Feedmark Boswellia Trial

3.   Results and Discussion

 

3.1.   Participants and initial horse assessments

Twelve participants and 14 horses from different regions of the UK were recruited to the trial and remained for the duration of the trial. Horses ranged from 12 years to 27 years old (average 18 years), with two horses performing no exercise, seven performing light exercise, and five performing medium exercise. No horses performed hard or very hard exercise. The occurrence of common health issues affecting participating horses was reported (Table 3), with joint issues being the most prevalent. Other issues declared were liver damage and ligament wear and tear.

All twelve participants completed the initial survey and feedback survey 2, whilst 11 completed feedback survey 1 and 10 completed the final survey on product efficacy.

 

Table 3. Health issues affecting participant horses at the start of the trial

	Health Issue
Exercise level	Joint	Respiratory	Digestive	Skin	Other
No exercise (n=2)	2	1	1	0	0
Light exercise (n=7)	7	3	2	4	2 = Liver damage, suspensory ligament wear
Medium exercise (n=5)	3	4	3	2	0
Totals	12	8	6	6	2

n=number of horses

1.  

3.2.   Efficacy of Boswellia formulations

Comparisons of common health issues affecting horses at the start and end of the trial were performed using owner reported symptoms. Owners were asked to rate the symptoms displayed by their horse for each of the health issues, enabling assessment of the trial formulations on these symptoms. All other dietary fractions were to remain the same during the trial to make it as practical as possible for participants.

Joint issues

Joint issues were the most common health issue affecting trial horses with 12 out of 14 horses (86%) reported as having joint issues. Of the 12 horses with joint issues, seven had been diagnosed with arthritic changes in joint structures and one with changes in their lumbosacral disc. The four remaining horses had not been formally diagnosed with joint changes but were still exhibiting reduced mobility. Mobility was evaluated from scoring the frequency that horses showed shortened strides and swollen legs (Table 4).

The frequency that shortened strides were observed by participants were reported on a scale of 0 to 10, with zero indicating shortened strides were never observed, a score of 5 indicating they were observed approximately 50% of the time, and a score of 10 indicating they were observed all the time. The median score for frequency of shortened stride was lower for horses at the start of the trial compared to the end of the trial, indicating a positive effect of the Boswellia product on the horse’s mobility. It should however be highlighted that information for three horses was missing at the end of the trial which may have influenced results gained.

 

Table 4. Mobility assessments (frequency of seeing a shortened stride and swelling of joints when movement was restricted) for horses at the start and end of the trial

Horse	Arthritic changes diagnosed	Shortened stride frequency		Joint swelling frequency
		Start of trail	End of trial	Start of trail	End of trial
		Score: 0-10*		Scale: never, sometimes, always, other
1	No	7	Not reported	Sometimes	Survey not completed
2	Yes	6	8	Sometimes	Sometimes
3	No	2	2	Sometimes	Sometimes
4	Yes	5	3	Sometimes	Sometimes
5	Yes	5	Not reported	Other – rarely	Survey not completed
6	Yes	4	7	Never	Never
7	Yes	7	7	N/A	Sometimes
9	No	3	Not reported	Never	Survey not completed
10	Yes	5	4	Sometimes	Sometimes
12	Yes	5	3	Never	Never
13	No	3	2	Never	Never
14	Spinal changes	3	0	Never	Never
Median		5	3

N/A:       Horse was not stabled or restricted in their movement.

*:            Shortened stride assessed on scale of 0 = never observe a shortened stride, 5 = observe shortened stride about half the time, 10 = observe shortened stride all the time.

 

The frequency that participants observed their horses with swollen joints after periods of restricted movement (due to stabling or travel), were also reported at the start and end of the trial on a scale of never, sometimes or always. An ‘other’ option was available for participants to include more specific information. Of the 12 horses with joint issues, swollen joints were reported sometimes in five horses and never in five horses at the start, with one horse reported as having swollen joints rarely. Results for joint swelling at the end of the trial were lacking data for three horses, however data for all other horses remained the same as it had at the start of trial. These result suggest that joint swelling was not greatly influenced by the Boswellia product, however results may have been affected by the low level of joint swelling exhibited by horses throughout the trial which may have been too mild for any changes to be noticeable.     

In addition to the assessments on stride length and joint swelling, participants were also provided with a free text option where they could include additional information. At the end of the trial the following common themes comprised the comments:

• Horse was less clicky
• Freer in paces
• Improvement in picking out feet and movement
• Freer moving, more energetic and willing to move forwards, especially at the start of exercise  
• More comfortable when ridden and when moving of own accord
• Coped better with hard ground
• Less lameness
• No change or improvement

These comments suggest a positive effect of the Boswellia product on horse mobility which was noticable when horses were moving of their own accord, when handled and when ridden.

 

Respiratory issues

Respiratory issues were also common amongst trial horses. Of the eight horses reported to have respiratory issues, six had been formally diagnosed with specific conditions (Table 5), whilst the remaining two horses displayed symptoms typical of respiratory sensitivities. Coughing and face rubbing were the two most frequently reported symptoms at the start of the trial, followed by headshaking. Horses diagnosed as having ROA (Recurrent airway obstruction) and pollen allergies shared the same symptoms whilst the horse with equine asthma was reported to only be affected by a cough and face rubbing, although this horse’s condition was managed with a nebuliser and intermittent administration of steroids.

 

Table 5. Respiratory conditions and symptoms affecting eight trial horses stated as being affected by respiratory issues at the start of the trial. (Please note: 2 horses = RAO only, 1 horse = RAO and pollen allergy, 2 horses = pollen allergy only, meaning the total count of symptoms displayed can be more than the number of horses)

	Respiratory diagnosis
	RAO*	Pollen allergy	Mild asthma / hypersensitised airway	Undiagnosed
Number diagnosed	3	3	1	2
Symptoms	Number displaying certain symptoms				Total
Coughing	3	3	1	2	9
Milky nasal dischange	2	2	0	0	4
Yellow/green nasal discharge	0	0	0	0	0
↑ resp. rate at rest	1	1	0	0	2
↑ resp. rate when working	1	2	0	1	4
Rubbing face (any cause)	3	3	1	2	9
Headshaking (any cause)	3	2	0	1	6
Headshaking (pollen irritation)	3	3	0	1	7

RAO: Recurrent airway obstruction

 

At the end of the trial, participants were asked the same questions on their horses respiratory health. Of the eight participants declaring their horse had respiratory issues at the start trial, only five completed the survey at the end of the trial meaning that interpretation of results may not be truly representative of the trial horses, or the wider equine population.

Table 6 summarises the respiratory issues affecting horses at the end of the trial. One horse declared as having RAO at the start of the trial was stated as having inflammatory airway disease at the end of the trial. Inflammatory airway disease is a term used to describe non-infectious lower airway inflammation, including RAO, therefore the results are counted in the RAO column for continuity purposes.

 

Table 6. Respiratory conditions and symptoms affecting five trial horses stated as being affected by respiratory issues at the end of the trial. (Please note: all horses were only reported to be affected by a single respiratory condition)

	Respiratory diagnosis
	RAO*	Pollen allergy	Head shaking – unknown cause	Undiagnosed
Number diagnosed	2	1	1	1
Symptoms	Number displaying certain symptoms				Total
Coughing	1	1	1	1	4
Milky nasal dischange	1	1	0	1	3
Yellow/green nasal discharge	1	0	0	0	1
↑ resp. rate at rest	1	0	0	0	1
↑ resp. rate when working	1	0	0	1	2
Rubbing face (any cause)	1	1	1	1	4
Headshaking (any cause)	2	0	1	0	3
Headshaking (pollen irritation)	2	1	1	0	4

RAO: Recurrent airway obstruction

 

Coughing, rubbing of the face and headshaking due to pollen irritation were the most reported symptoms at the end of the trial. These results follow the trend of those reported at the start of the trial, which could be interpretted as the Boswellia product not having any effect, however in the section where participants could provide additional information participants noted the following:

• Reduced symptoms when stabled
• Morning cough reduced when on trial product
• Less headshaking when exercised

Two participants reported no change in symptoms however one stated that the survey at the end of the trial coincided with an extremely dry spell of weather and harvest time in their area, resulting in considerable airbourne particles and dust which had triggered a respiratory challenge. The participant went on to say that in their view no supplement would have made a difference in those circumstances. 

Overall, the Boswellia product appears to support respiratory health with owners noticing reduction in certain respiratory symptoms, although the product should be used in conjunction with management practices to reduce exposure to irritating particles and pollens. The trial did not start until July when pollen levels in the air would be higher. Horses with pollen sensitivities often respond better when supplements and treatments are added to their diet/management regime before the pollen season so it will be interesting to see in the future if adding Boswellia to the diet earlier reduces symptoms associated with pollen irritation.

 

Digestive issues

Six horses were reported as being affected by digestive issues at the start of the trial, however only two of these horses had been formally diagnosed with a specific gastrointestinal condition. One horse was diagnosed as having gastric ulcers whilst the second horse was affected by colitis (inflammation of the colon and/or hindgut acidosis). Owners were asked to report on digestive issues that their horses were affected by and associated symptoms, regardless of if they had been formally diagnosed (Table 7). The most common issues at the start of the trial were digestive sensitivity, followed by hindgut acidosis. Although one horse had been diagnosed with colitis this horse’s main digestive issues were reported in the hindgut acidosis category with the condition manefesting itself as a reluctance to move forwards when ridden, sensitivity around the girth area and only being able to eat certain foods.

Colic is one of the most common issues affecting horses and is often thought of when digestive issues are discussed. Horses being prone to colic was only reported by three participants at the start of the trial and was associated with general digestive sensitivity and gastric ulcers, and not hindgut issues.   

 

Table 7. Digestive issues and their associated symptoms affecting six horses at the start of the trial. (Please note: horses were affected by multiple issues meaning the total count of symptoms displayed can be more than the number of horses)

	Digesitve issue
	Digestive sensitivity	Gastric ulcers	Colitis	Hindgut acidosis	Diarrhoea
Symptoms	Number displaying certain symptoms
Prone to colic	2	1	0	0	0
Loose droppings	2	0	0	1	2
Only eat certain foods	3	1	0	0	1
Sensitive girth area	2	2	0	1	0
Sensitive flanks	1	1	0	0	0
Loses weight easily	1	0	0	0	1
Relectance to move forwards when ridden	0	1	0	1	0

 

Four of the six participants reporting digestive issues in their horses at the start of the trial also completed the survey at the end of the trial, although only three of these participants reported digestive issues in the final survey. The one participant reporting digestive issues at the start of the trial but not at the end, is thought to be due to the digestive issues resolving as it was stated in the ‘other comments’ section that there were noted digestive improvements’, therefore the digestive section of the final survey was not completed.

For the horse diagnosed with gastric ulcers there appeared an improvement in some of the symptoms displayed, as sensitivity around the girth and flank areas was not reported at the end of the trial, and the owner stated there was less noise in the stomach. Fewer symptoms were also reported at the end of the trial for the horse diagnosed with colitis, with reluctance to move forwards when exercised and only being able to eat certain foods not being selected in the final survey. The owner of this horse also stated their horse seemed less sensitive to grass changes. All of these results are extremely positive and indicate the product had a positive effect on digestive health.  

Boswellia has undergone research in humans as a treatment for inflammatory bowel disease and diarrhoea due to its gastroprotective and calming properties. The reduction in symptoms displayed by horses at the end of the trial suggests that feeding Boswellia has similar benefits to horses with digestive issues.

 

Skin issues

Six horses were also reported to be affected by skin issues at the start of the trial. Reactions to fly bites followed by itchy skin were the two most common issues, although all participants rated their horses symptoms as mild. Such results indicate that none of the horses had severe skin conditions (Table 8), although one participant stated their horse develops large lumps which sometimes weep in response to fly bites, whilst another commented that their horse’s skin issues become worse when they have digestive issues. This was the horse that had been diagnosed with colitis, suggesting a link between hindgut health and skin health.

Four participants reporting skin issues at the start of the trial completed the final survey, although only three reported skin issues in their horses at the end of the trial. The horse who was reported as having skin issues at the start but not end of the trial may be due to an error by their owner when completing the final survey, accidently missing out the skin issues section, or it could be due to an improvement in the horse’s skin and therefore a true reflection of the horse’s health at the end of the trial. No further information was provided to confirm which of these reasons was the most likely.

The three participants providing information on their horse’s skin issues at the end of the of the trial reported similar or less severe symptoms. In addition, participants added the following comments:

• Fly bite reactions were less severe but still apparent
• Seemed to have less reaction to bites
• Coat appeared smoother and softer – it was quite coarse before

Such results suggests the Boswellia product was supportive of skin health, in particular reducing reactions and irritations to fly bites which is likely due to the anti-inflammatory actions of the boswellic acids within the Boswellia.   

Table 8. Skin issues affecting six horses at the start of the trial and three horses at the end of the trial.

	Skin issue
Severity of symptoms	Itchy skin	Scabby skin	Dry skin	Sarcoids	Reacts to fly bites	Sweet itch
	Start of trial
No symptoms	2	2	0	2	0	1
Mild symptoms only owner notices	2	0	0	0	0	1
Mild symptoms others can notice	1	0	2	0	5	0
Moderate symptoms that impact on welfare	0	0	0	0	0	0
Severe symptoms that need vet treatment	0	0	0	0	0	0
	End of trial
No symptoms	0	1	1	1	0	1
Mild symptoms only owner notices	2	0	0	0	0	0
Mild symptoms others can notice	0	0	0	0	2	0
Moderate symptoms that impact on welfare	0	0	0	0	0	0
Severe symptoms that need vet treatment	0	0	0	0	0	0

   

3.3.   Product useability and handleability

Formulation 1

Formulation 1 comprising of all ingredients combined into one mix, was evaluated via the first Microsoft Teams discussion group and feedback survey 1, which took place and was issued after the product had been fed for approximately two weeks. Three participants were able to attend the first discussion session which was extremely helpful to hear their experiences of feeding the product. The discussion highlighted that there were serious issues with the product sticking together and forming an almost solid block, making it extremely difficult to measure out the correct amount to feed and meaning the product had poor useability and handleability.

During the discussion participants were also asked if the product was palatable and well received by their horses. The three participants agreed that their horses found the product palatable and had no issues with their horses eating their feeds containing the product.

Results from feedback survey 1 showed similar results, with all participants reporting the product had poor consistency and useability (Table 9). The main issue was the products ability to stick to itself, creating a solid mass within the tub. This then lead to difficulties in measuring out scoops as participants had to break up the product before they were able to fill the scoop. Due to the nature of the ingredients, clumping was a concern so all participants were advised to shake the product periodically with the aim of reducing the clumping, however this was not successful, with only four participants reporting a slight improvement, and six reporting no improvement at all. Interestingly, one participant seemed to have very few issues with the product and reported shaking did improve useability and that the product was easy to measure. When products are made they are mixed in industrial mixers that are monitored for their ability to mix products equally. It maybe that due to the nature of the trial product ingredients, achieving an even consistency is difficult, resulting in that particular participant receiving a more useable trial product.

 

Table 9. Participant feedback on formulation 1 consistency and useability

Description of product consistency	Frequency
Free-flowing	0
Dust-free	1
Dusty	0
Clumps / lumpy	9
Sticks together	8
Sticks to tub	2
Becomes a solid mass	9
Description of product useability
Easy to fill the scoop	0
Easy to measure the correct amount	1
Have to scrape the product to loosen it prior to scooping	8
Clumps / lumps make it difficult to measure the correct amount	8
Difficult to fill the scoops	5
Other:      Had to use hands and fingers to loosen clumps / lumps	1

 

Due to the issues with clumping being raised in the discussion sessions, participants were asked for their views on an alternative, two-part formulation for the product. This would require participants to measure out scoops from two bags for their horse, rather than from a single product. Participants were asked if this was of concern to them (Table 10). No participants selected that it would be of concern to them although six selected that they would want to test this type of product before commenting. Results also showed that clear feeding instructions would be required on such a product.

 

Table 10. Participants concerns on feeding a two-part formulation

Concerns on feeding a two-part formulation	Frequency
Yes – it would take longer	0
Yes – I may get it wrong	0
No – it won’t take much extra time	3
No – if the feeding instructions were clear	6
Maybe – I would like to test this type of product before commenting	6

 

Formulation 2

Following the feedback on the formulation 1, a new two-part formulation was developed using the same ingredients but separating the Boswellia extract from the high-fat ingredients that facilitate absorption. This formulation continued to be provided in a single container, but with each part in separate bags that were labelled accordingly. Feeding instructions clearly stated the feeding rate of each part. For horses, the feeding rates were different for each part, requiring a full scoop for one part and a half scoop for the other part.

The two-part formulation was distributed to participants at the end of week 3 of the trial, and participants instructed to feed formulation 2 instead of formulation 1. This formulation was fed for two weeks then a second discussion session planned. Unfortunately only one participant could attend this discussion session. Feedback from this discussion was considerably more positive with the participant finding the new product easy to use and handle whilst still retaining palatability. A second feedback survey was issued to all participants the following week (week 6) to obtain views on the two-part product.

To determine product consistency, the same questions and answer options were used in feedback survey 2 as those used in the first product feedback survey (Table 11). This enabled direct comparison between formulations. Slightly different answer options were used to determine useability of the two-part product to ensure that this new type of product was functionable in the practical setting.

All twelve participants completed the feedback survey 2 which showed a clear improvement in product consistency and useability. All participants found formulation 2 free-flowing and free from clumps and lumps. The Boswellia extract was reported as being dusty by six participants, which is due to its very fine powder composition. The improved consistency enabled scoops to be filled easily when measuring out both parts of the product, however only six participants thought that the feeding amount for the Boswellia extract part of the formulation was easy to measure. This was due to the feeding amount being a half scoop measure. It is not always possible for feeding levels to be whole scoops unless a base ingredient is used.

Table 11. Participant feedback on formulation 2 consistency and useability

	Frequency
Description of product consistency	High-fat part	Boswellia extract part
Free-flowing	12	11
Dust-free	11	3
Dusty	0	6
Clumps / lumpy	0	0
Sticks together	0	0
Sticks to tub	0	0
Becomes a solid mass	0	0
Description of product useability
Easy to fill the scoop	12	12
Easy to measure the correct amount	12	6
Lumps make it difficult to measure the correct amount	0	0
Feeding amount clear	12	11
Feeding amounts unclear	0	1

 

Participants were asked if palatability was affected by changing to a two-part formulation. Eleven participants stated palatability was not changed however one participant selected that palatability had reduced. No further details were provided on how palatability had decreased.

Participants were also provided with the opportunity to include any additional comments they had on the two-part product at this stage of the trial. Four participants stated they would prefer a different size scoop specifically for the Boswellia extract part of the formulation to avoid the need for measuring half scoops. This is a factor that has been considered in the final formulation that will go to market (see 4.2. Outcome).

The final survey completed at the end of the trial asked two questions relating to the product. The first question followed on from the suggestion for two different sized scoops that was made in the feedback survey 2, whilst the second question asked participants views on the use of a base ingredient to facilitate feeding rates of the Boswellia extract (Table 12). Ten participants answered these questions, with the majority of the view that two different scoop sizes would make measuring the correct feeding amount easier. Only one participant had concerns about two scoops sizes potentially leading to incorrect amounts being fed, which could be an issues if the scoops were returned to the wrong product part.

 

Table 12. Participants views on the use of two different sized scoops in a single product and on the use of base ingredients, gained from the end of trial survey.

Options for the two-part formulation	Frequency
Two different sized scoops make it easier to measure accurately	9
Two different sized scoops could lead to incorrect amounts being fed	1
There would have to be half scoops anyway to account for different feeding rates for horses and ponies	1
I do not like the idea of having different sized scoops in a single supplement	0
I want feeding to be as easy as possible	7
Participant views on the use of a base ingredient for the Boswellia extract
I do not mind the use of a base ingredient if it facilitates feeding	5
I prefer there to be no additional base ingredients but understand if it is needed to make the product easier to feed	4
I would not feed a product with an additional base ingredient	0
Other:     As long as the consistency works well to avoid clumping	1

 

Participant views on the use of a base ingredient to facilitate feeding of the Boswellia extract were almost evenly split, indicating that participants are not overly concerned about the use of base ingredients so long as they faciltiate feeding and useability of the product.

 

 

4.   Summary and Outcome

 

4.1.   Summary

The Boswellia trial aimed to assess the suitability for bringing to market a new product using new a new Boswellia ingredient. The trial incorporated assessments of efficacy and product useability and handleability. Efficacy was tested using owner assessments of horse health, focusing on four main health issues which boswellic acids are known to help in other species; joint issues, respiratory issues, digestive issues and skin issues. Results indicate a clear benefit of feeding the product (in both formulations) on mobility, with horses having freer movement, being less clicky in their joints and generally feeling more comfortable which lead to improvements when ridden, handled and when moving over hard ground. Boswellia products are often promoted to support joint health and the results from this small trial show such promotion is valid, with results most likely due to the anti-inflammatory effects of the boswellic acids.

Such anti-inflammatory effects also supported horses’ respiratory, digestive and skin health, with most horses on the trial showing a reduction in symptoms for such conditions. When feeding Boswellia products it is important to use them in collaboration with appropriate management and feeding, as no product offers a single solution to health issues. Reducing respiratory and skin exposure to allergens and irritants will reduce the reactions, which when combined with the reduction in inflammatory response, helps to reduce symptoms. It may also be that feeding Boswellia before exposure to such irritants provides even greater support. This is an interesting area of potential study in the future.

The nature of the ingredients in the trial product required a change in formulation to a two-part product. This change solved the issues of clumping and created a product that was effective and useable, although the dustiness of the Boswellia extract was noted. The feeding of half scoops for one part of the product was also noted, and has been taken into account in the final formulation.

1.  

4.2.   Outcome 

Based on the results of this trial a new two-part Boswellia supplement has been developed. The high-fat part of the formulation will remain the same as that tested, and the Boswellia extract part will be combined with a base ingredient that increases the feeding rate of this part of the product to a whole scoop (for horses). This enables the same size scoop to be used for both parts of the product and removes the need to include two different sized scoops.

The use of different sized scoops in a single product could easily lead to incorrect amounts of one or both parts of the product being fed if scoops were mixed up, or one scoop was lost. Although this would not cause any safety concerns as all ingredients are safe to feed at higher levels, it would affects efficacy and the number of servings in the product which would lead to one part of the product running out before the other part. Such issues are reduced if a single scoop is used for both parts of the product.

The use of a base ingredient also makes the product less dusty which is important for Feedmark who focus on selling high quality products, and for owners as a dusty product can be difficult to handle, put them off feeding, and can also deter some horses from eating their feed.

The new product, Boswellium™, is available to purchase now.

 

Note of thanks

Feedmark would like to sincerely thank participants and their horses for being part of the trial, and for their time in providing feedback on the product, it is truly appreciated.