Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
wow that was a good one.
listen here smart guy.
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I dont even know 1 /20th of what Riot does when it comes lameness evaluations. If you think you are a better judge of lameness than the professional (Riot), than have at it. But you are not.
|
Again, evasion.
Let's clean this up nice and neat so you can be on your way.
You:
"the vet isnt even recommending treatment like shock wave. Just 60 days stall rest and hand walking."
The vet:
"In a lesser horse we would rehabilitate, probably using stem cell therapy, but it takes a year to fully resolve, and it usually reduces a horses quality...we should stop her racing career."
Yeah, he's not recommending any special treatment...just retirement.
As far evaluating lameness, again, you have been completely turned around and bent over a barrel by Riot.
Neither Riot nor anyone else in this thread was involved in the examination of Havre De Grace, so any purported skill in lameness evaulation is irrelevent. What is relevant is that the examining veterinarian noted that Havre De Grace was "1/5 lame" on his written report. Non-examining veterinarian Riot noted that Havre De Grace was "not lame" on her DT post.
Who exactly is trying to be a better judge than whom here?