25/05/2026
Well written explanation to the questions being asked 👏 ❤️ I'm honestly proud to be part of such a wonderful team.
Garry Hinton, Academic Director, HM International School of Horse & Hoof Care - addresses some of the concerns that have been raised online regarding HM.
——————
Over the last week, HM have deliberately stayed focused on what we have always done - supporting owners, students, professionals, and, most importantly, horses.
However, because of the volume of misinformation, outrage, and speculation currently circulating online, I feel it is important to address a number of claims directly and calmly.
Before people continue to sharpen pitchforks on social media, perhaps it is time to pick up cameras, x-rays, measurements, and evidence instead.
1. HM has never been banned anywhere in the world.
Neither HM, Lindsay, nor myself have ever been banned from Germany or any other country. The document currently circulating online was sent to a horse owner in Germany who was independently rehabbing her horses. Importantly, the document itself acknowledged that the horses appeared clinically well at that stage, but expressed concern about the long-term implications of distorted hoof capsules.
At no point did the vets involved contact us directly, request information from us, or seek clarification regarding the rehabilitation process. They instead relied on assumptions formed from outdated online material.
The owner in question had never undertaken formal HM training, had never completed HM courses, and had never received direct personal support from us. In other words, this was not an HM-managed rehabilitation case.
Despite the online narrative, HM were never served with court orders, never prohibited from teaching, and never banned from holding seminars in Germany. In fact, shortly afterwards, we conducted a well-attended 3-day workshop in Germany, with a welfare vet present throughout, and we are returning again this September.
2. Claims regarding horses being euthanised due to HM practices.
These accusations are deeply serious, and we do not take them lightly.
From all the information and communication we have across our students, trimmers, professionals, and rehabilitation cases, we are not aware of horses being euthanised as a result of HM rehabilitation protocols.
The reality is that many owners find us when they are already at the final stages of desperation, after months or years of failed interventions elsewhere. Some horses are already suffering severe pathology by the time we become involved. We do everything we can to help, but not every case can be saved.
What we do maintain is extensive photographic records, measurements, videos, correspondence, and, where possible, serial radiographs. We document our cases carefully and transparently.
3. HM is not a “method.”
HM and The Phoenix Way are not based on subjective interpretation of the hoof. We are focused on teaching owners and professionals to recognise and respect internal anatomical relationships, species-appropriate management, and biological balance.
Methods rely on opinion. We rely on observable anatomy and measurable consistency.
4. The “long toe” criticism.
The distorted toes that attract so much criticism online are not something we celebrate, they are evidence of pre-existing pathology growing out through rehabilitation.
The horses arriving to us commonly present with stretched and torn laminae, compromised sole depth, elevated heels, distorted capsules, and, in many cases, pathology within P3 itself. Those distortions were not created during rehabilitation, they existed before rehabilitation began.
Healing damaged laminae and restoring internal balance is a process. The distorted capsule must grow out over time while correct proportions are gradually restored.
Because critics continue to claim that these feet must inevitably damage soft tissues, we have recently invested heavily in ultrasound investigations to monitor those structures throughout rehabilitation. Thus far, we have not identified evidence supporting those claims. What we are consistently observing instead is horses becoming progressively more comfortable and functional as dorsopalmar balance improves and vertical toe depth is restored.
5. Why we publish sequential radiographs.
Some of our critics have dismissed our monthly radiographs as “worthless.” We fundamentally disagree.
Sequential radiographs are one of the few ways to document changes inside the hoof capsule over time. Most importantly, we do not wait until a horse looks “perfect” before sharing the data. We show the process as it happens, including the difficult stages.
If we lacked confidence in what we are observing, we would simply publish polished “before and after” photographs once rehabilitation was complete. Instead, we openly document the progression month by month, because transparency matters.
6. Research and p*er review.
We are actively compiling longitudinal case studies and data for formal write-up and future scrutiny.
Our working hypothesis is that chronic hoof capsule imbalance and divergence play a major role in the tearing of the laminae and the pathology currently labelled under the broad umbrella of “laminitis.”
We fully expect our conclusions to be challenged and scrutinised, and they should be.
Scientific progress requires open examination, not social media hysteria.
7. The accusation that HM is abusive or cult-like.
This narrative is both painful and profoundly inaccurate.
Those who actually know HM, privately and publicly, know that our community is supportive, compassionate, educational, and deeply committed to horse welfare.
What we will not do is endlessly host hostile arguments on our pages from people whose sole intention is disruption or personal attack. We moderate our spaces accordingly.
Lindsay and I have both openly acknowledged that, years ago, we followed many of the same mainstream approaches promoted throughout the industry today. We changed because we observed biological consequences that we could no longer ignore.
It is also important to recognise that the owners who come to HM are not naïve or vulnerable people looking to blindly follow someone. They are often intelligent, thoughtful horse owners who have already tried multiple mainstream approaches, sometimes over many years, before seeking alternative answers. Many arrive after feeling repeatedly failed by existing systems, and some have heartbreakingly lost horses or donkeys despite doing everything they were advised to do. To dismiss these people as somehow manipulated or incapable of critical thought is not only insulting to HM, but also deeply disrespectful to a wider community of caring horse owners who are simply trying to prevent further suffering and loss.
Disagreement is acceptable. Abuse, baiting, and personal attacks are not.
Importantly, while many online discussions about HM have become deeply personal, we do not spend our time targeting individuals across the internet. We defend our work, our observations, and our right to respond, but personal destruction is not our ethos.
Lindsay nor me, send anonymous letters, emails or messages, that is simply not how we operate. If we ever have anything to say, we sign it.
8. Evidence and scrutiny.
HM is probably one of the most scrutinised organisations in modern hoof care, and despite that, we continue to produce sequential data publicly.
The equine industry has historically lacked meaningful longitudinal documentation showing how trimming practices alter hoof capsule morphology over time. That gap in evidence matters.
When we ask for evidence demonstrating healthy, balanced hoof capsules suddenly “failing due to diet alone,” we are not mocking anyone. We are asking legitimate scientific questions that deserve proper investigation.
This industry cannot evolve if uncomfortable questions are treated as hearsay, or mocked by the very industry perpetuating some of these issues (however unintentionally).
9. Diet and laminitis.
We have not abandoned the importance of diet. Nutrition remains critical to equine health.
What has changed is our understanding of what initiates many cases of hoof capsule divergence and laminar pathology.
As we continue analysing radiographs, hoof morphology, and rehabilitation progressions, we are increasingly observing that distortion and imbalance within the hoof capsule appear to precede, and potentially initiate, the tearing previously attributed almost exclusively to dietary causes.
That observation requires further study, not outrage.
If we continue treating every case exclusively through a laminae-centric or pharmaceutical lens, while ignoring long-term mechanical imbalance within the hoof capsule itself, we risk missing critical pieces of the puzzle.
10. “HM only show successes.”
This accusation is categorically untrue.
Anyone who spends time inside TPW will see owners openly discussing both the successes and the very real challenges involved in rehabilitation. Rehab is not a polished before-and-after fairy tale. It is often messy, emotional, slow, and complex, especially when horses arrive with years of pre-existing pathology.
At GTL, where we are conducting structured case study research, we are selective about the horses we take on. We will not knowingly accept horses where we feel there is no realistic prospect of achieving meaningful comfort or future soundness, not because of rehabilitation itself, but because of the severity of damage already present when the horse arrives.
That said, some horses do arrive with permanent structural damage. Not every horse will grow a textbook-perfect hoof capsule again. However, those horses are carefully monitored throughout rehabilitation, and at no point would we knowingly allow suffering to continue unchecked. If we believed a horse’s welfare was compromised beyond what was acceptable, appropriate action would be taken immediately.
No horse is denied pain relief. However, it is also no secret that, during our rehabilitation case studies, horses are frequently reduced off or removed from metabolism-calming medications either immediately or shortly after rehabilitation begins. This is done under veterinary oversight and careful monitoring. If at any point we believed medication was still necessary for welfare, those horses would absolutely be returned to it.
We also undertake regular blood panel monitoring on horses at GTL throughout rehabilitation. Thus far, we have not identified bloodwork patterns that correlate with worsening rehabilitation outcomes or ongoing laminar collapse.
What we are consistently observing is a general reduction in insulin levels as rehabilitation progresses. Some horses maintain very stable insulin levels, while others fluctuate over time. Importantly, even among horses whose insulin values occasionally sit above the traditionally cited “safe zones” promoted within some laminitis research models, we are not observing the catastrophic clinical deterioration those models would predict.
These horses are remaining comfortable, functional, and importantly, are not demonstrating ongoing laminar collapse during rehabilitation.
That does not mean insulin is irrelevant. It means the real-world clinical picture appears to be significantly more complex than the current narrative often presented online.
11. “It’s the track system fixing the horses, not the trim.”
This argument makes very little biological sense.
Are critics genuinely suggesting that if distorted, imbalanced hoof capsules were simply left untouched, then movement and improved management alone would somehow restore internal hoof balance and repair the pathology?
That is not an experiment we are willing to conduct on compromised horses.
Movement, environment, diet, and management are absolutely important, we have never denied that. But balanced trimming matters enormously because the hoof capsule itself directly influences loading, mechanics, internal stresses, and how the horse functions.
Importantly, because this criticism has become so widespread, we have actively followed horses who are not maintained on track systems 24/7 and who also have controlled grass access. So far, our observations suggest that where hoof balance is maintained appropriately, we are not seeing the catastrophic hoof deterioration critics continue to predict.
Again, this is precisely why ongoing observation and longitudinal data collection matter.
12. “HM experiment on horses and allow suffering.”
No. Absolutely not.
Our entire ethos is centred around improving horse comfort through restoring balance to the hoof capsule and respecting internal anatomy.
The suggestion that we deliberately allow suffering is profoundly upsetting to those of us involved in these rehabilitations daily.
What is true is that many horses arrive to us with severe pathology already present, including significant P3 damage and osteonecrosis. We did not create that pathology.
What we are finding, through careful radiographic monitoring, is that in some osteonecrotic cases, mild degeneration can continue for a period even after balanced rehabilitation begins. Importantly, this does not appear to correlate with worsening comfort levels in the horse itself. In many cases, horses become more functional and comfortable despite the pre-existing pathology still stabilising internally.
We monitor these cases extremely closely taking different radiographic views. If we believed rehabilitation was causing suffering or deterioration, we would stop.
13. Cadaver limb transport and workshop standards.
There has also been misinformation spread regarding our cadaver workshops and transportation procedures.
Following similar online accusations many years ago, HM worked directly with Trading Standards and DEFRA in the UK and received formal permission to responsibly transport cadaver limbs for educational purposes.
The limbs are sourced professionally through suppliers who also provide the veterinary industry. We do not solicit body parts from random owners or handle these materials irresponsibly.
The limbs are transported frozen, securely contained and locked during transport in accordance with guidance provided to us. The “blood leaking from bins” narrative currently circulating online is entirely false. What people are seeing is condensation moisture resulting from frozen limbs thawing during transportation, not blood leakage.
We take these educational workshops seriously because understanding internal anatomy matters. Our standards surrounding sourcing, transport, handling, and respect for these specimens are extremely high.
14. Misinterpretation of rehabilitation protocols.
Another issue that needs clarifying is that not everybody discussing or attempting “HM rehabilitation” has been formally trained, licensed, mentored, or assessed by HM.
Like any educational organisation, we have qualified professionals, students at varying stages of learning, owners undertaking guided rehabilitation, and individuals attempting to replicate aspects of rehabilitation independently based only on public material or partial understanding.
Rehabilitation of severely compromised hoof capsules is nuanced and case-dependent. It requires careful observation, ongoing assessment, accurate interpretation of anatomy, and appropriate management decisions throughout the process.
Where individuals misunderstand, oversimplify, or incorrectly apply concepts without proper education or support, that does not automatically mean the principles themselves are responsible for poor outcomes.
This is precisely why HM places such strong emphasis on structured education, mentoring, licensing, case review, and longitudinal documentation. We actively encourage owners to seek qualified support and not attempt to manage complex rehabilitation cases purely from internet commentary or isolated images online.
15. Public educational content and owner interpretation.
Educational information about hoof care exists everywhere. There are countless books, courses, videos, clinics, trimming diagrams, and social media pages from many different approaches within the equine industry, including traditional farriery, barefoot trimming schools, veterinary guidance, and independent educators.
Owners have always learned from publicly available material and, rightly or wrongly, many will attempt aspects of hoof care themselves.
HM is not unique in providing educational content online.
The difference appears to be that HM is currently being held to a standard that no other educational organisation or methodology is expected to meet. Namely, being held directly responsible for every individual who may misunderstand, partially apply, or incorrectly imitate information they have seen online.
That is neither realistic nor consistent with how education functions in any other area of equine care, or horse training, or any other equine practice or discipline where owners learn online.
This is precisely why we continue to emphasise the importance of proper education, mentoring, structured learning, case review, and qualified support for complex rehabilitation cases.
Our online material is intended to educate, provoke discussion, encourage observation, and challenge people to think differently about the hoof. It is not intended to replace comprehensive training, ongoing mentorship, or responsible case management.
16. The claim that HM students only receive “10 days of hands-on trimming.”
This is also completely inaccurate.
Our HMB Pro students undertake two intensive residential training camps across the duration of the 2-year programme, alongside continual assessment throughout their studies.
Importantly, the majority of real learning does not happen from isolated workshop days alone, it happens through ongoing case management, mentorship, observation, and practical application over time.
Students are required to submit and document their own rehabilitation case studies throughout the course. These are monitored and assessed continuously through online trimming sessions, instructor reviews, radiographic discussions, photographic analysis, and ongoing mentorship from qualified instructors.
This model has allowed us to successfully educate and support students internationally, which has always been central to HM’s vision.
We recognised early on that if meaningful change in hoof care understanding was ever going to occur, it could not remain confined to small localised teaching groups within one country. The problems we are discussing are global, and therefore education also needed to become global.
Modern technology allows us to mentor students all over the world in real time while they work directly with horses in the field, often documenting cases longitudinally over months and years. In many ways, this gives us more continuous oversight of student progression and case development than traditional short-format educational models.
To reduce the entirety of that process down to “10 days of trimming” is not only misleading, it fundamentally misrepresents how the school actually functions.
It is also worth clarifying that learning within HM does not stop at formal course requirements alone.
Students are strongly encouraged to attend additional 3-day practical workshops whenever possible, both to further develop their practical skills and to assist owners and rehabilitation cases in real-world environments. These workshops allow students to deepen their understanding through direct observation, anatomy work, trimming discussions, case progression reviews, and collaborative learning alongside instructors, professionals, and p*ers.
Education within HM is designed to be ongoing, immersive, and progressive, not something limited to isolated classroom sessions.
Likewise, qualified HMB Pros are required to undertake Continuing Professional Development (CPD) each year in order to remain affiliated, licensed, and recognised within HM.
We believe that hoof care, rehabilitation, anatomy, and case management should never become stagnant. As new observations, data, radiographic analysis, and case progressions emerge, our professionals are expected to continue learning, refining, and developing their understanding accordingly.
That commitment to ongoing education and scrutiny is one of the reasons HM has continued evolving while much of the wider industry remains fixed within long-established assumptions.
17. Finally, I want to say something about Lindsay.
The online portrayal of Lindsay bears no resemblance to the person known by those who actually work alongside her, learn from her, or have rehabilitated horses with her support.
She is driven, relentless, intensely studious, and deeply committed to understanding the hoof at a level few are willing to pursue. At times, she pushes herself far too hard because she genuinely cares about solving problems that continue to devastate horses and owners worldwide.
Without Lindsay, many of these conversations would not even be happening.
She is not a narcissist, a cult leader, or an abuser. Not only does Lindsay, her family and friends, find that intensely distressing to read, but those of us who know her personally find it’s like reading a fantasy novel about someone where reality absolutely does not fit with the character being portrayed.
But as we often say here at HM, don’t let the truth get in the way of a good drama.
This industry needs a shake-up that is without doubt now very obvious. But she is not the industry scape-goat. Have we not seen enough of the damage that personal social media attacks can do to people.
Lindsay is someone willing to challenge long-held assumptions in an industry that often reacts emotionally when deeply established beliefs are questioned. HM and Lindsay have garnered much hate over the years because we continue to call out the damage that is being done to horses via personal interpretation of hoof balance. However, she does not attack ad hominem anyone, she is challenging the industry as a whole.
There have been many, many times that both Lindsay and myself have attempted to work and discuss our findings with industry professionals, but sadly it is they, not us that chose not to listen and therefore closed the doors of communication, replacing it with mockery or disdain.
What option do we both have at that point, but to keep moving forward growing our network ourselves. Some call it a movement, I’m happy with that if it drives change. Many professionals have already joined us, and many more will no doubt continue to do so in the future. For that we are grateful.
The last week has shown just how quickly online outrage can overtake meaningful discussion. But despite the noise, we will continue documenting, studying, questioning, teaching, and above all, advocating for horses.
Because in the end, this should never have been about internet drama, speculating without context or proof that we have indeed caused any harm whatsoever.
It should always be about improving welfare, not stagnating with the status quo. And when the drama and the HM pile-ons, with scant truths ensue, is the horse really in our hearts? Or is it the drama that is more powerful, egged on by that random reward hit of serotonin.
I hope I have made it as clear as I can in this post, that the horse remains central to what we do.
So before condemning people from behind keyboards, perhaps the better question is this:
Are we prepared to honestly investigate what the hoof is showing us, even if it challenges what we thought we knew, even when it challenges personal identity?
Garry Hinton
HM.
