      Granted the horse would never be any good to make money racing anymore...so maybe it is more of a financial reason than a physical one?
      • meruru, on 05/07/2008, -1/+13Slate had a better explanation: http://www.slate.com/id/2190571/
        • Waiting2awake, on 05/07/2008, -3/+8But even that article seems to claim the issues are all the same issues everyone has had to deal with. Cleanliness, circulation, secondary damage to viens, tissues, etc.... All of which seem to be marginal concerns or at least concerns that can be mitigated.

          The one I hadn't thought of was the result of re-injurying it when the Horse wakes - but in the article it goes on to say the solution to that problem - waking them in the water.

          So once again it seems to be more of an economic issue than a compassion one. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I am sure most Horses, and their owners are not in a position to afford such costs. A Horse that has made his owners millions is a different story. Like I said though, not that there is anything wrong with it - I just have yet to hear a real compassionate reason, lots of rational economic justifications though.

          • MoofTheStoof, on 05/07/2008, -1/+10Sometimes compassion is providing a quick, painless end instead of a painful, lingering one.
          • Chompy, on 05/07/2008, -0/+24You can't keep a horse in a pool for three months. The real reason that it's lethal is because horses freak the ***** out when you try to cast up their legs. Bones take months to heal, and if horses could talk all you'd be hearing for those three months is getitoffgetitoffGETITOFFGETITOFF.. Horses can literally kill themselves just with sheer panic.
            /grew up with horses
            //shoveled enough horse crap to build a small island
          • humperdeath, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1Hey man, we need something for the back of all our stamps.
          • whodat807, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3It's not financial -- if the horse lives, the owner could make millions putting the horse out to stud. A lot of horse owners make even more money from pimping their horse than they did racing.

            They tried to save Barbaro, and even after a year of top of the line medical care, he still had to be put down. Eight Belles broke both front legs--there was no chance.
      • trogdor282, on 05/07/2008, -1/+30I think if people are still losing limbs to diabeetus then we haven't quite mastered circulatory problems.
        • Protoss, on 05/07/2008, -0/+8I'm Wilford Brimley, I'd like to talk to you about diabettus...
        • Markpdotcom, on 05/07/2008, -3/+3diabeetus?
        • cdahlkvist, on 05/07/2008, -1/+7So maybe we should put them down instead of trying to find other solutions.
      • cawpin, on 05/07/2008, -1/+9"That is it."

        No. If a horse has a broken leg it can't stand on it, obviously. A horse isn't smart enough to know this. They will constantly try to get up if you lay them down. Two broken legs is impossible to mend, even enough for them to walk.
      • pogfreak, on 05/07/2008, -2/+0What an ignorant, judgmental, and flat out cruel thing to say, Waiting2Awake. Shame on you! Had you spent any time around horses or people who care for them you would see how ridiculous and flat out cold your statements are.
    • CrazedLeper, on 05/07/2008, -23/+1"A horse's hoof is *designed* like a passive mechanical pump,"

      "Designed"? Intelligently designed? No? You sure? Really? Ok.
      • cawpin, on 05/07/2008, -1/+19Shut up. He didn't say anything about ID. You're making a problem where there isn't one.
        • CrazedLeper, on 05/08/2008, -2/+1He said designed. That's all it takes. You're all in denial...the river choked with the living.
          • chrgrose, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Any causal process that acts to manipulate some structure can effectively design.
      • Chompy, on 05/07/2008, -1/+4*****! Busted. The creationists finally caught us in a lie. Our entire mad evolution conspiracy has been brought to it's knees by one careless comment. Thanks alot, livescience.com.
      • directedition, on 05/07/2008, -2/+1My stomach is designed to break-down food. My brain is designed for thinkin'. My foot is designed for kicking your ass.
        • CrazedLeper, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2Is this ridicule? Last I heard, ridicule was not scientific enough to be considered evidence.
    • directedition, on 05/07/2008, -0/+6Not according to PETA "OMG! They're killing horses now that their slaves can no longer serve them!"
    • zodieman, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4From the Far Side by Gary Larson:
      "Doris, like all vet students breezes through Chapter 9".
      In the panel you see an open book with a list of equine diseases and their 'treatments': Every single entry in the treatment column is "shoot".
  • mentallyinhell, on 05/07/2008, -7/+10So the hoof is like a heartbeat? Why not find another way to keep the blood moving while the leg heals?
    • dissurmom, on 05/07/2008, -8/+23PLEASE PEOPLE STOP!
      Just let the poor animal have it's peace... Your common sense won't do it any good at this point.
      /reloads shotgun
      • Waiting2awake, on 05/07/2008, -13/+5 Better keep it loaded just in case you get a hangnail... wouldn't want you to suffer. Really, I'll be doing it for your own good... ;-)
    • catachip, on 05/07/2008, -6/+17It's the same in your own body. The reason that blood makes it back from your feet to your heart is that the muscles in your calves and thighs compress the veins, forcing the blood upward. There are also one way valves in the leg veins that keep your blood from moving back down once it's pushed up.

      This is why if you sit for a long time, say on an 8 hour flight, you can form clots in your leg veins. The blood pools down there because your leg muscles are not contracting and pushing it up. This pooling causes clots to form. When you stand up, the blood starts flowing again and the clot can get lodged in your heart or brain (i.e., heart attack or stroke).

      This is actually a very ingenious evolutionary solution to the problem of low venous pressure. Human animals out in the savannah are typically not sitting motionless in plane seats for 8 hours.
      • dk911, on 05/07/2008, -19/+5Actually, a truly ingenious evolution would be our bodies adapting to the needs and creating a mechanism to pull the blood back up to the heart. Evolution should be weaning us FROM the days in the savannah and TO the couch (or plane seats) and adapting us to NOT get those potentially lethal clots. That would be evolution at its finest... however, no such thing has appeared yet, thus showing that either we're one design, not going to evolve. Or evolution can ONLY occur very slowly... ;-) (just ribbin' the evolution-aries among us)
        • Murdats, on 05/07/2008, -5/+19I know you are trolling, but tv and planes have been around for only 1-3 generations, it takes hundreds of generations for evolution to take effect.
          60 years = not much
          200 years = not much
          5000 years = maybe something
          20, 000 = something measurable
          1,000,000 = noticable differences
          1 billion = new species
        • catachip, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Exactly Murdats. Evolution occurs in populations over thousands of generations. Not over a hundred years. We're talking thousands, and hundreds of thousands, and millions of years to perfect the current system.
        • acknotSW, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0Just to add to Murdats fine post, we are currently hindering evolution through our advances in medicine.
        • Oea420, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Don't digg him down, he is right.

          Or are you saying propping up the sick, dying, and people with genetic diseases isn't going to change the way our species turns out in the end?

          Is it a bad thing? No. Is it in our nature to help the sick, dying, and those less fortunate? Yes.

          Is it this very nature that landed us as the dominant species on the planet, even? Maybe

          It's a difficult topic
  • lukeduke, on 05/07/2008, -13/+61Not really lethal, but the world needs Elmer's glue.
    • RealmDown, on 05/07/2008, -3/+25This comment is full of FUDD.
    • ubuwalker31, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2The first horse I ever bet on was named "Ready for Glue 2"
  • UtahApocalyse, on 05/07/2008, -64/+40Real Reason:

    Cheaper for the elitist owner to euthanize the horse then to pay for medical and rehab. Plus even after rehab the horse would never race again, and not earn the owners any more money.
    • schnikies79, on 05/07/2008, -7/+60If you don't anything about the subject then just shut up.

      Horses make much more money after retiring from racing than they ever do in racing. Ever heard of stud farms? Millions was spent on Barbaro and they still couldn't save him.

      I love it when people talk about horses and horse racing like they have a clue. I'm not supporting or bashing racing but I've worked with (and owned) horses all my life.
      • thanakar, on 05/07/2008, -14/+10Belle was a philly, not a stallion, not much in stud fee's coming from her.
        • schnikies79, on 05/07/2008, -4/+19She still reproduces, no? With the right stud, her colt(s) would be worth a fortune.

          Females are worth a lot too.
          • Waiting2awake, on 05/07/2008, -9/+6 So would her medical bills. Those bills are concrete - her future progeny is speculation.

            Not saying that money was the issue - but money is always the issue.
          • schnikies79, on 05/07/2008, -4/+11I've known a few trainers that have had horses in the derby. They would darn near give up their own life to save a horse. They people love their horses like people love their children.

            No amount of money could have saved this horse. Some things just aren't medically possible, this is one of those things.
          • Waiting2awake, on 05/07/2008, -1/+5Schnikies - You do seem to know considerably more about horses than me. So I will simply ask you why? Why is it that they are unfixable? I have read the article, and the other salon one and I haven't seen any issue with Horses that wouldn't be with any other animal(including man) and we have solved those(more or less) - so why not here?
          • kh99, on 05/07/2008, -1/+4If they had tried to save her, same people would be complaining that they were allowing the horse to suffer because they hoped to make money.
          • schnikies79, on 05/07/2008, -1/+10I'll quickly explain.

            Horses are built to distribute weight across their legs, with about 65% to 70% of the weight on the front. Putting the front legs in a cast would force most of the weight to the back legs, which quickly kill the horse. Uneven or extended periods of extra stress on horses legs causes blood-pooling, abscesses, infection. Well why not just suspend the horse? That can be done to an extent, but a horse won't cooperate. A human in a similar situation would understand but a horse just won't stay like that for very long. How about the horse laying down? Again, horses don't like (and won't) do that, but even if they would, it quickly causes pneumonia and fluid build up around he heart which leads to heart failure.

            When Barbaro broke a leg, they did try and save him but infection killed him. Belle had two broken ankles. As far as I know (not all details are out yet), one shattered and they other was compound. Think of a tree breaking over and splintering, this is similar. The compound break and the wounds that go along with it ended up deeply in the dirt, which added to the break makes almost guaranteed infection.

            Normally if a horse would have to euthanized, they would do off the track and away from the crowd, but this horse was hurt so severely they couldn't even move her.
          • cawpin, on 05/07/2008, -2/+2"Why is it that they are unfixable?"

            What is the problem here? It isn't hard to see why a horse with 2 broken ankles is almost impossible to fix. Think of it this way. It you walked on your fingers and that's the only way you could get around, the only way you could eat/drink. Could you survive if all 10 fingers were broken?

            That's essentially how a horse is walking, on the tips of fingers. That's why they're so sensitive to broken legs.
          • jcaino, on 05/07/2008, -4/+2think of it as breaking your femur - a condition in humans that means death a majority of the time.
          • cdahlkvist, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2jcaino: majority?

            Most femoral breaks and fractures are survived.

            Fractured neck of femur and broken neck of femur are the worst and even those have a high survival rate.

            Death rate (even in the elderly - which is the group most susceptible) is only around 20%-30%.

            http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcg ...
            http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/325/7369/868
          • muchachoburacho, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2Ok, now break both femurs, and make it so we basically have to stand all the time in order to live, and now you are in eight belles position.
          • s0nicfreak, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1If she already has leg problems, the added weight from pregnancy is going to be a huge problem...
    • kh99, on 05/07/2008, -2/+24Yeah, because the owner wasn't upset about it or anything.
      • directedition, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1His emotional state has something to do with the medical possibility of saving a horse with TWO broken ankles? If it was possible to save the horse, they would have done it.
        • kh99, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1That was sarcasm. I agree with you - I was arguing against the idea that the "elitist" owner did it only out of financial concerns.
    • truthhammer, on 05/07/2008, -3/+31Do you have any idea how much that horse is worth? If it could be saved, the owner would save it.
      • CosmicJustice, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2The owner didn't have any say in the matter. The track vet made the call and the owner didn't find out it was his horse until it was over.
    • AtWorkSurfer, on 05/07/2008, -12/+13Elitist!? Are you telling me that was Barack Obama's horse?
      • RudeTurnip, on 05/07/2008, -1/+11"Elitist" is the new dismissive term for people who disagree with your point of view. It's the 2008 version of 2000-2007's "liberal."
        • GiggleStick, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Indeed. The cost of arugala is becoming exceedingly prohibitive. I might have to look for it at the *gasp* super-market or produce stand if this keeps up.
      • NoStoppingUs, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1lol
    • rolf, on 05/07/2008, -5/+8I like cats -- but I wouldn't spend much more than $500 on fixing one pet. If a problem is really bad and the creature is in pain, I'd rather euthanize it. It's not that I don't have the money, but I would rather save that for my family in case tough times come whom I care much more about.

      Other people have different priorities. Please recognize it as pragmatism rather than cold heartedness.
      • cdahlkvist, on 05/07/2008, -8/+6Then you should not have pets.

        If you want to have a pet then you are responsible for it's health and well-being.

        You know, in the long run, it's cheaper to care for a pet than a child. So why not let your diseased or broken children die? I mean, you can always make another kid.
        • muchachoburacho, on 05/07/2008, -1/+5Animals can not understand the pain they are in, a human can. It's less fair in some people's opinion to subject the animal to the excruciating pain of recovery, especially if it's quality of life after the fact would be greatly diminished. Sometimes it's not even about money.
          • cdahlkvist, on 05/07/2008, -3/+5Wait. Your reasoning is that because the animal cannot understand the pain that it is more humane to put it down?

            So we should hold true to that reasoning when a newborn or infant child is in pain, correct? I mean, your logic would apply to that situation also because newborns can not understand the pain they are in either.

            Let's assuming that a newborn child loses it's lower extremities. They would be in great amounts of pain and their quality of life after will be greatly diminished.

            I'm glad you agree with me that we should put them down too.

            Thank you for making my argument.

            I just don't think you see the absurdity of your reasoning. Hell, "it's just a dumb animal" would be better than your excuse.
        • rolf, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1My limit may be lower than other people's, but most people would follow my principle. They may spend 1000, 5000, or 50,000 to save a beloved pet. But they'd have a limit and would probably not go broke to save it. A child of theirs, they'd probably sacrifice everything to save.

          If you can't see the difference, I'm sorry. When I have a pet, I am responsible to feed it and generally take care of it and make sure it's not miserable. But I don't owe it my life savings or even anything close to it.
      • JimSwarthow, on 05/07/2008, -3/+3you're an idiot.
    • JimSwarthow, on 05/07/2008, -4/+2hey numbnuts, before you post stupidity like that maybe you oughta at least learn English. - "then" is not synonymous w/ "than", btw, you fkn bonehead.
  • zievo, on 05/07/2008, -15/+3One horse's opinion:
    http://www.idkwtf.com/videos/latest-videos/horse-a ...
    • jackalsclaw, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1why is there no love on digg for family guy all of a sudden?
  • BLiSTeD, on 05/07/2008, -15/+8Of course lots of inbreeding has also increased the weakness of these horses ankles while strengthening other "desirable" characteristics.
    • Regbooker, on 05/07/2008, -2/+2Actually inbreeding doesn't affect in the way you are suggesting. Inbreeding affects groups in the sense of hereditary diseases. Limiting the gene-pool of a certain group thus promoting, as generations goes-by, the expression of certain hereditary diseases carried by this group.
    • Meatetarian, on 05/07/2008, -1/+10I don't know why you're being dug down. There's a ton of inbreeding in horse racing. We were all digging the story on Japanese imbred dogs with horrible defects a few days ago and it's the same situation here.

      Moreover, we're racing horses that aren't completely developed -- their legs aren't fully bone until 3-4 years from what I've read and the horses that we race are, generally speaking, 3 years from the first of the year, not the date the horse was born (so really the horses are 2-3 years old).

      Not to be crass, but it's akin to having a newborn headbutting competition.
      • zeppo, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1I agree this type of horse racing should be illegal. Very cruel and inhumane.
      • KegBol, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1Show me where to watch newborn headbutting competitions, and I'll stop watching horses.
    • auto98, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3True Blisted - it's worth noting that wild horses have wider and stronger ankles, such having being bred out because there is apparently a speed advantage
      • Regbooker, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4That's because of artificial selection, not inbreeding.
    • jackalsclaw, on 05/08/2008, -0/+2speed is the priority not heath in horse breding.
  • rjpaulisick, on 05/07/2008, -7/+65PETA should check this article out...best to put the horse down in a peaceful manner than have it suffer through an agonizingly slow death as a result of its two broken ankles.

    It's not because they hate horses, PETA. Those owners and trainers keep better care of those animals better than you could ever hope to do.
    • Airloss, on 07/18/2008, -14/+2because you would like to be shot if it was expensive to rehabilitate you after a major car accident?

      • schnikies79, on 05/07/2008, -2/+16Money wasn't a factor, it simply wasn't possible to save this horse.

        Again, for the 100th time. No amount of money could have saved this horse. Check out Barbaro, millions was spent trying to save him and he still died and with only one leg broken. Belle had two broken legs, at least one with a compound fracture and the other shattered.
      • momsshizzle, on 05/07/2008, -2/+6Believe me, those horses are taken better care then you take care of yourself.
      • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3If people remain in a vegetative state too long sometimes the doctor "pulls the plug" too, if;
        1) they don't think that there is a chance of recovery
        2) there is a lot of suffering...

        There was an issue about this a while back re: a girl called Teri? Remember?
    • HonestAbe, on 05/07/2008, -3/+13PETA would love to put it out of its misery.

      http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
      • anstice85, on 05/07/2008, -0/+12I actually emailed PETA to ask why they kill more animals than even the Humane Society. The representative said that PETA will take animals who are knocking on death's door and their owners don't have enough money to take them to a vet or need them humanely euthanized. They think of themselves as a last resort.

        By the way, the people behind that website (petakillsanimals.com) are the Center for Consumer Freedom, a front group for the tobacco, restaurant and alcohol industries. Some of their board members are from Philip Morris and various steakhouses across the country. Obviously they've got some corporate interests to protect by attacking PETA. Not saying PETA are right, but it's good to know about motives (the Scientology/Narconon connection comes to mind).
        • directedition, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3Then why did they feel the need to lie about it? It was a secret until a little look at their tax records revealed their purchase of an enormous walk-in freezer.
        • Tomchei, on 05/07/2008, -1/+5PeTA = Humane Society
          PeTA = Wackos = Humane Society

          People who really care about animals = ASPCA
    • anstice85, on 05/07/2008, -4/+2Yes, trainers truly love their horses- like the trainer of the horse who won this year, Big Brown, who drugged horses with "performance enhancing drugs" a few years ago and escaped to Rio de Janeiro after he was busted for it.
    • AtomB, on 05/07/2008, -1/+10Well I would say that they shouldn't be pushing these horses to these levels against their will anyways. I don't think this horse would have two broken ankles if it wasn't pushed to the breaking point every race.
      • zionsrogue, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Breaking point every race? Do you know anything about horse racing? Horses are a lot like starting pitchers in baseball. They are used conservatively, only every one in awhile, saving their strong legs for the big races. Jockies are trained NOT to push their horses depending on the race.
    • gorgalor, on 05/07/2008, -2/+7I don't recall PETA protesting against horses being put down for broken bones. They have been protesting against pushing horses to their absolute breaking point, so to speak.
  • wexmajor, on 05/07/2008, -3/+65Horses are poorly constructed.
    • soupnrc, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1Hahaha... well done, good sir, well done.
    • Nubli, on 05/07/2008, -6/+1Their anatomy is close to humans. Hmm..
    • Ladymongoose, on 05/07/2008, -0/+13Actually back-to-basics horses are perfectly put-together. The Thoroughbred is a poorly constructed horse, man-altered equine. Ever take a look at Mongol ponies or the Spanish Barb?Those critters are tougher than any 1000 pound, 17.2 hand modern race horse. We're the ones that bred horses to be tall and fast without regard to their basic structure, which nature prefers to be small and squat.
    • atact88, on 05/07/2008, -5/+0You mean, not very intelligently designed?
    • PixelEater, on 05/07/2008, -2/+2Especially today's Mustangs.
  • amightywind, on 05/07/2008, -4/+36These animals are being bred for destruction. Compare how lightly built the thoroughbred is compared to the handler's horse next to him. Back in '73 Secretariat was a war horse. Huge with thick legs. The horses of today do not resemble him.
    • hd95, on 05/07/2008, -0/+14Read an article on Secretariat. His handlers will tell you that horse knew he was the shiznit even blowing grass in people's faces as a joke.
    • granolajoe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+10Definitely. And he was a ridiculous performer. There's no reason to breed these top-heavy, super-light-legged horses. It's just asking for trouble
    • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Yeah, but back in the old days, they still put down horses if they have broken legs.

      A clever design would be one that allows survivability even though a limb is gone.
      E.g. A roach is a good design.
    • quill, on 05/08/2008, -0/+0"Compare how lightly built the thoroughbred is compared to the handler's horse next to him."

      Different breeds have different basic sizes? Say it ain't so!

      I'm not saying that your main argument is wrong (although I believe that it is). I am saying that your example is extremely poor.
  • hd95, on 05/07/2008, -4/+17it's a goofy idea but i wondered why they couldn't have one of those wheelie things they do for dogs... now i know why
    • mhuggins, on 05/07/2008, -0/+6You weren't alone in thinking that.
    • Laminarcissus, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Because a "wheelie thing" for a thousand pound horse would weigh nearly as much itself, horses can't support their own weight resting against their upper bodies like dogs can, and horses don't have the same temperament as dogs; they won't even tolerate casts on their legs much less a contraption nearly as tall as them.
  • flaznog, on 05/07/2008, -9/+5The loss of Eight Bells was a tragic. But this is bit more disturbing...

    "Injured Horses You Didn’t See"

    http://therail.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/injure ...
  • suttercain, on 05/07/2008, -26/+6Where's your omnipotent God now? Dude can't even give this beautiful creature some good legs! Sounds sadistic to me.
    • Anonchrist, on 05/07/2008, -1/+10You sir are stretching the anti-religion thing to far. We all know that there are serious problems with theism, but this is not one of them.
      • Velvolver, on 05/07/2008, -0/+8Well regardless, involvement by man such as taking to young horses that have been selectively bred...all leading to the horses not having very strong joints and bones; then racing them like crazy down a track could be a factor.

        But just go blame it on God.
        ***** idiot.
        • suttercain, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeletal_system_of_th ...

          Not all issues are caused by human breeding... Do you have a source to state I am wrong?
          • Velvolver, on 05/08/2008, -1/+1It's right there in your own source...horses that are put through great stress at a young age such as show horses are prone to injury. Thanks for the source numb nuts!
        • suttercain, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1Didn't you say breeding? Is it stress, breeding or both? Because my claim was against breeding.

          PS. Why are you screaming about numb nuts? This is not a porn film.
    • CaptainBukko, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6What are you talking about? If anything it's man breeding horses specifically for racing that has caused their flawed legs.
    • directedition, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3Vote for Ron Paul! Because this comment has nothing to do with the article!
    • Szandor, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1As an atheist, I want you to STFU.
  • nutniqs, on 05/07/2008, -3/+2also pain
  • kaynesan, on 05/07/2008, -4/+2I see.
  • brstilson, on 05/07/2008, -12/+6I haven't read the article yet, but I'm going to say that it's because after centuries of selective breeding, horses' legs are actually too thin to properly support their weight, giving them poor circulation. Thus, when a horse breaks its leg, it will never properly heal.
    • Waiting2awake, on 05/07/2008, -5/+1Maybe not to race again - but to live? Graze? Life as a general Horse?
      • anstice85, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3From my understanding after that injury it probably wouldn't have been able to stand again.

        (Plus, it had probably been pumped with a lot of drugs).
        • Waiting2awake, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Sounds like an average kegger.
      • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Read the article...
    • schnikies79, on 05/07/2008, -0/+8Thoroughbreds are selectively bred, so that might (read probably does) cause problems, but all horses are this way.

      Wild horses who break a leg always die, every single time. Same goes for zebras, giraffes, deer, etc.
      • BeforeSputnik, on 05/07/2008, -2/+3They "always die, every single time." I can't resist.
        Wild horses who break a leg always die, most of the time. Or maybe they sometimes die, every single time. :)
        • schnikies79, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Lol, yea it did sound funny.
        • brstilson, on 05/07/2008, -0/+460% of the time it works....every time
      • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2The FSM was drunk when HE designed horses/zebras/giraffes/deer
  • NewsrmPicasso, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2Thanks for posting this. I was curious after seeing the horse euthanized on the news.
  • TropiCara, on 05/07/2008, -9/+332 horses are euthanized on the race track a day in the u.s.... that to me makes this sport not worth it.
    • BelatedHero, on 05/07/2008, -4/+23It really is a pointless "sport".
      • Tomchei, on 05/07/2008, -3/+4So is boxing, baseball, basketball, football, soccer, hangliding, skydiving, acting, martial arts, magic, and a mess of other activities.
        • Laminarcissus, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Except we do all those ourselves.
    • rolf, on 05/07/2008, -5/+6I wonder how of those digging you up will also be eating chicken, pork, or beef tonight.
      • Velvolver, on 05/07/2008, -0/+12I'll be eating at taco bell tonight. That counts as horse btw.
      • BelatedHero, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3What does that have to do with it rolf? I'm not some PETA nut. I say it's pointless because it's just a rich person's game solely about money, the horses be damned. The owners only care about getting that big jackpot. Most everyone probably looks down upon greyhound racing. Why is horse racing any different?
        • yardie, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2By that reasoning every sport is a rich mans sport. Race horse owners are rich because of the payout? The guy at the local OffTrack or PMU is probably not that rich. But the rich are certainly welcome there. NASCAR, Formula 1, Track and Field, hell, you name a sport with any traction and their is a rich backer somewhere. The fact of even owning a horse is expensive. Between feeding and the vets, keeping one costs more than a kid.

          I'm not a horse owner but I think you've seen too many movies. Go to the tracks now. They take all kinds. That era you are referring to exists only in the movies.
    • halogoggles, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1I dugg you up but do you have a source? I want to read more about that... if that's true how does anyone on the planet think this "sport" is OK? Morons.
      • lilrabbit129, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3In the same way that you can eat chicken, pork or beef. They're bred for that purpose. People really need to stop anthropomorphizing beasts of burden. They're not pets.
    • directedition, on 05/07/2008, -0/+8You're right, Zebra racing would pwn much more.
  • displaced1, on 05/07/2008, -10/+3122,000+ dead in Myanmar.......
    • skyshock1, on 05/07/2008, -1/+28Dude, ***** yeah. Rambo 4 ruled.
    • spoonchucks, on 05/07/2008, -0/+13Horsies, dude... HORSIES.
    • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Bad Karma. They weren't euthanized though..
    • anotherjack, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Worth mentioning. But to the casual observer it seems like foriegn people are always dying of something. If they could arrange to die at the Kentucky Derby, or even a Monster truck rally, you'd see immense sympathy. Heck, one little Myanmaran child drowning in a bucket on the main stage would do it. Millions of dollars would pour in. That is how the American conscience works. That horse was utterly destroyed in a moment of triumph in front of millions. That's showbiz.
  • dafragsta, on 05/07/2008, -2/+3Why is it lethal? Ever see a horse with crutches?
    • mordea, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1No, but I've seen prosthetic limbs on horses.
  • hybridcreation, on 05/07/2008, -10/+13Making horses run around a track for the entertainment of humans is stupid.

    And I AM NOT a PETA freak.
    • acdcfanbill, on 05/07/2008, -0/+12You don't have to make them, any horse that makes it into a race of that caliber loves to race. Most of the race the jockey will probably be slowing them down so they don't burn out before the end stretch.
      • CobaltBlue, on 05/07/2008, -4/+5So that constant whipping they do is to slow them down?
        • whodat807, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2actually a lot of the whipping is to make it go straight. if you have a huge crowd of screaming people on one side, the horse will naturally veer away from them. you whip them to make sure they don't go crowding against the rail.
          that said, i've always been ill at ease about the whipping.
        • Callahn, on 05/08/2008, -0/+0You don't whip a horse. You use a riding crop, which is little more than a smack to a horse. Abusing a horse isn't going to win you races.
    • Velvolver, on 05/07/2008, -1/+4So it watching cars go around a track, ***** NASCAR
      • Tomchei, on 05/07/2008, -2/+4And watching people chase a ball for the entertainment of humans is just as stupid.
    • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3I rather watch people run in circles...
  • xspinkickx, on 05/07/2008, -3/+2I am sure some of these horses live better then people but the question remains with all the injuries that occur and having to euthanize the animal because no amount of money will rehabilitate the animal, is why is this even a sport still??
    • mike17032, on 05/07/2008, -1/+4Because its a ***** HORSE, get over it.

      It died doing what it loved to do.
  • RobotLeAwesome, on 05/07/2008, -1/+13because horses are delicious
  • chaos7, on 05/07/2008, -24/+1digg is immature about animals and meat eating. digg should support peta not bash it. i'm disappointed in diggers.
    • schnikies79, on 05/07/2008, -0/+17PETA is one of the most hypocritical, ***** organizations on the planet.

      Even my vegetarian friends won't support them in the slightest.
    • mike17032, on 05/07/2008, -0/+12There is nothing mature about supporting eco-terrorists. In fact most of their views are so child like its amazing they live long enough to breed.
    • RyanP, on 05/07/2008, -0/+6Support the humane society. Screw PETA.
    • HellHorse, on 05/08/2008, -0/+0Hey I'm all for PETA! (People Eating Tasty Animals)
  • chaos7, on 05/07/2008, -7/+4horse racing shouldn't exist
  • bethlee, on 05/07/2008, -8/+3Had she been a male they would not have put her down so quickly. They would have tried to save her because a male horse has "purpose" even if they cannot race, they can be used as a stud. I think she was too young to be racing, she was only three.
    • whodat807, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1OK mr. expert. You are aware that females are needed for reproduction? Horse owners want their colts to reproduce with mares that have good genes -- a filly as fast as Eight Belles would have produced million dollar offspring. No owner in their right mind would just kill a filly like Eight Belles because it is still a hugely valuable commodity.

      And people have been racing three year old horses for a century. That isn't new. Perhaps the actual problem is the fact that thoroughbreds today are bred for speed and not for durability, making them more fragile than their predecessors.
  • rodgerse, on 05/07/2008, -8/+2Give me a break...the fact is noone is willing to care for it so they tell themselves they're being humane by ending its suffering..what bs, a broken leg is just that, a broken leg, the only thing thats lethal is ppls unsavory attitude towards animal suffering..and they're need to end it.

    The fact is a horse would be just fine if it was unable to walk.
    • Ouze, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1tldr, huh?
      • rodgerse, on 05/07/2008, -3/+0No, if YOU had read you'd see the article really doesn't say the horse would actually die.
        • PigGeneral, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0Wouldn't actually die, and just fine are a bit of a spread.
    • mike17032, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Wrong kid, try reading it next time.
      • rodgerse, on 05/07/2008, -4/+0"Immobility can cut off vital circulation within a horse's body, leading to a cascade of health compromises".

        doesn't sound like sudden/certian death to me...
        • logan074, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0I think the trained vet on scene knew what he was doing and he was trying to save the horse from the suffering that Barbaro endured.
          • rodgerse, on 05/07/2008, -1/+0You realize its likely barbaro could have lived, then your whole pain and "suffering" argument would be thrown out the window...

            Did the horse tell you it didn't want to be saved?.
        • kanabiis, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Barbaro could have been saved??!!! Are you delusional?? They spent MILLIONS, let me say it again, MILLIONS trying to save that horse, they spent more money then most people have available in health coverage trying to save that horse, and he still died.

          They probably could have spent a billion dollars trying to save the horse, and he would have died.

          Thats what happens sometimes, no matter how much money you throw, sometimes its not enough.
    • PigGeneral, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1"The fact is a horse would be just fine if it was unable to walk."

      I believe the article states otherwise good sir.
    • pogfreak, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Ignorant and cold to suggest the people who loved and cared for this horse wouldn't have done anything possible to save its life.
      • rodgerse, on 05/07/2008, -1/+0Are you telling me the vet knew from his few moments on scene that the horse wasn't going to live, or he read the horses mind and it said it didn't want to live?.

        Face it..a broken horse is an unprofittable horse.

        might as well sell it for glue or meat.
    • Chappync, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Come back and spout that kind of garbage after you have tried to rehab a few horses that have foundered (laminitis) or have broken a leg, it rarely works out and the animal is NEVER the same. This is an animal that has evolved to run in large groups in open areas, if a horse breaks a bone or comes up lame in their natural habitat they are food for something in short order. I have had to put down several horses over the years for various reasons and it has never been easy, but it has ALWAYS been the the best decision for the animal. Last one was the first pure polish arab we ever had, we had him for 27 years and he foundered on us, over 9k in vet bills and 2 months of agony for him, we should have put him down the second day. One before that was a 22 year old quarter horse cross owned by a couple of kids. They were taking him off the trailer for some day riding when his trailermate ( a horse he had been pastured with for 10 years) kicked, once... and shattered his near front leg. Try pumping enough phenobarb into a horse to kill it with a couple of kids under 10 screaming behind you sometime (why the parents let them watch this I don't know).

      Anyway, guess my point is, that while there are animals abused in this industry, it is not that much different from any other man/animal interaction, most people are doing what is best for the animal.

      • ashfish, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Being a horse lover and my family having used to own horses, I am very sorry for your losses. Putting any animal down is a horrible experience.
    • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1There should be some kinda tag we can put on diggers who don't RTFA....
      I mean, if we digg articles, and comments.. we should be able to digg the members as well huh?
  • XStatic, on 05/07/2008, -0/+11The legs have limited muscle and limited blood flow which inhibits healing of the bone and limits the ability to fight infection.
    Nerves are often complete severed in a break and the small number of arteries in the leg are often damaged which leads to even less blood flow.
    Antibiotics are generally not very effective because of the size of a horse.
    Horses don't tolerate being sedated very well, they tend to thrash about when coming to which damages many repairs, they also don't tolerate being immobilized in a sling for short periods of time, much less the months required to heal a bone.
    During healing, or even after, a non broken limb is often damaged attempting to support the entire weight.
    • Velvolver, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6Your information has led me to the conclusion that Horses are stupid
      • TheDreadDiggerD, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1How about poorly designed?
        • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -2/+2Friends should not let friends design drunk.
      • Oea420, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2???

        Yeah, racing horses who have been SPECIFICALLY BRED by humans for a long time to race race race.... it's no wonder their bodies are poorly adapted to other tasks

        look at cows
    • Laminarcissus, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Your information has led me to the conclusion that I accidentally navigated off of Digg.
  • soupnrc, on 05/07/2008, -1/+38Because it gets shot.

    100% mortality rate.
    • mhuggins, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Welp, I lol'd. See you guys at the gates of hell.
  • directive0, on 05/07/2008, -2/+10Hmm, wow that sounds like a really fragile cardio-vascular system. Seems like if we cared about these animals we wouldn't put them in situations where they could injure themselves to the point where the only treatment is euthanasia. I'm not saying it's cruel, thats not my call to make as I can't tell if the horses enjoy it or not. But if it were my horse, and I wanted it to stay healthy, it would be hanging out in my field and going for the occasional ride not tear-assing around a dusty track. That being said, I don't own a horse, nor do I have any experience racing them.
    • ILoveVerdi, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0You're right, it's not necessarily cruel, but it's completely negligent.
    • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -1/+2If you had a horse, you wouldn't let it do anything that could let it injure itself? Like run??? Horses run. They like to run. Running around a field with uneven ground makes it easier to break a leg than running on a flat field.
      You can't stop animals from doing what they like to do.

      Fetch========> Clue
      • directive0, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Then I'd provide it a level field. Your justification is a good attempt, but its not a question of either/or.

        When horses start showing up to races of their own accord, then and only then will people be able to convince me that they enjoy races. I wouldn't for a second assert that they dislike it, because I can't prove that (see how this works?) All I do know is that were it MY horse (a pet, or even a work horse) I would be very careful with the things I coerced it to do that would over-exert or risk that delicate system of circulation. Especially with the knowledge that were it to be injured in that way I would have to destroy it. And yeah, running, sure, I love to run too but I'm not entering myself in 100 meter dashes every week.
        • whodat807, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1I never got this. Why are you weeping over the plight of race horses? They get fed the best food, get the best training, get companion horses and goats to keep it company, get to stay in beautiful stables, and are loved for and valued their entire lives. Workhorses do not. Try finding a workhorse that had as much care and love as Barbaro.

          Why are so many people up in arms about the plight of racehorses? As horses go, they live like kings!
          • directive0, on 05/08/2008, -1/+1And I never got why people would waste so much money on a horse so it could run around an oval a couple times. Especially when any chance of injury means a complete loss of your investment.
  • galvo, on 05/07/2008, -3/+1Elmer's glue.
  • SillyDigger, on 05/07/2008, -8/+3....If horses could talk

    ITS TIME TO DIE!
    No, no, no its just a broken bone. It can heal! I don't wanna die!
    Sorry pal but we have to kill you
    Why?
    ...because
    • rhartman, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1Gah! Meant to bury and dugg instead forcing me to respond to a useless comment.
      Did you read the article or any of the other comments at all before posting your inane attempt at being funny?
      • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2Buried the SillyBugger.

        If the horses could talk it would be more like .....(according to the articles)
        I'M RUNNING! I'M RUNNING
        I'M NOT RUNNING? WTF??
        OW OW OW OW OW OW
        OW OW OW OW OW OWW
        WHY AM I NOT RUNNING OW OW OW
        "BANG".
  • drgreenberg, on 05/07/2008, -2/+3There's no reason appropriate medical technology couldn't be developed to repair a horse's leg. However, given the fact that the healed horse would likely not be able to race and would thus not bring in additional money, I think the will just isn't there to spend the money on such development. This really is a case of caring about the horses only as far as they are still income earners. Perhaps the sport needs some additional rules that limit the extent to which inbreeding can weaken the animals' physiology. For example, requiring horses to pass certain tests on bone mass or circulation in order to race. Then, the target "ideal" animal that breeding heads towards would be different.
    • Chappync, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2hundreds of millions of dollars are invested into equine veterinary research in many universities here in the states every year, a lot of that cash comes from grants from the Arabs who are into horse racing in a big way and benefits all horses whether they are race horses or not.
    • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Hmmm... i think they are trying to do the repair part... a LOT of money is in horse racing....
    • Laminarcissus, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Ahh, drgreenberg, I see the "Dr." is not in veterinary medicine.

      Chiropractor? Phd in Baseless Puffery?
    • vinny, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2You are completely wrong. Successful race horses are worth much more after their racing days for breeding.
  • Softstep, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0If I'm not mistaken, this was the 134th running of the derby. Its funny how now we take issue with horse racing.
  • VictoryGin, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1All these horse racing fans are just lucky Karellen isn't here yet...
  • animus, on 05/07/2008, -7/+1this article is horse *****.
    the reason why horses are killed is money.
    technology exists to replace any broken bones, but they would never be able to race again to regain the cost of it.
    liars.
    • Chappync, on 05/07/2008, -0/+5Ever hear of Barbaro? Money was not an issue there and they were still unable to save him...
    • RogaDanar, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Wow...someone else who doesn't know what they're talking about.

      Ever hear of breeding? Stud fees? That's where most owner's make their money...not from winning races (though winning races helps). Owners want to save their horses if they go down, especially if they're a prime specimen.
  • zmigliozzi, on 05/07/2008, -2/+2And its not as easy to breed a filly, another reason they killed her on the spot. If it was a colt they would of kept him long enough for some breeding purposes.
  • centran, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2The #1 simple rule with horses is if you can't get them to stand then they are as good as dead.
    You don't need to understand all the various veterinary reasons of why that is so.
    • crapmatic, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Well, gee, that's good enough for me.
      • centran, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1That is not to say you can't try to help the horse to stand.
        There have been cases of a sick horse lying down and five people shoving it back on its feet for it to make an eventual recovery. However, if you can't get the horse to stand then it is a goner.
        I know it seems weird. Why not just let the horse lay down to recover? It needs to rest, right? For various reasons in the article and for psychological reasons; that horse needs to be able to stand on it's own to recover.
        So like I said, the reasons behind it might be complicated but all that someone who is not a vet needs to know is if you can't get the horse to stand then consider it dead.
  • prleet, on 05/07/2008, -4/+1What the ***** people: Sport is you alone competing, not riding on some damn donkey or a ***** horse for that matter...its animal cruelty period. Dog/chicken/cow/lemur/ whatever it is, using another specie in a sport is plain sick.
  • scooby007, on 05/07/2008, -1/+1The plight of this animal is still sad :( If you've ever had to face the prospect of putting your family pet down, you know how painful this is. Sorry, Belle.
  • mynameiscal, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Cracking story.
  • taketheleap, on 05/07/2008, -1/+3"sorry Thunder, I gotta put you down..."

    http://www.idkwtf.com/videos/latest-videos/horse-a ...
  • MrGordonLiu, on 05/07/2008, -3/+0A sport would be watching the jockeys run around a track.
    A jockey can choose to participate.

    Also - I think that if a Jockey's horse has to be killed, so, too, should the Jockey. It might make these idiots think twice about what they are doing. It's only fair.
    • Shots, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Olympics are happening this year. I think they are still doing the Marathon...

    • Chalks777, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1Yeah. Because a human's life is totally worth the same as a horse's.
  • whodat807, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4I don't understand why people are so concerned about the plight of racehorses. Racehorses live in million dollar stables, are cared for by highly trained professionals, get fed the absolute best food, have companions (like small, friendly goats to keep them from getting lonely--no joke) and after a few races, they get to spend the rest of their lives reproducing. What other animal gets that sort of attention? You think racing is the only way for a horse to break its legs? Workhorses break their legs all the time! And you can bet they don't receive the same amount of attention and care that million dollar thoroughbreds do when they get injured.
  • RogueMountie, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0...because horses are stupid.
  • natgem, on 05/07/2008, -0/+0This happens all the time. Why has PETA now suddenly come forward to do what they do best (complain, complain)? Yes, it's a tragic situation and the poor horse was probably in excruciating pain, but this has been happening for quite a long time now.
  • TreatsTheBear, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I thought broken horse bones were lethal because humans killed them whenever they happened. Silly me.
  • silverleaves, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1A horse cannot live with a compound fracture or a broke bone that breaks through the skin. There it is. That's the facts. Even if you manage to fix a fracture with surgery by placing pins and screws through the bones and wrap it all up in a cast, the horse will still not be able to stand on it. The minute a horse is woken up from surgery, the first thing he tries to do is stand up. You can not talk to them or reason with them and tell them to be still or else they will injure themselves.
    So you have to wake them up in a pool of water while he is in a sling because he will thrash around and re-injure the leg if he is not cushioned in some way. If you place the horse in a sling, it would have to be for only a short time while he comes out of the anesthesia. Horses are herd animals and need to stand 99% of the time with their weight evenly distributed on all four feet or the blood does not circulate evenly.
    If the horse has a slight fracture it may be possible to heal it if the horse can put equal weight on all four feet.
    I can not stress this enough, If there is one leg that has some pain in one leg the horse will shift his weight onto the other foot. This, in time will cause Laminitus or Founder in the foot taking all the weight. What eventually happens is the hoof will peel away from the foot that is supporting all the weight. The pain is just as the author said, like pulling off your finger nails with pliers. That's why it's used as torture during wars, the pain is unbearable. Why would anyone want to put a horse or any animal through this?
    It would be very, if not impossible to heal a horse with one broken leg. They tried with Barbaro and eventually after months and months of care had to put him down because not only was the broken leg not mending but he developed Laminitus in the other hoof. They, the owners and trainer, tried more and spent more on Barbaro than anyone had ever done and were still unable to save him.
    A lot of the commenter's think horsemen are hard and cruel to the horses but I've seen grown men with tears running down their faces after putting down a horse.
    Eight Bells had two broken ankles, you would only be torturing the horse trying to keep her alive.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.