Willem

quote:

and this quote is from...?...supersize, surprise ...http://www.dogsports.com/rethinkingspayneuter.html

Personally every time my bitches come into season I am tempted to desex my male dog (but alas I show him) because he loses the plot. I keep them as separated as humanly possible, exercised separately, male dog goes to work with husband (on the farm) for the day & he's in his crate in the house while I exercise the bitches outside.

He's a whiny hormonal mess. How is that better than not being a slave to hormones?

Note - he's still well behaved and will do what he's told, but he gets a really crazy look in his eye & can't sit still/relax

if he is one of the unlucky ones that get an early cancer due to de-sexing or joint and ligament problems he won't be relaxed either.

Our family has always had male dogs and all have been desexed. To be honest they have all passed in old age and none of them have had cancer as you state Willem. Me personally, would always have my dogs, either male or female desexed because, even though I buy them through registered breeders, have no desire to show or breed with them. The decision is ours as a family and I envisage this decision will continue

My last 4 male dogs were all castrated -

None had cancer

two lived into old age , two had catastrophic health emergencies and were PTS.

All were VERY active - and one only had a luxating patella - due to an injury sustained as a youngster . It was surgically fixed, and he never had a relapse.

I have had pet bitches who were speyed ..these all lived into old age with no cancer or joint problems

Willem - can you show us what cancers and when desexed dogs get ?

I provided 5 links to scientific studies in my post #80 - I'm very, very reluctant to summarize the findings of them on my own as everyone will tell me then, that these findings would be just my opinion. All these studies are scientific based, not blogs or opinions from an individual. And all the studies come to the conclusion that early de-sexing will increase health risks (it is not only cancer) and ligament and joint issues. I will keep my dog entire - would this be a guarantee that she will never has to cope with one of the issues? ...of course not. Nor is it scientific evidence if someone had 10 de-sexed dogs and none of them had cancer or ligament issues. I know people who lived nearly for 100 years despite that they have been heavy smokers - individual cases don't proof anything.

Conversely, regarding to the 5 studies I listed, no one here came up with a recent study that would a) contradict the finding of the mentioned studies, and b) verify that de-sexing has no negative health effects.

But again, everyone is entitled to take from this information provided in this thread whatever he / she wants.

Eta: and I'm still waiting for a reasonable answer why we classify cropping of ears and docking of tails as animal cruelty, but at the same time we have no scruple to justify cutting a dog's ball off or remove the uterus following our desire for more convenience. We even accept it as a measure to manipulate the hormones to gain an advantage in a sporting competition like agility - and at the same time people wonder about the dodgy trainings methods adopted by some parts of the greyhound industry.

And Willem please work on not assuming you know more than everyone on this forum. There are a lot of very experienced breeders, rescuers & vets on here, it would do you good to open yourself to learning instead of just forcing your opinion down people's throats.

it is totally up to you what you put down your throat, really, I don't give a damn - if you don't want to read what I publish here just put me on the ignore list, I'm absolutely happy with this.

Not nice :

the only thing I do here is providing / sharing information - it is totally, absolutely totally up to everyone what he / she takes from it, and whether they think the information in the links I provide have some merits or not. Others are keen to claim the opposite and contradict my comments heavily, however, they are very reluctant to come up with something substantial....and that's ok too. I don't 'force' anyone to believe what I share here - everyone is entitled to his / her own opinion. If the questions I ask here, or the information I provide here, are inconvenient for some readers, they don't have to read it, they can even put me on their 'Ignore List' and that's absolutely fine with me.

And Willem please work on not assuming you know more than everyone on this forum. There are a lot of very experienced breeders, rescuers & vets on here, it would do you good to open yourself to learning instead of just forcing your opinion down people's throats.

it is totally up to you what you put down your throat, really, I don't give a damn - if you don't want to read what I publish here just put me on the ignore list, I'm absolutely happy with this.

Personally every time my bitches come into season I am tempted to desex my male dog (but alas I show him) because he loses the plot. I keep them as separated as humanly possible, exercised separately, male dog goes to work with husband (on the farm) for the day & he's in his crate in the house while I exercise the bitches outside.

He's a whiny hormonal mess. How is that better than not being a slave to hormones?

Note - he's still well behaved and will do what he's told, but he gets a really crazy look in his eye & can't sit still/relax

if he is one of the unlucky ones that get an early cancer due to de-sexing or joint and ligament problems he won't be relaxed either.

Our family has always had male dogs and all have been desexed. To be honest they have all passed in old age and none of them have had cancer as you state Willem. Me personally, would always have my dogs, either male or female desexed because, even though I buy them through registered breeders, have no desire to show or breed with them. The decision is ours as a family and I envisage this decision will continue

just to clarify this: I never have stated that all dogs that have been de-sexed will end up with cancer - however, based on recent studies there are strong hints that de-sexing will increase risk regarding cancer and ligament issues significantly.

Personally every time my bitches come into season I am tempted to desex my male dog (but alas I show him) because he loses the plot. I keep them as separated as humanly possible, exercised separately, male dog goes to work with husband (on the farm) for the day & he's in his crate in the house while I exercise the bitches outside.

He's a whiny hormonal mess. How is that better than not being a slave to hormones?

Note - he's still well behaved and will do what he's told, but he gets a really crazy look in his eye & can't sit still/relax

if he is one of the unlucky ones that get an early cancer due to de-sexing or joint and ligament problems he won't be relaxed either.

Can you quote your source for this comment? I'm curious to read a validated paper on the connection between desexing and joint/ligament issues. I'm also really keen to see the study showing desexing and early cancer connections.

see post #42...

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0055937

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102241

http://www.caninesports.com/uploads/1/5/3/1/15319800/vizsla_javma_study.pdf

http://saova.org/articles/Early%20SN%20and%20Behavior.pdf?hc_location=ufi

Eta: here a recent one (May 2016) about the impacts on German Shepherds http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vms3.34/full

Personally every time my bitches come into season I am tempted to desex my male dog (but alas I show him) because he loses the plot. I keep them as separated as humanly possible, exercised separately, male dog goes to work with husband (on the farm) for the day & he's in his crate in the house while I exercise the bitches outside.

He's a whiny hormonal mess. How is that better than not being a slave to hormones?

Note - he's still well behaved and will do what he's told, but he gets a really crazy look in his eye & can't sit still/relax

if he is one of the unlucky ones that get an early cancer due to de-sexing or joint and ligament problems he won't be relaxed either.

...Pros & cons as in health issues

wrt your concerns about health issues you might also be interested in this thread http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/267474-vaccichecklooking-for-interested-dog-owners/.

There are statistics showing that the average live span of dogs declined over the last years by approx. 11%, despite new science, better (?) food and better (???) medical care, and there are strong hints that over-vaccination and de-sexing play a major part in the shorter life span. http://www.doglistener.co.uk/why-are-our-dogs-dying-so-early

There is nothing in that link to support your claims.

The link you have provided is an opinion piece, not an academic study. Furthermore, if you go to the original source, you'll see that the results are descriptive statistics only. So no conclusions can be drawn about any associations with desexing etc. You also cannot conclude that there is a difference in lifespan; as is noted, the surveys are not comparable because there were substantial differences in the way they were conducted.

This is why you need to review and understand the literature before using it in an attempt to support your argument.

we still waiting for your 'scientific sources' you are still holding back (see post #44)- and I can conclude, leave this with me, sometimes you just have to put one and one together. I guess you would have also told people who claimed already 40 years ago that smoking wasn't healthy that they are wrong based on the arguments of the all mighty tobacco industry.

Eta this quote from the link:

three of the most important hormones - before I would do anything that would compromise the control of those hormones I for sure want to see the proof that there are no negative side effects when I gamble with the outcome of thousands years of evolution, and not the other way around. And if there are any serious hints indicating serious side effects, yes I take them serious...and the recent Golden Retriever and Lab studies are scientific studies that can't be ignored.

Eta ....and wrt the 'academic horse' your are riding: I worked nearly 10 years for the American Battelle Institute as a scientist - I think I'm pretty capable of evaluating all kind of scientific and not so scientific information.

Willem - docking usually wasn't done under anaesthetic, with pain killers etc and desexing is. Does that give you at least one significant difference?

Also desexing is done for a myriad of reasons and docking, whilst traditionally done for a myriad of reasons, was assumed to be largely image motivated by the time it was banned.

And yes, my dog is desexed, I chose to desexed him at around 6 months (mini schnauzer). To the OP, do whatever works for you, if I had a larger breed I would probably wait until it's fully grown.

well, de-sexing a male wasn't done always under anesthetic too - so where is the difference?

...the point is that even if I would dock or crop my dog under anesthetic, all done by a vet (yes, I know I wouldn't find a vet to do it if there is no emergency) and with no more pain involved as it is associated with de-sexing, it is still classified as animal cruelty while cropping / docking the balls / uterus are not.

that's an interesting position paper from the AVA wrt mandatory de-sexing: http://www.naiaonline.org/uploads/WhitePapers/Mandatory_Desexing_Statement_Dec071.pdf

quote:

...Pros & cons as in health issues

wrt your concerns about health issues you might also be interested in this thread http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/267474-vaccichecklooking-for-interested-dog-owners/.

There are statistics showing that the average live span of dogs declined over the last years by approx. 11%, despite new science, better (?) food and better (???) medical care, and there are strong hints that over-vaccination and de-sexing play a major part in the shorter life span. http://www.doglistener.co.uk/why-are-our-dogs-dying-so-early

@ corvus & WoofnHoof:

I could use the same argumentation (...pros and cons, old fashion overthinking, no apparent ill effects....) wrt docking and cropping of tails and ears - so how do we justify that latter is classified as animal cruelty and heavily fined, and the 'docking and cropping' of balls and uterus - which is unquestionable a much more extensive surgical modification - is ok as it serves our convenience?...isn't that the pinnacle of hypocrisy?

you might check out Applaws http://www.mypetwarehouse.com.au/applaws-its-all-good-sm-md-breed-adult-dog-food-15kg-p-24342 ...it seems Woolworth gave up on selling it (they had the 2.7 kg packages), I might go online - just have to freeze it as I only feed kibble as an addition.

It's not so much about those not doing the right thing Willem... it's about making all these laws and regulations and then not policing them effectively...

Anyways... it comes down to individual owner decision as to whether they desex their dog at whatever age they feel is appropriate. There are pros and cons on both sides of that debate, and we should leave it at that, OK?

T.

if 'we leave it at that' I'm concerned we soon will have laws like in SA and ACT, and look what's happening now in VIC...and then there is no individual owner decision anymore! The more 'de-sexing' becomes a normal procedure or even a first choice of surgical modification, the sooner we will have the same laws here in NSW.

wouldn't that be an even greater motivation for mass production?...with all the entire dogs available?

Their dog breeding laws are super strict.

and the Swedish dogs know this so they behave differently :D ?

That is just a silly comment. I will only respond to you if you stop trolling.

no it is not. I only want to indicate that at the end it is up to the owner - the Swedish dog owners might have different motivations and drivers behind them, but at the end they demonstrate quite convincingly that you don't have to de-sex your dog to control over population. Conversely we can have the strictest breeding laws here in Australia, but if the puppy farmers and unregistered breeders don't do the right thing, nothing will have any impact on over population.

wouldn't that be an even greater motivation for mass production?...with all the entire dogs available?

Their dog breeding laws are super strict.

and the Swedish dogs know this so they behave differently :D ?

I did go in depth with these specialist especially overseas and there opinion is and this is on there own studies with dogs with cancer especially that the younger they are desexed the more prone they are to get cancer and to get it at a younger age, especially Rottweilers with bone cancer. I spoke to probably 4 oncologist in Australia and two in Europe who were researching Haemangiosarcoma in GSD's specifically and 3 in the US and they all had the same advise that desexing to young is not beneficial to a dogs health both physically and mentally.

My GSD was desexed at 6 months but that was not the cause of her cancer heamangio is believed to be a hereditary cancer and really attacks certain breeds Golden retrievers , GSD, Bernese Mountain dogs etc, etc. But it was bought up regulary in conversations with these experts about desexing early.

unfortunately, staffies are also a breed prone to cancers http://www.ufaw.org.uk/dogs/staffordshire-bull-terrier-mast-cell-tumour

this is a good start for reading: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

and here the result of a recent study http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102241

Not really. Much of the research examining risks for certain types of cancers and joint disorders is breed-specific. For example, the second article you linked to is a study of labs and golden retrievers. Findings from studies such as this cannot be generalised to other breeds. So not very helpful for the OP who is getting an SBT.

There are more recent and more rigorous academic studies reviewing current literature which conclude that, in general, the benefits of desexing likely heavily outweigh the risks. That's without even considering the benefits of reducing the number of unwanted dogs being dumped at pounds.

if this is a valid argument, can someone explain to me why countries like Sweden where only less than 4% of male dogs and approx. 7% of bitches are de-sexed do not have any problems with overpopulation and pounds?...fact is that only USA and Australia is promoting de-sexing as the silver bullet for over-population, and fact is that obviously both countries have problems indicating that this strategy obviously doesn't work.

Perhaps because Sweden has super strict pet ownership laws and dogs are expensive to buy there.

wouldn't that be an even greater motivation for mass production?...with all the entire dogs available?

this is a good start for reading: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

and here the result of a recent study http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102241

Not really. Much of the research examining risks for certain types of cancers and joint disorders is breed-specific. For example, the second article you linked to is a study of labs and golden retrievers. Findings from studies such as this cannot be generalised to other breeds. So not very helpful for the OP who is getting an SBT.

There are more recent and more rigorous academic studies reviewing current literature which conclude that, in general, the benefits of desexing likely heavily outweigh the risks. That's without even considering the benefits of reducing the number of unwanted dogs being dumped at pounds.

...and you will enlighten us and publish the links to those 'more recent scientific studies' that contradicts the findings of the papers I provided?

I'm not going to do your research for you. I have enough of my own to do. :laugh:

Also, I'm not going to post articles that I have access to as an academic, as not all are publicly available.

Before taking such a strong stance against desexing, it would be beneficial to do a more thorough and objective review of the academic literature beforehand (you will find relevant articles if you do this). Then if you decide to post study findings in an attempt to support your argument, you need to ensure that you have a good understanding of the study methodologies/limitations etc.

that's a strange advice from someone hiding his/her sources of knowledge...you don't have to copy the articles, just provide the link to the published scientific study here.

I lost a GSD at 5 to Hemangiosarcomma which is not uncommon in the breed but not usually so young . While trying desperately trying to find a way to help her and speaking to some of the best animal oncologists both here and overseas the common thread was early desexing is not good for any dog. Unfortunately my girl lost her battle 18 months after the stage 3 tumour turning up in her back leg.

Upon looking at getting another dog a female Cane Corso and talking again with the contacts i had made they pleaded with me to desex no earlier than 12 months, but preferably 18 months - 2 years.I had a issue as some breeders were desexing at 8 weeks. All these specialist vets here and overseas would not desex there own dogs before 12 months. Most were after there 2nd birthday.

Anyway my girl got done at 13 months and she has a litter mate and she is totally different. . Her sister is very lanky and she was desexed at 5 months but my girl is solid a bit shorter but way thicker more to the breed standard. Bigger head etc.

That was the selling point for me when these vets and they are specialists in oncology, internal medicine, joint experts etc from Australia, Europe and the states not your regular vet they would not desex there own animals so young.

at this stage no scientist can tell you exactly what impacts early de-sexing has on a dog - all the hints point to negative side effects, and assuming that there is any positive side effect is just gambling with the health of the dog. We know that the right hormone levels are vital for the mood / behaviour and immune system of a dog. In stress situation the adrenaline level is up, causing mammals to become less pain sensitive and increase overall performance, and we know roughly how the thyroid level effects the mood. We know that the testosterone level increases significantly in a young growing dog and that it will reach a peak after 6 to 18 month (approx., depending on individual dog and breed) if we don't cut his balls off before it happens.

We know that the hormone levels vary over times and for different development periods, some hormones level will change even through the day. These hormone patterns are quite complex and they change all the time, one hormone level goes up, the other decreases, following a perfect program designed by thousands of years of evolution. If we interfere with this program without even knowing the details, we risk negative impacts regarding the dogs' immune system, reproductive system and normal behaviour.

Those hormone patterns will vary even more during the development of a young dog when compared to a matured dog. We know that young dogs go through fear phases, and these fear phases are likely linked to specific hormone patterns - however, no one knows the details. So how can anyone make sure that the date of de-sexing a young dog doesn't interfere negatively with a fear phase?....no one can. There is very strong evidence (e.g. Viszla study) that early de-sexing increases the risk of anxiety in dogs (separation anxiety, fear of thunder, fear of humans and dogs leading to fear aggression etc.) significantly, and this is no surprise considering the importance of fear phases for the development of a dog.

this is a good start for reading: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

and here the result of a recent study http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102241

Not really. Much of the research examining risks for certain types of cancers and joint disorders is breed-specific. For example, the second article you linked to is a study of labs and golden retrievers. Findings from studies such as this cannot be generalised to other breeds. So not very helpful for the OP who is getting an SBT.

There are more recent and more rigorous academic studies reviewing current literature which conclude that, in general, the benefits of desexing likely heavily outweigh the risks. That's without even considering the benefits of reducing the number of unwanted dogs being dumped at pounds.

if this is a valid argument, can someone explain to me why countries like Sweden where only less than 4% of male dogs and approx. 7% of bitches are de-sexed do not have any problems with overpopulation and pounds?...fact is that only USA and Australia is promoting de-sexing as the silver bullet for over-population, and fact is that obviously both countries have problems indicating that this strategy obviously doesn't work.

this is a good start for reading: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

and here the result of a recent study http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102241

Not really. Much of the research examining risks for certain types of cancers and joint disorders is breed-specific. For example, the second article you linked to is a study of labs and golden retrievers. Findings from studies such as this cannot be generalised to other breeds. So not very helpful for the OP who is getting an SBT.

There are more recent and more rigorous academic studies reviewing current literature which conclude that, in general, the benefits of desexing likely heavily outweigh the risks. That's without even considering the benefits of reducing the number of unwanted dogs being dumped at pounds.

...and you will enlighten us and publish the links to those 'more recent scientific studies' that contradicts the findings of the papers I provided?

saw 3 dead ones on the way dropping off the kids for school (along the Princess Highway before the Figtree / Wollongong exit); couldn't stop. On the way back I found this one

approx. 500 m before the Dapto-Kanahooka exit; already in a bad decomposed state (based on the smell I would estimate that it was dead since 3-4 days), but no signs of being smashed by a car - really looked like it dropped dead from the sky.

I found it helpful to exercise it on staircases (also a good exercise for the own fitness level :) ) - when going up and down, the stairs dictate a certain rhythm and force the dog into the right position. If the staircase is interrupted by rest platforms: even better as these provide holding points. Find some public places with a lot of stairs and off you go....

Eta disclaimer: obviously exercising it on stairs is not suitable for all sizes of dogs - smaller dogs might struggle.

when working in Jabiru / NT the trees around the mine mess where shared by cockatoos and bats - in the morning the cockatoos flew out, the bats in; in the evening the bats out and the cockatoos in. A pretty noisy and stinky spectacle.