# What are your opinions on this YouTube rant?



## EmberScarlet (Oct 28, 2016)

I don't watch RaleighLink14 myself (I find her very immature and she gives dangerous advice), but a friend who watches her videos linked me this;




I hope that the other young teens that watch her videos don't get sucked into the idea that being in charge while riding is evil, telling your horse to do things is evil, stalls are evil, the industry is always evil, etc. 

What are your opinions about the points she brings up, and do you think genetic engineering belongs in the horse world?

EDIT: At around the ten minute mark, she claims ''horses weren't 'put on the Earth' to win us ribbons''... uh, the ones you know and love were. Horses would be extinct or farmed like cows for meat (in larger quantities that is) if we didn't domesticate them to be creatures of labor. She probably wouldn't be sitting in her warm comfy home if it weren't for the service of animals for hundreds of years, lol.


----------



## phantomhorse13 (Feb 18, 2011)

I have to admit to not watching the whole thing.. I started raising my eyebrows when she talked about making the first video at work (not sure what she does, but pretty sure its NOT making random rants to put on YouTube) and they just kept rising..

While I am all about treating animals with empathy and kindness.. I don't need a random person on the internet telling me what is in the "best interest" for my horses.


----------



## COWCHICK77 (Jun 21, 2010)

Subbing to come back later....


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

I haven't watched the video yet but agree with the OP - today's horses have all been bred to be of some use to humans, whether it was back in the day when they were the 'cars, trucks and farm tractors' and carried men into battle to todays leisure and competition horses. Even the horses raised for meat in parts of Europe have been selectively bred to be the best for that use.
That happened a long, long time ago and you can't put the clock back to return the refined modern day horse to being something close to the Przewalski horse.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

I have liked some of her videos in the past (I didn't watch this one), but stopped watching a long time ago when every video was a rant, bash, or cussing about something endlessly. Not saying she's a bad person, but your opinions of what's "right" for your horse isn't always right.


----------



## SteadyOn (Mar 5, 2017)

I think it depends on what the modifications are. Selective breeding for bigger, stronger, faster, sounder, more athletic, etc., horses has been happening for millennia. If genetic alterations can create a healthier, sounder horse with a longer career before arthritis, injuries, etc. break them down, that's a win for rider AND horse. If the long term health of the animal isn't a major goal in genetically engineering a horse, and they're just going for short term success at the expense of the horse's health and well being, then it's not ethical. But those questions of ethics are no different than in normal breeding.


----------



## carshon (Apr 7, 2015)

I think she still comes off as emotional and immature. I don't agree with "making" a super horse in the lab. But then again I don't think embryo transfer is right either. The way I look at it is this. We breed for certain characteristics and discard the off spring that don't "fit the bill" If we can custom order our horse from a lab we may be able to lessen the unwanted horse population. Reduce those that go to slaughter, create a horse that never gets Navicular, EPM, Uveitis - etc. 

Modern genetics and modern medicine are all a 2 edged sword.


----------



## Kristopher (Jan 30, 2018)

Lol. I think first of all she is to young to really no what she is talking about lol. Just likes to here herself talk. Lol. Anyone can watch a video and say something about it. I used to be in the rodeo, and have been on horses all my life. First off. The rodeo animals are some of the most well kept animals out there. There treated better then people. Horses have helped people going back long ago, plowing fields helping people work the land. Working and bringing cattle in from pastures. They are very well maintained. There will always be people that abuse animals just like people kill each other. But for the majority of us, we love and take care of our animals. There is a lot of people on YouTube that just talk cause they think it sounds good but really just annoying to listen to people that really no nothing. Lol


----------



## ChieTheRider (May 3, 2017)

I think that the point could come across better if she had better rhetoric skills and didn't seem like an angsty teenager. I don't know much about these cloned horses. It's weird, it's probably not the best thing, it's tampering with God's natural way of things, but if there was some more proof given in valid order and without useless expletives, then her argument would be more convincing. Selective breeding is different than actually lab-forming an embryo. Genetic engineering causes a whole lot of problems and I personally think it won't be the best idea. Also, those animals would probably be crazy expensive and, like other "clones", infertile. So I think it's weird, if not creepy that there are these GE horses out there. Saying that, even IF I was as much of an activist as she, I'd probably dislike this video as it's really immature and really, really making a mountain out of a mole hill. there are more effective ways to get your point across. Didn't finish the video, got tired of the cussing and ranting. However, in the portion I saw, she came across being very immature.


----------



## ApuetsoT (Aug 22, 2014)

ChieTheRider said:


> Also, those animals would probably be crazy expensive and, like other "clones", infertile. .


Clones aren't infertile. There is a Highbrow Cat clone, Copy Cat, who was created for the purposed of breeding. Unless the sex cells of the embryo were purposely modified, there's no reason a close or GE animal would be sterile.


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

i Agree that she is immature and ranting.
What she is referring to, though, is not selective breeding but genetic engineering

Genetically engineered ?super-horses? could win Olympics* | Daily Mail Online

It has some useful techniques,like eliminating hemophilia in humans, and other genetic defects , however, there is a fine line between using it to eliminate genetic defects and in creating 'super' horses,
Yes, I agree genetic engineering is controversial, but her approach is immature,tackless (loves the F word),plus once she goes into all bits, spurs, crops being evil , any credibility goes out the window!
Cloning is not the same as modifying the DNA sequence in an animal


Crispr is a tool for making precise edits in DNA, discovered in bacteria.

The acronym stands for 'Clustered Regularly Inter-Spaced Palindromic Repeats'. 

The technique involves a DNA cutting enzyme and a small tag which tells the enzyme where to cut.

By editing this tag, scientists are able to target specific regions of DNA and make precise cuts, wherever they like.

Here, the scientists focused on the myostatin gene sequence which controls and limits the growth of muscles.

By changing this, the horses will be able to develop significantly more muscle mass. 

By suppressing the myostatin gene sequence the horses can develop greater muscle mass.


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

Seems they did use thecripr on cloned embryos, but once that is done, that embryo is no longer a true clone,having been genetically modified.


----------



## Smilie (Oct 4, 2010)

Far as cloned horses, I see they have already used them in polo. Well, if anything, her rant caused me to become more informed, far as how much cloning has been used in horses. I knew a famous barrel racing horse had been cloned, but admit to being ignorant beyond that

Six cloned horses help rider win prestigious polo match | Science | AAAS


http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/tag/cloning


----------



## Fimargue (Jun 19, 2015)

Oh lordy. :icon_rolleyes: Holier than thou...

Maybe I wouldn't like to go work, but I still have to. As well as us, the horses have their job. If I want a dog, I have a dog, but I don't get a horse just for company and to decorate the yard. The relationship is different and in my experience most horses actually like having a job and routine.

I don't agree at all with genetically engineered horses. That's just so wrong.

The part where she says horses where not put on earth for yada yada proves that she doesn't know much. Does she think that we would have this amount of different breeds, and horses in general, if it weren't for the different disciplines and uses that motivate people to acquire them? 

Hard to take a person who thinks 'you don't need to wear a helmet if you are a smart rider' seriously. If you know horses at all, you should know they are prey animals and not 100% predictable, and crap happens. You cannot control everything.


----------



## ChieTheRider (May 3, 2017)

ApuetsoT said:


> Clones aren't infertile. There is a Highbrow Cat clone, Copy Cat, who was created for the purposed of breeding. Unless the sex cells of the embryo were purposely modified, there's no reason a close or GE animal would be sterile.


I think I was confusing it with something else then whoops.


----------



## aubie (Aug 24, 2013)

I made it :45 seconds. Way to self absorbed to listen to.


----------



## waresbear (Jun 18, 2011)

Who watches this crap?


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

I too am big on animal rights & humane treatment & unfortunately there's a lot of stuff in the horse world that goes against that grain. Ddon't get me confused with the fanatics tho, who would rather feral horseys be cooped up in feedlots eternally than humanely culled, or who don't believe in ever riding horses, etc, etc.

But nope, just can't stand watching a rant vid about it - I did try for the sake of objectivity, got thru about 3 mins, but that will do. So sorry Ember, can't give an objective opinion on it for you.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

I don't see how this leads to intelligent discussion, therefore, I have no interest in her opinion. Period. She is very young, so can be forgiven I guess, but does not deserve my time (I only watched the first four minutes). Her opinions are vague, uneducated, and emotional.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

Smilie said:


> i Agree that she is immature and ranting.
> What she is referring to, though, is not selective breeding but genetic engineering
> 
> Genetically engineered ?super-horses? could win Olympics* | Daily Mail Online
> ...


See, this is intelligent discussion. Contrary to a kid ranting because she has a camera and an Internet connection @Smilie brings valid scientific knowledge to the table.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

Riding a horse occurs on a wide spectrum, just as "putting children to work" does. You can make your child mow the lawn once a week, or you can make your child go down to the Nike factory to sow sneakers all day all week. You can insist that your child practice the piano to help him through a slump in motivation, or you can make your child practice all day every day so you can live your life vicariously through your child's music ribbons and prize moneys. You can insist that your child play outside and be active, or you can send your child to an Olympic training farm (as they exist in most totalitarian countries). 

The girl in the video likes to stir the pot and create controversy. She's not entirely wrong with her observations, but she's observing character traits that are endemic in humanity. Just see how we treat the planet for the sake of prize money (a.k.a. "profits").

What I don't like about the video is that she's only making emotional argument. What exactly are the ethical implications of editing genes vs. deciding which stallion can procreate with which mare? Both have the same end effect: they manipulate the species genetic make up. So yes, some valid points made on an emotional level, but sound ethical and scientific arguments are largely absent. Well, she doesn't get paid for those - she gets paid for putting eyes on ads. Using horses.


----------



## EmberScarlet (Oct 28, 2016)

There is not much intelligent discussion to be found in this video. Your 100% right.

This is exactly the reason I usually avoid watching argumentative videos from other young people... I don't have time to be slammed by one-sided rants from kids who are too young to have experience in practical and social logic. Teens are simply incapable of forming complete, intelligent thoughts and seeing the whole picture the same as adults can. Young brains aren't developed fully.
I hardly ever see a teen make a rational argument that acknowledges both sides of the discussion fairly and with real scientific research to back. And that applies to both sides of any argument. I see it everywhere.
Occasionally I see an impressive and reasonable discussion from a young adult or teenager, but that's the exception and not the rule. 

That's just my opinion and experience on that matter. And by my own standards, even this is another one-sided teen opinion... Ironic.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

Acadianartist said:


> I don't see how this leads to intelligent discussion, therefore, I have no interest in her opinion. Period. She is very young, so can be forgiven I guess, but does not deserve my time (I only watched the first four minutes). Her opinions are vague, uneducated, and emotional.


 Unfortunately that type of overly melodramatic, opinionated and frequently uneducated ranting does seem to get a following - not all younger people either - and as long as they keep running in blinkers they're never going to really learn enough to be able to consider themselves 'well informed'


----------



## JoBlueQuarter (Jan 20, 2017)

This kid is seriously messed up... I'm not even going to comment on what she said; it's all crap.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

EmberScarlet said:


> There is not much intelligent discussion to be found in this video. Your 100% right.
> 
> This is exactly the reason I usually avoid watching argumentative videos from other young people... I don't have time to be slammed by one-sided rants from kids who are too young to have experience in practical and social logic. Teens are simply incapable of forming complete, intelligent thoughts and seeing the whole picture the same as adults can. Young brains aren't developed fully.
> I hardly ever see a teen make a rational argument that acknowledges both sides of the discussion fairly and with real scientific research to back. And that applies to both sides of any argument. I see it everywhere.
> ...


I think a lot of us would tend to agree with you @EmberScarlet, but I think there are some teens who are quite capable of having intelligent, rational thoughts so I'm glad that you acknowledge that it is possible. 

Perhaps what you are pointing out is that it has become far too easy for anyone with an opinion to spew out nonsense and get a following in our age of social media. Kids have always been immature, that's sort of the definition of immature. But no one listened to those crazy rants when I was a kid because there was no forum to post them on. Now, anyone with a big mouth can become viral. 

As a teacher of late teens/early adults, I don't see a generation of idiots, but I do see a generation of kids struggling to sift through an information overload to separate fact from opinion. The single most important thing kids need to learn today is critical thought. Forget about whether you agree or disagree with her opinions - does her line of argument hold up? Is she basing her statements on facts that are objectively verifiable? Does she take into account various sources of information generally scientifically accepted? Is she appealing to reason or to emotions? It isn't hard to pick apart someone like this. I'm sure she means well, but someone needs to sit down with her and explain the basics of debating, not to mention horsemanship, and animal husbandry.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

EmberScarlet said:


> I hardly ever see a teen make a rational argument that acknowledges both sides of the discussion fairly and with real scientific research to back.


Check out Shelby Dennis on YouTube. All of her "argumentative" videos are well put together. She'll restore your faith in young people, though I'm uncertain whether she's still a "teen".


----------



## JoBlueQuarter (Jan 20, 2017)

Acadianartist said:


> *I think a lot of us would tend to agree with you @EmberScarlet, but I think there are some teens who are quite capable of having intelligent, rational thoughts so I'm glad that you acknowledge that it is possible. *
> 
> Perhaps what you are pointing out is that it has become far too easy for anyone with an opinion to spew out nonsense and get a following in our age of social media. Kids have always been immature, that's sort of the definition of immature. But no one listened to those crazy rants when I was a kid because there was no forum to post them on. Now, anyone with a big mouth can become viral.
> 
> As a teacher of late teens/early adults, I don't see a generation of idiots, but I do see a generation of kids struggling to sift through an information overload to separate fact from opinion. The single most important thing kids need to learn today is critical thought. Forget about whether you agree or disagree with her opinions - does her line of argument hold up? Is she basing her statements on facts that are objectively verifiable? Does she take into account various sources of information generally scientifically accepted? Is she appealing to reason or to emotions? It isn't hard to pick apart someone like this. I'm sure she means well, but someone needs to sit down with her and explain the basics of debating, not to mention horsemanship, and animal husbandry.


Thank you, @Acadianartist. :lol: It's funny; sometimes I don't feel like 'a teen' just because I think (and hope) I am different than people like that girl.


----------



## EmberScarlet (Oct 28, 2016)

mmshiro said:


> Check out Shelby Dennis on YouTube. All of her "argumentative" videos are well put together. She'll restore your faith in young people, though I'm uncertain whether she's still a "teen".


She's one of the few young adults I am subscribed to on YouTube, honestly. 

On the other hand, I've seen some ADULTS make pretty immature rants about Raleigh. And that's what I'm talking about. People can be rantish on both "sides". 
I hate seeing the comments of people commenting on her (Raleigh)" horrible riding".. You shouldn't make fun of people's skills. You should encourage people to do better. Some people are mean to her just for the sake of it... :frown_color:


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Acadian, wish I could 'love' not just like your post! You hit the nails! 

Yes, so agree, critical, rational thinking is one of the most important things kids should be taught & all too often overlooked... Not just lately - current teens arent the only ones without those skills by far Ember. While kids have less life experience of course, I don't see them as at all stupid, less able in the brain dept... Or even less irrational & objective on the whole than most adults. That also much of the time haven't learned to consider stuff rationally. 

While the principal said 'they're too young for that' I was stoked that even back in grade 3(8-9yo kids) my kid's teacher said 'rubbish' & insisted on teaching them stuff like 'persuasive writing', learning about alternate points of view(fosters respect for other's views too) & what makes rational arguments(tho it made parenting harder when they practiced that on me! :lol. This year, new highschool, my youngest has just started, they are big on this - tho sadly it seems a novel thing for most kids - they even teach philosophy as one of the subjects from 7th grade up!


----------



## Foxhunter (Feb 5, 2012)

In all reality horses are not jumping any higher than they were decades ago. 

The highest jumped by horse and rider was 8' 1.25" (2.74m) way back in 1949.

Fastest US Derby time was Secretariat in 1973

Fastest Epsom Derby was Workforce 2010 2m 31.33 s. .33 seconds faster than Ocean Swell way back in 1944.

Things have changed a lot. Better understanding of the mechanics, fitness veterinary and nutrition as well as training, has given horses better lives but genetic engineering hasn't improved their ability.


----------



## boots (Jan 16, 2012)

That was kind of amusing and I'm glad she and I are not related. Then it would be less amusing.

But! Having been a very opinionated person long ago (about almost anything), I will now fall to my knees and thank the merciful Lord there was not you tube, or anything like it to record my rants.


----------



## UnhappyHacker (Dec 30, 2017)

so Ive literally watched her since I started riding and heres my thoughts. 
I don't think this has much to do with her being a youtuber as they can actually be very successful and influential but her whole black and white ideas on the horse world cause some of her fans to become literally the most ignorant riders I've met... 
I think the main issue is that the only people who actually believe her advice are beginners, and her advice WILL cause injurys, no questions asked. she literally tells people that if they wear helmets their a bad rider, and those who care about her opinion (usually beginners) may listen and put them selves at a greater risk. 
she has a lot of ignorant and wrong points from other eq youtubers, since most just parrot each other, and none of them ever share statistics or FACTS. if you want my opinion she gets all her sources from another youtuber who has a very black and white opinion on how to treat horses. 

I don't think theres any thing wrong with genetic engineering for horses. its been totally blown out of proportion, pretty much all meat we eat is gm, plants too. it could be a lot better for horses too, you could lower the chance of arthritis, hoof issues, what ever you want which I don't see as an issue.
the likely hood of the horses being born heavily mutated is actually very low but obviously she wouldn't have looked into genetic modification at all before posting. but I guess creating a healthier animal is abuse? 
I don't think some one should ever be judged by the horse they ride, as long as its healthy and sound enough, breed, size or colour a horse is a horse. gm has given us entire BREEDS of animals and they suffer less than their genetic counter parts as they are literally made to suit their function.


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

I agree with her that horses are living breathing animals with feelings and emotions. Horses speak in emotion, in my opinion. Horses have been bred to "perfection" by humanity, but humanity also has been bred to "perfection" by humanity (though sometimes I feel like we are heading toward that comedy idiocrity). I do feel like show people should consider treating horses with more empathy, especially with things like the big lick and rollkur. Whips, Spurs and bits can be objects of abuse but in the right hands can be a tool for refinement. 
My problem is a lot of people I know think if they read a book and watch a TV show (not even a tutorial like Warrick but a movie like Warhorse) they're experts. Then they get a horse and try to apply human logic to the horse and blame the horse for being a horse. I've seen barrel racers on Instagram yank on the reins and kick and spur and whip horses willing to do the thing and they do it out of ignorance... And the horse suffers. I've seen dressage people (in person) beat their horses for winning 2nd place in a show. These are a small percentage of the horse community that make the whole horse community look bad. They do it for money, they do it for fame. 

I chose to be a voice for my horse. I chose to do what I do for my horses. I'm not the best and I never will be, but I will always keep my horse in mind before acting. But I'm of the opinion that what I do with my horses is none of anyone's business unless I make it their business, and I feel the same about others. 

I feel like she has a decent message in this video. Sometimes she (to me) comes across like a mean girl. But that's the whole youtube provocative​ culture that's been popping up lately. 

But honestly I don't mind these people being provocative because if one horse is treated with more empathy because the human second guessed their methods because of a rant, she did her job. But horses are treated more humanely now than in the past. Before cars, horses were viewed like machines. They were rode hard, put away wet, never appreciated or considered. I have been reading a horse training book from 1920 and even in the last 100 years, training in most places has come to be more geared toward keeping the horse in mind, especially Warricks methods.

My 2¢


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

UnhappyHacker said:


> pretty much all meat we eat is gm, plants too. it could be a lot better for horses too, you could lower the chance of atheritis, hoof issues, what ever you want which I don't see as an issue..


This is not true, unless you confuse artificial selection with genetic modification. The meat you eat is from animals bred (the parents are selected by human beings) for human purposes. That's the exact same process as domestication and has been going on for thousands of years. 

Genetic modification, which is tinkering with a species' DNA in a lab, is a new thing. In commercial food plants, it is mainly corn and soybeans which have been so modified. Not fruits or vegetables, by and large. So far. 

Cloning is an entirely separate process from the two above. It appears that cloning of superior or desired individuals is becoming more common. As long as someone has the money and desire to do something that is humanly possible, you bet it will be done.


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

My life is mainly about attempting to find calm, ease, harmony, and joy, while hopefully contributing to the wellbeing of others and the world. Nothing that has been written about this person in this thread leads me to the conclusion that watching anything of hers will further my goals.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

EstrellaandJericho said:


> But honestly I don't mind these people being provocative because if one horse is treated with more empathy because the human second guessed their methods because of a rant, she did her job. But horses are treated more humanely now than in the past. Before cars, horses were viewed like machines. They were rode hard, put away wet, never appreciated or considered. I have been reading a horse training book from 1920 and even in the last 100 years, training in most places has come to be more geared toward keeping the horse in mind, especially Warricks methods.
> 
> My 2¢


See, that's the problem. I never said I thought cloning horses was a good idea. I'm suggesting that her rant is ineffective because of how she goes about expressing herself. Of course I didn't get very far into it before turning it off. 

I practice liberty training with my spooky, anxious mare. I ride bitless. We do clicker training too. My daughter is into show jumping, and it helps her 13 year old self get motivated about improving her riding and her relationship with her horse. I've seen her unhappy with a first place ribbon (because she was the only one in the class, and knew she hadn't done as well as she could have), and be thrilled with a fifth place (against 12 older, far more experienced riders). So it's not all about the ribbons. At my daughter's barn, I see nothing but supportive, helpful, friendly girls and healthy, happy horses that are keen on doing their job. My daughter's horse loves to jump. He's depressed when he doesn't have a job to do. Show him a jump, and he perks up, gets excited, and thinks his little 14.2 self can fly! Like people, I think horses do feel good about having a job to do. 

Horses get abused, absolutely. People can be selfish, for sure. But her rant does nothing to prevent horse abuse. Abusers will not watch her rant and suddenly see the light. They'll tune her out in a second, giving her a lot less time than I did. 

She's allowed to have an opinion, but it should be an informed opinion, and she should express it in a rational way. 

Oh, and telling people to ride without a helmet? That takes away ANY credibility she might have hoped to have had.


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

Acadianartist said:


> See, that's the problem. I never said I thought cloning horses was a good idea. I'm suggesting that her rant is ineffective because of how she goes about expressing herself. Of course I didn't get very far into it before turning it off.
> 
> I practice liberty training with my spooky, anxious mare. I ride bitless. We do clicker training too. My daughter is into show jumping, and it helps her 13 year old self get motivated about improving her riding and her relationship with her horse. I've seen her unhappy with a first place ribbon (because she was the only one in the class, and knew she hadn't done as well as she could have), and be thrilled with a fifth place (against 12 older, far more experienced riders). So it's not all about the ribbons. At my daughter's barn, I see nothing but supportive, helpful, friendly girls and healthy, happy horses that are keen on doing their job. My daughter's horse loves to jump. He's depressed when he doesn't have a job to do. Show him a jump, and he perks up, gets excited, and thinks his little 14.2 self can fly! Like people, I think horses do feel good about having a job to do.
> 
> ...


please don't take my examples as all show people are abusive, because that's not what I was saying. When most people get on their soap boxes, their message falls on deaf ears. I personally am tired of hearing about David Hoggs feelings on gun control right now (which is something I don't want to discuss but I'm using it as an example of a similar person on a soap box that can be relatable because depending on your personal opinion, his isn't informed). The rant she went on was ineffective to you, but you can't say it didn't affect some young girl we will never have the pleasure of knowing, who may be in a situation where she is being lead to believe horses have no feelings or thought. I have met trainers with the philosophy that horses were only on this Earth for their personal gain. NOT ALL TRAINERS ARE THIS WAY but to say they don't exist is just not true. Heck, there's a video out right now of a trainer who flipped a horse to it's death, and that trainer genuinely believes their method of training is effective in teaching horses to submit. Those are the trainers who look bad.

Please don't take my words and personify them. I am not attacking you as a person. I don't know you from Adam, and I am not about to pass judgement on you because you think she is a little girl ranting about something you think is stupid. I'm just providing an opinion of my own. I can agree her method and her presentation aren't to par to be taken as serious as a heart attack, but I do find some of the points she makes to be poorly delivered, but still decent points.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

Acadianartist said:


> Oh, and telling people to ride without a helmet? That takes away ANY credibility she might have hoped to have had.


Oh, careful now. You should not accept or reject an argument because X made it, and you should not accept or reject an argument regarding B because of an argument that X made regarding A. Her lack of credibility stems solely from her lack of offered evidence, both regarding A and B.


----------



## EmberScarlet (Oct 28, 2016)

mmshiro said:


> Oh, careful now. You should not accept or reject an argument because X made it, and you should not accept or reject an argument regarding B because of an argument that X made regarding A. Her lack of credibility stems solely from her lack of offered evidence, both regarding A and B.


Hmm. I half agree, half disagree... Credibility is a sort of trust, and when you give downright dangerous advice, your credibility in *certain areas* is dented. Example; she makes ridiculous claims about helmets.
In a different video, she said shoes are unimportant to riding... What do you think I'm going to expect from her in the future? I immediately have the impression she doesn't have great safety sense. I would take the rest of what she says with a grain of salt, at least safety wise. Some of that trust is gone. 

At the same time, she could be completely wrong about safety, and be 100% right about everything else (not that she is..). I can't say, "she's wrong about A because she's wrong about B, even thought they are two unrelated subjects...". So yes, just because someone is wrong about one thing, doesn't mean they are a loony. 

My 2¢.


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

I am not advocating for not wearing helmets but the argument against wearing them is you are going to take less risks not wearing a helmet over wearing a helmet. It does prevent your noggin from becoming a splattered head but it doesn't prevent your neck or spine breaking. 

I wear helmets sometimes and don't others.


----------



## EmberScarlet (Oct 28, 2016)

EstrellaandJericho said:


> I am not advocating for not wearing helmets but the argument against wearing them is you are going to take less risks not wearing a helmet over wearing a helmet. It does prevent your noggin from becoming a splattered head but it doesn't prevent your neck or spine breaking.
> 
> I wear helmets sometimes and don't others.


I'm... not sure I believe wearing a helmet makes me take more risks. Are my brain cells somehow sizzled by the helmet? News to me.
I also wear a seatbelt. It can't save all of me, should I bother wearing it? 

As someone who has personally suffered a serious motorcycle accident where a shoulder blade was broken, I can tell you I'd be DEAD right now if it weren't for my helmet (which split down the middle). And, the helmet made me no more reckless. The crash happened out of my control.

Not trying to personally attack you or be rude, but those sound like easily dispatched arguments. I am very emotional about the use of helmets, considering that have have saved countless lives, including mine.


----------



## EmberScarlet (Oct 28, 2016)

On a side note I forgot to add; I'm not going to criticize adults for not wearing a helmet. You can make that decision. I just have a problem with Raleigh's helmet opinion.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

EmberScarlet said:


> Hmm. I half agree, half disagree... Credibility is a sort of trust,


She never had any credibility to lose, because she always argues polemically and emotionally, absent any kind of evidence - be it from personal experience or, Gasp! - peer-reviewed research.

Now, if she were to make a new video based on a stack of scholarly articles combined with rich evidence from her experience dealing with hundreds of horses, that argument would have to be studied on its own merits. It would not be fair to say, "Oh, it's her again!" and dismiss her. 

(More likely it'll be, "Oh it's her again, and *again* she has no evidence but anecdotal one to back up her inflammatory claims!") 

In any case, it's more of a general sentiment. You can apply it to Clinton Anderson, for example. Listen to what he has to say about this topic or that, don't reject him - or swoon -simply based on your opinion about him from previous encounters. It leads to the polarization that we observe it contemporary American political...uhm..."culture".


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

EstrellaandJericho said:


> I am not advocating for not wearing helmets but the argument against wearing them is you are going to take less risks not wearing a helmet over wearing a helmet. It does prevent your noggin from becoming a splattered head but it doesn't prevent your neck or spine breaking.
> 
> I wear helmets sometimes and don't others.


There are *zero *real arguments for not wearing a helmet. There are those who want to feel the wind in their hair regardless of the risk. That is their prerogative. But there is no rational nor logical argument. Sorry.


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

EmberScarlet said:


> On a side note I forgot to add; I'm not going to criticize adults for not wearing a helmet. You can make that decision. I just have a problem with Raleigh's helmet opinion.


I take no offense and your argument is valid. I was in a terrible car accident and my seat belt saved my life so I am not arguing whether any person should or should not wear a helmet... I have only heard the argument and am parroting it. I feel you should know the alternate argument to be able to properly rebut it, rather than dismissing it because you were told or feel like it is an invalid argument. I don't think that you lose brain cells putting on the helmet, it's just some people might feel it's a Band-Aid to slap on your head to prevent any injury. I personally feel like most people are smarter than that, and realize that it doesn't prevent all injury. If I don't feel safe getting on Jericho I'm probably not going to get on him because it's a good idea even if I'm wearing a helmet.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Avna said:


> There are *zero *real arguments for not wearing a helmet. There are those who want to feel the wind in their hair regardless of the risk. That is their prerogative. But there is no rational nor logical argument. Sorry.


My rational & logical argument is that I didn't expect my horses to have roamed far away through the forest so didn't bring a helmet, but don't want to walk all the way back


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

loosie said:


> Avna said:
> 
> 
> > There are *zero *real arguments for not wearing a helmet. There are those who want to feel the wind in their hair regardless of the risk. That is their prerogative. But there is no rational nor logical argument. Sorry.
> ...


shame shame! :wink: /Sarcasm


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

loosie said:


> My rational & logical argument is that I didn't expect my horses to have roamed far away through the forest so didn't bring a helmet, but don't want to walk all the way back


That isn't an argument that's a circumstance. Things like that happen all the time in life, one just tries to minimize them.


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

Thing is, just because there are arguments for and against something doesn't make those arguments equal in merit. I see this mistake all the time in the media. "The controversial subject of tobacco smoking", as an example. There is no controversy whatsoever about tobacco smoking. There are just people who do it and make up rationales for why they are doing something so awful to themselves on one side, and the overwhelming tsunami of evidence on the other. 

Sometimes there are valid arguments on both sides of a question. Helmets are not in this category.


----------



## EmberScarlet (Oct 28, 2016)

EstrellaandJericho said:


> I take no offense and your argument is valid. I was in a terrible car accident and my seat belt saved my life so I am not arguing whether any person should or should not wear a helmet... I have only heard the argument and am parroting it. I feel you should know the alternate argument to be able to properly rebut it, rather than dismissing it because you were told or feel like it is an invalid argument. I don't think that you lose brain cells putting on the helmet, it's just some people might feel it's a Band-Aid to slap on your head to prevent any injury. I personally feel like most people are smarter than that, and realize that it doesn't prevent all injury. If I don't feel safe getting on Jericho I'm probably not going to get on him because it's a good idea even if I'm wearing a helmet.


Agreed. Helmets are NEVER the end-all-be-all. Accidents and injuries can still happen, for sure. One should always be logical and aware when dealing with horses. It's amazing what you can avoid.


----------



## boots (Jan 16, 2012)

Avna said:


> There are *zero *real arguments for not wearing a helmet. There are those who want to feel the wind in their hair regardless of the risk. That is their prerogative. But there is no rational nor logical argument. Sorry.


I'll disagree with you on this. 

First, I _do_ wear a helmet in all but one situation. I wear one when riding my old steady ranch horses or young stock. Those rides of an hour or two when I'll be getting off and changing horses or doing other chores.

However, I _do not_ wear one if I am going out to ride fence or irrigation ditches, or check stock in the summer. With temps near and over 100F, heat exhaustion and/or stroke is a certainty if one wears a helmet. Any helmet. If I'm going to be out for 7 to 13 hours, I'm wearing a large brimmed hat. 

Yes, I have a risk of falling and sustaining a head injury, but I avoid the other condition which can be just as harmful and will certainly happen.


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

boots said:


> I'll disagree with you on this.
> 
> First, I _do_ wear a helmet in all but one situation. I wear one when riding my old steady ranch horses or young stock. Those rides of an hour or two when I'll be getting off and changing horses or doing other chores.
> 
> ...


I think you win this one.


----------



## blue eyed pony (Jun 20, 2011)

Raleigh's been around a while now and never seems to get any more logical. You'd think by now she'd have learned. But I guess whatever gets the views and gets her paid...

On the initial topic of genetic engineering, I do think there need to be limits put in place. Removing a problematic gene from an otherwise good bloodline (HERDA from Poco Bueno lines for example) or isolating and removing the gene that causes EIPH in Thoroughbreds (because it's NOT just galloping hard, it's genetic, from a specific stallion a few centuries ago) would be of massive benefit. Engineering horses to run faster, jump higher, move flashier... no. Do that with careful, thoughtful selective breeding, like everybody who isn't a billionaire.


----------



## boots (Jan 16, 2012)

Avna said:


> I think you win this one.



:sad:

I think the ranch hand situation is unique. And I hear there are very few ranch hands or cowboys left, so most folks don't have our excuse. :smile:


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

boots said:


> :sad:
> 
> I think the ranch hand situation is unique. And I hear there are very few ranch hands or cowboys left, so most folks don't have our excuse. :smile:


I've ridden five or six hours in dang hot weather in this: 
Da Brim :: Products :: Equestrian :: Endurance

But your point still stands.


----------



## AtokaGhosthorse (Oct 17, 2016)

This girl wears me out. I've watched her a few times... and I just... I can't. She's exhausting, she's loud, she's young. Which is sad because she may have some valid points to make, but they're lost beneath the make up and profanities.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

Its a shame that she's giving young people a bad name because I'm pretty sure she'll be exactly the same person saying much the same sort of thing when she's in her 50's.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Avna said:


> There are *zero *real arguments for not wearing a helmet. There are those who want to feel the wind in their hair regardless of the risk. That is their prerogative. But there is no rational nor logical argument. Sorry.


And there are zero real arguments for not wearing a body protector. Frankly, there are zero real arguments for riding a horse for pleasure. Much safer to stay on the ground! There is no real argument for taking any risk in exchange for pleasure!

Here is something to contemplate: My rancher friend hires sheepherders who have never ridden a horse, gives them a few minutes of instruction via sign language and broken Spanish, then has them riding horses in the mountains, often alone, for 12 hours/day. In 35 years, the only injury that needing medical attention was a wrenched shoulder - bandaged and released for work in one visit.

And among the family members? *4 generations of riders have never had a head injury*. Good luck convincing them there is a reason they need to ride with helmets!

HOW and WHY one rides a horse has a huge impact on risk. I wear a helmet most of the time because I generally don't mind wearing them. You could not pay me to try jumping with a horse without one. But when we've visit my friend's ranch, even my wife and daughter skip the helmets (wife in light blue). BTW - a horse following 2,000+ sheep rarely spooks!








​ 
An Australian saddle is easier to stay in than an English one. That is at least as much a fact as the fact that helmets reduce the serious head injuries IF someone falls. But no one says all children must use Australian saddles and only switch to English after age 18! Jumping greatly increases the risk, 10-40 fold (1,000-4,000%) depending on the study. Yet few argue that no child should be allowed to learn to jump.

Bandit has become far less reactive than he used to be. This summer, I may do some desert riding in my Tilley hat instead of my helmet. If I do, my risk of head injury will still be far lower than someone in a helmet jumping a course for fun. But someone who jumps for fun will be praised as a serious rider. I'll just be 'taking unnecessary chances'...:icon_rolleyes:

Discussions of safety with horses rarely involve evidence. Or they will take one small factor - helmets, for instance - and discuss it outside of the totality of risk. A helmet reduces your risk of head injury during a fall by 80%, maybe more. But if you want to know how much it actually reduces injuries, you have to combine it with the risk of falling in the first place. 

Most of my riding involves a horse walking thru the desert. Even if he spooks, there is often no where for him to run - so he doesn't:








​
My overall risk is vastly lower than someone who rides in various horse sports. Without the context of how and where and why someone rides what sort of horse, there is no way to evaluate how much a helmet contributes to overall safety.​


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

bsms said:


> And there are zero real arguments for not wearing a body protector. Frankly, there are zero real arguments for riding a horse for pleasure. Much safer to stay on the ground! There is no real argument for taking any risk in exchange for pleasure!
> 
> Here is something to contemplate: My rancher friend hires sheepherders who have never ridden a horse, gives them a few minutes of instruction via sign language and broken Spanish, then has them riding horses in the mountains, often alone, for 12 hours/day. In 35 years, the only injury that needing medical attention was a wrenched shoulder - bandaged and released for work in one visit.
> 
> ...


Well, we've hijacked the thread. But to bring it back to a semblance of relevancy, I will make the point that the plural of anecdotes is not data. To have a discussion which can come to actual conclusions (and then why we need a discussion board at all, huh?), one would need good statistics, plus a methodology for determining what those statistics actually convey. 

Lacking the above, there are only observations. Here's one of mine: protective gear is always a choice and a tradeoff based on risk assessment. One of the difficulties in assessing risk like this, is that there are several different kinds or levels of risk. One is that cracking ribs is not the same kind of injury as brain damage. Even becoming a paraplegic is not the same as brain damage. NOTHING is the same as brain damage. That's why you can't compare body armor with a helmet in any direct way.

Obviously, slow trail riding is not the same overall level of risk as cross country jumping, in the sense of hours in the saddle per injury. But I know two people who inadvertently became cross country jumpers while on an easy trail ride, with disastrous results. That's just in my very limited personal acquaintance.

As far as what someone calls you or thinks of you, well, we know how useful a criterion for behavior that is!


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

Unfortunately many people don't realise that a helmet would have been a good idea until the day comes along when they have reason to think it would have been!!
To say that because you've been riding for X number of years without ever needing one isn't a good reason to not wear one.
I was in my 30's when it happened to me. I was an experienced rider at the peak of my ability when my horse tripped over in a patch of scrubby ground when just riding quietly home at a walk. 
Of course a helmet wouldn't have prevented any other bodily injury - who would think like that - but it would have saved me from being knocked unconscious, having a fractured skull, a scar around the side of my head as a lifelong reminder, the worst headache imaginable that lasted for days and a stay in a hospital bed I could also have done without.


----------



## Werecat (Aug 23, 2015)

Fimargue said:


> Oh lordy. :icon_rolleyes: Holier than thou...
> 
> Maybe I wouldn't like to go work, but I still have to. As well as us, the horses have their job. If I want a dog, I have a dog, but I don't get a horse just for company and to decorate the yard. The relationship is different and in my experience most horses actually like having a job and routine.
> 
> ...


These are my -exact- thoughts.

As for Raleigh, I watch her ironically. I literally listen to hear videos to get a laugh. I totally am behind exposing bad practices in industries, but the fact that her viewers are mostly children, she should really reel back on the excessive profanity and ranting, and maybe more would take her seriously. The anti-helmet thing to me is no different than telling a motorcyclist that they shouldn't bother with a helmet, because it only protects their noggin.

In working ranch situations, where heat stroke is a factor as boots pointed out, I totally understand that, and that is one of those situations where I get not wearing a helmet.

I'll admit, I've taken several trail rides without a helmet... and for the most ASSIGN reason, I was having a good hair day and didn't want to have to go to town after to run errands with helmet hair. My new solution? Wear a ball cap after haha.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

mmshiro said:


> Oh, careful now. You should not accept or reject an argument because X made it, and you should not accept or reject an argument regarding B because of an argument that X made regarding A. Her lack of credibility stems solely from her lack of offered evidence, both regarding A and B.


Wow, I see I missed a lot! 

Not to wade too deeply into the helmet debate, I think it's important to differentiate respecting people's choice not to wear a helmet (assuming they're responsible adults), and telling people not to wear helmets. While some people here have given reasons why they don't wear helmets, or don't wear them all the time, I didn't hear anyone recommending ALL riders abstain from wearing helmets. That would be crossing a pretty significant line.

So let's say I hire a new riding coach for my daughter, she comes over to my place and the first thing she tells my daughter is to remove her helmet. Do you think I will allow the lesson to proceed because maybe she's good at teaching riders to collect their horses or go over a jump? Heck no. 

While it is theoretically possible to be right about some things, and wrong about others, what I was referring to is credibility. This kid is not just choosing not to wear a helmet, but making the very dangerous recommendation to other kids that they shouldn't wear them either. To me, that destroys her credibility as someone competent to give advice. 

In my work, one of my responsibilities is that of an academic journal editor. If an article is submitted and makes excellent arguments A, B, and C, but D is completely ludicrous and demonstrably false, I cannot accept that article as is. Like it or not, the validity of arguments A, B, and C are affected by argument D. So either argument D needs to be reformulated or removed, or the article is rejected. This is how knowledge gets transmitted, or not. Sadly, there aren't any editors on Youtube.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

If one wants to wear a helmet as a magic talisman, OK. But if you know many riders who have ridden for 20-50 years without ever having a head injury, and if you know families who have gone generations riding uncounted thousands of miles without a head injury, then...yes, that is a significant data point. It indicates that wearing a helmet for THAT environment and THAT sort of riding would provide an unmeasurably small improvement to overall safety.

OTOH, those who jump regularly ARE at significant risk - and wearing a helmet will not reduce their overall risk down to the level of the riders I've mentioned.

Some studies:

"_This would be in keeping with the speculation that in horse riding accidents there are two methods of riding: either jockey style (cross country position) with the head forward, where the rider would be more likely to sustain a cervical injury accompanied inevitably by a head injury, and classical style where the head is held high and the rider would be likely to fall on to the buttocks.

Jumping is the most dangerous horse riding activity. In Australia, injury rates were found to be especially high among event riders and in the USA cross country schooling accounted for 22.5% of accidents at pony clubs. USCTA statistics16 show that most serious injuries occurred in a jumping phase. There were 12 back injuries in 1993 and seven in 1995, all occurring in cross country....

...The speed of falling is thought by many to be relevant to the likelihood of serious injury as slow falls are sometimes the worst in this respect. The proximity of other horses seems to be the major problem for jockeys as their tuck and roll technique seems to ameliorate quite a lot of injuries. Recent fatalities in eventing have nearly always been when the horse has fallen on the prone rider...._"

Spinal injuries resulting from horse riding accidents

http://www.nature.com/articles/3101280

"_*The place* where most accidents occurred was on cross country. Cross country involves jumping fixed obstacles at speed. If a horse hits one of these obstacles, either the rider or horse and rider will fall. The second most common area was either stadium or other unspecified. Warmup areas for the jumping phases were the next most likely place for an injury. *It comes as no surprise the jumping phases accounted for 86% of the injuries. Dressage accounted for only 1% and the stable area and other accounted for 12%, again indicating the surprisingly large number of unmounted injuries*_*.*"

The link no longer works, but that was from a study done of eventing in the USA around 1988. Notice a person on the ground working with horses was more likely to be injured than one riding dressage. That would be in line with my own experience. I've been slammed into the ground multiple times while dealing with upset horses with my feet on the ground, but haven't come off a horse I wasn't trying to come off.

Spinal injuries resulting from horse riding accidents

"_Injuries are an inevitable consequence of horse riding since the rider's head may be poised up to 4 m (13 feet) from the ground and the horse travels at a speed of up to 65 km/h (40 mph)....In the USA horse riding is a rare cause of spinal sporting injuries and a very rare cause of admission compared with the UK units...

...The only figures in the UK that attempt to analyze the relative risks on proper epidemiological grounds are the figures from the Jockey Club. In the United States and Australia causative factors have been identfied. NEISS figures from the USA for 1998 show most injuries occurred at home/sports, 36.9% were males, 63.1% were females. The riders 25 ± 44 years of age had a higher per cent of injuries than in 1997 and 1992 ± 1996. The United States Pony Clubs Accident report for 1999 states that cross country schooling accounted for 22.5% of accidents, a percentage that was much larger than the time and numbers involved.

In Australia injury rates were found to be especially high among event riders, with frequent falls, injuries, and even deaths. The highest injury rates were among the riders competing at the highest levels...."

_http://img2.tapuz.co.il/forums/1_100057126.pdf

Profile of horse riding injuries in adult horse riders registered with the Kwa Zulu Natal Horse Society.

"_The overall prevalence of injury was 90.3%. Muscle strains were the most common type of injury. The head was the most commonly injured site (46.4%), the lower back was the site most likely to be injured many times. Forceful falls were ranked as the most severe type of injury mechanism. *Most injuries occurred whilst jumping (63.8%).* Use of protective equipment was associated with injury prevention and protection....

...*Fildes (2007) found a fourfold greater mortality for the non-helmeted rider compared to those wearing a helmet.
*
Of all the horse riding activities, according to Silver (2002) and Paix (1999) *jumping is most likely to produce an injury, and according to Paix (1999), the cross country phase of eventing is more than 70 times as dangerous as horse riding in general*, with an overall injury rate of one per 14 hours of cross country riding....

...In a study done by Sorli (2000) to determine the demographics of hospital admissions and mortality associated with equestrian activities in the 33,000 riders in British Columbia, he found that the mean number of yearly admissions was 390, with head injury the most common cause of hospital admission (20%). [Note: 20% of 390 is 78, versus 33,000 riders]...

...Table 4.9 shows that most injuries occurred whilst jumping (63.8%) and the least occurred during flatwork (10.3%)_."

Risk management requires looking at the total picture. Someone who is likely to fall off gains greater benefit overall from someone who isn't likely to fall off. Someone who is likely to fall at high speed gains more benefit than someone whose horses are walking. How the horses are trained, how they are ridden all are part of what feeds into the risk.

VS Littauer, writing years ago about jumping, noticed the following:

"_I am also against gripping strongly with knees alone because as a result of abrupt movements of the horse which the rider has not been able to follow rhythmically *he often loses his position by pivoting on the knees, usually landing on the horse's neck or beyond.* All of us have seen this happen to such riders during unexpected refusals or irregular take-offs for the jump. Obviously, gripping with the lower thighs, knees and upper calves is stronger than with the knees alone. 

Furthermore, a strongly fixed knee interferes with the flow of the weight into the stirrups and stiffens the knee joints, thus greatly diminishing the amount of spring in the rider's body. This spring, which is rarely mentioned by other schools of forward riding is to me a very important element in a good, effortless forward seat. 

And last, but not least, I am quite certain that a hard grip stiffens a beginner and, once in the habit of being stiff, some never relax in their lives. So how am I to produce relaxed riders (not merely sitters) if my teaching from the outset is to be based on a fixed knee? Thus, with great regret, I had to reject for my work this part of the Italian method, of many principles of which I personally am so fond._ 

Common Sense Horsemanship, Chapter 5"

If someone believes wearing a helmet means they are doing their best for safety, without accounting for the totality of the riding risk environment, then a helmet becomes harmful. If a helmet is used as ONE tool of risk management, much better. But I don't know how one gets around the common experience of western trail riders, where there just are NOT very many serious head injuries. I haven't met _in person_ a single western trail rider who knows anyone who has had a significant head injury while riding horses. That does NOT make the risk "zero", but it certainly suggests the risk is far smaller than many sports riders accept every time they train.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

Just so we're clear @bsms, are you telling people they should not wear helmets? I'm just curious. It sounded to me earlier like you were expressing your personal choice, but you keep coming back to it, so maybe you're suggesting wearing helmets is a bad idea?


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

Just to add to numbers quoted above:

"Reducing Head Injuries

Sports and organizations that have adopted rules regarding helmet use have seen decreases in the number of head injuries and deaths. For example, the United States Pony Club, a youth organization, has documented a 60% decrease in head injuries after mandating that participants must have an ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) approved helmet with chinstrap fastened when mounted. Additionally, horse related deaths dropped from 4.9 per year (73% due to head injuries) to only one death caused by a vehicle collision in the three years after youth organizations and the New York State Horse Council mandated the use of ASTM/SEI (Safety Equipment Institute) certified helmets (Malavase, 1994)."

Equestrian Injury Statistics


----------



## SteadyOn (Mar 5, 2017)

I accidentally rode without my helmet yesterday. First time in eleven years (and the last time was on a vacation where they weren't an option). 

I went up to the barn wearing a snug warm hat, and I don't wear hats often. When I went to mount up, I assumed that I'd changed into my helmet because I was wearing something on my head. When I hopped off and went back into the barn, I realized I hadn't. I was pretty horrified.

Wearing a helmet doesn't make me think I have a magic feather and that I'm impervious to injury and can't be hurt. I wear a helmet because I KNOW I can be hurt. I don't jump, and I don't wear a body protector because I'm very unlikely to be involved in the type of fall where the horse is going to land on me. Also, broken ribs heal but brain damage never truly does.

I have a very strong sense of self preservation -- just not so strong that I'm willing to give up riding!


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

You guys said the anecdotal evidence wasn't good enough so she brought data. I don't think she's arguing you shouldn't wear a helmet, she is just providing what you guys asked for.


----------



## Foxhunter (Feb 5, 2012)

I know a helmet or my hunting cap have saved me from a concussion or worse many a time. 

I think riding western is less of a risk than English riding where you are jumping etc. 

Dressage riders rarely wore a helmet unless in the arena competing but rules changed and now they have to wear one when mounted. 

In the U.K. all children riding have to wear a helmet. Adults can choose. Certainly been proven to protect.


----------



## AtokaGhosthorse (Oct 17, 2016)

I know the times I've come off at horse, either at speed or not, it wasn't my head that took the brunt of the fall... it was my wrists, my neck and my back.

I'm not hollering people shouldn't wear helmets myself. That's a personal choice and one that needs to be made by the rider. But I think the elephant in the room is there's a multitude of horrific injury that can occur when riding... or falling off... a horse that a helmet will not prevent. 

Were I a jumper, not a ******* equestrian, I'd darn sure wear a helmet. But. I'd be leery of the thinking a helmet prevents concussions - if that were the case I don't think the NFL and NCAA would be so concerned with athletes that take a head injury while wearing a helmet. 

I do see Christopher Reeve's case trotted out (no pun intended) quite often by the MUST WEAR A HELMET ALWAYS crowd.

The fallacy in using his case to support the helmet argument is that his injury was a spinal injury, not a skull injury.

I do also see the argument that wearing a helmet may lead to someone feeling safer, more insulated, from injury than were they not wearing one and are therefore more likely to do silly things that can get them hurt because they think they're safe. There may be some validity to that angle, but I'm hesitant to use that as a rock solid argument to NOT wear a helmet. I think this question is like to many horse questions - there are too many variables to make it a blanket rule, across the board, to wear one or not.

(Sort like driving to the store to get groceries - I'm not using a 5 point safety harness and a helmet in my Dodge Charger. If I were in a dragster or an Indy car, I'd dang sure have a helmet on and any other safety equipment I needed for that type of driving/sport. But I don't want Indy drivers telling me to wear a driving suit, a helmet and a 5 pt harness when I'm just going to get groceries and I'm not going to argue they're silly for wearing the gear they do. LOL)


----------



## AtokaGhosthorse (Oct 17, 2016)

boots said:


> :sad:
> 
> I think the ranch hand situation is unique. And I hear there are very few ranch hands or cowboys left, so most folks don't have our excuse. :smile:


There's more than you think. We also ride for long stretches of time in high heat and humidity.

My egg would boil under a helmet. I either wear a ball cap to protect my eyes and so I don't have to wear sunglasses, or a cowboy hat, and even then my head feels like it's smoking by the time we're done.

I've also been in thick brush, had tree branches run up under my cap or hat, and rip it off my head. Don't really want to have a helmet on my head and strapped down when that happens.

That said, if I were eventing, not going on 5-10 hour rides in thick brush looking for missing cow/calf pairs, I'd be wearing one.


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

Riding a horse -- any horse, doing anything -- is inherently dangerous. If you want to take the edge off that risk by protecting the part of your body which has your mind, emotions, memory and senses in it, I'm just not sure why this is an arguable procedure. 

To me head injuries have some analogies to airplane accidents. Airplanes are a low risk way to travel, compared to cars, mile for mile. But when something does go wrong, _you fall out of the sky in a box full of screaming horror._ That's why there cannot be a direct comparison, as there can be say with motorcycles. 

I'm not afraid of breaking my wrist or cracking my tailbone, awful as that would be. However, becoming a vegetable for which my family will have to be responsible for the duration of my miserable days, that's worth avoiding by the use of a simple not particularly inconvenient device. 

We all know jumping is more dangerous than most other equestrian activities. But that isn't the point at all.


----------



## Abstang2002 (Feb 16, 2017)

I'm not into breeding enough to have an opinion on the video she is talking about. I don't think animals are machines, so I don't disagree with her on that. But this video is crap. and misrepresents the equestrian world. It makes us all look like whiney little brats just like her. Even if I disagree with most of her points, I still think her channel wouldn't be so hated if she stopped cussing everyone out for 5 seconds and turned off her whiney little brat act, and maybe, just maybe, acted mature for like 2 seconds. But all of that mixed together makes it impossible to take her seriously. Even if I disagree with someone's points, I cant deny a good argument and a well put together video, this isn't even an agreement, its an embarrassment. Its so sad that this goes on and this is what the public sees as the "Equine community"


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Acadianartist said:


> Just so we're clear @*bsms* , are you telling people they should not wear helmets? I'm just curious...so maybe you're suggesting wearing helmets is a bad idea?


Ummm...rather unlikely.








​
However, I strongly believe it is just one step in a safe approach to riding - and a very small step for many approaches to riding. I do not, in any way, believe helmets should be thought of as mandatory or as a minimum. I simply know too many people who have ridden for many decades in the wild without them and without injury. 

I think the use of helmets is grossly overrated. There are many things that can have a much greater impact for safety, including how you handle a horse, the type of saddle you use, the construction of the saddle, etc. For example, in the picture above, I'm using sheepskin on my slick-seat, slick-fork saddle. The small sheepskin made it more secure and the larger style sheepskin even more so.

However, I've recently been riding a cordura nylon Abetta - and it feels MUCH easier to stick on a bouncy horse than even the sheepskin-covered saddle. As in...safer. That doesn't mean I'll never ride a slick-seat saddle again, but I'll be accepting more risk when I do so.

This picture comes from a Jane Savoie book:








​ 
Notice she considers G to be unbalanced. But if G's horses spooks hard, the rider's momentum will turn G into E. It would turn balanced rider E into H - and H is at serious risk of falling on her head. "G" is not unbalanced, but rather a good defensive approach. Yet too many teach "E" as essential to good riding!

Too many people seem to think, "_I'm wearing a helmet, that is all I need to do!_" But safety in horses is much more complex, and a trail rider can easily be safer without a helmet than a jumper with one. In fact, a trail rider may have very little improvement in safety from using a helmet - almost unmeasurably so. 

"Airplanes are a low risk way to travel, compared to cars, mile for mile. But when something does go wrong, _you fall out of the sky in a box full of screaming horror."

_Well, I spent a good part of my adult life strapping into ejection seats. But yeah - I'm much safer helmetless in a commercial airliner than I am wearing a helmet on a motorcycle. That IS a fact!


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

I have never met any adult rider of even slight experience who thought that as long as they wore a helmet they didn't have to do anything else to keep themselves safe. This is a straw man argument. Maybe some tourist in a dude string, wearing thongs and shorts BUT has that required helmet on. 

There's a whole raft of things one should be continually doing, from reading your horse and staying alert to wearing the right kind of shoes to checking your gear over before mounting up to not letting training slide. Any serious rider knows this. 

I also want to point out that riding unbalanced into a spook doesn't put you into a balanced position unless the horse spooks itself to be underneath where you ought to have been. My horse never does seem to spook that way.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

Avna said:


> Riding a horse -- any horse, doing anything -- is inherently dangerous. If you want to take the edge off that risk by protecting the part of your body which has your mind, emotions, memory and senses in it, I'm just not sure why this is an arguable procedure.


Thank you. I'm done arguing it, personally.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

bsms said:


> Too many people seem to think, "_I'm wearing a helmet, that is all I need to do!_" But safety in horses is much more complex, and a trail rider can easily be safer without a helmet than a jumper with one. In fact, a trail rider may have very little improvement in safety from using a helmet - almost unmeasurably so.


Ok, after this I'm done :icon_rolleyes:

I'm glad to hear you are not suggesting that others shouldn't wear helmets @bsms. But I struggle with the logic you propose above. In your mind, helmets = some mental invincibility shield apparently. Also, that trail riders need not bother wearing helmets since only jumpers can crack their skulls. Hmmmm, really? Funny, my mare spooked last summer on a trail and I got a concussion. Must have been because I was wearing that stupid helmet! duh!


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

bsms said:


> Notice she considers G to be unbalanced. But if G's horses spooks hard, the rider's momentum will turn G into E. It would turn balanced rider E into H - and H is at serious risk of falling on her head. "G" is not unbalanced, but rather a good defensive approach. Yet too many teach "E" as essential to good riding!


Yup, G is _unbalanced_ because the rider is committed to a center of gravity behind the legs, and it takes more than a mere split second to shift that center of gravity to offset acceleration in an unexpected and unpredicted direction. "Balanced" means "neutral" or "unbiased". 

If I had sat in "G" when my horse spun 180º and bolted would have caused me to rip into her face at best, and end up behind saddle (and ultimately behind horse) at worst. Instead, I merely lost a stirrup but didn't use the reins until I was in control of my body. 

Even _when_ I'm balanced (as in the picture), a swift departure of my horse, even an anticipated one, can leave me "behind" unless I grab some mane. Settling into a chair position and being generally relaxed would be a recipe for my _walking_ home more often than not, even absent a spook.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

mmshiro said:


> Yup, G is _unbalanced_ because the rider is committed to a center of gravity behind the legs, and it takes more than a mere split second to shift that center of gravity to offset acceleration in an unexpected and unpredicted direction. "Balanced" means "neutral" or "unbiased".
> 
> If I had sat in "G" when my horse spun 180º and bolted would have caused me to rip into her face at best, and end up behind saddle (and ultimately behind horse) at worst...


Writing as someone who has OFTEN had his horse spook HARD while riding in "G" - you are wrong. There is a reason the old cowboys rode that way.

When your center of gravity is behind your stirrups, and your horse slams on the brakes and/or drops the shoulder into a violent turn, you are pre-positioned to have your weight driven into the stirrups. Your shoulders come forward because, as you say, " it takes more than a mere split second to [consciously] shift that center of gravity"- and when your shoulders come forward, you now are balanced over your stirrups instead of in front of them.

I've been in "G" for many 180 "turn & burn" maneuvers, and NEVER ripped my horse's face. Every once in a while, the theories of riding need to be tested against reality.

This sequence was taken from a video of a spook. The too short base of support at the beginning had its predictable result in the fraction of a second of the spook:










When Larry Trocha was asked why he didn't teach a classical seat for cutting, he replied that he wanted his students to stay on...






I got my start by reading VS Littauer, but this painting from the early 1800s showed English riders riding defensively - as they ought to for that environment:








​
Position "G" is a good defensive position. If the horse slips, stumbles, reverse course, etc, the rider's weight MUST come forward - but with G, a shift forward merely puts you into the stirrups.

"I also want to point out that riding unbalanced into a spook doesn't put you into a balanced position unless the horse spooks itself to be underneath where you ought to have been. My horse never does seem to spook that way." - @Avna

Mine do the "OMG Crouch", spreading their front legs and dropping in the front. Or drop a shoulder and spin 180. Or drop and shift sideways. Or throw it in reverse. All of those moves result in the horse moving in some degree toward the rear. After all, they usually want to avoid something ahead of them. And if I'm a little to the rear, and they shift to the rear, they DO shift under me.

If y'all are falling off and hurting yourself, then maybe you need to rethink your riding position. Because what you are doing apparently is not working as well as what the untrained and untaught sheepherders are doing.Instead of thinking, "I'd better wear a helmet for when I fall", maybe you should try to stop falling so often.

"_Settling into a chair position and being generally relaxed would be a recipe for my walking home more often than not, even absent a spook_." - @mmshiro






































​
I doubt old cowboys rode that way because they didn't mind walking home on their own. I suspect it simply worked for them, as it has for me.

PS - I have no idea what the exclamation mark is at the top of my post. Maybe the forum software is flagging it as bogus thought...​


----------



## JoBlueQuarter (Jan 20, 2017)

@bsms - I've been looking at the examples you've shown and I see a difference in the 'cowboy seat' and figure "G". When you look at "G" you can tell that the person is off-balance and that a spook would unseat him/her. He/she is leaning slightly forward and looks off.

The 'cowboy seat', however, _is_ balanced. The feet are further forward, partly due to the long stirrups, but he's sitting back into the saddle and is sitting straight and balanced. I'm not sure how to explain it, but when you look at "G" and the 'cowboy seat' pics side-by-side you can see a difference.


----------



## AtokaGhosthorse (Oct 17, 2016)

It's the shoulder position that's different. The shoulders aren't lined up with the hips in G and that's where the imbalance is going to get the rider in trouble. The cowboy pictures all show people with their shoulder in line with their hips. Ideally, the heels should be down and yes, lined up with the hips unless engaged for some reason, like the cutting photo. That guy is pushing back in the stirrups as the horse maneuvers. I'm sure if we saw the very next 'frame', his heel position would be different depending on what the horse is doing.


----------



## Cherrij (Jan 30, 2013)

Honestly, who can listen to all that? I get bored and annoyed with long videos staring at a face... 

I hate extremists who claim everyone does wrong. Comon. There are plenty of people who do good. Who do their best and share it with others. 

Whilst I might agree that the sport horse lacks real horse in him, he has been made in to a sports equipment, there are few who are changing that too. We all know that fancy sport horses at hight levels usually live in their stables most of the day with strict exercise routines.. 
Well, we also know that Valegro (Olympic champ in dressage for those who don't know) lives in pastures a lot.. he lives almost like a horse.. 

And there are plenty of people who don't care about medals and ribbons and their horses have better lives than they would have in the wild, because they are safe and fed and taken care of!!! Ok, there are those who don't fulfill their duty to the animal, but the same happens everywhere to anything - some people have too many cows and can't feed them, some forget to feed their dogs, some even don't feed their kids... that's just special kind of people.


----------



## Cherrij (Jan 30, 2013)

@bsms - The position, well, the G position might work for cowboys. 

I used to ride similar to that.. off balance, chair seat.. When horses did all kinds of things I kissed the ground. Wasn't too often when horses did that kind of things, but it happened enough. 

Since I learned a balanced seat, and the importance of actually having your legs shorter for trail rides and extreme activities, I haven't fallen. And horses have done crazy things.. and I have lost stirrups at fast canter in 2 point and found them. And even when I was on the route of sitting this balanced as I do now, I survived crazy rodeos on 2 horses who really wanted to get rid of me.. 

I know I am no cowboy, I know I haven't ridden 500 horses, but in my statistics it's better for me to sit balanced like E and survive, even though I do admit that at few times when needed legs push into stirrups and they go forward...


----------



## Foxhunter (Feb 5, 2012)

Two serious falls I have seen have happened on the road just walking along. In one instance the rider died as a result of a head injury and she was wearing a hunting cap, the horse slipped and went down onto his side and she hit the side of her head on the tarmac. Another was a wannabe dressage rider no hat, fell and hit her head resulting in death. 

I always rode wearing a hat. I remember once riding out in a woollen hat, it was cold and I hadn't changed it. The school bus passed me and boy, did I get some stick from my pupils on that bus! They were so cross with me it was unbelievable. 

A western saddle is easier to stay on than an English. Ask a western rider what the horn is for and they will say for roping, rubbish, it is a wonderful grab handle!


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

Foxhunter said:


> Two serious falls I have seen have happened on the road just walking along.


I'm not surprised. You can die even from a standstill, standing on your own feet: see "one-punch homicides". It's not the punch that kills you, it's passing out and being unable to protect your head. Add to that the height from which you drop when riding...


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

bsms said:


> "_Settling into a chair position and being generally relaxed would be a recipe for my walking home more often than not, even absent a spook_." - @mmshiro
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Only Image 4 sits in a position as in "G", and he'll fall over backwards if his horse takes off in a hurry because he's pressing himself backwards using the stirrups. Despite having been photographed, he needs lessons. 

All the others have a pretty decent alignment of shoulder-hip-almost heel, *not at all* what is illustrated in "G". Those photographs offer no support for "G". Though I must say that posting the trot will be very hard for most of them. Image 1 and 3 are almost perfect. Image 2 sits on a sleeping horse, so he offers no evidence for proper riding position.


----------



## Foxhunter (Feb 5, 2012)

Obviously the shoulder hip knee in alignment is correct and way the best however many times I have shoved my feet forward and taken the backward seat as this is safer especially on a bucking horse or one coming down from a big fence into mud.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

bsms said:


> If y'all are falling off and hurting yourself, then maybe you need to rethink your riding position. Because what you are doing apparently is not working as well as what the untrained and untaught sheepherders are doing.Instead of thinking, "I'd better wear a helmet for when I fall", maybe you should try to stop falling so often.


Brilliant advice! You should write a book about it. You could call it "Why helmets kill" and subtitle it "Just don't fall!" In fact, make it a whole series. You could write one about how lifejackets cause drownings, how seat belts cause people to die in car crashes, and how fire alarms cause fiery infernos. 

I can't believe we're still talking about this...


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

Acadianartist said:


> bsms said:
> 
> 
> > If y'all are falling off and hurting yourself, then maybe you need to rethink your riding position. Because what you are doing apparently is not working as well as what the untrained and untaught sheepherders are doing.Instead of thinking, "I'd better wear a helmet for when I fall", maybe you should try to stop falling so often.
> ...


how about common sense horsemanship. We can start out by saying "helmets protect your head but not your neck, shoulders, thumbs, and the rest of your body. So whether or not you wear a helmet is up to you, but don't think the only thing to save you when you take a fall."

I can understand you are passionate, especially about safety, and especially about children thinking it would be ok to not wear a helmet, but I think the only person being hostile in this debate is you. This was an unnecessary jab, and is honestly no better than the young lady who we originally were talking about.


----------



## JoBlueQuarter (Jan 20, 2017)

AtokaGhosthorse said:


> It's the shoulder position that's different. The shoulders aren't lined up with the hips in G and that's where the imbalance is going to get the rider in trouble. The cowboy pictures all show people with their shoulder in line with their hips. Ideally, the heels should be down and yes, lined up with the hips unless engaged for some reason, like the cutting photo. That guy is pushing back in the stirrups as the horse maneuvers. I'm sure if we saw the very next 'frame', his heel position would be different depending on what the horse is doing.


Exactly!

We're very off-topic, btw


----------



## Foxhunter (Feb 5, 2012)

Sheep herding is done at a slow pace, probably the fastest is a jog trot. There is no cutting a stray back because, sheep being sheep, a breakaway will soon run back to the flock. 

I have probably fallen off more than most, should I have looked at the way I rode or stuck to the well broke horse? What about all the remedials I sorted so they could live a good productive life rather than hanging from a hook? 

One nasty fall I had was when two of us were walking home. The horse I was on gave the impression he was a bully but he was always last in pecking order. Both of us were walking on a long rein, I had my feet out the stirrups, Mick made a face at Charlie who made a face back, there was no contact between them. Mick leapt sideways crossed his legs against the bank and went down head first. 
I was propelled out the saddle landing straight on the top of my head on the road. I flipped onto my back with the fall. Mick did his best not to stand on me as he regained his feet and he all but missed me just catching me with a back foot brushing across my face. 

I honestly felt as if my ears were driven down into my armpits! Busted nose, cut across the eyebrow and in need of a new helmet. Had I not been wearing one goodness knows what the outcome would have been.


----------



## Werecat (Aug 23, 2015)

Foxhunter said:


> Two serious falls I have seen have happened on the road just walking along. In one instance the rider died as a result of a head injury and she was wearing a hunting cap, the horse slipped and went down onto his side and she hit the side of her head on the tarmac. Another was a wannabe dressage rider no hat, fell and hit her head resulting in death.
> 
> I always rode wearing a hat. I remember once riding out in a woollen hat, it was cold and I hadn't changed it. The school bus passed me and boy, did I get some stick from my pupils on that bus! They were so cross with me it was unbelievable.
> 
> A western saddle is easier to stay on than an English. Ask a western rider what the horn is for and they will say for roping, rubbish, it is a wonderful grab handle!


That is so scary, but drives home how freak accidents happen resulting in death, and to try to take every precaution you can.

Aha, yes the horn can be a save, as well as the pommel swells make it a little harder to go over the horse's head. I've recently switched to an English type saddle for trail riding, and the lack of swells does make me feel like I can fly over his head easier haha! I do have a grab strap though.

However, on the flip side I have heard of riders getting severely injured by saddle horns.


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

I love discussions like this! (I'm glad we are doing position /helmet discussions, rather than talking about some girl's rant. I detest rants, especially by folks too young to be telling others their business. ok, MY rant is over . . . )

anyway, 
the big difference between how the cutting hrose riders work, and the position illustrated and called 'G" 











If that the rider in G has her foot totally braced FORWARD into the stirrup, and to do that, she probably has a rigidly locked knee. That means so much of her weight is down, pushed hard against that stirrup, FORWARD of her center of gravity, that when the horse props, she will be projected forward, with her stirrup being the pivot point. If she grips hard with the knee, it can become a pivot point. 

You watch that cutting rider. His knees are soft, and his feet ar IN the stirrips, but never pushing it hard foward. His weight is in the SADDLE, and he leans forward and stays soft in his waist and shoulders, absorbing this movement. 

a limp rag cannot be projectiled, but a stiff stick can!


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

Acadianartist said:


> Brilliant advice! You should write a book about it. You could call it "Why helmets kill" and subtitle it "Just don't fall!" In fact, make it a whole series. You could write one about how lifejackets cause drownings, how seat belts cause people to die in car crashes, and how fire alarms cause fiery infernos.
> 
> I can't believe we're still talking about this...


Or a chapter on why a sheepskin seat saver is as good a safety device as a helmet......


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

thread temporarily closed for moderator review


MOD NOTE:


After some discussion, the mods are reopening this thread.

All I can say is . . . * be nice to each other. We are 'family'.*


----------

