WreckitWhippet Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 My breed doesn't even make their list... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortstep Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Might be accurate for your breed, but what about the other breeds? We've already seen that you quoted inaccurate data for chi's, and if they are relying on owner reporting for breed then the whole database is suspect. The problem is people are too quick to trust scientists and think the sun shines out of their bottoms. You are proof of that SS because you keep posting links without thinking about the content critically. The decision makers are doing the same, guilty until proven innocent is right, doesn't matter that there is no credible data to back up their ideas, they are just jumping on the anti breeder bandwagon. Firsly I do not know if Chi have no eye disease in Australia or not, I am working off of Toy dogs information that the chi is not eye tested in this country and she is not aware of any eye disease. However in the UK, US, Canada, Sweeden, Norway, Finland, they either highly recommend or mandate eye certs for Chi. That is all I know. I think breeders need to proactive espcially right now and yes they should be able to prove their dogs are not sick if they are being accused by 'these' decisions makers. I do a DNA test on my dogs that I know they are negative on, because Kennel club people are working that some people might cheat on their pedigrees, so I have to be treated like I cheat too and cannot have more than one generation of Normal by parentage DNA results. And who is pushing this song and dance? Not 'these' decsions makers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 My breed doesn't even make their list... Impossible, it's a genetic mess that desperately needs to be outcrossed, SS said so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 My breed doesn't even make their list... Impossible, it's a genetic mess that desperately needs to be outcrossed, SS said so Hey, according to them SBT's are disease free when the stud books are all open, use the SBT as the cross and taa-dahhhh problems solved. They can be affected by L2-HGA and HC, there is a DNA test available for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Staffies for all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Might be accurate for your breed, but what about the other breeds? We've already seen that you quoted inaccurate data for chi's, and if they are relying on owner reporting for breed then the whole database is suspect. The problem is people are too quick to trust scientists and think the sun shines out of their bottoms. You are proof of that SS because you keep posting links without thinking about the content critically. The decision makers are doing the same, guilty until proven innocent is right, doesn't matter that there is no credible data to back up their ideas, they are just jumping on the anti breeder bandwagon. Firsly I do not know if Chi have no eye disease in Australia or not, I am working off of Toy dogs information that the chi is not eye tested in this country and she is not aware of any eye disease. However in the UK, US, Canada, Sweeden, Norway, Finland, they either highly recommend or mandate eye certs for Chi. That is all I know. I think breeders need to proactive espcially right now and yes they should be able to prove their dogs are not sick if they are being accused by 'these' decisions makers. I do a DNA test on my dogs that I know they are negative on, because Kennel club people are working that some people might cheat on their pedigrees, so I have to be treated like I cheat too and cannot have more than one generation of Normal by parentage DNA results. And who is pushing this song and dance? Not 'these' decsions makers. But short step cant you see what you are saying? Surely you cant expect breeders should race around and get all of these tests done when they have no reason to because they havent seen it ? The beagle page has dozens and many Ive never even heard of being inthe breed let alone this country - why would I start to test my dogs for ALL of these things to prove they are healthy? If I saw it or I was alerted to it being a risk I will then be pro active but surely Ive misunderstood what you are saying and you dont expect a breeder to test for everything on the list in case when there is no reason other than a LIda data base to say there is even an in case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Staffies for all! Bloody hell its no wornder every one is breeding them and wanting them! Just take their recommendations from the LIda data base :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Staffies for all! Bloody hell its no wornder every one is breeding them and wanting them! Just take their recommendations from the LIda data base :rofl: how far out of touch is LIDA if they have no idea about L2-HGA and HC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Well with this list for beagles Im going sticking with in breeding where none of this has been seen in over 30 years because if outcrossing puts my dogs at risk for any of that stuff it doesnt look like much fun to me.! Organ System Involved Cardiovascular Bundle branch block Factor VII Deficiency in Dog Factor VIII Deficiency Haemolytic Anaemia Haemophilia A Pulmonary stenosis Tetralogy of Fallot Ventricular septal defect Von Willebrand's disease Endocrine Hypothyroidism Lymphocytic thyroiditis Thyroiditis Gastrointestinal Allergies Hypercholesterolaemia Immune Immunoglobulin A deficiency in Dogs Integument Allergies Atopic dermatitis Cutaneous Asthenia Demodicosis Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Necrotizing panotitis Perianal gland tumor Sebaceous gland tumor Musculoskeletal Calcification of intervertebral discs Cleft lip Cleft Palate Multiple epiphyseal dysplasia Otocephalic syndrome Short tail Nervous/sensory Cataract Cataract with microphthalmia Corneal Dystrophy Distichiasis Epilepsy Eversion of nictitating membrane Gangliosidosis GM1 Glaucoma Globoid cell leukodystrophy Lysosomal Storage Disease Optic nerve hypoplasia, bilateral Persistent pupillary membrane Progressive Retinal Atrophy (PRA) (X-linked) Retinal dysplasia Respiratory Allergies Urogenital Amyloidosis Cancer, bladder Hermaphroditism Kidney aplasia, unilateral Mononephrosis Renal hypoplasia, bilateral Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortstep Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Again. Forget purebred breeders working to make it accurate they should be yelling their bloody heads off about any of it being used to judge our breeds and what we do. We only breed 8 and a half thousand dogs a year australia wide and everyone else breeds a couple of hundred thousand how is the stats they collect on any dog that looks like our breeds going to help us and why should we have to make decisions in our breed based on what is happening outside of what we are doing? However, not much bloody chance of that when the ANKC gave em 30,000 bucks to fund it. Before you know it we will be told there is a prevalence of 10,000 and we only bred 1000 LOL that is likely true but we only have ourselves to blame for this situation, in my opinion. Now as I understand it, the total disease tracking system is not near complete yet. All dogs will soon have to be microchiped ANKC will have to collect the MC number on every dog ad link it to the dogs registration number. Vets will send the information linked to the dogs MC number. Uni collects all the registration records with MC number and downloads the vet records directly on to each dogs uni record. So only a disease for the dog with the KC MC number will be recorded for that dog, making it every accurate as far as tracking the ANKC dogs (Dx could be suspect however). But the real way this will be used to is to track the disease to the direct dogs in matings. Since they also are tracking the registration numbers of each dog to the MC number, they then can also track every pup back to it's parents, thereby tracking and recording any diseases the pups those parents have and can also link it back to grandparents. Here is the basis and data for the EBV system. They also can directly track each disease to each breeder BTW. As you may remember I was very vocally oppose to this on this forum and elsewhere, but no action has been taken and they system is slowing being put into place. so now I have to live with it and will make the best of it. So we have known for several years at least this was coming. Now I will just now have to make the most of it. I really an not worried as I follow all my pups closely so know what is going on with them. If there were any surprises then I would want to know anyway so this would bring them to my attention. Now all I can do is hope it helps me to breed better dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Time for all breeders to stand up to our vets and request that NONE of our dogs information is collected and distributed in any form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 (edited) Again. Forget purebred breeders working to make it accurate they should be yelling their bloody heads off about any of it being used to judge our breeds and what we do. We only breed 8 and a half thousand dogs a year australia wide and everyone else breeds a couple of hundred thousand how is the stats they collect on any dog that looks like our breeds going to help us and why should we have to make decisions in our breed based on what is happening outside of what we are doing? However, not much bloody chance of that when the ANKC gave em 30,000 bucks to fund it. Before you know it we will be told there is a prevalence of 10,000 and we only bred 1000 LOL that is likely true but we only have ourselves to blame for this situation, in my opinion. Now as I understand it, the total disease tracking system is not near complete yet. All dogs will soon have to be microchiped ANKC will have to collect the MC number on every dog ad link it to the dogs registration number. Vets will send the information linked to the dogs MC number. Uni collects all the registration records with MC number and downloads the vet records directly on to each dogs uni record. So only a disease for the dog with the KC MC number will be recorded for that dog, making it every accurate as far as tracking the ANKC dogs (Dx could be suspect however). But the real way this will be used to is to track the disease to the direct dogs in matings. Since they also are tracking the registration numbers of each dog to the MC number, they then can also track every pup back to it's parents, thereby tracking and recording any diseases the pups those parents have and can also link it back to grandparents. Here is the basis and data for the EBV system. They also can directly track each disease to each breeder BTW. As you may remember I was very vocally oppose to this on this forum and elsewhere, but no action has been taken and they system is slowing being put into place. so now I have to live with it and will make the best of it. So we have known for several years at least this was coming. Now I will just now have to make the most of it. I really an not worried as I follow all my pups closely so know what is going on with them. If there were any surprises then I would want to know anyway so this would bring them to my attention. Now all I can do is hope it helps me to breed better dogs. Well Im sorry Im not taking it on the chin.I dont reckon we should be as much to blame as other players in this game of diseases data base and what our dogs might suffer with. People who came at a topic with no objectivity and decided to go ahead and fix a problem they didnt really know much about because they chose to work without talking to the people they were bad mouthing If they had they would know that there was a glaring fault in their system - Purebred breeders only breed papered dogs and a dog that is called a breed isnt necessarily a dog we bred. Edited July 10, 2011 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortstep Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 (edited) Well Im sorry Im not taking it on the chin.I dont reckon we should be as much to blame as other players in this game of diseases data base and what our dogs might suffer with. People who came at a topic with no objectivity and decided to go ahead and fix a problem they didnt really know much about because they chose to work without talking to the people they were bad mouthing If they had they would know that there was a glaring fault in their system - Purebred breeders only breed papered dogs and a dog that is called a breed isnt necessarily a dog we bred. The microchip tracking will make that a non issue, if the MC numbers tracks back ot an ANKC dogs then it goes on that dogs record, in fact it stops ANKC dogs from being blamed for other non ANKC dogs problems. The way I am looking at it is, it will hopefully clear up a lot of unknown information. It can in fact prove that ANKC dogs are notsick dogs, and just like with the Chi discussion, it will prove if Chi are getting Dx with eye disease at the vets office or at a specialty vet. Then we can deal with the facts. From the EBV point of view I think it woudl be great to have several generations of vet visit data collected on the dogs in the pedigree and their offspring. I wonder if we the breeders will ever see that, more likely the dog wil just get a risk number or some such thing, leaving us to guess exactly what the problem was or was not. Edited July 10, 2011 by shortstep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortstep Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Time for all breeders to stand up to our vets and request that NONE of our dogs information is collected and distributed in any form. I wil ask my Vet about this. Last time I asked he was not on the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 Time for all breeders to stand up to our vets and request that NONE of our dogs information is collected and distributed in any form. I wil ask my Vet about this. Last time I asked he was not on the system. nor was mine, however I will be requesting that none of my dogs information is entered. It's not a legal obligation for us or our vets to provide the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortstep Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 nor was mine, however I will be requesting that none of my dogs information is entered. It's not a legal obligation for us or our vets to provide the info. But really what is the point. There really is nothing I take my dogs to vet about that I would worry about ending up on some database. It might help pick up trends in our breeds that we might not see until much later, provided that information is given back to us. And as I said before it will only track MC numbers back to the dogs themselves, so my dogs may help prove that my breeds health status is not a welfare issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 perhaps I might not have a problem with it, if every vet could get a diagnosis correct and diagnosis was properly confirmed. The number of owners who have been told their dogs have HD, ED, luxating patella etc and there's found to be no cause for concern upon seeking a second opinion, instills no confidence in me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toy dog Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 perhaps I might not have a problem with it, if every vet could get a diagnosis correct and diagnosis was properly confirmed. The number of owners who have been told their dogs have HD, ED, luxating patella etc and there's found to be no cause for concern upon seeking a second opinion, instills no confidence in me. nor i, e.g. one of my girls was walking very wonky in the back legs, took her to not my regular vet but because he was on hols at the time i decided to go to my local vet. got her to walk they suggested that she might have HD and it was something to do with her hips. xray hips. couldn't find a problem with hips or patellas. referred me to a specialist in the field. paid $150 for him to say hmmmmmmmm don't really know i can refer you to a professor at uni. meanwhile......took her back to my vet who had come back from hols. straight away my vet felt on her back and she flinched "bingo" he said. x-ray her back showed me the xray, we both looked at the discs one was squashed. bingo he said again problem is slipped disc....on meds never be right as rain we know that but this is a classic example of wrong diagnoses and me having to pay first $300 for first 2 x-rays and then $150 for no diagnoses at all so you got that right sometimes there can be a wrong diagnoses so would they log that info on the system even if they didn't know what it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullbreedlover Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 We need the breed standards re written so they are less open to interpretation and we need judges who can effectively judge on that standard. Then we say as we do now the dog is judged on the day for how it conforms to the breed standard and if thats important to us when we choose a mate we take that into account but its only one of the things we need to take into account. The show ring is to judge the dog thats entered against its breed standard - thats what it always has been and in my opinion all it ever should be and if the KC simply said that and worked at breed standard interpretations life would be much simpler when we defend ourselves. Yep exactly - when you say words like moderately, long , short, etc people see longer, more moderate or shorter as better - depending on the judge. We need ratios - this bit should equal this bit etc Take a look at the basset ears set low has seen them set lower and lower and lower - they should have said where they should sit in comparison with the eye level or similar so everyone didnt keep going for lower set. We rely on this in the breed critiques but even then who is writing the critiques and we shouldnt need a critique - its should be clear to everyone . Ears: Set on low, just below line of eye. Long, reaching only slightly beyond end of muzzle of correct length, but not excessively so. Narrow throughout their length and curling well inwards; very supple, fine and velvety in texture. Actually Steve the current Basset Hound standard says where the ear set should be in relation to the level of the eye I see you have ignored my previous posts. Oh well, thems the breaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lhok Posted July 10, 2011 Share Posted July 10, 2011 The LIDA system would work if vets could get the diagnoses right and also have some clue as to what breeds people have instead of only knowing a few of the popular breeds. I used to work as a vet nurse, if a rarer breed came in they would have no clue as to what it was. The Maremma pup that came in for the puppy school was written down as a White Golden Retriever even though the owner stated it was a Maremma. As to the whole standards thing I am finding this all interesting as I am only just starting to get involved with the purebred world after having cross bred dogs and I know I might have gotten unlucky but the majority of them have had some "genetic" problem like HD/ED and cataracts in young dogs. --Lhok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now