Barbaro euthanatized

The Thoroughbred race horse which broke its leg running the Preakness eight months ago was put down today due to continued complications and poor quality of life. Barbaro broke 3 bones in his right hind leg into about 27 fragments. Repeated surgical repairs left him with a deformed leg which wore a cast or a splint. His left hind leg foundered from supporting his weight. After an additional surgical procedure to attempt to help his right hind leg, the veterinarians and owners decided to euthanize the stallion because they felt his quality of life was deteriorating and would not return to an acceptable level.

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/

http://www.vet.upenn.edu/newsandevents/news/Barbaro.htm

http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/16572920.htm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16846723/

What great comedic value. Beating a dead horse, glue, and shot because of a broken leg is really all you can come up with? Terribly creative. And heartwarming.

As for posting several links, I generally think it's useful to get one's news from a variety of sources, and wanted to give people their choice of venues, not just a single news outlet or only the hospital's press releases.

It may not mean much to many Chewers, but it's big news in the horse industry and veterinary community.

Successful correction of his extremely shattered leg was and is a major medical feat. The two major neurovascular bundles to the leg cross those shattered fragments, mere millimeters away, and if they had been severed, the leg would have been lost due to lack of nerve and blood supply. It was an amazing coincidence of circumstance that allowed a horse with that severe of injury to maintain the neurovascular supply and survive any length of time, and this one was fortunate enough to get immediate splinting and transport to one of the worlds' foremost veterinary hospitals for horses. His owners (despite their ability to receive millions in insurance if they put him down right away) chose to invest tens of thousands of dollars in treatment in the hope of returning him to comfort and making him pasture-sound.





Also, press conference with Dr. Richardson, the primary clinician on the case.

You might want to educate yourself before you comment.

He cannot be used to sire offspring, or at least any offspring he might sire could not be registered or raced with the Jockey Club, as they only accept live cover breedings.

Also, as for him receiving excellent medical care while people go uninsured:
Barbaro's owners spent their money on Barbaro. Many other people also donated to UPenn to assist in research to learn more about resolving important diseases of the horse. Whether you agree with their choices on how to spend their money (be it in this choice or what car they drive or whatever), this is a free country in which people can spend their money on that which they choose.
Certainly, rational people can disagree on the best use of limited resources (including but not limited to health care for the under/uninsured, feeding the hungry, research to solve disease, providing food and economic aid to underdeveloped and impoverished countries, solving mental illness and addiction [including comprehensive reform of handling of criminals and the homeless], reducing the spread of important preventable diseases, etc.), but would two wrongs make a right?

Where would you draw a line that is "too much" medical care for an animal? Vaccines? Spays and castrations ("neutering")? Antibiotics for infections? Pain relievers? Fixing a dog's broken rib? leg? A horse's? We kill 10-15 MILLION dogs and cats every year (yes, that's between 30 and 40 thousand animals a DAY) in this country purely due to overpopulation, because the average American allows their pet to have a litter or run loose without being neutered first. There are lots of things about the treatment of animals I'd like to change, but I'd definitely hesitate to say the average person spends too much or does too good a job of caring for their animals.

Oh, and by the way, many countries still use equines as an important part of their economies, and strides in improving the health and welfare of the horse can improve the economies of second and third world countries.

That is a comment to address to the people who spent their money on Barbaro. Although the chance of any horse surviving a shattered leg is slim, Barbaro was one of the few that actually could have made it. The more we learn the more likely it is that we can provide better care for any and all horses not just with broken bones but with the complications he experienced (support limb laminitis is a significant one). As an equine veterinarian, I do struggle with the desire to advance medical knowledge of horses so that we can fix them all, and the desire to also provide all the other things the world needs (perhaps more than they need healthy horses).

As I said previously, reasonable people can differ on their priorities for how to spend their time and effort in the division and provision of limited resources to a wide array of good causes.


Actually, he would likely have had equal if not worse complications from amputation. Horses must be able to bear weight evenly on all four limbs or else their other legs break down and then they are left "without a leg to stand on" as it were. To my knowledge there are only a few successful horse amputees in existance. (One is Barnaby in England, here are others) Here is a paper on amputation in the horse (pdf).

Right now, in fact, there is a horse who is currently undergoing the initial phases of recovery after amputation in Argentina (by Dr. Carlos Espinosa). I believe it to be the first equine amputee in that country. The horse is doing relatively well at this point, but it's still very early on.

Not a problem; I spend most of my days educating people about horses. Most people don't know that a horse laying down is a bit like a beached whale. They aren't designed for that, and they can't do it for long. Normally they have all their 1100 pounds focused on four feet, for a total of perhaps 100 square inches of weight bearing surface. Loosing one foot really wrecks them as that increases the amount of weight on the opposite leg disproportionately and they can't handle that much weight on one leg for long.