Czech GSD's with bad hips - Page 30

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Prager

by Prager on 02 December 2012 - 13:12

Wow . I did not understand why the opposition.  That is interesting. Are the people here that brain washed that they think that if someone  does not think much of OFA or better yet if someone  think that OFA can do better job that they are doing  that this someone would indicate that I use for breeding dysplastic dogs? That is quite a long projection? I have developed with Tina Barber LMX system before anyone else and I produce some of the best hips averages. I am promoting Fred Lanting's book on hips on my website and am selling it basically for cost just to get the info out. I have in past sponsored seminars on reading x rays and breeding better hips. I am telling people here that I confer and learn from the best radiologists in Czech and in US about the results of reading  hips x rays. I am advising people on how to position hips and  how to read hips. On nutrition and upbringing to get the best hips environmentally,..... I have done much, much more, but these I mentioned  here and that made some people think that I  would  use for breeding dogs with HD?!??! Wow ! and again Wow. 
....
 Prager Hans
 

by Blitzen on 02 December 2012 - 14:12

Never mind...not important. Some things are best left unsaid.

by Blitzen on 02 December 2012 - 14:12


http://www.offa.org/stats_hip.html?view=2

This is a link to some interesting OFA statistics on HD. It looks like, per their records and based on what would probably be mostly x-rays that were expected to get a normal rating,  the breed is experiencing a modest reduction in HD.


gagsd4

by gagsd4 on 02 December 2012 - 15:12


by Blitzen on 02 December 2012 - 16:12

Very interesting link, gagsd4. Thanks. Clearly OFA needs to be more critical of film quality and positioning. There will always be vets and techs who are more skilled at manipulating the dogs being xrayed. I've seen it many times myself, the first xray suggests subluxation and/or a shallow socket and a closer look will almost always show that the dog could have been positioned better. I can remember xraying a few dogs 3, 4 times before we got an xray we felt would pass. Some I know routinely re-xray fairs if the dog was sedated for the fair and take another with the dog awake. Most times the second xray gets the dog an upgrade. Maybe OFA needs to offer some sort of certifcation program for vets?

 It's also notable that most of those dogs, I think all on one of the graphs, that received upgrades were sedated for the failing xray, awake for the passing xray. I really wish OFA would require sedation to the point of relaxation for hips xrays (in addition to doing a better job of pre-screening diagnostic quality before accepting and sending xrays to their readers).  

OFA sure isn't perfect, but I don't know of any other organization that does a better job either. I guess it's just the nature of the beast to see opposing views when personal interpretation comes into play. However, with the use of computerized reading progams, I'd think that we should be seeing improvement. I don't know when this article was published, need to look. I have heard some say that OFA is more strict with grades than it once was, dogs that would have been fairs aren't getting number today etc.. Anyone noticed that?

guddu

by guddu on 02 December 2012 - 17:12

The type of sedation used, not just whether dog was sedated also affects the results. for this reason in some registries, it is standard practice to indicate the sedation that was used. I think its a bad idea to take pictures without adequate sedation.

by Blitzen on 02 December 2012 - 17:12

Thumbs Up Guddu, I totally agree.

by johan77 on 02 December 2012 - 18:12

I guess the bottomline is that as long as few dogs are evalutated by an offcial registry no one gain on it, not the breed, breeders or puppybuyers. If people should trust a breeders and his own specialist this only work as long as they are doing a better job than the experts working in the official registry, and who would judge that? It´s another story if a certain dog have been evaluated with mild HD/ED by an official registry and let´s say the police is intressted by this dog, in such cases they can have their own experts that evaluate if the dog is functional despite his HD remarks, this is done in denmark and norway what I heard when it comes to policedogs that have been evalutaed with some form of HD/ED remarks by the offcial registry in their respective country. Those who do the evaluations in the official registry are doing it under the rules and evaluations they are bound to, they are not evaluation if the dogs hips are likely functional. For example there was much protest here in sweden when we were forced to start using the FCI way of evaluating hips in year 2000, FCI uses the norbergs angle that we didn´t used before because not all breeds are suited for this because differences in how their hips looks, suddenly breeds started to show much HD over a night and some breeds was allowed to use the old system again. For some years know they have started to pay less attention on the norbergs angle and more looks how well the fit is between socket and ball, because this have shown to be more important for function than how deep the ball is in the socket, so this mean that a dog that previous was rated C can get a B today and therefore is breedable. Now when the norbergs angle is less important and they put more emphais on the fit an A-hip today is better than it was before they shifted their evaluations. If this shift in evaluation is done in all countries that use the FCI gradings or only here I don´t know. Moral of the story, today they believe this is the best way to evaluate but if they in the future found more things that is important for healthy hips they may change their evaluations based on new knowledge, just because norbergs angle says a dog has HD it doesn´t mean it could be functional even if it´s not breedable.

A combined HD/ED evaluation costs around 200 dollars here, not really a huge cost for a puppybuyer if compared to what you spend on the dog in a lifetime. The offcial registry by the kennel club is also excellent for information, a few seconds and everyone can get information about HD/ED evaluated progeny of all dogs, or more specific info about which combinations have given what, very user friendly and easy to use. Regardless if it´s HD/ED or other healthproblems, if 30% is evaluated in a litter you have 30% facts, the rest is only a guessing game and hence harder to predict.

The information from the kennel clubs registry can also be used by breedclubs or other organizations, like this one, all studs born year 2000 or later with at least 5 litters where at least 15 dogs should be evaluated for HD, in this list the red marked dogs means studs that produced more than 30 evaluated progeny which are above 25% HD, the blue dogs the same but have produced less than 10% HD. However statistics must be read in correct way, more evaluated progeny is better of course, but I wouldn´t mind a dog that may have had a little more HD but very liitle ED and is healkthy and strong in general, just like a dog with about the smae number of HD produced but one have only slight faulst and the other have many severe.

http://www.svenskbruksschafer.com/statistik/hanar%2015.pdf 








by hexe on 02 December 2012 - 20:12

Hans asked, " I have done much, much more, but these I mentioned here and that made some people think that I would use for breeding dogs with HD?!??! Wow ! and again Wow. "

In short, Hans, yes.  Yes, there are people who thought exactly that, despite, or based upon, what you said and what you did NOT say. In this day and age, what is left unspoken is as, if not more, important that what is said.





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top