SCIENCE

A Reply to Response to Comments on ‘Noseband type and tightness level affect pressure on the horse’s face at trot’

A Reply to Response to Comments on ‘Noseband type and tightness level affect pressure on the horse’s face at trot’

This letter, declined by the Equine Veterinary Journal, responds to MacKechnie-Guire et al.’s defence of their noseband pressure study. It clarifies key methodological and interpretive issues that remain unresolved and highlights why transparent discussion is vital to the integrity of equine welfare science.

A Reply to Response to Comments on ‘Facial pressure beneath a cavesson noseband adjusted to different tightness levels during standing and chewing”

A Reply to Response to Comments on ‘Facial pressure beneath a cavesson noseband adjusted to different tightness levels during standing and chewing”

In academic publishing, critique and reply are essential to scientific progress. This letter—declined by the Equine Veterinary Journal—is published here to complete the public record. It clarifies key methodological issues in a study of noseband pressures and highlights the importance of open discourse for equine welfare policy.

The Perfect Bit for your Horse

The Perfect Bit for your Horse

Emeritus Professor David Mellor—architect of the Five Domains Model—explores the biological and behavioural evidence showing that all bits, regardless of design, cause mouth pain. Drawing on decades of welfare science, he argues that the perfect bit is the one never placed in a horse’s mouth.

The Mouth-Iron-Free Solution for Sudden Death in the Racehorse

The Mouth-Iron-Free Solution for Sudden Death in the Racehorse

In this final paper, the late Dr Robert Cook reviews decades of anatomical, physiological, and behavioural research showing how bits cause pain, breathing restriction, and performance loss in horses. He argues that allowing bit-free options across all disciplines would improve welfare, enhance safety, and restore public trust in equestrian sport.

  • Your cart is empty.