sandgrubber

The problem here is that reproductive safety tests are ugly and demanding and involve lots of compromises. Who wants to breed dogs and then slaughter the test dogs and their offspring. Use a big sample and the animal rights community is going to be all over you . . . they may do so even for a small sample. Use a small sample and you are vulnerable to the many doubts that come from small sample size. Many drugs simply aren't tested for reproductive safety. Merck would probably have been better off if they hadn't done this testing and could simply say that reproductive safety was not tested . . . so "not for use on ...". I don't know the ins and outs of reproductive testing, but they've gotta be complicated. Eg., the effects of giving a drug to a bitch are likely to vary from the first to the second to the third trimester, and then there's the additional concern of possible effects through lactation. I don't see that there's an easy solution to this problem . . . other than for breeders to use only absolutely necessary chemical exposure for breeding bitches . . . and maybe also dogs.

Sonny is good, especially if your are in the group that thinks of their dogs as furkids...and the dog has a happy disposition.

Sure, do your reading. But don't just read up on Bravecto, read reports on NextGard, Trifexis, Soresto, and the many and various synthetic pyretheroids. Flea and tick treatments are all poisons of one sort or another. All are suspect. All have reports of dogs getting severely ill, having seizures, and/or dying after being treated. Some of these reports no doubt come from individual dogs with high sensitivity. Some are probably dogs whose onset of illness happened to coincide with being treated. You need to weigh the potential problems of treatment with the potential problems from not treating; and you need to compare one treatment against another with regard to both effectiveness and potential side effects. This is extremely difficult to do because data are limited (they test on Beagles so does it apply to CKCS?). . . extremely subjective. If paralysis tick is a problem in your area, the equation is heavily weighed in favor of treatment. If you're worried about a flea or two, stop worrying. If your dog has flea allergies, the equation is weighted differently. In my situation. Frontline no longer works. Fleas are awful here and the do seem to carry tapeworm but we don't have paralysis tick. My dogs share my bed and, in addition to felling bad cause my dogs itch, I get no sleep when the fleas get bad. One of my dogs gets seizures from pyretheroids -- had a horrid incident years back from a spot-on flea treatment based on pyretheroids, and the Soresto collaar provoked mild nervous system problems. Moreover, our local fleas seem to have become immune to the Soresto collar. Bravecto has worked wonderfully for my three dogs with no side effects. At least for three months. I'm ready to continue with it for another three months. I would not use Bravecto or any other non-essential meds on a pregnant bitch . . . although the FOI report on Bravecto is not as clear as Fides reports. Twenty, not 10, pairs of dogs/bitches were used. Ten were treated, ten were used as controls. The sample selection didn't rule out inclusion of bitches with prior history of birth defects: "The dogs were healthy and had a breeding history of at least four pups weaned in at least two of the three previous litters with no congenital malformations in any pup." So some of the bitches probably had prior history of delivering pups with birth defects. Moreover two litters from the control (untreated) group had total litter loss, as opposed to one of the treated group. The lost litters may well have included high defect loads . . .and somehow the bitch absorbed the pups or otherwise failed to deliver because somehow her physiological systems detected that the pups weren't viable. The accusatory Facebook page can be found at: https://www.facebook.com/groups/411371212394679/ The FOI report can be located by googling: BRAVECTO FOI Summary - Food and Drug Administration Happy reading. It's complicated!!!

Pyrantel pamoate suspension is great. It's sold as a pinworm medicine for human infants, as well as a veterinary medicine. Puppies liked the formulation I bought, and it was cheap ($35 bought me enough for a lifetime). Many many breeders use it in the US . . . dosage recommendations are widely available.

I'd say the cost and unavailability of this standard is pretty offensive. What about transparency? Worth a note to your minister. Yah, I know. Most of them are hacks of one sort or another, but this is not a politicized issue so, who knows, someone may think there's a feel good, or a point score advantage to doing something about it.

We have just done this with our border collies. Ours are all 10-15kg so we bought the 20-40kg ones and cut them in half. Because there is no way of knowing if the active drug is spread evenly throughout the chew nobody in any official capacity will ever advise doing it (to cover themselves if your dog ended up with inadequate protection as you could go back at them if they did advise it). I spoke to many people who have done it themselves for a while now so decided it was worth the risk with our dogs. if uneven distribution of the drug through the tablet is the problem, you could resolve that by grinding the table and dividing the resulting stuff into parcels. The 'tablet' in this case is huge . . . as big as an $AU 0.20 coin, so there should be enough stuff to make it easy to split accurately. We have AWFUL flea problems here and fleas have developed a resistance to many meds. My three are on day 87 with Bravecto . . . so far no fleas and one dead tick. Very impressed with the product.

This is not true. Avocado (persin) WILL kill parrots and can be harmful to horses and goats, but they're harmless to dogs . . . apart from being a bit high in fat. See http://www.avocadofactsfordogsandcats.com/ . . . or the sources it quotes (Dr. Jean Dodds and the ASPCA). Swallowing the seed could be a problem . . . you need to watch what your dog does with an avocado to tell. An although there have been cases of dogs becoming deathly ill from eating grapes, most dogs eat grapes with no problem at all. When I had 7 acres of pinot noir, my two Labradors probably ate half a kilo of grapes a day at harvest time (at least . . they followed the harvest crew around and ate drops from dawn to dusk). They were fine. I asked about dogs being poisoned by grapes on a vintners forum. There were several replies saying, 'no worries' ... our dogs gorge themselves. No one reported a dog getting sick from eating grapes. Apples and pears are great. Dogs love them . . there's a little cyanide in the pips, but the pips come out whole in the poop so the concern is minimal. Parrots may not leave much for the dogs, though. Stone fruits, likewise have cyanide in the pits. There are dogs who might get in trouble eating a peach or apricot pit. I'd be inclined to caution. Most dogs don't like citrus . . . though I had a neighbor whose Goldies gobbled down lemons! All the berries are fine . . . apart from blackberry thorns and the damage the dogs may do to plants. But they must be netted. Figs are fine if the birds leave any. My dogs were not interested in passion vines and passion fruit when I had them in WA. The biggest problem I've had with dogs and fruit trees was the dogs fondness for blood and bone fertilizer . . . and manure.

Poor puppy . .. poor owners. The sadder story is that (quoting from the article): Ms Merry said she and Michael then came across a Facebook group dedicated to over 50 alaskan malamutes from the Sandown breeders who suffered the same or similar fate as Malla, and for the past 19 months, have been involved in a major campaign and court case against Gympie dog breeders Peter and Faith Dykstra involving up to 36 dogs. It's weak journalism that the author didn't verify this source or follow it up. But there are 50 other pups suffering from the same or similar fate, someone should be asking about who the sires and dams were, and whether or not they were hip scored. I hope the major campaign and court case is less scatter-shot than this article.

I did this a few years ago. Frankly it wasn't worth the hassle but didn't really have the option as the UK was changing its import rules to allow dogs from the continent over with the basic rabies vaccine and Australia had no vacancies. NZ quarantine kennels are privately owned and run so can charge whatever they want. I think it was about NZ$1600 four years ago. The other downside is that when the dog was reregistered here in WA they put IMP NLZ on his name not UK! Where's the hassle? The requirements before travel seem to be the same. For 3 Labbies I got a quote just under $NZ3800 (for everything related to quarantine in NZ). The equivalent in Oz would be around $AU5100. Plus the NZ facilities are much more generous about allowing visitation, and will be able to board my dogs together. I've never spent time in NZ and wouldn't mind a couple months there.

Two unfortunately common Boston health problems should be mentioned. 1. Hemivertebrae (spinal problems): can be very serious. Avoid dogs with a screw tail. 2. Inability to whelp naturally. A UK survey found more than 80% of Boston litters are delivered by Cesarian . . . they are apparently THE WORST breed in this respect. The US Boston terrier club says that there are 20 eye problems to look out for in the breed ... and there are also skin problems (including dermodex) are common.

I'm thinking of returning to Oz, most likely WA. Quarantine with three dogs in Victoria is a big hurdle. I wouldn't mind spending three months in NZ . . . as required before a dog can go from NZ to Oz. Looks like there is much more choice for quarantine facilities in NZ than in Oz . . . I haven't yet inquired about prices. Are there problems here that I might not have identified?

The focus of the article is the US scene (and there's no question that the AmStaff and pit bull both come out of the US scene). I suspect the bias is a terrier person's frustration with bull breeds being called 'terriers' . . . when he views terriers as earthdogs. IMO the value of the article is focus on breeding macho dogs for macho image. The AKC first recognized the SBT in 1974...two years after it renamed the pit bull-derived breed that it had called Staffordshire Terrier to American Staffordshire Terrier. It is irrelevant, in this context, that the UK recognized the SBT in 1935. I see no denial that there's a long history behind the SBT in Staffordshire. We live in a highly urbanized/suburbanized culture. Dog breeding a la KC, AKC, ANKC, etc. still caters to traditional functions such as herding, retrieving, guarding, etc.. I see the article as interesting in pointing out both 'breeds' and registries that are favored by people who want to project a tough image. Do a little skimming and you'll find that these registries don't put much emphasis on health testing, but do put big emphasis on head girth and body weight. See what you get when you google XXL pit bull. I'll bet you don't find many references to health . . . or even temperament. There's a yabo sub culture that wants big scary dogs. People are paying good money for the image.

I'd suggest reading the full article. It contains much about recent diversification of bull breeds, no doubt opinionated and selectively drawing on history.

As I understand the chemistry involved, most of the stuff in dry food can store for long periods IF kept dry . . . especially if kept cool and dry. Fats will be the first to go. I wouldn't buy a fat-rich product that was near expiry date, especially if it has been stored over summer in a non air-conditioned environment. I have read, from relatively mainstream science sources, that degraded fats have some worrisome properties. The other possible problem is broken bags. Those nasty little moths that lay eggs can get in. I remember buying some out-of-date specials in WA and finding them full of little larvae that would make good treats for the chooks . . . but kinda disgusting as dog food.

What am I doing that creates double posts?

Terrierman's blog today had a lengthy diatribe on the recent (like last 50 years) proliferation of bull breeds. My guess is some of you will find it offensive, but everyone will find it interesting. I've clipped the concluding paragraphs below http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2015/09/what-hell-is-american-staffordshire.html "In the scrub country of Texas and Australia, the water hummocks of Louisiana, Spain and Florida, and the steep green volcanic mountains of Hawaii, working pig and cattle dogs look pretty much like they always have for the last 250 years. These dogs are fast, have good scissor bites, fully developed muzzles, and straight agile legs. In the world of honest stock-working catch dogs, no one spends too much time dreaming up fanciful histories and contrived names. Whatever the dog -- pure bred or cross -- the goal is to avoid the heavy-bodied ponderous dogs so popular among the bridge-and-tunnel set, and create a dog capable to going a full day in rough country. No one who works their terriers to ground, or uses catch dogs to chase semi-wild stock, has any confusion about what kind of dog they need to do their respective jobs, or the differences between them. By definition, a terrier must be small enough in the chest to go to ground in a natural earth. By definition, a catch dog has to be fast enough to catch, and large enough to hold an animal that has escape and mayhem on its mind. Neither dog can do the job if it looks like a "keg on legs" -- an apt description of many of the molosser breeds sold in the back of pet magazines today. The story then is an old one. In the world of true working dogs, form follows function. In the world of rosettes and puppy peddlers, form always follows fantasy. As ironic as it sounds, the blue-blazer rosette chaser and the young wanna-be bull dog man have that much in common."

In my experience, rotting wood is harmless. No splinters. I wouldn't worry about it. The puppies I've had don't like bark, so it may be good. Avoid pebbles. A friend of mine used them and when she took her pup in for Xrays there were pebbles here and there throughout his digestive tract. I've heard of sticks being a problem, but I think it's pretty uncommon. Mostly stick problems come about when someone is playing fetch and gets the puppy all hyped up. Then the puppy gets a stick lodged in its mouth or throat.

I always figured exercise was good and never restricted it. Never had a problem. My bitches (Labrador) have not been exercise maniacs, though. I think it's good to keep muscle tone up. Whelping is hard work.

The $AU has gone down by ~31% against the $US (from $1.05 to $0.72), so price increases are to be expected.

Around $10 US. Probably not a lot more for two than one.

Weed and feed lawn treatments tend to contain 2,4-D, which has the 'good' trait of killing broadleaf plants but not grass. There are a lot of questions as to its safety. Roundup and other glyophate (sp) herbicides have been extensively tested and seem to have no detectable effects on mammals. However, there are serious questions about cumulative and long term effects.

I have choco Labs. I think natural leather as it darkens works beautifully. An embrossed collar might be a good option. I just placed an order with this outfit . . . which came highly recommended and was relatively cheap. https://www.etsy.com/shop/GoK9?ref=listing-shop-header-item-count They seem to be new on Etsy and working hard to establish themselves by keeping prices reasonable. Who needs tags if you can have the dog name and phone number on the collar?

Someone on a well known and controversial blogsite claims that so many brachycephalic bitches require Ceasarians is that puppy noses against the birth canal stimulate oxytocin release. Flat faced pups do this poorly, thus in many cases (a majority of cases for some breeds) a Ceasar is required. According to this theory, the usual argument, that the head is to wide for the pelvis, is not true. If flat puppy faces are the problem, it makes it very simple to breed for free whelping, especially in breeds like the Boston, where some dogs have a bit of muzzle. It might also suggest that some sort of oxytocin therapy could be used to avoid Ceasars although . . . as breeders know . .. oxytocin requires a lot of caution and this would need to be carefully worked out by veterinarians. Does anyone know where the truth lies in this?

This theory has not been tested! The companies that make vaccines have no motivation to test it, and no one else can come up with the money. The duration of immunity IS being tested, ATM, for rabies vaccination. http://www.rabieschallengefund.org/latest/summary-of-the-rabies-challenge-fund-duration-of-immunity-study This study is small budget and funded by private donations. It is necessarily slow because dogs need to be tested for many years, and more than one vaccine needs to be tested. Results to date: Our conclusion from studies with the initial rabies vaccine is that the immunity conferred by that product, and assessed by the in vitro RFFIT, was excellent for the first three years, but declined during the fourth year, and continued to drop during the fifth year. The second vaccine group, which is now three years from vaccination, will remain on study for at least two more years. They are trying to do in vitro tests to see if the immune memory still provides immunity after the antibodies are no longer abundant. This is a horrid process . . . it means they have to subject a control group of unvaccinated dogs and a vaccinated (but no longer showing antibodies) group of dogs to actual rabies. The test fails if the control group do not become infected . . . or if the vaccinated dogs whose antibody level is low do get rabies. For obvious reasons, this has to be done in highly controlled labs. The first set of trials failed because very few of the control group got infected, so they're back to the drawing board. Parvo and distemper are different from rabies in that some dogs do survive, and survivors appear to be immune. So there is a good chance that a vaccine can confer lifetime immunity. However, this has not been systematically tested. I still err on the side of caution and do parvo and distemper vaccines at one, four, and seven and 10 years. I'm in the US, and the law says rabies must be done every three years.

Most likely you won't be able to keep her quiet. just try to keep her from going nutty crazy run-around bazerk and keep the incision dry and clean. Mine have never bothered the incision and E-collars have been unnecessary. Had one mess up the stitches, get infected, and have to go back for cleanout and stitching after doing some crawling on her belly in the dirt under the house. Also had complications, once, with what I thought was an emergency spay (unwanted pregnancy). As it turned out, she wasn't preggers, but something was out with her hormones and the vet described her as "in season" (she wasn't . . . she had been in season 5-6 weeks prior). This resulted in formation of a blood-rich mass in her abdomen . . . which appeared to me as a lump. This got so big it pressed on her bladder and caused frequent urination. The vet monitored this with ultrasound. They had some concern that maybe the problem was that a sponge had somehow been left inside. The problem cleared with no treatment, though at one point they were talking like they might need to do surgery. She's been fine since, and never really acted sick. Bottom line . . . there are occasional problems but they are rare. Monitor carefully. she'll be fine.