This is a placeholder text
Group text
by darylehret on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
"Sadly German Shepherd Myelopathy is unique to the breed and breeders that are breeding without this test should be dragged out to the nearest ally and worked over.. Twice."
Ha ha, tell us how you REALLY feel! Perhaps German Shepherd Myelopathy (not DM) is unique to GSD's, but there is NO reliable test FOR GSD's. It's worse to spread a false idea AS IF it were true, than to reject an idea that proves nothing.
by laura271 on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
What makes me fling my hands up in exasperation about the DM test is that a "clear" result doesn't mean that your GSD won't develop or be a carrier for the type of DM that is specific to GSDs. (As I understand the current DM test, I would be thrilled if someone told me that I was understanding the test incorrectly.)
by khlewis on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
Ofa recommends the test for GSDs and I think it's definitely better than nothing to test with something that might be slightly inaccurate than to not test at all. At least you've made the best effort possible to breed healthy dogs by having the parents tested.
by Keith Grossman on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
"The whole flipped up issue with carriers is that two carriers make it happen! Why risk it? The more I learn about this the more I'm petrified going forward.. It's not this serious but would you have you know... umm .. yeah.. "relations" with someone who has some kind of issue? Well, no.. I would not.. So why breed dogs where one has a issue?"
Are you suggesting that we eradicate cystic fibrosis by forbidding people who carry one abnormal copy of the responsible gene from having children?
I've been giving this issue a lot of thought lately and I'll have to disagree. Putting aside for a moment the fact that this test doesn't even cover the form of DM that is specific to GSD's, meaning that you could breed two parents who both show up as clear for this version of the condition and still end up with puppies that have the other, I find the philosophy of removing carriers from the gene pool overly limiting especially when the condition can be avoided simply by breeding carriers to non-carriers.
It's already well established that breeding for any single trait, say, color or side gait, is detrimental to the breed and breeding for the single trait of n/n for DM is no exception. As advances are made in DNA sequencing, we are likely to see markers emerge for all sorts of possible afflictions in our dogs...allergies, EPI, fistulas, thyroid problems, ANA, vWdz, pannus...the list is endless. If we eliminate from consideration for breeding any dog who carries one abnormal copy of the gene for any of these conditions, we will eventually not have any more dogs to breed.
Responsible breeders will test their stock and only breed carriers to non-carriers thereby producing no puppies afflicted with the condition. Irresponsible breeders are going to do what irresponsible breeders do anyway.
Are you suggesting that we eradicate cystic fibrosis by forbidding people who carry one abnormal copy of the responsible gene from having children?
I've been giving this issue a lot of thought lately and I'll have to disagree. Putting aside for a moment the fact that this test doesn't even cover the form of DM that is specific to GSD's, meaning that you could breed two parents who both show up as clear for this version of the condition and still end up with puppies that have the other, I find the philosophy of removing carriers from the gene pool overly limiting especially when the condition can be avoided simply by breeding carriers to non-carriers.
It's already well established that breeding for any single trait, say, color or side gait, is detrimental to the breed and breeding for the single trait of n/n for DM is no exception. As advances are made in DNA sequencing, we are likely to see markers emerge for all sorts of possible afflictions in our dogs...allergies, EPI, fistulas, thyroid problems, ANA, vWdz, pannus...the list is endless. If we eliminate from consideration for breeding any dog who carries one abnormal copy of the gene for any of these conditions, we will eventually not have any more dogs to breed.
Responsible breeders will test their stock and only breed carriers to non-carriers thereby producing no puppies afflicted with the condition. Irresponsible breeders are going to do what irresponsible breeders do anyway.
by VKGSDs on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
Totally agree, Keith.
As far as the OP, yes if I saw a dog advertised as "clear" I would assume it means the dog tested clear or is clear by parentage (being clear-clear).
As far as the OP, yes if I saw a dog advertised as "clear" I would assume it means the dog tested clear or is clear by parentage (being clear-clear).
by khlewis on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
@ Keith,
I'm in complete agreement. If you check the ofa website, eliminating carriers and at risk dogs would eliminate almost 50% of the gsd population (given that there is a large sample and one would think that would be mostly breeding stock). Some even argue that breeding an at risk dog to a clear dog is ok because the litter would be all carriers.
I'm in complete agreement. If you check the ofa website, eliminating carriers and at risk dogs would eliminate almost 50% of the gsd population (given that there is a large sample and one would think that would be mostly breeding stock). Some even argue that breeding an at risk dog to a clear dog is ok because the litter would be all carriers.
by Blitzen on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
I see nothing wrong with using an at risk with a clear. The goal should be to not produce more at risks.
by khlewis on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
@Blitzen
I agree!! Though I don't own any at risk dogs, I would be ok with breeding one to a clear dog.
I agree!! Though I don't own any at risk dogs, I would be ok with breeding one to a clear dog.
by Blitzen on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
A simple recessive is so easy to work around. We should be thankful that we have the DNA test available to those who want to use it.
by Kaffirdog on 04 December 2012 - 14:12
"What makes me fling my hands up in exasperation about the DM test is that a "clear" result doesn't mean that your GSD won't develop or be a carrier for the type of DM that is specific to GSDs. (As I understand the current DM test, I would be thrilled if someone told me that I was understanding the test incorrectly.)"
So what is the point of testing if the result doesn't mean anything anyway?
Margaret N-J
So what is the point of testing if the result doesn't mean anything anyway?
Margaret N-J
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
