Science Looks at "Too Heavy to Ride"

[kdow]

[QUOTE=kaitsmom;7786094]
Yes I read the article. I guess I was meaning to say I appreciated that aspect and thought the information was good. By “posts about weight” I was talking about the posts where people say they saw so and so riding and wonder if the rider is too heavy for the horse. I was just trying to explain why on those threads you don’t see at of heavy riders explaining the measures they go to to make sure their horse isn’t injured or carrying too much weight.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. I’m heavier than I’d like to be, and some of the threads that pop up just make me feel like I should give up on trying to ride entirely because I don’t need the added stress in my life of being hassled about it, and I am at a point with riding where I do need lessons but who’d even let me on a lesson horse? And by weight I am not actually that heavy - there are most certainly folks doing western stuff who pack considerably more load on the horse once you consider weight of an adult man plus all that blingy tack.

I’m probably always going to be heavy for my height - I’m built to have a lot of muscle naturally (good farm stock genetics doncha know) and I have autoimmune arthritis so it can be quite a struggle to keep my activity levels up. So when I buy a horse I expect to keep my size in mind looking at conformation, and to pay plenty of attention to saddle fit and the horse’s activity levels. I just consider that good horsemanship.

(And realistically, one of my friends is also interested in riding and he struggles to keep his weight high enough. I expect to hassle him just as much as I’d hassle myself about those elements, because bad saddle fit is bad saddle fit. You might get away with it for a while with a lighter rider, but it still probably isn’t any good for the horse.)

[dani0303]

Ok I’m going to use myself as an example and I did the math. I’m 5’6 and weight 215, 220 with a saddle. I consider myself a competent rider as I rode/showed the A-circuit in the 4’ jumpers until a few years ago. 15% would be a 1,400lb horse and 20% would be an 1,100lb horse. Neither of those are unreasonably large. My guy is a 16.2 solid boned WB. He’s older but sound. My weight never seems to bother him but because of his age (21) we don’t do much more than flatwork and smaller fences.

[Lady_Eboshi]

[QUOTE=goodhors;7786317]
Good comments everyone. Thanks for MANY details on old Cavalry practices, Guilherme. If anyone made good studies of “how to do it” with ridden horses of various sizes, people of various sizes and skills, it was the Cavalry folks back when it was so important to have Cavalry ready and fit at all times to be able to perform well in the field.

Guess there will always be some folks who “jump to conclusions” about larger folks riding horses and “hurting them”. Often the “jumper” only has enough expertise to get themselves into trouble!! No real depth of knowledge, and quite willing to open mouth to prove it! Same person doesn’t notice the happy way of going horse shows, good equitation of the person on horse, light hands on the reins, horse in fair proportion to rider above. Some breeds are quite noted for their weight carrying ability in being short-backed, manage their rider above EASILY. Icelandics are among the first to come to mind of those short-backed, smaller breeds. And those animals stay sound, not sway-backed or in pain under larger riders, way into old age!

We hear similar things about Driving Horses who often cover quite a few miles when out being used. Better Drivers make sure the horse/pony is fit, know his limitations before asking too much of the equine. But talking to Riders about going for a 10 mile drive, you see horrified expressions often! Then if one says they do that 10 mile drive 3-5 times a week, people start thinking you are cruel! Really not an issue to the sound, fit horse, they actually like getting out and going places. They are not sore when finished, kick up their heels when you turn them out to roll Not really THAT tired!!

The Judgy Pants Folk are not the skilled horsemen, folks who have gotten horses fit for distances, usually never did any riding for more than an hour or two except at a show. No understanding of what you can ask of a horse and still not “hurt” him by using your equine this way when horse is asked and prepared for their work correctly.

A couple of our older horse friends remind us with a laugh that “horses are Beasts of Burden!” They should be expected to do work for owners, maybe get sweaty and tired at times, while being enjoyed. The few hours most horses actually work is pretty small in a week, if he is not a busy lesson horse or out under a Cowboy covering miles. Owners sure get tired and sweaty serving the equines while working to clean stalls, haul hay, groom and feed, plus work to pay for everything!!

If anyone said anything to me about being too heavy to ride, I would get back in their face asking how they were entitled to speak about it? I would want to know their education that allowed them to be “experts” on this topic? With the big mouths, it is almost too easy to point at stuff on their horse, their riding, that needs MUCH improving before they point at others. They are riding the lame horses, iron-mouthed horse on the edge of being uncontrolled. Again, those who speak out to be nasty are pretty much the ignorant and quite willing to prove it. Their opinion has no value, so ignore it.[/QUOTE]

THIS^, precisely! BTW, check out the book The Obesity Myth for a very eye-opening look at the extent to which our culture has normalized “anorexic ideation.” We are literally living in a society now where eating disorders are the expected norm, since the body image held up to us as “acceptable” has become an extreme–literally the edge of emaciation.

Another factor is, almost NONE of our horses do anything that by the standards of the 19th century would be considered “work.” Back when horses WORKED for a living as in the cavalry, that was understood to be much of the day, nearly every day! With the exceptions of working ranch horses and heavily-used schoolies, our guys are on a permanent vacation!

Your horse will tell you if he’s not up to your weight; and if anything, pay attention to his fitness with long, slow distance work daily. If anyone has the effrontery to get in your grill about your weight, tell 'em to go pound salt in a rathole.

[OneGrayPony]

The article/study wasn’t really flawed; it just very strictly examined a single variable, one which is easy to examine and where rider style, fitness, etc can be controlled by simply piling weight on the same rider.

That’s true, but unfortunately non-scientific minded folks take articles like this issue edicts. Or judgey-pants proclamations. And that is sad. I’ve wondered if I were too much for my QH, with his micro-feet. But I figure it’s probably better for him to be ridden by me, a taller person who is heavier than he’d probably prefer, than for him to be dogfood or saddled with someone who doesn’t care about his wellbeing, so I watch his back for soreness with great rigor, watch his feet and legs (which has more to do with his breeding than anything else) and go from there. None of my horses have ever had any issues carrying me. I’m not saying I’d get on a 12h pony (although I did when I weighed considerably less, and I hated the whole experience because I couldn’t balance at ALL!) but even that, for a few steps to sort an issue out, the pony could deal.

We just make so much of this. I think we need to watch for horses and riders struggling and realize that sometimes still images don’t show the whole picture.

[D_BaldStockings]

Some information from the Tevis endurance ride

“A minimum weight of 165 pounds (74.8 kg) for rider with tack was required of winners of the Tevis Cup and Haggin Cup from 1976 through 1998. Contenders had to declare their intent to compete for the “top ten” and were weighed with their tack upon vet-in. If necessary, the rider was given added weight – sandbags – to carry during the ride. There are no weight requirements in effect beginning with the 1999 Ride. Riders continued to weigh in with their tack for statistical collection purposes until around 2010.”

“The heaviest horse to complete the Ride was an Arab/Percheron called Nugget, owned by the Mayor of Reno, Nevada. Nugget finished in 1958, weighing an estimated 1,600 pounds and standing between 16 and 17 hands.”

"A rider weight ratio was calculated as a ratio of rider weight divided by horse body weight. Rider weight and rider weight ratio had no effect on…
…overall completion rates among all horses
…finish time or placing
…no effect on miles completed before failure

(horse body) Condition scores had a significant effect.

google tevis rider weight for links

For this reason, I think the article, about horses with no strength conditioning or riding of any kind is likely fatally flawed in any conclusion as to rider weight.

[D_BaldStockings]

Some information from the Tevis endurance ride

“A minimum weight of 165 pounds (74.8 kg) for rider with tack was required of winners of the Tevis Cup and Haggin Cup from 1976 through 1998. Contenders had to declare their intent to compete for the “top ten” and were weighed with their tack upon vet-in. If necessary, the rider was given added weight – sandbags – to carry during the ride. There are no weight requirements in effect beginning with the 1999 Ride. Riders continued to weigh in with their tack for statistical collection purposes until around 2010.”

“The heaviest horse to complete the Ride was an Arab/Percheron called Nugget, owned by the Mayor of Reno, Nevada. Nugget finished in 1958, weighing an estimated 1,600 pounds and standing between 16 and 17 hands.”

"A rider weight ratio was calculated as a ratio of rider weight divided by horse body weight. Rider weight and rider weight ratio had no effect on…
…overall completion rates among all horses
…finish time or placing
…no effect on miles completed before failure

(horse body) Condition scores had a significant effect.

google tevis rider weight for links

For this reason, I think the article, about horses with no strength conditioning or riding of any kind is likely fatally flawed in any conclusion as to rider weight.

[Guilherme]

[QUOTE=Coanteen;7786832]
The article/study wasn’t really flawed; it just very strictly examined a single variable, one which is easy to examine and where rider style, fitness, etc can be controlled by simply piling weight on the same rider.

It’s your (also initial, since it’s part of your first post on this thread) comment that the rider fitness/ability question doesn’t need to be “scientifically demonstrated” that I questioned.

The “heavy good rider is better than light crappy rider” is pretty much a COTH dogma, but it is a far more complex and interesting question than that of pure weight, and I disagree with you that it’s so self-evident that scientific inquiry is not even necessary.[/QUOTE]

OK. Fair enough.

G.

[EventingMaff]

[QUOTE=2enduraceriders;7786784]
If veterinarians tracking pulse, respiration, abdominal sounds, muscle tightness, flexibility and soreness isn’t scientific enough for you I guess all studies are “anecdotal”.[/QUOTE]

Well it is still anecdotal unless the environment is controlled and the data collection process is controlled. This study is a controlled experiment where they are maintaining tack, rider quality, location, and workload (exercises the horse is put through) in order to look at stress levels of just adding weight. Once you can pinpoint how the WEIGHT affects the horse, then you can move on to isolate the impact of other variables as well.

Whenever you need to attribute causation, you need a large enough sample to rule out spurious outcomes, control of all other influencing variables, and a means of quantifying impact. For the purpose of studying the impact of more WEIGHT (only) on a horse, this study did a good job. Once that is established the more interesting questions of skill level, horse fitness, etc can be varied to assess impact. But you need to build an accurate foundation from which to launch those studies, and this is study is a good step in that direction.

[wendy]

THIS^, precisely! BTW, check out the book The Obesity Myth for a very eye-opening look at the extent to which our culture has normalized “anorexic ideation.” We are literally living in a society now where eating disorders are the expected norm, since the body image held up to us as “acceptable” has become an extreme–literally the edge of emaciation.

oh come on. I hate these threads because they are full of fat people trying to make up excuses to justify being fat. There is a Healthy Weight that is in-between “anorexic” and “obese”, and you owe it to YOURSELF to make sure you get there. Even if your horse can carry you around no problem, being overweight is damaging your own health every day, day after day. Anyone can lose weight- just eat less. No, you’ll never look like an anorexic model- normal women have round bellies, not flat ones. No, you won’t have a six-pack- healthy people have too much body fat to ever see a six-pack. But your knees and hips and kidneys will be much happier, and probably your horse will be to.

[Lady_Eboshi]

[QUOTE=wendy;7787968]
oh come on. I hate these threads because they are full of fat people trying to make up excuses to justify being fat. There is a Healthy Weight that is in-between “anorexic” and “obese”, and you owe it to YOURSELF to make sure you get there. Even if your horse can carry you around no problem, being overweight is damaging your own health every day, day after day. Anyone can lose weight- just eat less. No, you’ll never look like an anorexic model- normal women have round bellies, not flat ones. No, you won’t have a six-pack- healthy people have too much body fat to ever see a six-pack. But your knees and hips and kidneys will be much happier, and probably your horse will be to.[/QUOTE]

You need to read the book. Badly. Most people’s weight is not under their control, and the “ideal” weights on those charts are genetically impossible for about 95% of the population. You know who has the LOWEST “morbidity and mortality” across ALL age groups? Those with a BMI between 26 and 30! Which is something the Fat Police won’t ever tell you because the diet, drug, and fitness industries want YOU to continue being their Cash Cow. BTW, the supposed relationship between a few extra pounds and ill health DOES NOT EXIST! Yeah, surprised me too! We have been utterly indoctrinated with a cultural construct being pitched as medical information; just-not-so.

I have officially blown off trying to lose that “last 10 lbs.” There is no intelligent reason to, and it’s futile anyway. Happy as a clam at 155! Though I will continue eating low-carb because that’s what we are biologically best suited for.

Go read the book and find out the REAL reasons you are so revolted by “fat.”

[Lady_Eboshi]

[QUOTE=EventingMaff;7787860]
Well it is still anecdotal unless the environment is controlled and the data collection process is controlled. This study is a controlled experiment where they are maintaining tack, rider quality, location, and workload (exercises the horse is put through) in order to look at stress levels of just adding weight. Once you can pinpoint how the WEIGHT affects the horse, then you can move on to isolate the impact of other variables as well.

Whenever you need to attribute causation, you need a large enough sample to rule out spurious outcomes, control of all other influencing variables, and a means of quantifying impact. For the purpose of studying the impact of more WEIGHT (only) on a horse, this study did a good job. Once that is established the more interesting questions of skill level, horse fitness, etc can be varied to assess impact. But you need to build an accurate foundation from which to launch those studies, and this is study is a good step in that direction.[/QUOTE]

Why do we seem to need so much “science” today (much of which is actually pseudo-science) to tell us things which with common sense are self-evident?

If your horse is excessively sweating, breathing hard, having to slow down or stop on hills or refuses to go on, HE ISN’T FIT ENOUGH FOR THE JOB you are asking him to do! He may also not be the most suitable. You don’t ask a chunky Percheron to do the Tevis Cup any more than you ask an Arabian to pull a plow; if you weigh over 200 a big powerful WB is going to be a better match for you than a 14 hander unless you’re talking Icelandic or Paso who was bred for the job.

If your horse is conditioned properly, ridden judiciously, and cared for appropriately, only the real outliers have an “issue” here. Don’t need university eggheads to tell you that, just look around you at the average horse show, trail ride or hunter pace.

[french_fry]

[QUOTE=Lady Eboshi;7788020]
Why do we seem to need so much “science” today (much of which is actually pseudo-science) to tell us things which with common sense are self-evident?

If your horse is excessively sweating, breathing hard, having to slow down or stop on hills or refuses to go on, HE ISN’T FIT ENOUGH FOR THE JOB you are asking him to do! He may also not be the most suitable. You don’t ask a chunky Percheron to do the Tevis Cup any more than you ask an Arabian to pull a plow; if you weigh over 200 a big powerful WB is going to be a better match for you than a 14 hander unless you’re talking Icelandic or Paso who was bred for the job.

If your horse is conditioned properly, ridden judiciously, and cared for appropriately, only the real outliers have an “issue” here. Don’t need university eggheads to tell you that, just look around you at the average horse show, trail ride or hunter pace.[/QUOTE]

Those are really convenient symptoms for a horse that is carrying too much weight! As an experienced horsewoman, I’d think you’d recognize that the signs (especially the initial ones) are typically much subtler and harder to directly connect with rider weight/balance.

Most people aren’t in tune with their horses enough to recognize the signs that the horse is uncomfortable with the workload or the rider’s weight/riding style. Or, if they do, they attribute it to other things.

I watched a barnmate go through endless drama over her horse’s soundness issues. Saddle fitter, chiro, massage, injections, x-rays, etc. No one would tell her she was too big for her horse. Everyone was happy to take her money and try to fix him without acknowledging the biggest issue. First it was being pissy when girthing/pinning ears under saddle, then issues with his neck, then his hocks, then finally his back. At the end she couldn’t figure out why he was “rein lame.” She stopped riding him entirely for awhile and brought him back slowly. He was okay for a little while but is now devolving into the same pattern. The vets, farriers, chiros, trainers, etc. are lining up with their palms out for $$$.

Caveat: I understand that this is but one anecdote. I have other personal experiences but alas, no studies.

[Velvet]

@goodhors;7786317

The Judgy Pants Folk are not the skilled horsemen, folks who have gotten horses fit for distances, usually never did any riding for more than an hour or two except at a show. No understanding of what you can ask of a horse and still not “hurt” him by using your equine this way when horse is asked and prepared for their work correctly.

Well, George Morris has a major thing about weight in the rider and I don’t think he fits in this category (not that I agree with him that often).

[NoSuchPerson]

[QUOTE=Velvet;7788064]
Well, George Morris has a major thing about weight in the rider and I don’t think he fits in this category (not that I agree with him that often).[/QUOTE]

Apples and oranges.

George Morris is working with people who aspire to reach the top levels of performance. Most of us fat old ladies are perfectly happy with some nice trail rides and the occasional trip around the “Chicken Little Jumper” course at the local horse show.

[Guilherme]

I don’t think we need a university level study to tell us that kilograms are harder on a horse than kilometers (all things being equal).

How much is too much? The reason I criticize the studies cited is that they presume limits and then go look for evidence to support them, vice asking “what are the possible limits?” and then go evaluate them. I cited a few centuries of documented use by armies as a base of research that could have been tapped. Near as I can tell it wasn’t (except to continuously reference a limit that never really existed). Much of that evidence will be “anecdotal” in that it is not controlled by single variables. It is much more than than ruminations, however, because there is a large base of actual experience. Someone cited information coming from vet. checks at endurance races as a valid source of information. Again, this type of information is “anecdotal” because it is gatherer under non-academically rigorous standards. It is useful, however, because it demonstrates a bunch of real world experience. It ought not to be disregarded on that ground. It ought to be used for what it is.

Query, could a major endurance competition be used to collect data that would support a study designed such that data collected could effectively narrow the areas of speculation that are rampant in these discussions?

I’ve agreed that the study referenced presents a very narrow data window. In that sense we take it for what it’s worth. The larger question is “what is it worth?”

G.

[goodhors]

Might we all just agree that horses are stressed by carrying weight? And with so many studies, it seems horses are stressed by almost EVERYTHING to some degree. They are PREY animals, so it doesn’t surprise me that their heart rates, breathing, may increase microscopically, even just haltering and leading horse inside to be groomed for riding. Horses are STILL wired to be somewhat alert to their situation, changes in things around them, because a prey animal NEEDS to watch for dangers to run away from.

I look at a horse and their stress levels as just part of them being horses, built that way and not much you can change. How much they stress in situations can often be lessened with consistant handling, exposure to many things and being the “confident herd leader” when working with horses to show them there is nothing to fear.

I also think that a horse ridden, by anyone, saddled or bareback, large or small rider, is ALWAYS going to create some stress as horse manages his situation. Extra stress can happen with doing new things, riding in new locations, having horses around him or going out alone.

So as a slightly different way of looking at the stressed horse, he actually will be a bit “more fit” in being stressed during use. Exercise programs of any kind want you to “do a little more” than you are comfortable with, get that heartrate up, breathing deeper, so you are WORKING your heart and body to keep it healthy.

I look at a horse in use, as being stressed for his own good. Used regularly, that horse will be more fit, used to the work expected, able to easily manage what is asked of him under a small or larger rider. If he is not used regularly, of course the Rider needs to keep an eye on horse and give him some rest breaks, or ask for slower paces to allow horse to do a longer ride. The same would apply for the light or heavier rider on their horse who is not so fit.

Guess I am back with my older friends, thinking “horse is a beast of burden” and he will do better working, stressing a bit, than sitting in the field watching out for lions to come eat him! Life is FULL of stressful things for horses who get used. You can’t avoid them, horse DOES react inside, though handler may never have horse act up in those situations. Getting horse out and using him for your fun of Riding, Driving, Trail Rides or lessons, means he WILL get stressed and you are helping horse be healthier, by being active and raising his heart rate and breathing.

I just see nothing wrong with stressing your horse, getting him working with his ridden load. Rather like yourself, exercising with weights, faster rates during a set, to stress your body more than your body ever works without weights during exercise. Horses are MADE to work, even work HARD, so they CAN run freely to keep their bodes working well.

Can’t help you with the MENTALLY stressed horse who over reacts to everything. Those ones are wired differently, maybe genetic in some cases, have to be managed individually.

This carrying on about rider being large, heavy boned, fat or obese, flyweight, anorexic on their “poor” horse, is ridiculous. Just another reason to feel for the posters to point at others, to feel 1. superior, or 2. picked on. QUIT being mean or letting other folks control you, just go ride your horses without being judgemental either way. Horse probably will be healthier for being worked at all!

[Pipkin]

I agree, weight is always difficult to discuss with tact.

At this time it is mostly opinions, but I’d love to see some actual hard science. The Duchy study is only really a preliminary study. It would be great to definitively say - ‘you are too heavy for your horse’, or ‘you are a fine weight for your horse to carry’, completely unaffected by personal bias. But I think this might never happen, because there are too many variables, such as horse fitness, way of going, age etc.

I think to an extent, being a light rider is a myth. No matter how you stand on the scales, it doesn’t change the number. Hopefully we all try to be sympathetic balanced riders anyway, riders that bang on their horse’s back is a completely different/unrelated issue.

What is possibly more important, is looking at what makes a horse a good weight carrier.

I’ve seen riders above a certain weight go for a draught type, when actually certain draught breeds have weak backs, because they were bred for pulling rather than carrying, and they aren’t weight carriers at all!

I know that arabs are apparently good weight carriers, and you’d never think to look at them! So what makes a good weight carrier? Height? Conformation? Fitness? Bone density? These are the questions we need answered

[goodhors]

[QUOTE=Pipkin;7788123]
What is possibly more important, is looking at what makes a horse a good weight carrier.

I’ve seen riders above a certain weight go for a draught type, when actually certain draught breeds have weak backs, because they were bred for pulling rather than carrying, and they aren’t weight carriers at all!

I know that arabs are apparently good weight carriers, and you’d never think to look at them! So what makes a good weight carrier? Height? Conformation? Fitness? Bone density? These are the questions we need answered :D[/QUOTE]

The Arabs have a bit of advantage, in that their short back has one less vertebrae in it than other breeds. I understand that “now and again” a Part-Arab will also have the less vertebrae number, but usually they have the common number of vertebrae.

I think the shorter backs tend to be stronger because the spine is supported with muscling, so being shorter means the muscles are also shorter. Maybe stronger in those shorter muscle lengths, than longer muscles for long-backed horses. Of course both short and long backed horses can be helped with exercises and good riding skills, to use their bodies better.

Looking at older equines, the shorter backed-ones, even in heavy use over a lifetime, have spines that seem to stay “up” better. While the longer-backed animals, spines tend to drop more as they age.

Cleveland Bay horses, among the larger breeds, are known for being short-backed. Chosen as good weight carriers for many years in the Hunt fields. They have no Draft or cold blood in the Purebreds, though they are listed as a Draft horse by the USDA, because they pulled vehicles. The UK use of Draught term for horse pulling anything, is pronounced as “draft”, so easily confused by anyone “back in the day” in classifying breeds.

Old style Morgans are pretty short backed, but you have to find them by families now. More modern Morgans are not so short coupled as they used to be. Other breeds also have family lines known for short backs, short coupled, to do the work those horses are noted for.

[EventingMaff]

[QUOTE=Guilherme;7788112]
I don’t think we need a university level study to tell us that kilograms are harder on a horse than kilometers (all things being equal).

How much is too much? The reason I criticize the studies cited is that they presume limits and then go look for evidence to support them, vice asking “what are the possible limits?” and then go evaluate them. I cited a few centuries of documented use by armies as a base of research that could have been tapped. Near as I can tell it wasn’t (except to continuously reference a limit that never really existed). Much of that evidence will be “anecdotal” in that it is not controlled by single variables. It is much more than than ruminations, however, because there is a large base of actual experience. Someone cited information coming from vet. checks at endurance races as a valid source of information. Again, this type of information is “anecdotal” because it is gatherer under non-academically rigorous standards. It is useful, however, because it demonstrates a bunch of real world experience. It ought not to be disregarded on that ground. It ought to be used for what it is.

Query, could a major endurance competition be used to collect data that would support a study designed such that data collected could effectively narrow the areas of speculation that are rampant in these discussions?

I’ve agreed that the study referenced presents a very narrow data window. In that sense we take it for what it’s worth. The larger question is “what is it worth?”

G.[/QUOTE]

Empirical testing almost always tries to start with theory – although G I agree with you here that the theory they started with wasn’t their best option. You seem to be well read in the cavalry histories and documents, that would have been a better place for them to start than age old hear-say of “cavalry said 20% of horse’s weight”.

I also didn’t intend for my previous post to imply that data collected at events (endurance, eventing, dressage, what have you) isn’t use-able or should be discarded! It’s absolutely still data. You just need much more of it for statistical power to draw conclusions and you’re limited to correlations as opposed to causation (which this study was shooting for).

I think it’s a starting point for future studies. This study in itself – not ground breaking. But it’s getting people talking and laying a solid foundation for future research to build on that can cite this study and say “given these results, let’s go a step further and look at…”

[kdow]

[QUOTE=wendy;7787968]
oh come on. I hate these threads because they are full of fat people trying to make up excuses to justify being fat. There is a Healthy Weight that is in-between “anorexic” and “obese”, and you owe it to YOURSELF to make sure you get there. Even if your horse can carry you around no problem, being overweight is damaging your own health every day, day after day. Anyone can lose weight- just eat less. No, you’ll never look like an anorexic model- normal women have round bellies, not flat ones. No, you won’t have a six-pack- healthy people have too much body fat to ever see a six-pack. But your knees and hips and kidneys will be much happier, and probably your horse will be to.[/QUOTE]

Who gets to decide what a Healthy Weight is for any given individual? Because I know plenty of people who don’t match up to the common idea of a “healthy weight” based on appearance and the stupid BMI charts, but whose doctors are quite happy with them as they are. (Activity level, bp, blood tests all good, etc. Heck, the only complaint my doctor has for me is that he would prefer to see my activity level increase, but he understands why it is difficult for me to do so with the arthritis, so as long as I’m making an effort he’s happy.)