DM Testing - Page 2

People clearly need to understand exactly what a health test offers and exactly what it WILL do.

That in itself will be difficult for many people.

Many will assume and then assume some more and then even more.

Thanks for your views.  I don't intend to even attempt suing anybody, there were no tests available for either of these conditions when I bought the dogs that sadly went onto develop them. 

I just wondered if breeders would be putting themselves at risk if they didn't do tests that were available.

The tests available do not give "black and white" answers.  

Some problems show symptoms similar to others and as I understand it the only real test for DM can only be undertaken after the dog is dead.  Its not that long ago that if a GSD had problems with its back legs that it was assumed it was a hip problem, with testing we now know that this is not always the case.  As a Teenager we had a dog who's back end started to deteriorate and the vet immediately said "hips" and xray'd to discover the dog had great hips, and then they said it could either be nerve damage or muscle wastage, today I guess we would assume DM.

Symptoms of DM can also be the result of old age.  If we look at many old human's how many of them show muscle wastage, difficulties walking and even curvature of the spine?  We don't immediately liable them with a "disease" but accept that part of getting old is getting "tatty" as my Gran would say.

From what I understand that the only "real" test for DM is by screening the spine after death as this is the only "definite" way to see what state the spine is in see http://www.caninegeneticdiseases.net/DM/basicDM.htm for images.  I guess any disease that is diagnosed by "diagnosis of elimination" cannot be fully understood.  Maybe we need more people who's dog's show all the classic signs of DM to have to have them tested after death and then we can compile "factual" information both in level of deteriorate and genetic information.

I have heard of dogs who  have been tested "at risk" to be fine for the whole of their lives and sadly one was told that they were clear ended up unable to walk and showing all signs of DM.  Sadly injury and/or old age will get to us all (dogs and humans) in the end.

Lily, The breeders are not putting themselves at risk, but they are choosing to risk the health of their pups by not testing. At least by testing, a sincere effort has been made to try and produce the healthiest pups possible.

Liebe, Yes, it is well-known that there are plenty of dogs that tested "at.risk/affected" and have never become symptomatic. Also, you are correct about the fact that there have been cases where a dog tested clear or carrier and after passing, necropsy showed the dog had DM. Nothing in life is perfect and these facts should not minimize or negate the extreme value of the DM DNA test. It is essential to DM test all dogs used for breeding to avoid producing pups that will be "at risk/affected". I agree that with older dogs sometimes it is hard to know what is really causing the mobility problem, even if the dog tests at risk/affected for DM. DM also strikes the young. My dog is only 6 years old with good hips, no arthritis or spinal abnormalities. She is DM symptomatic and she tested "at risk/affected". There is no doubt that she has DM. Sadly, she is declining as expected, soon to be put in a cart, if she is willing and is still able to love life. I will let her tell me shat she wants and I will listen to her wishes. DM really sucks, especially in such a young dog. DM has become a very personal issue for me and I'm sure you can understand why.