OFA statistics - Page 1

OFA statistics based on breeds having at least 100 evaluations from January 1974 through December 2005: GSD are ranked #39 overall in percentage of dysplastics vs number of evaluations. Number evaluated - 86907; 3.4% excellent; 19% dysplastic Based on the total number of xrays submitted per breed, GSD's rank #3. Goldens are #1 with 109,798 xrayed; 3.5% excellent; 20.2% dysplastic. Rottweilers #2 with 85,308 xrayed; 7.9% excellent; 20.5% dysplastic. Also of interest is Labs are ranked #74 with 176,444 xrayed; 16.8% excellent; 12.3% dysplastic.

Sorry, meant to say "based on the total of xrays submitted per breed ranked higher than the GSD...." After factoring in the Labs, GSD's rank 4th in total number of hip xrays submitted to OFA.

??? Are those statistics based on total X-Rays submitted or total X-Rays submitted with the box checked to disclose the bad results? Interesting, being from the land of OTCH Goldens they don't discuss Dysplasia as openly as GSD or Rottie owners. My vet had mentioned her practice has seen a dramatic rise in cases of Dysplasia in Labradors, guess her observations were correct.

The OFA stats are based on the number of xrays submitted and evaluated. It's my understanding that if that box is checked, negative results per se will not go on their website, but they are still counted in the statistics. I found it interesting that, as a general observation, where the percentage of excellent ratings increases, the incidence of HD seems to decline. Not really sure how much importance to place on OFA ratings though since I've heard numerous stories about dogs receiving one rating, being re-xrayed and getting another. It happened to 2 of my own dogs. Some of it is in the quality of the film, the level of relaxation of the dog, and the expertise of the person doing the xraying.

phooey !! I believe that if x rays are not of sufficient "quality" to be read - they would be rejected as just that ! I also know several excellent rated dogs in different breeds that produced severely dysplastic pups (at an early age). If I OFA my dog at exactly 24 mos. and he gets a fair -- that's how his hips look for his age on that day. If I x ray him again when he's 9 - and he's had little or no FURTHER DETERIORATION OF THE JOINT - THEN 'FOR HIS AGE" HE MIGHT EARN A GOOD ! Again, if the x-rays are not up to OFA standards, they would say so. When I stopped breeding I had 8 GENERATIONS UNBROKEN OF OFA HIPS AND ELBOWS ON THE DAM'S SIDE - THAT IS NOT BY ACCIDENT - that is from breeding OFA TO OFA and FEEDING PROPERLY _- TOO MANY PEOPLE ARE MAKING TOO MANY EXCUSES AS TO WHY THEIR DOG HAS BAD HIPS - THE OFA IS ONE BIG REASON WHY MORE GSD'S HAVE GOOD HIPS TODAY -- IF THE NEUF PEOPLE HAD UTILIZED THEIR SERVICES 30 YEARS AGO, THEY WOULD (MOST LIKELY) HAVE MADE MORE IMPROVEMENT IN THEIR OVERALL HIP STATUS THAN THEY HAVE !! certainly, carrying their OVERWEIGHT PUPPIES UP AND DOWN STAIRS didn't help any hips !! CONSISTENCY IS KEY -- GOOD HIPS "generally" make more GOOD HIPS - THERE IS FAR MORE DATA TO SUPPORT HIS TODAY THAN THERE WAS 30 years ago when people were screeming "enviornmental" causes - and it took 3 large men to hold up a CRIPPLE AMERICAN CHAMPION dog so that he could get a breeding to a CHAMPION BITCH. And what did the breeders say then ? that some still say today -- that's okay -- if I get 6 pups - a couple of them are bound to have OK hips !!

Pineridge, OFA is not always consistent. 2 dogs I bred were xrayed the same week by 2 different vets, one in Utah, one in Alaska. Both dogs were rejected by OFA ON THE VERY SAME DAY- mild HD. Both vets said -no way - so the dogs were done again, the xrays resubmitted within a month of the rejections and both received good ratings. I got one of those dogs back and his hips at 10 year of age were still free of HD. I have friends with similar stories, dogs do not always get the OFA ratings they deserve. However, all things considered, OFA is right most of the time I think and is still the only certifying agency I trust. I have to think that my experiences were unusual and the exception rather than the rule. I never counted the number of OFA dogs I've owned and bred, but it must be somethere around 15, 20 and these 2 were the only ones that did not receive the evaluation expected. It did teach me to always think about another xray on a questionable dog, OFA does not always reject poor quality films and they do occasionally make mistakes.

Blitzen -=- i can seconf what you say -- i had a dof within the past couple of years OFA'd -- mind you --- i personally [ and very qualified at that and without predjudice ] read the x-rays with the first vet in regards to the quality of the film /postion and structures of my dog --- a second vet had the same findings -- we all agreed that this dog would get an OFA excellent -- - got back the report ..."fair"was the rating -- i was astonished -- the bone was super .. the relationship of the head of the femur into the acetabulum was perfect -- had i not diagnosed this myself and with two others .. and not being certified i would have taken the OFA as gospel -- but not ever again -- you are correct as i , in my opinion i deduct if this happened to me more than once then --possibly many dogs do not get the rating they should

Alphapup, The same thing just happened to a friend of mine with Malamutes. The vets and the owners all thought the dog would get an excellent, but OFA said "fair". They may re-xray him and send it to OFA again.