Bump to give those interested in learning what’s actually known about DOD’s a chance to digest these.
It’s a complicated issue–there doesn’t seem to be a crystal clear cut answer to the question.
At the AHA inspection last week, this topic came up. The judges felt that early signs of uneven bone development is primarily a question of nutrition, with serious implications, though it most often resolves.
My understanding of OCD stems from an unfortunate experience with a nice young TB I bought after college ('84), with puzzling intermittent lameness in the LH, in between which he was a very nice, yet hot, ride. I decided I’d lost my touch…that he was just not a good match for me, and sent him to be sold. At Vince Dugan’s, his lameness suddenly cropped up just as he was on the point of selling; the deal was cancelled, and he went across the road to New Bolton to see if they could figure out what this was…the upshot was that I donated him to New Bolton (though insurance had approved euthanasia) where he was diagnosed with an OCD lesion (a pocket in the growth plate where cartilage has failed to harden off and turn into bone) in the stifle. He underwent an experimental treatment (I think the surgeon was Dr. Dean Richardson) to scrape away the lesion, and stimulate the bone around it to fill in.
The horse’s temperament was exceptional, and he endured a long rehab, some at NBC, some at Vince’s. It’s my understanding that the surgery was very successful–he was able to return to work, was sold by Vince (NBC got the proceeds, of course), and as far as I know was sold to the same buyer who had been interested in earlier…he was having a decent career in the jumpers last I heard (late 80’s).
At that point, it was explained to me, and I haven’t seen anything to contradict this, that nutrition was a primary factor in the development of OCD.
This makes sense to me, especially knowing that there are certain regions that are noted for producing good, sound horses; I seem to recall hearing as well that geologically these are areas rich in certain minerals important to bone development, including calcium. I heard it explained once that KY, and the area of FL around Ocala had the same vein of soil, deposited there after the Ice Age, and that this was also found in Ireland and parts of Europe.
There is also an impact-based component to the healthy development of bone and soft tissues–after reading up on this factor, I’ve become rather convinced that stall rest is very often more detrimental than beneficial in many cases (obviously, there are serious injuries that preclude turnout, but on balance, I think we stall-rest far too many minor injuries).
I often wonder how with the “improvements” we have seen in footing over the years, our incidence of lameness doesn’t seem to have decreased…did we really ride around on lame horses all the time in the old days when we schooled and showed on whatever happened to be underfoot? Did we just not realize how lame the horses were? Or were they <<hmmm>> sounder in the days before ‘good footing,’ NSAID’s and injections?
It all gives one pause, especially knowing that a young horse is practically the only kind you might <<assume>> should at least start with a clean slate as far as wear and tear, and healthy bone development…
Ethics should not be put aside, and I think the other thread has exposed some interesting inconsistencies as far as disclosures/lack thereof; there is a certain amount of 'what was known/when was it known to the stor(y,ies) being spun over there. I would certainly not be comfortable dealing with such shifting ground.
But it has also exposed a wide range of opinion and knowledge about a serious issue for breeders and buyers. Both groups can only benefit from staying up to date on the latest information.
Information and to be informed about OCD’s … it could go on forever. Bottom line there is nothing normal about it. = deal breaker for me! :winkgrin:
What’s that saying… Keep It Simple!
The problem with the first study is that neither the sires nor the dams were xrayed, so there is no way to track a genetic component.
Also, it was only done on one farm, so there was no way to compare managment practices with final results.
And the German study (as I recall) just concentrated on OCD and none of the other DOD issues.
But still plenty of good info – and shows a fairly clear-cut correlation between lack of turn-out and an increase in the condition. However I’m sure there is more at work here…
One conclusion I’ve drawn from the first study is to not plan for very early foals and, if one has foals born early in the year, try to make sure they have adequate turnout. Another conclusion is to not overload the weight and to watch the weight on early foals/rapidly growing foals, particularly when the grass begins to come in very rich in early summer.
Neither of these studies actually prove a cause for OCD. To have a study prove a single postulated cause you would need at least 100 horses in each group to finish the study. It is usually wise to start with 20-30% more subjects at the start than you need at the finish. The horses would have to be matched for age, sex, breed, BMI, and if possible bloodlines. All horses entering the study would need to be xrayed and found free of DOD. Then all environmental exposures except for the one studied (eg size of turnout, or copper supplementation vs deficiency or Calcium/phospohorus ratios, etc.) would need to be exactly the same between the two groups. The study should last for about 3 years (six months to 3 yr six months of age). You could either take xrays periodically throughout the study, and drop the horses out whenever they develop0ed DOD, you could wait for the total time of the study to expire and then xray, or you could xray periodically and any horse found to have DOD could then enter the treatment group to see if the disease could be reversed. The vets (at least three reading every xray) reading the xray should not know to which group the horses belong. Ideally their caretakers should not know either ( though that is difficult to do if you are studying the size of the turnout).
As you can see from the above the study would be difficult and expensive to do. The cost of keeping 260 horse for that length of time plus taking 10 -12 xrays/ horses 2 - 13 times (5200-40,560 total) plus the cost of personnel would be more than most research facilities could bear. The study is also limited in that it looks at only one potential causative factor at a time.
As breeders we do the best we can with the limited knowledge out there, It would be nice if our breed organizations would notify us when they pull a stallion for a recurrent developmental problem like wobblers, OCD, or roaring. Currently is seems to get pretty hushed up.
I think the KWPN attempted a scientific study a number of years ago. Maybe some of the other Dutch breeders remember it. What I remember is that they were euthanizing foals to look at their bones. Anyone else remember?
Even if you have a mare and stallion with the very best class of radiographs, you won’t have data going back multiple generations.
Oakstable, you are right. The KWPN did an extensive study a few years ago. I have not looked at it lately so I can’t quote the numbers or direct you to the actual study but I do remember some of the findings which were not at all surprising.
I don’t remember how much emphasis there was on the genetic aspects but we all know that the Dutch are very careful in the screening of stallion prospects.
The conclusion of the study was that exercise was very important. The foals that were confined and given no exercise were the highest risk. The foals that were confined and given forced exercise were very high risk. The foals that were given plenty of room for free choice exercise were the healthiest.
About 30 years ago I had my first experience with OCD when a lovely horse that we had imported for our sales program failed a pre-purchase exam. He had worked well and was sound and had “the normal” x-rays before we imported him. I rode him every day and had no soundness issues. He was sometimes late behind with one lead change. Turned out it was OCD in a stifle. I had never heard of it before and immediatly studied all the information the good vet hospital could give me. Later I had extensive discussions with Dr. Wayne McIllraith who was recognized as a leading authority on the OCD and did a lot of surgeries to clean up lesions. He confirmed that it could be a combination of a genetic pre-disposition in the big, fast growing foals and a nutritional imbalance and a lack of exercise. All of the foals in our care, which included various breeds and bloodlines, were on a carefully balanced diet and lived in age and type compatible groups in carefully maintained pastures with stalls avialable in case of extreme weather or illness or injury. In all those years we had two cases of OCD diagnosed. Neither of those were from my bloodline but were in foals that were in our care. Since we handled large numbers of foals every year Dr. McIlraith said that our percentages were quite good and we should not change anything in our foal program. I do watch foal joints very closely and adjust diets and supplements immediatly if I see a hint of epiphysitis because I personally belive there is a connection between epiphysitis and OCD.
The point of the long report is to point out that there can be multiple contributing factors and that careful management of exercise and nutrition can make a big difference. Perhaps buyers will want to visit foals in their home environment prior to purchase in order to see first hand how they are fed and exercised and raised.
[QUOTE=TQ;5223537]
The point of the long report is to point out that there can be multiple contributing factors and that careful management of exercise and nutrition can make a big difference. Perhaps buyers will want to visit foals in their home environment prior to purchase in order to see first hand how they are fed and exercised and raised.[/QUOTE]
This is very important.
[QUOTE=Kyzteke;5223142]
The problem with the first study is that neither the sires nor the dams were xrayed, so there is no way to track a genetic component.
Also, it was only done on one farm, so there was no way to compare managment practices with final results.
And the German study (as I recall) just concentrated on OCD and none of the other DOD issues.
But still plenty of good info – and shows a fairly clear-cut correlation between lack of turn-out and an increase in the condition. However I’m sure there is more at work here…[/QUOTE]
Is is surprising that sire and dams did not have xrays? Without this sounding conspiracy theorist, lets say this study was done on TB’s. Lets say in this big study you did notice a genetic factor in a very lucrative TB stallion. Are you gonna publish your results?
Take TB breeding on a whole. It’s about breeding the fastest horse, it isn’t about keeping defects out of the breed. Honestly the things that get passed on that we should be concerned with just aren’t. But having said that, if we had not bred certain horses we would be missing an amazing gene pool. So I actually get that big breeders of sporthorses and Thoroughbreds take gambles on certain “might be” heritable traits. And I’m not talking about things already mentioned in the previous thread like HYPP. That is completely different.
A few years ago a big debate errupted with a stallion over here and the Irish Horse Board because he would not get approval because he had curbs. The vet said because you couldn’t prove it wasn’t hereditary the stallion wasn’t approved. And I’m sure there are people in the “OCD doesn’t bother me camp” who will surely say that curbs are much worse.
I haven’t been a breeder very long and maybe because I haven’t been a breeder very long I find sometimes I’m in a headspin from all the information you need to take in to breed a horse. And you grab certain bits and throw others away. Then what you threw away you think crap, I need that again.
And like everything of course there will be environmental factors playing a part too. And I accept that OCD can be evnironmental as well, but from my experience there is a genetic link too. No science to back me up, just dealings with the problem in sport way, well racing. So I guess that would make me less inclined to use a horse which has OCD in my breeding program and that does not make me right.
Anyway, those are my musings for this morning!
Terri
I’m not sure why you did a “spin off” thread.
End of the day the ‘other thread’ spun off from it’s original topic so much that this was absolutely what the thread was about.
What is posted here sits rightly and properly in that thread in my opinion.
I said there that I’d actually allowed horses of my own to take part in Research undertaken over here and the conclusions of that were pretty much similar to the first report in so far as concluding that grow rates and weight were a prime facor. There were also other things too such as exercise regime but the Hot spot was growth rate and weight.
So indicating that one of main things that could be done in terms of intervention and practical management of the situation with regard to OCD was to review and manage feed and exercise and particularly to not feed the horse as if it’s a beef bull heading for the dinner table.
[QUOTE=SilverBalls;5222257]
Information and to be informed about OCD’s … it could go on forever. Bottom line there is nothing normal about it. = deal breaker for me! :winkgrin:[/QUOTE]
What do you mean?
Do you mean you wouldn’t buy a horse that had OCD?
Or you’d never buy a horse that had an OCD parent*, or any full* half* siblings.
Or do you mean if you had a young Oldenburg colt and it developed OCD that you’d geld it*, put it down*, conclude that this was purely because of what you did*, what it’s breeders did*
Truth be told, OCD is multi-factorial and as such what you should DO is never that black and white and simple.
[QUOTE=Thomas_1;5223659]
What do you mean?
Do you mean you wouldn’t buy a horse that had OCD?
Or you’d never buy a horse that had an OCD parent*, or any full* half* siblings.
Or do you mean if you had a young Oldenburg colt and it developed OCD that you’d geld it*, put it down*, conclude that this was purely because of what you did*, what it’s breeders did*
Truth be told, OCD is multi-factorial and as such what you should DO is never that black and white and simple.[/QUOTE]
I mean:
NO- I would not buy a horse with OCD or remants of OCD surgery.
NO- I would not buy a young horse who had an OCD parent if I was privy to that knowledge. I could never be sure as to how and when the OCD developed on the offspring.
NO- If I purchased a weanling/yearling it would be gelded for sure, and if OCD’s developed I would have to make the best of it. Knowing me, and depending on what I could live with, I would possibly give it away. One day at a time… 
While I agree with your “black & white” analogy, as far as OCD’s are concerned, there are NO gray areas.
The point of this thread was to pull out some research information separate from the “I’d never” and all the moral and ethical comments on the other thread.
It’s point was not to drag the other thread into this one, which is what I see happening 
I could be wrong, but it really looks like the real purpose of this thread is very thinly veiled advertixing for KER products!!!
And SilverBalls, if you own a WB, there very well might be a sire in the background in Germany who had OCD. Some of the top sires in Germany had it. It is NOT a death sentence. A lot depends.
- It is in the TB and STB world and has been for a long time and they still bring big bucks and earn lots of money racing. They routinely have the surgery done and go on with their lives.
- Jumper people don't care if the horse has a good show record and can jump.
- Europeans don't think it's a death sentence either - they grade the degree of OCD and just deal with it.
- The dressage world in this country has gone absolutely bonkers over it - and almost everything else as well. If a horse isn't perfect in every way and guaranteed - while a foal standing by its mothers side in the pasture - to win the Olympics, buyers won't touch it or want to pay a fraction of the asking price.
HOW is this a veiled ad for KER? I reference KER articles frequently. Should I not reference any Progressive Nutrition articles either, just because they also sell products?
I sure wish this thread would stick to what research is out there and let the “I’d never” and “it depends” comments live on the other thread.
I try and avoid these threads, because they mostly just make me want to pull my hair out. I’m not a breeder, nor do I breed. However, I am a scientist that studies articular cartilage. My master’s thesis actually looked at the influence of dietary energy source on cartilage development. So I guess you could say that I do have some sort of stake in this battle.
Okay, first some clarification of what is the correct terminology: 
OC= Osteochondrosis, abnormal biology of the articular cartilage and underlying bone (lesion).
OCD = Osteochondrosis Dissecans, which occurs when a piece of cartilage and/or bone actually detaches from the joint surface (fragment).
That’s just about irrelevant, as even if they had lesions as young horses they are not likely to show up in radiographs of an adult horse. Most of the top equine orthopedic surgeons don’t like to operate on lesions in very young horses, as many lesions will resolve themselves with time. They do not fully “heal,” but instead repair with a hyaline-like scar tissue that isn’t always visible on radiographs.
Here’s a summary of the current research, in a nutshell.
Is there a genetic component? YES
Are there management components? YES
Do we know exactly what they are and how they affect articular cartilage biology? NO
Bottom line, OC is a multifactorial disease. This is well known, and even scares some researchers away… the data we do have makes it seem extremely unlikely that there is a single clear cause.
Yes, environment and management are known to play roles in the development of OC. However, there are also (likely several) underlying genes that are either present or absent. If those genes are absent, it’s a lot less likely that the environment can influence them and influence their role in cartilage development.
[QUOTE=Absolut Equestrian;5223815]
OCD = Osteochondrosis Dissecans, which occurs when a piece of cartilage and/or bone actually detaches from the joint surface (fragment).
That’s just about irrelevant, as even if they had lesions as young horses they are not likely to show up in radiographs of an adult horse. Most of the top equine orthopedic surgeons don’t like to operate on lesions in very young horses, as many lesions will resolve themselves with time. They do not fully “heal,” but instead repair with a hyaline-like scar tissue that isn’t always visible on radiographs.
Here’s a summary of the current research, in a nutshell.
Is there a genetic component? YES
Are there management components? YES
Do we know exactly what they are and how they affect articular cartilage biology? NO
Bottom line, OC is a multifactorial disease. This is well known, and even scares some researchers away… the data we do have makes it seem extremely unlikely that there is a single clear cause.
Yes, environment and management are known to play roles in the development of OC. However, there are also (likely several) underlying genes that are either present or absent. If those genes are absent, it’s a lot less likely that the environment can influence them and influence their role in cartilage development.[/QUOTE]
Thank you so much for spelling this out.
[QUOTE=JB;5223781]
The point of this thread was to pull out some research information separate from the “I’d never” and all the moral and ethical comments on the other thread.
It’s point was not to drag the other thread into this one, which is what I see happening ;)[/QUOTE]
Yes, this is exactly my point, thank you for perceiving it.
I did not get involved in that other thread, and I did not keep reading to the point where it deviated from its topic, which to me was about the ethics of disclosure–which needn’t necessarily involve only OCD, though that was the issue in the instance at hand. I think that other thread was on its way to being one stinky can of worms…I didn’t hang around to see.
Meanwhile…
Re OCD–what I’ve learned from staying abreast of things over the years (you don’t just donate a horse to a fancy vet hospital, have it involved in a cutting edge surgical procedure that WORKS, and not stay intereseted in the topic) is that bone is much more dynamic than one might assume; therefore, the question of OCD is not absolute…
Am I demented, or do I recall reading in the COTH issue that awarded Rox Dene Show Hunter of the Year that she had OCD as a young horse? (Maybe Chandra B. will chime in?) It is known to resolve over time “in many cases,” and this would be a good example.
The difficulties with isolating each and every possible cause and defining airtight parameters might preclude a definitive “OCD” study from being completely conclusive…but aggregate trends that are recognized can be interpreted, and some generalities drawn.
I would be really hard pressed to agree that there is any “acceptable” level of OCD…OCD lesions cause pain and lameness.
But since the process of calcification of soft growth plates doesn’t happen overnight, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that the frequency of undetected OCD that resolves might be more higher than is recognized. It would seem to me that at some stage you might be able to take ANY young horse and describe it’s bone development as incomplete.
As for x-raying parents…at what age would that be done? What would it prove? It might confirm the existence or absence of OCD. But in a youngster an xray would not ensure that OCD would never develop, and in an older horse an xray would not reveal whether there had been any in the past. An xray could not prove that the cause is/or isn’t genetic and not due to nutritional or management practices.
As for PPE xrays, my horse had a full set. He passed with flying colors (his xrays were looked at by the venerable Dr. Reed at NBC to confirm this)…but there was no clinical indication that anything was out of order at that point, nor would it have been (nor is it today) routine to xray stifles during a PPE.
It’s all well and good to posture that its’ a black and white issue, but I beg to differ. I do so not as a breeder (though I now am one), but as a horse owner who was adversely affected by an actual experience with OCD.
Back to the reason I started this thread and didn’t get involved in the other one–it’s because there are so many gray areas that need to be weighed against each other, but it’s not all about guessing because there is a certain amount of research That has been done. Most research by definition is not conclusive, though–nearly every study I’ve read on any topic finishes off by saying that there are other points that need to be pursued by further research, and that is the case with this topic.
