Thread: Very interesting food for thought.

Originally Posted by gsp follower

i trust ruff you still would want any genetic factor remove even tho its not the whole solution ie you wouldnt breed carriers/sufferers

I wouldn;t breed any carrier or sufferer of any genetic condition I was aware of. I, personally, am against even breeding carriers to clears.... My problem in this isntance is that I am not convinced the testing telling what is and isn;t genetically predisposed is in any way accurate.

Mine are out from eight weeks old EB, not working, but they are out. By six months they are working.

Over weight or big dogs jumping I think is what starts it. The only bitch I've had with joint issues was one hell of a jumper, I'll also note that pure breeds seem to be more susceptible to weight issues.

Originally Posted by Wirehunt

Mine are out from eight weeks old EB, not working, but they are out. By six months they are working.

Over weight or big dogs jumping I think is what starts it. The only bitch I've had with joint issues was one hell of a jumper, I'll also note that pure breeds seem to be more susceptible to weight issues.

I like to have the puppies out and about from to six weeks old with the bitch too...they need to be introduced to the outside world so to speak...

I guess there is something for hybrid vigour The comment re purebred dogs... thems fighting words, @Wirehunt...with regard to the Epagneul Breton in France for instance, for the male to become an elite sire he must record an A or at least B HD classification along with other merits through the trialing and exhibition of his offspring...he must initially get an excellent in the showring as part of his trial championship title...

In the gundog breeds it is interesting to note that HD is apparent in show spaniels, but virtually unknown in working spaniels.

Hopefully without starting a war, the evidence of how effective specific disciplines are must be addressed.

Imagine the health of thoroughbreds if the Melbourne Cup was judged only on the birdcage parade????

I've got pure breds EB They are the hardest to keep down at a good work weight and I have no idea why.

What weights are the show ring dogs generally kept at, and what fitness level?

Originally Posted by Wirehunt

I've got pure breds EB What weights are the show ring dogs generally kept at, and what fitness level?

@Wirehunt, the quote of the day around the show ring is 'fit for purpose'...I laugh myself silly when I hear that...there is the quantitive 'show condition' slogan...I have had judges berate my dogs for not being in show condition (in other words they did not have enough condition...ie not fat, all muscle etc)...I told a judge that my bitch had taken a mob of steers off the crop that morning before the show when he told me she was not in show condition...he replied I do not care what she does or how many cattle she moves she is not in show condition...you should see some of the Labradors...went to a show in Taupo last year...one judge from the US favoured the more 'fit for purpose' type (of Labrador)...you get a real picture of just how we have arrived at the working and the show types...I believe, for the pedigree dogs, it is very sad testament...I have shown my dogs to prove that a gundog can be a trialist and rough shooters dog but still be correct to standard I have had a challenge point refused on account of the judge not knowing what breed my Epagneul Breton male was...to be fair he had probably never seen one before...

Which has really nothing to do with HD...

Originally Posted by EeeBees

@Wirehunt, the quote of the day around the show ring is 'fit for purpose'...I laugh myself silly when I hear that...there is the quantitive 'show condition' slogan...I have had judges berate my dogs for not being in show condition (in other words they did not have enough condition...ie not fat, all muscle etc)...I told a judge that my bitch had taken a mob of steers off the crop that morning before the show when he told me she was not in show condition...he replied I do not care what she does or how many cattle she moves she is not in show condition...you should see some of the Labradors...went to a show in Taupo last year...one judge from the US favoured the more 'fit for purpose' type (of Labrador)...you get a real picture of just how we have arrived at the working and the show types...I believe, for the pedigree dogs, it is very sad testament...I have shown my dogs to prove that a gundog can be a trialist and rough shooters dog but still be correct to standard I have had a challenge point refused on account of the judge not knowing what breed my Epagneul Breton male was...to be fair he had probably never seen one before...

Which has really nothing to do with HD...

In the vast majority of instances, if it is in a show ring it is not fit for purpose. How long would Thoroughbreds last as "fit for purpose" if we changed the Melbourne Cup to the horses simply walking into the birdcage having someone pick the prettiest one and we all go home. Performance of any performance animal must always be the first benchmark. The reason we have so many of these genetic anomalies in some many breeds is because they are predominantly judged to a written standard with no performance needed. It's an absolute catastrophe for just about any animal a written standard has ever been applied to. Meanwhile... the people working their animals have few problems, it's no rocket science. Showing of dogs as a benchmark of any kind should be considered fraud.

The fact we know bugger all remains and anyone trying to claim something definitive in its regard is going against all of the scientific information we have at hand.

bieng a conspiracy theorist from way back i wonder if there is any combined vet will to solve hd it must be quite a money spinner??
if as you say ruff xrays are practicly useless in diagnosing it i imagine like doctors vets are welded to a collective theory and practise with little financial gain or will to be the whistle blower.

the surprising result was the irish wolfhound,such a low percentage for such a large breed. even allowing for variance in human interpretation of xrays, what is the explanation for the difference in breed results other than the fact their is a genetic element?are there any other conclusions? i was surprised at the NZ brittany result although this was based on 2 dogs. as my own dog was recently evaluated(the xrays were sent to australia for evaluation)he scored 1 in each of the six components for a total of 6 against a stated breed average of 11.9.all 4 generations of ancestors have been hipscored and all have been rated good or better.

What both these last two posts completely ignore is the other side of the coin, as presented by Mortensen and others that the X-Ray diagnosis appears to be inaccurate and flawed. The comment about all the dogs with HD that showed no signs.... umm, well do they have it or not? or is the x-ray methodology flawed? Is there any credence to be put in the Huntaway results if we are to believe that the system being used to bring these results together is to be treated as extremely suspect? While this doesn't discount the results in itself it does cast a very large shadow over their true meaning. We also have to then factor in the occurrence of complete misdiagnosis as clearly shown by LM and we then may well be on a different track.

Using statistics gained from a methodology many considered highly flawed is not going to help anyone, oh it will help some people to sell pups saying they have tested, but if the testing method is flawed what does that mean? We know non-dysplastic parents are credited with producing dysplastic dogs and vice versa, so it makes current testing, with a caveat in the meantime on PENNHIPP, virtually worthless from a genetic point of view... but it is still held up as a sales tool.

Remember Mortenson's example of his own bitch diagnosed 100% by his vet as having HD, though Leon could see no sign of it on the x-ray at all... He later discover a strain toe tendon which, when fixed, returned the dog to normal. Had the owner been a layman such as us that bitch would have been removed from the gene pool, all her progeny siblings and parents would be under suspicion and yet the reality was HD never existed in the dog. We have to question how often such things happen.

back when we done the hip scoring under the old scheme, my vet took the xrays and also gave the x ray the once over as did i, and we both had a chin wag over it...... and i payed the $530
as per the system we then waited until the results came back after being put to the panel of three vets at massey. and the official document came in the mail the results went towards the average of the breed concerned and we bred according to the average.........ideally well below the average.
now we have pennhip........same concept different ruler and different place to send the x rays............and now $600+

Mortensons example was with one breed and one bitch, and you do not state if the results were in fact one vets opinion or the official graded result of a panel of vets ?
to dismiss the systems which are used worldwide over one example is flawed..... the huntaway example does prove working breeds do have it but for many it can be a non event due to the nature of work.
when it does occur in an extreme instance most if not all don't end up as retired hanging round the woolshed.

under our vdd system we have our own vets in germany who do the grading and all dogs must have a pass to breed, works well enough for most german breeds, i think the pudelpointer has no HD at all.
pennhip or bva the system only works when everything gets scored not everything gets bred.

i have been out of the working dog seen for many years but in all the dogs ive seen at trials mustering or buying replacements or even just nosing at other peoples dogs,
ive never seen it.
ive seen it in labs so know what a bad case looks like and yes ive seen lots of working dogs get the bullet but honestly can never remember hd bieng the reason.
are you saying kawhia thats its reared its head or like algae bloom its always present waiting on some factor or other to flare up.??
my distrust of vets comes from a suspicion that they like to protect thier income a little to much and dont believe experienced dog owners are even capable of doing the simplest health care for thier dogs without thier expert supervision.its certainly a poser but breeding from anything with it wouldtn be a help.
but id guess the rediculous cost of working dogs of all kinds hasnt helped the selective breeding programs. again the backyarders and the greedy must have played a downgrading part in working dogs to.
in that every clown with a half useful dog or bitch thinks they have a fortune in the kennel.

seen a country calender episode showing vets hip scoring a bitch prior to breeding so maybe it is starting down south, and was one programme on a vet from taihape/hunterville doing the same thing too, thar will know ?
like any working breed i would expect the cull rate to be high and not just for lack of working ability.

I think the term "working" is being taken to an extreme here, though it certainly applies and my knowledge of working sheep dogs is enough for me to know the true prevalence in a general fashion, but I was referring more to the working gundog strains. Spaniels in particular. HD and other hereditary diseases are common in the show strains of springer and cocker and virtually unkown in the working strains to the point that most are not tested due to the "why test for what doesn't exist" philosophy.

Kawhia, your own website with your partner Gillian for her cockers says this....
In the 1920’s and 1930’s, Show Cocker Spaniels went through a period of huge popularity, and were ‘puppy farmed’, with the result that they became plagued with hereditary diseases, including PRA, hip dysplasia and ‘cocker rage’.
In the meantime, the Working Cocker Spaniel changed little, and remained relatively free from such diseases.

Going back to my original points....

• We have seen little to no improvement in the incidence of HD despite having a testing regime.
• We do not have any solid information to confirm that HD diagnosis is even generally accurate and only a slim hope for PENNHIPP
• We have reasonable evidencde of widespread misdiagnosis or convieniant diagnosis
• GSP FOLLOWER correctly alludes to many practises by evcen the best vets being more revenue based that reality based
• People so far claim Diet, Genetics, Envrionment, Weight and fitness, incorrect raising and now whelping boxes, to be causes.... in other words... anything...we're not sure....

In other words we don;t know what causes it, we are not even sure it exists to the degree claimed and the only thing done to change this is to continue to x-ray dogs which we know is basically ineffective. A conspiracy theorist could really doing a "60 minutes" segment on Vets and bredders on this one I believe.
What we do seem to know, and going by your website, agree on is that the real test of physical soundness and selection is best done, for best results on the hills and not under an X-Ray machine.

on the hill proves one side, any breeder aims for that first and foremost.
on the breeding side for some breeds the X ray is a huge part of the process.
we can hip score and at least see the science side, the huntaway example does show despite what the x rays show the dogs are still doing the job.

the working cocker has been going through a long period of revival in the uk, sadly inbreeding and pet breeding has seen the need to genetic test now.

the breed clubs feeding into the NZKC will advise on there HD status, the only measure we are looking for is the breed average, is it going up or down ?
the numbers actually being scanned did not appear to be increasing for most breeds compared to numbers whelped reagrdless.
compare that to a regulated breeding programme like the german breeds where everything gets scanned and the system works well.