• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse
1 of 2 < >

Event Announcements now available FREE to all registered users

We just reconfigured the Event Announcements forum to be available as a free service for all registered forum users. See the thread stuck at the top of that forum for more information.
2 of 2 < >

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

And another one falls through the cracks! :(

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by quietann View Post
    Total side point here, but one of the most common rat poisons is an anti-coagulant taken by many humans (Warfarin or Coumadin -- same thing, different modes of administration.) And the risks are known -- you bleed more if you get hurt, you have a greater chance of having an aneurysm, etc.

    (My mom started taking Coumadin after having a pulmonary embolism -- a blood clot in the lungs -- for which she was given IV Warfarin while in hospital. Less than a year later, she had a brain aneurysm which was almost certainly related to the Coumadin, and she died.)
    I may be mistaken but I think it was used in people first and then in larger per # dosages as a rat poison?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warfarin

    Nope it was rats first then people.
    You are correct.

    My point, however, was that there are many substances that we know are harmful in people without conducting studies to determine they are.
    Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

    http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

    Comment


    • Originally posted by quietann View Post
      And, hm, Bluey has yet to address my question, which is the same one asked by several others here. Too busy trying to "win" I guess...
      No, just tired of not responding, that was not going anywhere with all the ganging up comments.
      Decided to try to respond more and see what may happen.

      The way I see it, I wonder if those trying to silence me realize that, without some of us questioning the ones for the slaughter ban, there would not be any debate, just a few post from the usual suspects and the threads would die?

      Where will they go find their fun next, you think?

      Talking about wining, too bad no one seems interested any more on the horse in this story, just that their side win?
      Don't know what a win may represent to them, the most posts, maybe?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
        No, just tired of not responding, that was not going anywhere with all the ganging up comments.
        Decided to try to respond more and see what may happen.

        The way I see it, I wonder if those trying to silence me realize that, without some of us questioning the ones for the slaughter ban, there would not be any debate, just a few post from the usual suspects and the threads would die?

        Where will they go find their fun next, you think?

        Talking about wining, too bad no one seems interested any more on the horse in this story, just that their side win?
        Don't know what a win may represent to them, the most posts, maybe?
        No one is trying to silence you. The goal is that you stop calling people RARA's, HSUS & Peta memebers, etc. As you are incorrect in saying the folks on here are affiliated with these groups.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by up-at-5 View Post
          D_Baldstalkings, Sorry, I guess you didn't read the first line of the post in question. It was a quote from a FB page, I wasn't there.
          I hope I fixed that implication that those were your statements. I did know and read that you were not the originator, sorry if I confused others by my multi-quoting.

          If what I edited is not enough, let me know.
          Last edited by D_BaldStockings; Apr. 2, 2013, 04:55 PM.

          Comment

          • Original Poster

            follow up article
            http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edito...editorial.html

            Comment


            • Originally posted by FalseImpression View Post

              Seems Canada is flirting with a Chinese disaster.
              from sunridge1:Go get 'em Roy! Stupid clown shoe nailing, acid pouring bast@rds.it is going to be good until the last drop!Eleneswell, the open trail begged to be used. D Taylor

              Comment


              • Originally posted by FalseImpression View Post
                At least some more information, if from the same initial questionable source with a certain agenda.

                So the horse was tested, they don't say if before or after being killed and was found clean, whatever then they did with him.

                I wonder why, in all their anti slaughter rhetoric, they don't mention the real story here again, that some sold him and then claimed they had tried to buy him back and why that was not possible?

                We still don't know and that, I thought, would be what the article was about.
                Maybe the next one?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by jetsmom View Post
                  Why didn't your dad just have him put down, either by bullet or vet?
                  I have no idea, other than no place to shoot him or bury him.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                    At least some more information, if from the same initial questionable source with a certain agenda.

                    So the horse was tested, they don't say if before or after being killed and was found clean, whatever then they did with him.

                    I wonder why, in all their anti slaughter rhetoric, they don't mention the real story here again, that some sold him and then claimed they had tried to buy him back and why that was not possible?

                    We still don't know and that, I thought, would be what the article was about.
                    Maybe the next one?
                    Did you contact them with your questions/comments?
                    from sunridge1:Go get 'em Roy! Stupid clown shoe nailing, acid pouring bast@rds.it is going to be good until the last drop!Eleneswell, the open trail begged to be used. D Taylor

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                      At least some more information, if from the same initial questionable source with a certain agenda.

                      So the horse was tested, they don't say if before or after being killed and was found clean, whatever then they did with him.

                      I wonder why, in all their anti slaughter rhetoric, they don't mention the real story here again, that some sold him and then claimed they had tried to buy him back and why that was not possible?

                      We still don't know and that, I thought, would be what the article was about.
                      Maybe the next one?
                      I can play this game too Bluey. So the slaughter house said they tested him and found him clean. However, the racing barn knows his previous history and knows that's impossible. So who is slanting the evidence now?

                      Comment


                      • one more use of the natural, renewable resource

                        in Business definition, a natural resource is not manufactured or artificially modified. While horses are a bred-by-man mammal, they are considered natural in that they reproduce, grow live and die quite successfully if humans fail to intervene.

                        Renewable means the supply may be rebuilt/restocked. You can breed more horses if you deplete the number existing at present, just as you can plant and grow more trees, wheat, corn. Non-renewable would be things like Oil, Gold.

                        Resource means something available to be used given the ingenuity of mankind.
                        We use sun, oil, corn, wheat, and we use horses.

                        What is in dispute is the use of a horse as an edible. And not that they CAN (as uncontaminated horsemeat is not poisonous to humans) but whether one SHOULD.

                        I am stepping back from replying to this aspect of the thread because I think it is a personal decision, not one I should influence or choose for others.
                        Last edited by D_BaldStockings; Apr. 2, 2013, 10:27 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by D_BaldStockings View Post
                          I hope I fixed that implication that those were your statements. I did know and read that you were not the originator, sorry if I confused others by my muti-quoting.

                          If what I edited is not enough, let me know.
                          No problem, I too, went back and edited so the first line is set apart from the rest.

                          Hey Quietann, nice to see you posting here on this thread. Remember me from Florida, sitting by the pool

                          Bluey, I don't think anyone is trying to "silence" you (although it would be nice if you'd give it a rest once in awhile). I'll donate 10 dollars to the horse charity of your choice, if you go a whole week without using the words or phrases HSUS, activist, RARA, fail to understand, final use, slaughter, and banning driving because of a drunk. Oh, and no smiley faces either!
                          What say?

                          Oh, and the horse was slaughtered, did you not bother to read the article that was posted here, or even check out the link?
                          Last edited by up-at-5; Apr. 2, 2013, 05:06 PM. Reason: adding in "no smiley faces"
                          "Anti-intellect and marketing, pretty, pretty, who needs talent
                          Crying eyes, we're so outnumbered, fight for the right to remain silent" Buck 65

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post
                            I may be mistaken but I think it was used in people first and then in larger per # dosages as a rat poison?

                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warfarin

                            Nope it was rats first then people.
                            You are correct.

                            My point, however, was that there are many substances that we know are harmful in people without conducting studies to {determine they are.
                            Really?
                            Usually 'we know' because at some point in the past a person or persons was unfortunate enough to use a harmful susbstance and suffer the ensuing damage. Might not be a Study, per se, but at least some data.

                            Perhaps I am getting the wrong meaning from your post... I took it to mean stuff used in animals that we 'haven't' tested in humans and the hearsay is negative but un backed up. So not aggreeing with the 'WE KNOW" part.
                            Last edited by D_BaldStockings; Apr. 2, 2013, 10:30 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by quietann View Post
                              And, hm, Bluey has yet to address my question, which is the same one asked by several others here. Too busy trying to "win" I guess...

                              In my experience, you will never get an answer to that question. Several of my questions regarding this topic have also gone ignored. What Bluey excels in is deflecting and then creating a diversion, a roundabout way to never have to address a sensitive topic.

                              Case in point:

                              Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                              No, just tired of not responding, that was not going anywhere with all the ganging up comments.
                              Decided to try to respond more and see what may happen.

                              The way I see it, I wonder if those trying to silence me realize that, without some of us questioning the ones for the slaughter ban, there would not be any debate, just a few post from the usual suspects and the threads would die?

                              Where will they go find their fun next, you think?

                              Talking about wining, too bad no one seems interested any more on the horse in this story, just that their side win?
                              Don't know what a win may represent to them, the most posts, maybe?
                              Originally posted by FalseImpression View Post
                              While an editorial piece, it does bring up some important points.

                              When a trainer learned of Backstreet Bully’s fate and pleaded with the abattoir not to sell him as meat, the company said it had him tested and found no “bute,” which is only banned within six months of slaughter. No one will say if Backstreet Bully was sold for meat.

                              As Dr. Martin Appelt of the food inspection agency says, the passport system is based on honour. But principles are often the first to be sacrificed when there’s money to be made.

                              One would think that if the meat from BSB was not sold for human consumption, the officials involved would make that very clear. They are already under scrutiny for accepting a horse with a falsified passport. Why they won't come out and say the meat was not sold for consumption speaks volumes. Good PR would be for them to say they were extra careful and withheld the meat from being prepared for human consumption.
                              Proud owner of a Slaughter-Bound TB from a feedlot, and her surprise baby...!
                              http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e350/Jen4USC/fave.jpg
                              http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e3...SC/running.jpg

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by D_BaldStockings View Post
                                Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post
                                I may be mistaken but I think it was used in people first and then in larger per # dosages as a rat poison?

                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warfarin

                                Nope it was rats first then people.
                                You are correct.

                                My point, however, was that there are many substances that we know are harmful in people without conducting studies to determine they are.
                                Really?
                                Usually 'we know' because at some point in the past a person or persons was unfortunate enough to use a harmful susbstance and suffer the ensuing damage. Might not be a Study, per se, but at least some data.

                                Perhaps I am getting the wrong meaning from your post... I took it to mean stuff used in animals that we 'haven't' tested in humans and the hearsay is negative but un backed up. So not aggreeing with the 'WE KNOW" part.
                                An actual study is different from anecdotal 'used in these patients with these results' which doesn't incl placebo and other measures to rule out what could happen even without the substance [being studied] presence in the subjects.
                                That's what I am saying.
                                Lala and Bluey and Fairfax keep suggesting that Bute is a non-issue for people because there are no studies saying it is an issue.
                                And because horses take it without getting cancer.

                                I am saying that we know it's an issue even without proper studies because we did use it in people, saw ill effects, and other better, safer treatments came along. And that this harm to patients who used it also explains why there are not and will not be any true studies.
                                I've said, repeatedly, that doing a study to prove something is harmful is hard to do, in part thanks to the challenge of getting subjects to sign up for a harm study. I guess we would have 3 eager subjects were we to conduct such a study- Lala, Fairfax and Bluey who are certain it's not harmful and A-ok to feed to humans, but I think more would be a challenge to find.

                                It's also hard to get funding for a study like this too.
                                Heck if the slaughter plants/pro-slaughter side want to prove it's not a big deal, since they are the ones who would profit from the results... they should go for it and fund a study!
                                Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

                                http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by jenm View Post

                                  While an editorial piece, it does bring up some important points.

                                  When a trainer learned of Backstreet Bully’s fate and pleaded with the abattoir not to sell him as meat, the company said it had him tested and found no “bute,” which is only banned within six months of slaughter. No one will say if Backstreet Bully was sold for meat.
                                  Can someone explain to me why the slaughter plants [who is the speaker of the above quote in the article, I assume] and several pro-slaughterers here on COTH keep insisting that there's only a 6 month ban on bute, when everything I've found says it's a drug that is never to be used in animals for human consumption?

                                  I also wish they would stop using the term 'passport' when they mean the IED.
                                  It is my understanding that a true passport, like the ones European horses have, are signed by the Vet administering or Rx'ing the med. [and someone who has actually seen w/their own eyes the passports European horses have for slaughter correct me if I am wrong on that]
                                  IEDs do not have that.
                                  Last edited by Angela Freda; Apr. 2, 2013, 05:48 PM. Reason: spelling
                                  Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

                                  http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by D_BaldStockings View Post
                                    one more use of the natural, renewable resource

                                    in Business definition, a natural resource is not manufactured or artificially modified. While horses are a bred-by-man mammal, they are considered natural in that they reproduce, grow live and die quite successfully if humans fail to intervene.

                                    Renewable means the supply may be rebuilt/restocked. You can breed more horses if you deplete the number existing at present, just as you can plant and grow more trees, wheat, corn. Non-renewable would be things like Oil, Gold.

                                    Resource means something available to be used given the ingenuity of mankind.
                                    We use sun, oil, corn, wheat, and we use horses.

                                    What is in dispute is the use of a horse as an edible. And not that they CAN (as uncontaminated horsemeat is not poinsonous to humans) but whether one SHOULD.

                                    I am stepping back from replying to this aspect of the thread because I think it is a personal decision, not one I should influence or choose for others.
                                    don't spoil the party with facts now!

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by FalseImpression View Post
                                      Just as an aside, it's annoying that they refer to nitrofurazone and bute as "performance enhancing." It would actually strengthen the article to point out that most riding horses are treated with various preparations to address injury or illness that are not permitted for food animals, that it's not just about performance-enhancing drugs of questionable ethical value.
                                      If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by Alagirl View Post
                                        don't spoil the party with facts now!
                                        You see that is the kind of smart alec comment people are tired of, It is not constructive. Why do you post on these threads anyway Alagirl?
                                        I never knew that you were not a horse person until someone brought it up, then over the years I realized you never have spoken of your own horses or riding. Do you just enjoy riling people up? Because it sure would appear that way, I do not see you adding anything constructive to the conversation.
                                        Sorry if you find that offensive, but I find your repeated little zings to be really not helping things at all. I am sure you will turn that around to mean you are being attacked, when we know that the Trio are the only ones being attacked. Like I said before there seems to be little you or Bluey are doing for slaughter or against, But maybe you both could really care less how horses are slaughtered, but really enjoying stirring the pot.
                                        Just the way it appears.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by Sannois View Post
                                          You see that is the kind of smart alec comment people are tired of, It is not constructive. Why do you post on these threads anyway Alagirl?
                                          I never knew that you were not a horse person until someone brought it up, then over the years I realized you never have spoken of your own horses or riding. Do you just enjoy riling people up? Because it sure would appear that way, I do not see you adding anything constructive to the conversation.
                                          Sorry if you find that offensive, but I find your repeated little zings to be really not helping things at all. I am sure you will turn that around to mean you are being attacked, when we know that the Trio are the only ones being attacked. Like I said before there seems to be little you or Bluey are doing for slaughter or against, But maybe you both could really care less how horses are slaughtered, but really enjoying stirring the pot.
                                          Just the way it appears.
                                          Honey, I have been called all kinds of things in the last 6 or 7 years.

                                          It wears thin. And yes, it was always with the implication that since I do not support the ban I could possibly not care for animals.
                                          yes, plenty of personal digs.

                                          and oh my, guess what?

                                          Every time. every.single.time. certain people are called out on their lack of a) knowledge; b) lack of facts; c) outright...well, can't say it here or I'll be accused of name calling, wouldn't want that now...utter nonsense they switch the subject, divert attention, throw in a few personal digs that are very thinly veiled personal attacks and we rinse. lather, repeat until we reach the same strawman 'argument' again.

                                          Now, it is a moon thing.
                                          we used to have one of these themed amusements every single month, one week before Full Moon. Yes, we had them long enough and often enough that I actually bothered to keep track of it.

                                          The next thing I am expecting to be brought up - again - would be the fact that I do not own a horse. Which LauraKY has beaten like the proverbial dead horse for a good while now. Care to comment on that?

                                          Fact is the argument against slaughter is less sturdy than a house of cards.
                                          Every single time the pebbles are pulled from the foundation it's reduced to rhetoric (from PETA and HSUS) and emotions.

                                          Emotions are fine. But the way you feel has little or no bearing on how I conduct business.
                                          Pretty simply put: if it does not affect you stay out of it.


                                          On the other hand the anti slaughter/pro ban demands do affect the whole of the industry. And not in a positive way.

                                          Bluey and myself have pointed that out, before the plants closed down.
                                          If it would not be such a sad state of affairs it would be fun to say 'we told you so', and that was well before the economy collapsed.

                                          Oh, right: Bluey was called a liar for saying that horses got turned lose to fend for themselves. Did not happen.
                                          Well, it did, it does.
                                          She got called a liar for telling people how the closure of the plants affected the market where she lives.
                                          nah, didn't happen. because the handful of ladies who live where the pastures are always green (or in an apartment above the garage in mid town for all I know) don't see it in their MLP world.

                                          Never let some facts get in a way of a good cause, right!

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X