JESSIE

Perhaps informing you that I have been breeding cavies longer than Jed that I have been a member of this forum longer than Jed will give me the right of free speech without assumption working at every turn I am happy to be told which dog NOT to mate if only I could find ONE other than my own which has been scanned that could be used for breeding

Though scanning needs to be part of this

That's very interesting Dellcara, it highlights the importance of not focusing on the one single issue and looking at the big picture. And highlights the need to know the status of at least one of the parents

How many cases of genuine diagnosed SM (and not epilespy or the more common "I think my dog may have SM because he scratches alot" cases) are you actually aware of in this country? Then compared that to the ratio of the very popular breed?? The few and far between cases that I personally know of have actually come down from lines imported from the U.K. Purporting this is not answer to the questionThe scan results given earlier in this thread demonstrate that it is a known genetic disorder in the breed in this country This is incontrovertible

Then give 2 simplistic responses How many cavs have you scanned for SM before you bred them?How many cav breeders do you know who scan before they breed?

Jed you have intimated throughout this entire thread and given much energy to explaining why breeders will not or can not scan You said that this is why they are no longer breeding. If having to scan breeding dogs and not using any which are not A is the reason why breeders are no longer breeding then good riddance That bit of informative news demonstrates motivations other than those they have purported to Questions arise as to steps they may have avoided in addressing other genetic diseases in the breed Most notably is MVD They are no loss to the breed I am an Australian purebred breeder and disclosure of that or what breed I have is not remotely relevant for me to be involved in this conversation They are transparent and inequitable questions but predictable Rebanne if a breeder will choose not to MRI scan and only breed “As” they have to inform the owners that there is a high risk of their dog having SM because scanning is something they have chosen not to do It is a recognised genetic disease of the breed in this country If you only breed scanned A dogs then you inform them that there is still a one in four chance but you are following recommended protocols doing all you can to get it right. As a potential pet owner I know which breeder I would prefer. Due to the current distance issues and expense scanning all pups is not feasible Other breeders are testing for hip scores and various other polygenic diseases inherent in their breeds prior to breeding Cav breeders should be no different They need to ensure that the dogs they use for the purposes of breeding are only ‘A’ Shortstep accusing those who tell the truth ‘animal rights’ is an old ploy and easily seen through In my case nothing could be further from the truth Assumptions that the incidence is less in this country are reasonably argued There is no denying it is in some dogs in this country Any breeder who seriously wanted to breed for the betterment of the breed should want to be involved in ensuring it is not spread and become a bigger problem for the breed as in the United Kingdom This is more reason not less for all breeders to scan breeding dogs and only use A parents.

So, you keep all pups until minumum of 6 months, max of approximately 2.5 years, and knock off any which are not "A"? Wouldn't you keep your pick of the litter, send the others to pet homes desexed (so no chance of passing SM on if they are affected) then have the dog you kept scanned if you wish to use that dog in your breeding program? If this dog is not an 'A' then it is desexed as per the breeding protocol guidelines of not breeding with anything other than an 'A'. And that, my dear, is why so many breeders no longer breed. There is NO definitive test. NONE AT ALL. EVEN BREEDING DOGS GRADED A DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT NO PUPS WILL HAVE SM. But won't it reduce the number of affected pups if only 'A' dogs are bred with? Doesn't it make sense if the research so far suggests that breeding only 'A' produces 1 in 4 affected and breeding with anything else produces more than 1 in 4, then wouldn't any decent breeder want to go with the best odds? If the only test available, even if not definitive, is to MRI breeding stock then shouldn't that at least be tried? Yet people like Bet Hargraves make it seem that breeders must test - and that will guarantee pups unaffected by SM. I'm not trying to shit stir, it just seems to me from a pet owners perspective that if the 'medical experts' who are the ones doing the studies suggest that breeding with only 'A' graded dogs will get the least number of pups affected then why would breeders not be all for scanning their breeding stock and only using 'A'dogs? edit - oops didn't mean to have size so big like I was shouting

Even the 'experts" don't propose such a dramatic stance. As a breeder what is your plan to eradicate this lamentable wretched disease from your breed? if you have read this entire thread you will know what I said very early on ... "There is no denying there is a problem in the breed - we can only do as we have always done and that is to use the tools available to us if possible." Exceptionally though breeders do not want to utilise or advocate the use of the one new tool which is available (albeit challenging to get to and pay for) The researchers and scientists advocate this to be the most important advance so far in how to remedy the problem with published protocol recommendations As you have always done has produced a breed on the edge of extinction You are mistaken if you scan and only breed with A There is hope there is no sense in research and recommendations if breeders use their delusions of grandeur to avoid having to be inconvenienced or accountable

You love to attack, but fail again to deal in reality. Don't you feel even a bit silly for your first attack on me which was all assumption on your part and all wrong? So here you go again and you are wrong again. Read this..... I have never said that breeders should not test, nor ever questioned if testing should be done. You are yet again accusing me of things that are in your mind only and not real. So lets see if you can apologies this time for attacking me for something I have not said. Now if we can be in real world for a few seconds and get out of Pedigree Dogs Exposed Relived. I notice you did not answer if you are a breeder of Cavs or any breed or even own this breed? If you really are breeding Cavs, You said that the offspring should be screened and cull the affected 1 in 4 offspring. When do you screen all your pups you produce? How old are the pups when you do this/what is the youngest age they can be screened? Do you do this prior to placing them so the owners know their pup is not affected? What is it costing you to do this per pup? Are in fact 1 in 4 of your puppies affected? Is this 1 in 4 rate consistent across all of your bloodlines, another words do you have any line that has not produced at the 1 in 4 rate? These are questions that deserve answers if you expect anyone to listen to you about how to breed cavs. Shortstep if this is a serious question the answer obviously is that You scan dogs which you have selected for breeding prior to breeding and if they are not A discard them If breeders are only breeding certified A then there is a 75 percent chance that the dog you have selected from these matings is an A as it comes from two A parents. Some will need to be culled and disappoint which were considered but a minority only Without reservation this is preferable to potluck

You love to attack, but fail again to deal in reality. Don't you feel even a bit silly for your first attack on me which was all assumption on your part and all wrong? So here you go again and you are wrong again. Read this..... I have never said that breeders should not test, nor ever questioned if testing should be done. You are yet again accusing me of things that are in your mind only and not real. So lets see if you can apologies this time for attacking me for something I have not said. Now if we can be in real world for a few seconds and get out of Pedigree Dogs Exposed Relived. I notice you did not answer if you are a breeder of Cavs or any breed or even own this breed? If you really are breeding Cavs, You said that the offspring should be screened and cull the affected 1 in 4 offspring. When do you screen all your pups you produce? How old are the pups when you do this/what is the youngest age they can be screened? Do you do this prior to placing them so the owners know their pup is not affected? What is it costing you to do this per pup? Are in fact 1 in 4 of your puppies affected? Is this 1 in 4 rate consistent across all of your bloodlines, another words do you have any line that has not produced at the 1 in 4 rate? These are questions that deserve answers if you expect anyone to listen to you about how to breed cavs.

Even the 'experts" don't propose such a dramatic stance. As a breeder what is your plan to eradicate this lamentable wretched disease from your breed?

Shortstep Your assertion that you would find breeding dogs @ 1 in 4 which may be affected unacceptable but justifying why a breeder is not testing and possibly breeding every one affected is unfathomable. Rather than embrace this breeders tender exculpation and make statements publicly which pretend to give alibi for breeding with dogs which are not MRI scanned because it is difficult to get them to the machine, it costs too much money it is not in their lines they have never seen it Australia is not the United Kingdom and is different and there is no point because 1 in 4 will still be affected Nothing more than transparent futile exercises in self justification and the world can see itThey make purebred breeders look like simpletons needing legislation Dogs in this country are affected and they are being bred with and if the purebred dog world is in trouble the breeders who participate in this dictatorial scandalisation expose themselves but they bring the entire purebred dog fraternity into disrepute Dellcara There is no credible excuse The breed is in trouble and science is giving us a way forward to lessen the numbers of miserable lives Scan the dogs only breed A or don’t breed themIt is what people have expected from you all in accordance with the crescendo and chant of betterment of the breed

It is incredulous that you pretend not to know the obvious answer As any breeder with a whit of knowledge would know you plainly ensure that you never breed from a dog which is not an 'a' You take the one pup out of 4 which is not an 'a' and cull it (not the parents)and only breed on with any 'a' which is produced Smoke and mirrors or is it ignorance? Additionally those of you who attack Bet have the whole world laughing at you as they watch you fumble through excuses as to why you continue to breed with dogs which are like rent a bomb for the breed.Flagellation of those who are telling you what needs to be done continues to place attention on the fundamental cruelty by purebred breeders who think they are exempt because they exhibit their animals in beauty contests.It is not Bet Hargraves who is responsible for the breed’s demise it is instead those breeders who hang onto megalomania born in the last century There is no hope for the breed while dinosaurs who account themselves as breeders appallingly behave as bullies rather than as guardians of the breed

Genetic health test clearances do not guarantee that Cavalier litters will be disease-free, but the odds in favor of producing genetic disease-free Cavalier puppies are greatly increased when only tested and cleared Cavaliers are bred, and therefore it is irresponsible to the puppies and the buyers to not test and clear all Cavalier King Charles spaniel breeding stock. Breeders who do not fully health test their dogs and do not follow the breeding protocols are the ones who are damaging the future of the Cavalier King Charles spaniel breed. Scan your dogs or stop breeding them.These excuses and ill informed remarks disgust me and it is diabolical that you pretend to care. How do we distinguish truth from error when all some breeders do is avoid true responsibility in the name of how a dog looks. These responses authenticate your lack of caring for the dogs you own and breed and you are exposed for your cruel Grandiose delusions to the entire world. Offspring without SM only occurred when there was at least one parent of Grade A status There were higher numbers of SM clear offspring it both parents had Grade A All Grade A* offspring (SM clear over 5 years) had at least one parent that was Grade A 100% of offspring were SM affected if both parents were SM-affected SM also occurs in Grade A x Grade A crosses (approximately 25%, but this figure might be improved if more older dogs are screened dogs); Using dogs of unknown status was risky for SM affectedness; 50% of dogs in a Grade A x Unknown cross were SM affected Matings of Code A CKCS to Code A CKCS have produced 75.9% offspring with no SM. ● Matings of Code A CKCS to either Code D, E, or F CKCS have produced 41.9% offspring with no SM. ● Matings of Code A CKCS to unscanned CKCS have produced 50.0% offspring with no SM. ● Matings of Code D CKCS to Code D, E, or F CKCS have produced no offspring free of SM.

The end does not always justify the means and this is barbaric !!!!!!!!!!