Bursting the myths and maximising the sharing of tips and ideas – the past, the present and the future

Myths abound in equine practice and often prevent any thought about what we are doing. The worst myths are easily picked up and maintained by owners seeking to find a cheap, easy and available option that avoids the need to seek professional advice. Often rationality is completely over-looked and the evidence for efficacy is lost in the smoke and mirrors that surround most such myths. Whilst there are some myths that still stand the test of time, most have been shown to be counter to the interests of the patients. Why then did they develop in the first place ? This is easily answered as an expected outcome of the days of magic and vapours as a basis if medical practice.

What one eminent person says usually becomes dogma and what appears in a widely popular book or journal article is taken as the rule that accepts no contradiction or alternative. Is this all bad ? No, it is not, but it is important that every myth and dogma is critically analysed and proven or disproven. Not many of us would be inclined to follow the instructions of Hippocrates (477 BC) in wound management but in fact his management of arrow wounds on horses was probably safer and more logical than the dogma that developed through the Middle Ages until the concepts of vapours and salts was dispelled by a new generation of thinking medical clinicians.

On the basis that 2 anecdotes don’t make data we all recognise that many of us develop techniques that work ! For sure, if we were able to understand that any beneficial “idea” should be carefully scrutinised to ensure that we don’t lose the benefit of “blue sky thinking”. On the other hand, we all recognise that some concepts and ideas that work for others don’t work for us. The ESPY sarcoid treatment using frozen allografts of the tumour embedded in the neck is a great example of this. The published reports of the technique describe very positive outcomes but many reports including my own findings are far from satisfactory. So why does it work for some but not others ? Where are the issues that bias one way or the other coming from. Does it mean that we should not explore the positives and develop the technique.

Myths are somewhat different to dogmas – myths are usually based on vague suppositions and often rely on magic and gullibility ! A myth is defined as a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining a natural or social phenomenon, and typically involve supernatural beings or events. Reliance on supernatural event is not a way to practice medicine – homeopaths rely on this and prey on the gullible, the vulnerable and the disillusioned ! A broad understanding of the sequence of events involved in a disease process such as laminitis headshaking, wound healing and cancer encourages the dispelling of myths and the application of new dogmas based on evidence that in time will be tested again in the light of new knowledge.

This paper explores a few of the myths within the broad scope of equine practice in cancer medicine, headshaking, laminitis and wound management as examples of how these have been influenced by a scientific and thinking profession.