Suspending Belief: Veterinary tools that outrun the evidence (#348)
- Rick LeCouteur
- Jun 9
- 3 min read
One of the more intriguing developments in recent years is the Equusir BEST‑BOX, a device marketed to diagnose and treat energetic imbalances in horses and dogs using color light, infrared, and bioenergetic scanning.
But what does the evidence say?
To answer that question, we might do well to consult not a veterinarian, but a fictional detective.
Sherlock Holmes.
Sherlock Holmes, the iconic detective created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, is perhaps literature’s most famous champion of evidence-based reasoning. Long before evidence-based practice became a formal concept in human medicine, veterinary medicine or science, Holmes exemplified its core principles:
Observation, deduction, and logic.
Always grounded in objective data rather than instinct or opinion.
In A Study in Scarlet, Holmes cautions:
“No data yet.”
“It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence.
It biases the judgment.”
This principle should serve as a warning in the context of unverified diagnostic tools and treatments. The Equusir BEST‑BOX may appear futuristic and appealing, with glowing lights, sleek design, and promises of pain relief, enhanced performance, stress reduction, and even immune optimization. But are those claims grounded in rigorously gathered evidence?
What Is the Equusir BEST‑BOX?
The Equusir BEST‑BOX is marketed as a therapy chamber that:
Scans the animal’s energy field to detect weak points or blockages
Applies photobiomodulation (PBM) and infrared-B light therapy
Aims to restore equilibrium in physical, mental, and cellular systems
Its manufacturer claims applications in everything from muscle recovery to hormonal balance. For horses, purchase price is said to be around $140,000 USD. For dogs, allegedly around $47,500 USD.
But again - where is the evidence?
To date, the only study made public by Equusir is an internal report from 2017 suggesting the BEST‑BOX influenced the autonomic nervous system in horses. However, the data were never published in a peer-reviewed journal, and key details such as sample size, use of controls, and randomization, are missing.
While photobiomodulation and infrared light do have published veterinary applications (e.g., wound healing, osteoarthritis, cognitive support), these refer to standalone therapies, not the integrated Equusir system. No independent, peer-reviewed trials evaluate the full BEST‑BOX.
In Holmesian terms, we are theorizing without data.
The Seductive Power of Anecdotes
High-profile stables and dog rehabilitation centers report anecdotal benefits. Equusir claims more than 150,000 reports generated per year. That sounds impressive, until you remember Holmes’s caution:
“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data.
Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
- A Scandal in Bohemia
Anecdotes can inspire interest, but they are not a substitute for clinical trials. They are vulnerable to bias, placebo effect, and the natural variability in disease progression.
Holmes’s Method
Let’s revisit what made Sherlock Holmes such a model of clear reasoning, providing a guide for modern veterinary thinking:
Observation before interpretation.
Deduction based on fact, not opinion.
Resisting emotional bias.
These tenets are as relevant to diagnostics in veterinary medicine as they were to Victorian crime scenes.
Rick’s Commentary
The Equusir BEST‑BOX may very well offer some benefit, particularly in the realm of comfort care or performance recovery.
But until it is validated through independent, peer-reviewed, double-blinded, controlled clinical trials, its role in veterinary medicine should remain adjunctive and experimental - not diagnostic or curative.
Holmes would not reject new ideas outright. But he would insist:
“Data first. Theories later.”
Veterinarians, clients, and regulators alike would do well to follow his lead.
Product Information
Comments