Buyer Beware - DM information - Page 5

---- >If you haven't added it, a section on the tests results of dogs that may subsequently be tested from clear parents  

Sadly, the OFA has given an automatic clear to first generation progeny of tested dogs. Therefore, people wont be testing these dogs :( People wont spend money to test already cleared dogs, especially in this economy...

Again, I thank you for your idea! It is brilliant and I am very grateful to you for your excellent suggestion to keep track, officially.

Marjorie
http://www.gsdbbr.org The German Shepherd Dog Breed Betterment Registry
BE PROACTIVE!
http://mzjf.com --> The Degenerative Myelopathy Support Group  

Just because the OFA has presumed all progeny to be clear doesn't necessarily mean that everybody will not test progeny, I wouldn't make that assumption. Some people have a 'belt and braces' philosophy. As I say you could also encourage people to test litters from clear progeny via your page. If they don't they don't, but there is nothing to be lost by asking for volunteers to 'test the test'. Those with a specific interest in DM may be interested in doing so.

The OFA web site has been updated to state that there have been two dogs that were diagnosed with DM but were not homozygous for the SOD1 mutation detected by the UM test. So we know that the UM test does not cover all forms of DM. In particular, just because a dog is "clear" by the UM test does not me the dog cannot develop DM. http://www.offa.org/dnatesting/dmexplanation.html Note that the test is now described as being for the most common form of DM. That means the most common form across all dogs. Another form of the disease *may* be more common in a particular breed. Of the two dogs one was a Bernese Mountain Dog that was homozygous for a different SOD1 mutation. The other was my GSD. He was homozygous for the normal form of the SOD1 gene. The genetic cause of his DM is unknown but UM is working on it. Again my dog is "clear" by the UM test but was diagnosed by UM as having DM. Breeders should not state that their dogs cannot develop DM. The UM test only covers one form of the disease. There are at least two other forms, one of which is known to occur in GSDs and may even be common in GSDs. At the current state of knowledge there is no way to determine that a particular dog cannot develop DM. Any breeder who continues to advertise such is acting out of ignorance or intent to decieve. UM says that that the test detects the genetic cause for "the most common form of the disease". It may be reasonable to advertise "dogs that are free of the most common form of DM". I personally find that wording troubling as we just don't know how common the other forms are in different breeds. The form of DM detected by the UM test does not affect the sensory nerves very much. My GSD had an almost complete loss of sensation that progressed with the paralysis. I have talked to several other GSD owners whose dogs showed a similar profound, prgressive loss of sensation. I have been in correspondence with researchers at UM. They are very interested in tracking down this alternate form of the disease. To do that they need more data. If you have a dog with DM who shows a profound and progressive loss of sensation please have him/her tested. If the result is normal/normal please contact Liz Hansen at UM immediately. Douglas