What do I need to ask for? - Page 3

Yes, I ditto the thumbs up on Blitzens posts!

"The "A" allele appears to be very common in some breeds. In these breeds, an overly aggressive breeding program to eliminate dogs testing A/A or A/N might be devastating to the breed as a whole because it would eliminate a large fraction of the high quality dogs that would otherwise contribute desirable qualities to the breed. We recommend that breeders take into consideration the DM Test results as they plan their breeding programs; however, they should not over-emphasize the test results. Instead, the test results should be one factor among many in a balanced breeding program." says OFA. Workingdogz, an honest question for you, and I'm not trying to be confrontational, I truly would like to hear how you would go about utilizing test results if you were, say, a "World Class Breeder" of working dogs? I know you're not a breeder ,so this is of course only hypothetical. Thank you, Joan.

joanro;
Like all decisions made when making a breeding,
everything, the entire dog, would have to be taken in to consideration,
not just one certain test result.

Just like breeding for specific color, coat length etc,
any time you focus on just one element, others will suffer.
This is why when you breed, you have to take a long hard look at the picture
in front of you, the entire picture, and do it honestly and without bias.

But it also means you need to start with the best "artwork" you can possibly find.
Not a "paint by numbers" and you are missing one of the paints and a brush.

Do I think the DM test is going to prevent DM?
On the fence about that just yet,
as it has not really been proven long enough, but,
that said, it certainly cannot hurt to test for it!
I think when you combine most of the health testing available,
I see no reason why NOT to do it. If it were outrageously expensive and still not 100% concrete,
then no, but since it is so affordable, why not?

We have never had the sorrow of dealing with DM, and hope to never have,
but we have had the odd bad hip, so healthy hip/elbow history is
just one of many things important to us when we look for a puppy.

We would also look to what both the sire and dam bring to the breeding,
what needs to be maintained/improved etc,
what their performance and possible production record is as well.

But then, I don't believe we have ever purchased a "World Class" puppy
I know we never bred one

Ok, the world class thing was just a joke cause of the other thread. But my point is, even OFA doesn't have any concrete recommendation for what to do with, for example A/N dogs. I was not suggesting that is a bad idea to test. The dogs testing N/N are not guaranteed not to ever develop DM, so who do you eliminate from the program? The dogs testing A/A are not guaranteed to develop DM. I think it is a conundrum.

joanro
I agree with what you are saying, but along the same train of thought,
OFA Excellent dogs have produced dysplastic progeny,
so does one just not OFA then?

Or, do you do a reasonably amount of testing
to ensure you are breeding only healthy strong vital animals?

I'm all for testing, but again, one must take the entire picture into account.
And of course going with an established breeder that has trained, titled, worked,
lived with and health tested their breeding dogs, and has progeny from
several generations of their own breeding is about the best way to go!

Sure, those types are not very easy to come by in our country,
but I would at the very least select a breeder that has some actual experience
in training and titling dogs to an established recognized standard.

I would also at this time select bloodlines that are known to produce good overall health,
and then select dogs from these lines that are known to produce this as well as
working ability, solid temperment etc.

Like any other form of testing available, it is simply one more tool available to be used.

I agree with you, but I did not say don't test. But unlike H/E testing, there is not guideline set down by the OFA as to what to do with specific results for a specific dog.

The DNA DM test is not intended to eliminate any dogs from breeding. The goal is to prevent producing at risks. At risks can be bred if they are bred to a normal. All puppies will be carriers, no need for DNA. If a carrier is bred to a normal there will be no at risks, there will be normals and carriers. The puppies can be DNA'd at 4 weeks.  

There is only one way to prove that this is a simple recessive mode of inheritance - breed an at risk to an at risk, DNA the litter and all will be at risk also. I assume this has already happened unintentionally and I  would  also assume that OFA and their testing lab is aware of that. Thus opting out of testing for DM by using the notion that N/N are not guaranteed to never develop DM not a very strong argument. Is it impossible, no, anything is possible. Is it probable? No. As Dogz has already pointed out, OFA excellent dogs can and do produce dysplastic progeny. Is that a good reason to argue against xraying hips? I think not.

My gawd, people what can be more simple and more rewarding than swabbing your dog's cheek so you don't produce dogs that develop DM?

joanro;
Thats part of the problem with it, it's still "too new" in some respects.
I think people just need to use it when looking at the overall picture.
I don't think it can hurt to test and publicize the results,
then others can decide on their own what direction they want to take.
And I certainly wasn't implying you thought no one should test

To me, for example, the long coat test means nothing. I don't care about coat length.
If it was a pup I wanted from a breeding I wanted, I would not care if it was long or stock.
To some, coat length is a factor, there is now a test to determine if your dog carries the LC gene,
which amuses me since for so many years, it was never an issue with the SV

Now look, now they are "allowed" again

If down the road they can prove conclusively that the DM test will eradicate it,
then we are all one step ahead by testing the dogs now.
It's always best to know all the good and bad in your lines.

I never said or even suggested NoT to test. All I asked is what do you do with the carrier for example? And I'm not talking should you breed it, but do you destroy it? Again, Blitzen, don't get so upset, I never said don't test. Swabbing a dog's cheek is not going to prevent DM unless all the dogs other than N/N are eliminated, and even they are not guaranteed not to develop it, no more than exraying a dog's hips is not going to prevent HD unless affected dogs are not in the gene pool. It's not rocket science. It just means that breeders are going to have to become hardcore to eliminate this affliction, in spite of what OFA says. That's allI have to say.

I'm not upset with you, joanro, you said you test your dogs. What upsets me are the people who are alwasy looking for excuses to offer to novice buyers as to why they don't test their dogs. 

Of course I wouldn't destroy a carrier. If it were breedworthy, I'd breed it to a normal. If it were pet quality, I'd do as I have always done with pets, place it with a non-breeding agreement.