She probably feels s tupid. The "trimmers" around here are usually very quiet when I'm around, but talk their faces off when they're with horse owners by themselves. They must teach that.

Regards

hurleycane wrote:
Yes, that is understood, thanks. The purpose of my post, however, was to correct the vet's statement that the bacteria forms the pus. That is wrong. The BODY forms the pus. That's all -- didn't intend to have a whole discussion on what pus is.

caballus wrote:
But why not? don't all forums discuss running into pus? :confused:

*smile*

caballus wrote:
What vet's statement?

Pus: a creamy, viscous fluid exudate that is the result of fluid remains of necrosis of tissues. It is usually pale yellow to yellow green, sometimes whitish, and sometimes bloody. Its main constituent is an abundance of polymorphonuclear leukocytes. Bacterial infection is its most common cause.

Fundamentally pus forms in response to bacteria accumulation. The bacteria gains access and as the bacteria multiply, pus builds accumulates.

Thomas_Ride&Drive wrote:
Post #50 of this thread.

caballus wrote:
Without a foreign body, there is no pus. Most often it's bacterium, but it can be an amoeba, virus, fungus, etc.

caballus wrote:
Thanks.

What's wrong with that statement?

He said bacteria creates pus in a hoof abscess.

Creates means to cause or to bring into being.

Without infective tissue there's no pus. It's there because the neutrophils are working to fight infection.

I've never yet seen or read of a hoof abscess that's been caused by any other reason.

I brought it up cause you were incorrect. And you lorded your incorrectness over a Vet. When you are cut with a knife, does the knife create the wound or does the body create the wound? Bacteria in the flesh creates pus. BTW bacteria have their own slime too ya know. It is part of their defense.

hurleycane wrote:Knives don't cut people, people cut people. :cool:

Oh the pitfalls of casual language. Reminds me of a long ago patient conference with a highly regarded attending surgeon. I described a discharge as being pu$$y. He kindly requested I spell the term for the benefit of the residents and interns present at the conference.

Matter of perception, I guess. When I think of 'create' then I think of the actual creation by the subject ... in other words the bacteria making the pus when, actually, its the body that makes the pus when there is bacteria present.

One of my favorite inaccurate Vet terms..."sterile abcess"?????


The close second place..."contracted tendons"

^ Is that being a little bit pregnant?

caballus wrote:
Again Gwen - the body does not make "pus." Pus is the soup that results from the fight with the invading organism or devitalized tissue. Many components in pus which are not of the body's making.

deftly stepping over the puddle of pus...


I've been reflecting on the whole BUA "movement" for a while now.

The last few decades have seen professional farriers really step-up their game. At least partially motivated by a shift in attitude among growing segments the horse-owning public, who decided they were willing to pay more to an actual farrier than to the kid who could get shoes onto a horse without immediately crippling the beast.

Instead of everyone charging "the going rate" and racing to get through enough horses to make a few dollars, the price range between Cheap Johns and the top hand farriers grew considerably. (Even though most farriers still undercharge for their work.) The state of the art improved. All was going pretty well...

Then the economy started coming off the rails. Horseowners started feeling the pinch, especially when they had to write the check for shoeing every six weeks... There was considerable motivation to justify using the cheaper shoers. "He's the barn shoer." "Everyone else likes him." "Couldn't find anyone else in this area."

The result of selecting a horseshoer based on price and easy availability shouldn't surprise anyone who knows anything about farriery.

So now the horseowner has a lame horse and is at the crossroads. She can either admit that her cheapness has resulted in suffering for her animal, which makes her a bad momma and obligates her to find and pay-for a real farrier to fix the mess... Or she can jump on the BUA bandwagon, blame all horseshoers for her situation, and get off with nice, cheap trims while convincing herself that the ongoing problems are the result of previous shoeing, or the acceptable consequences of keeping Dobbin "natural".

Of course, to avoid being the neglectful owner who won't pony-up for qualified farrier services, the BUA convert has to pretend that what she's doing is obviously the right thing, and that anyone using conventional farriery is a backwards, horse-abusing *****.

Amazing thing is that it sometimes works. Watch for horseowners waxing apologetic about the fact that they have their horses shod or trimmed by a guy who actually has a forge & anvil! "I'd really prefer to have them barefoot, but..."

.