Elfin

May I join you all in the Corner? Happy New Year, Corner Dwellers!

The PhD candidate has said that the DNA is not to identify breed (or mix thereof), but for a future unknown study. Perhaps it would have been better off to use the DNA to identify specific breeds, if specific breeds are going to be named in the study results. How will the media twist the results around of "scientific proof" that breed XYZ is "suitable" or indeed "unsuitable" for Australian society? What will be the public's attitude to the breeds listed lower down on the "suitable" list? The study itself does not worry me. It is the title of the study and what the media will do with the results that concern me. Hi Elfin, I'm glad your concerns about the study itself have been addressed, because it seems like research that could have lots of positives to it and after having participated myself with my dogs and seeing no cause for concern, I'd hate to think Tammie might struggle to find participants because of opinions posted in this forum. What do you think might make for a better title? I reckon Tammie would be open to suggestions. I should have said I have no concerns with the way the dogs will be treated during the assessment part of the study. One question that has not been answered is Are you testing the behaviours of specific breeds? Is it individual DOGS that will be noted as "ideal", or breeds (or crosses thereof)? Will differences in breed characteristics be taken into account? eg. I am guessing you will get a different response from an Afghan with a stranger than you will with, say, a Labrador. I could not give any ideas for the re-naming of the study. I still have concerns with the subjectivity of the words "suitable for living in Australian society" and "ideal". What are the expected outcomes of the study?

My three dogs doing supermegafastzoomies is my favourite sight, but also terrifying at times. I just close my eyes sometimes!! To deny my dogs their zoomies would be to deny them of their biggest joy. ;)

We are all thinking of you here, Trish and Steve. Get well Grover. ;)

The PhD candidate has said that the DNA is not to identify breed (or mix thereof), but for a future unknown study. Perhaps it would have been better off to use the DNA to identify specific breeds, if specific breeds are going to be named in the study results. I met a lady with her gorgeous Maremma the other day. She swore black-and-blue that the dog was a Golden Retriever, even after I showed her pictures; it said so on the papers she got with it from the pet shop.... And despite the Herald Sun being far from the ideal source of any type of information, it is (unfortunately) the most-read paper in Victoria. How will the media twist the results around of "scientific proof" that breed XYZ is "suitable" or indeed "unsuitable" for Australian society? What will be the public's attitude to the breeds listed lower down on the "suitable" list? The study itself does not worry me. It is the title of the study and what the media will do with the results that concern me. EFS

Poor Grover. If you are coming to Melbourne to see an internal medicine specialist: http://www.melbvet.com.au/html/s02_article...p;nav_top_id=-1 Rob and Darren are great. Or http://www.vch.unimelb.edu.au/group.php?groupID=524 Steve Holloway or Linda Abraham Fingers crossed you don't need to come down.

I wish you all the best with your study, Tammie, but unfortunately I cannot participate. Thank you for coming to this forum to answer our questions.

So what if the media and/or government take your scientific findings that your own breed is not "suitable for Australian society" (your own words) and gives your breed bad press/legislates against it? Surely the person conducting the "other study" would be able to get clearance to collect DNA for themselves?

Two things that immediately jumped out at me. Are you testing the behaviours of specific breeds? Is it individual DOGS that will be noted as "ideal", or breeds (or crosses thereof)? Will differences in breed characteristics be taken into account? eg. I am guessing you will get a different response from an Afghan with a stranger than you will with, say, a Labrador. Why are you taking DNA if it is not part of your study? No other study is mentioned in the email or flyer, leading one to believe that the DNA is for your study.

Love the sound of the "Primitive Natural" variety. I was after a "performance" food with no corn. Perfect! When/where will it be available, Sags?

This is like saying "give her some human tablets if you have them". Please DO NOT use random human eye drops in any dog at ANY time. You could cause serious problems that can cause blindness. Specific medications are for specific conditions. eg. if you put Prednefrin Forte (commonly prescribed for humans) into a squinty eye that may have a small ulcer, you can cause the cornea to (literally) melt. Bathing the eyes with cool black or camomile tea will sooth the eyes until a vet can be found. Edited to make sense.

Woot Woot, Grover! Soooo glad to hear the great news!! Love and ear rubs from your cousins in Melbourne!!

This was one of my major concerns. As Jed said "best suited" for one person is completely different to what is "best suited" for another. Will we end up with a generic, bland, bog-standard, zero-drive, robotic, fluffy quadruped back-yard-dweller, that is deemed by all and sundry (including the government) to be the most "suitable" dog for us, and any other breeds are considered "unsuitable"? Scary.

"Just as we’ve previously produced dogs able to herd sheep or pull sleds, so we should be able to breed dogs perfectly suited to their role as companions." I thought there were already ANKC recognised breeds that were "produced" to be companions??? Parts of the article make sense, I find other parts not so clear as to the intentions... and there are MANY studies cited that are unpublished. Dunno, I might just leave it to the behaviour experts and academics.

Fair enough. It still doesn't mention pure bred dogs or breeders. Not to worry, I am not participating, but may write a bumbling letter of concern to the PhD candidate anyway.

sandgrubber, I just don't quite get the feeling that is what the study aims to do. It is entitled "The ideal companion dog study" and NOWHERE mentions pure bred dogs or breeders, and it is being run my the psychology department not the biology department. Then again, I could be completely wrong. I can forward the email to you if you like, just PM me your addy.

I am not smart enough to put my concerns into complete sentences!! My "concern" is really a general feeling of uneasiness about using DNA to scientifically "prove" which breed (cross or otherwise) is most "suitable for Australian society". The media could have a BALL with the results.

It's being run at Monash. Overseen by Dr Pauline Bennett and Dr Linda Marston. " Data may be reanalysed at a later date." "Funding for this study has been generously provided by Petcare Information and Advisory Service and the Victorian Bureau of Animal Welfare."

Still got all fingers, toes and paws crossed for cousin Grover! Keep fighting, big guy!!

My mistake, mita; I was the one that wrote temperament test. I have just re-read the info, and it actually only uses the phrase "behavioural assessment". There is a passing reference to educating the public about dog behaviour and training. They also want the owners of the dogs to complete some questionaires. They seem to want to find out a way of measuring which dogs are the most "easy going, friendly, non-aggressive, relaxed and sociable". That rules out my dogs, who would probably completely ignore a stranger! Snobs!

It looks like the DNA is to identify breeds. I wasn't planning on attending; I am having trouble with the whole "suitable for living in Australian society" and "select breeding dogs" bit... I (perhaps naively) thought that there were no "unsuitable" breeds, only unsuitable owners... And what if, at the end, participants are told their adorably cute Oodle is an ideal breeding dog?

I have just received an email inviting me (and anyone else I know that owns a dog, so that's you guys ) to participate in a PhD study on dog behaviour. You are invited to take your dog along, it will be "temperament tested" and a DNA swab will be taken. I became quite uncomfortable about the following statement from the information attatched to the email: The development of an accurate behavioural assessment that measures these characteristics in dogs would assist in identifying dogs best suited for living in Australian society and could be used to select breeding dogs. Am I reading too much into this statement?

Good news that a heart problem has been ruled out. His continued elevated heart rate and other symptoms are very worrying, though. Make sure that any vets/specialists that see Grover understand that a Deerhound's NORMAL resting systolic blood pressure is around 200mmHg (almost double normal BP of other breeds). Most vets don't know this and it could confuse a diagnosis. Fingers crossed that a diagnosis is found quickly. We are thinking of you.

Have PM'd you. Ear-rubs to Grover, from his Melbourne Deerhound cousins.

That is very interesting, sparky. When he was "sad", was he in pain? And can you remember who "cheered up" first, you or him, after putting the t-shirt on him? RIP brave Deerie