Why use both organic and inorganic minerals?

Organic minerals (minerals bound to organic molecules like amino acids) are generally easier for the body to absorb because they are more bioavailable. However, inorganic minerals (such as sulfate or oxide compounds) can still be effective and sometimes have advantages in specific situations, such as stability, price, and availability.

By combining both types, you can ensure that:

1. The horse receives sufficient minerals – Organic minerals can supplement where the absorption of inorganic minerals is unknown or low.

2. Dietary efficiency is maintained – Inorganic minerals are often cheaper and more stable in mixtures. Many of them are absorbed very well, and some individuals even absorb inorganic minerals at least as well. The best absorbed inorganic minerals are usually sulfate compounds, and in this way you can also add extra sulfur to the mixture (important for detoxification, coat, hooves, etc.).

3. Individual needs are met – Some minerals are well absorbed in their inorganic form, while organic bindings may be better for optimal absorption – at least for some individuals and for certain minerals. There is a general lack of research in the equine field, so what we write here is primarily derived from cases where horses have previously been fed “100% organic mineral” supplements and yet have developed deficiencies. Regulator Complete’s products are designed to support the horse’s mineral needs by combining organic and inorganic minerals, ensuring a more holistic supply. These statements are based on experience from previous use and are supported by research into mineral absorption in horses.

When is one preferred over the other?

• Organic minerals:

o When there is a need for high availability, for example due to stress, illness or high workload.

o If you are concerned that the feed's content of competing minerals may inhibit absorption, although well-conducted research shows that this is often not the case.

• Inorganic minerals:

o When the composition of the diet already ensures good mineral balance.

o If the feed is to be cost-effective and the minerals are readily available in sufficient quantity.

What affects mineral absorption?

Studies, for example from Kentucky Equine Research, show that many factors come into play:

1. Fiber content – ​​High fiber content can inhibit the digestibility of calcium, phosphorus, and magnesium.

2. Mineral ratios – Oversupply of one mineral can inhibit the absorption of others (e.g., a high calcium-phosphorus ratio can enhance magnesium absorption but inhibit phosphorus absorption).

3. Quality of the mineral – Organically bound minerals are often better absorbed than inorganic ones, but not always. On an individual level, you can’t be sure what works best. By having different sources for most minerals, Regulator Complete’s products provide better coverage.

The level of "better absorption" seen in some studies with organically bound minerals is often surprisingly small (a few percent) and most relevant if supply is tight. Unfortunately, this is used by some companies as an argument for reducing the dosage per daily dose.

Conclusion

The choice of organic and inorganic minerals depends on the overall composition of the feed, the horse's needs and economic considerations. By combining the two types, you can:

• Balance high bioavailability.

• Covering multiple horses is better than just one type.

• Achieve stability and durability.

• Ensure sound economics.

This provides the horse with the necessary minerals under different conditions.