This podcast is the second time I have picked up a popular horse magazine, reviewed the articles and added my thoughts on the ones I selected. I received some positive comments the last time I did this and thought I would do this again. After all, you are reading these magazines without any balancing views. It is like watching one station's newscast and then hearing the same story on another station with a completely different take on the same information. With your horse's health at stake, it is important to understand that if a published article is in a scientific journal, you shouldn't think that the information is accurate or not agenda-driven. But it is worse when a lay person writes an article about this scientific information using authoritative language and structure, publishing their views as accurate. While these authors try to remain neutral, they often miss the subtleties or omit alternative views. I try to bring depth to each article, often with opposing ideas or interpretations. I try to be thought-provoking but constantly ask, "Is this in the best interest of you and your horses?" With a magazine filled with dozens of paying advertisers, how can the magazine stay impartial?