david a hall wrote:
That would be my take on it as well. Need to cover this with John.

M. W. Myers, D.V.M.

Dr Renate Weller has written lots on the subject.

david a hall wrote:
On coronet angles?

M. W. Myers, D.V.M.

mwmyersdvm wrote:
You can easily check the numbers. Take this image ans use the 'free mark-up' tool to place an additional angle over this image. I suspect you will find the heel and toe markers will dictate the angle relative to the ground.

mwmyersdvm wrote:

A radiograph is also a 2d representation of a 3d object. Would you consider radiographs to be an accurate representation of a hoof/limb?

I guess you can get a ball park but it wont be accurate, any check you run on the photo will be accurate, its just the 2d image isnt an accurate representation of the hoof.

reillyshoe wrote:
For the measurements usually taken, these are actually two dimensional at the point they are taken so it is less of a problem. The parameters used have been done on radiographs for some time so there is a fair amount of data to back up the validity of the measurements. The radiograph acts more like a cross section on a lateral view than a lateral photograph does. The photo tries to mimic three dimensions while the radiograph essentially 'flattens' the image in the way it acquires the image so the production of the picture is a little different.

Additionally, radiographs are taken at a number of angles to work out the three dimensions for diagnostic purposes. CT takes many angles at many levels and can reconstruct the image in three dimensions upon the completion of the study.

M. W. Myers, D.V.M.

This is the exact sort of ball park piffle that's worrying with the veterinary world today & that's not leaving out the so called expert farrier clinicians.
Its hard to refrain from sarcasm, But one could say.The average man in the streets wild guess would be more accurate & more adapt on the subject .
Dr Myers what flaws do you see in that hoof in the photograph you presented. rendering it a useless representation to draw conclusion from & that you would never use as a broad guide for determining average coronet angles in a horse .

owen charles wrote:Do your own sketches . . . .

owen charles wrote:
The general discussion aside from your direct critique is that coronet angles do not really fit into the equation. I see you have some rather rigid opinions that few people share about a great many topics, but I prefer keeping an open mind and continuing to look for better ways to accomplish goals and move forward. I have excellent results with my "piffle", so I will continue to use it and improve my skills and share my findings for everyone's review and benefit where applicable. Pat and I are merely discussing our respective observations and ideas regarding the Metron program and it's pluses and minuses. There are no perfect solutions, not even yours, at this time.

"Best guesses" may work well for the backyard horse, but some real data usually needs to be applied to the upper level performance horses. The farrier and veterinary professions are constantly evolving and one can either move forward with new ideas and technology or fall into the path of the dinosaur.

M. W. Myers, D.V.M.

pug says , skippy is a troll .
chris

mwmyersdvm wrote:In other words you couldn't see it.

owen charles wrote:
Then perhaps I could benefit from your sage wisdom and you can point them out.

M. W. Myers, D.V.M.

chris bunting wrote:Having an opinion on a farrier forum makes you a Troll does it.?This forum must be the epicentre for trolls then.
So what would you call an angry little man with very average shoeing skills that keeps snuffling like a little mangy pug .?
Any suggestions chris ?

mwmyersdvm wrote:Have a look at the growth ring & lack of fullness in the bulbs. one would have to say that is not a model average normal healthy hoof.