German Shepherd Dog > IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT re Degenerative Myelopathy (DM) (105 replies)
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT re Degenerative Myelopathy (DM)
by Videx on 11 February 2012 - 22:33
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT – re. Degenerative Myelopathy (DM)
TO ALL “GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG” BREEDERS AND OWNERS
DOGenes Inc. http://www.dogenes.com/This mutation has been identified in the German Shepherd Dog (GSD) breed. As a result of this mutation the protein product of this gene is prematurely terminated. This means that the mutated gene produces a partial protein product that is not functional. While there is strong evidence from the biology of this gene that this mutation could be the cause of DM, we need many more clinical samples to confirm this finding.
Is pleased to announce
that we have possibly identified a new gene and mutation for Degenerative Myelopathy (DM).
The first priority is to get as many confirmed DM cases from your breed as possible. Anyone with a GSD that has DM is urged to contact DOGenes Inc. for materials to collect a DNA sample. At this point, I am very optimistic about this discovery.
Because this is such a very serious and fatal disease, I hope that we can work together to determine if this is a causative mutation.
ALL INFORMATION WILL BE KEPT STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL AT ALL TIMES.
Mary H. Whiteley, PhD
by Videx on 13 February 2012 - 12:35
|Mary (DOGenes Inc.)|
I have some people asking if the potential new test will offer anything more than existing tests for DM? – David (Videx GSD)
David (Videx GSD)
Whereas the current test is for a "RISK FACTOR" it does not necessarily mean that a dog that is homozygous for the mutant allele will develop DM. So the current test says that a dog that is homozygous for the mutant allele might develop DM or be affected with the disease or be normal. The test that I am hoping to develop will be a diagnostic test for the disease itself, and should impact breeding decisions to avoid the disease altogether. - Mary (DOGenes Inc.)
by starrchar on 13 February 2012 - 16:30
|Thank you Videx. I have a dog with DM and plan on contacting them. I have lots of questions, but will ask directly. I hope in the meantime all breeders will continue to use the DNA test presently available.|
by Abby Normal on 14 February 2012 - 11:14
Whilst other research continues I do agree that we must continue to use the existing test for DM to limit as far as we can the incidence of this condition.
by marjorie on 19 February 2012 - 18:04
|The existing test is a bad joke for GSDS- diagnostics test results dont match, nor do the symtoms and etilogy of the diseases. GSDS are beiing thrown out of a gene pool, prematurely based upon bad sceince..The existing test is not for GSDS. There have already been incidences where carriers have developed DM and a clear dog has developed DM. Not even ONE generation of dogs has been followed to prove what they re claiming is in fact, the truth. The progeny of clear dogs get an automatic clear. The ALS society has said there is no animal model of ALS, and in fact, a new gene (not the SOD1) has been implicated in the development of ALS, which, of course, is not DM, no matter what you might wish to call it. According to the ALS Society, the SOD1 has a long way to go to be implicated in the development of ALS. They are not entirely sure it is casual, not casual.|
Said it before and will say it again- the Emperor's New Clothes.... I cannot wonder how many dogs will be thrown out of a gene pool, that is already small and subdivided, thus making other diseases more concentrated. This is a recipe for disaster :( I wont say *I told you so* when it
is proven that there is no relation to DM of the GSD and the SOD1. I will just cry for the breed and what greedy humans have done to it, IF there is even a breed left, at that time.
by Oskar1 on 19 February 2012 - 19:58
dont give up, if there are more of your kind out there, our breed will survive !
Thanks David, to keep us on top - you definately put a lot of work in this, thank you very much.
It is surprising for me that some will put the the "research", of some plus making orientated company, out there, as they would pronounce the cure of it all. Does not make sense to me.
Quote from David's post :"...is for a "RISK FACTOR",does not nesecerely mean....that dog that is homozygous for the mutant allele will devellop DM. The Test I am HOPING to devellop....."
There is a lot of hoping, as well as hoping to devellop involved, just a little too much for my taste.
Now before I am or Majorie are getting lynched, it is good that there are new aproaches out there. Quite good indeed, but I will not spend money in to private company, that says for itself, that the outcome does, at this point, prove nothing. "may not, does not have to, hoping to devellop..." is sure a nice thought, but has nothing to do with sience.
I sure would prefer if for instance, it would be mandotory to x-ray the backs - based on proven sience, given that ALL results would be reportet, that I would agree to any second.
Majorie, thanks very much for your very balanced post.
by Videx on 19 February 2012 - 20:16
|marjorie: A truly, very appropriate post. Thank you.|
by Blitzen on 19 February 2012 - 20:21
|Why would anyone throw out a dog just because it tested at risk? As far as I know there has never been a recommendation by OFA, Clemmons, or Coates to withdraw any dogs from a breeding program based on the test results. Haven't they all suggested a more conservative approach? |
Is the Flash test still available?
Long time, how have you been?
by Blitzen on 19 February 2012 - 20:28
|Wouldn't it be great if all these researchers pooled their knowledge and went in the same direction?|
by Oskar1 on 19 February 2012 - 20:28
thanks for asking, doing good, thank you. Hope everything is fine with you and of course your dogs.
How could they possibly recommend that test - it' s at a start, it's not proving facts, they say it themselves - we are hoping, it does not mean.....
It sure is good to stay on the ball, and it definately is good to research, I am just a bit susspicious when profit orientated companys try to sell me something.
by Oskar1 on 19 February 2012 - 20:29
|Blitzen, that would truely be a plus !|
by Blitzen on 19 February 2012 - 20:45
I don't understand why there can't be some cooperation between these researchers. All we are getting is why one test isn't as good as the other. How is that benefitting the breed? I've never looked at this as a test meant to eliminate dogs from a breeding program. Why would anyone even consider that?
by Oskar1 on 19 February 2012 - 20:53
you are wellcome.
To a certain extent you are right - following your instinct is ok, but to put it to a percentage :
Knowledge : 70%
Instinct : 25%
Gut feeling : 5% !!
Just joking, everyone will have to figure that out for themselves. But all should use the info at hand, HD/ED results, breeding schemes, trail results......... ok, it's hard - we just now are beeing tought that these results also maybe questionable. But what would be the alternative ? We have & should use what we have at hand, it's the best we have.
We should not, as you correctly say, base our decision onto something that is knowingly not proofen.
by beetree on 19 February 2012 - 22:12
|Blitzen: I agree, sounds like a fight for research dollars. So, Marjorie, you don't believe in the University of Missouri research? Is that what this is about? |
Or anybody elses research on DM genetics? How about a link to yours?
What am I missing about this?
by beetree on 20 February 2012 - 22:34
Seems to be a lack of answers to my questions ... So I wonder, is this just a grand-stand declaration?
by Abby Normal on 20 February 2012 - 23:50
|I was very disappointed to see so many hopes, possiblys and maybe's in the statement from DOGenes too. I found the information on their website about it very limited and hence I framed my own initial response to it very carefully.|
Since it costs nothing to send in samples to further ANY research I think it can only be worthwhile.
However, what I did not say before is that the dealings that I know some have had with this company before have not what I would call professional for other DNA tests. The DNA samples are not required to be submitted by a vet, and so could come from any dog - there is no requirement for identification via a third party. That bothers me a great deal.
It worries me deeply that anyone encourages others to disparage or discard existing tests when they are all that we currently have to work with. Cynic that I am, I always think that those who do so are happy to hang their hat on a reason not to test, or have other motives. I was always taught to read between the lines at what is NOT being said.
No one suggested throwing them all out of the gene pool!
My understanding is that there are clinical trials being undertaken right now for ALS drugs to treat DM. That is the whole point...it is a trial to see if it works. Much research is trial and error.
Original research said@:
Genome-wide association analysis reveals a SOD1 mutation in canine degenerative myelopathy that resembles amyotrophic lateral sclerosisRecent research (from Finland) says:
Taken together with the D90A SOD1 mutation, 87% of familial ALS in Finland is now explained by a simple monogenic cause. The repeat expansion is also present in one-third of familial ALS cases of outbred European descent, making it the most common genetic cause of these fatal neurodegenerative diseases identified to date.
Science is not entirely sure about a lot of things to do with both ALS and DM and many other diseases, but to cast everything aside whilst a definitive answer is sought is folly. You say generations have not been followed through. No they have not - yet, but tested dogs will be. If none are tested they cannot be. What would be the ultimate bad joke for the GSD is that while this horrible disease besets the breed we stand aside and do nothing.
by Blitzen on 20 February 2012 - 23:58
Abby, thank you for a great post.
by marjorie on 21 February 2012 - 05:55
--->What would be the ultimate bad joke for the GSD is that while this horrible disease besets the breed we stand aside and do nothing.
http://www.gsdbbr.org The German Shepherd Dog Breed Betterment Registry
http://mzjf.com --> The Degenerative Myelopathy Support Group
by marjorie on 21 February 2012 - 06:47
|--- >You say generations have not been followed through. No they have not - yet, but tested dogs will be.|
Wrongo! Progeny of a clear sire and DM are automatically clear, according to the OFA. That is making a big leap of faith that they are right about the SOD1 (or putting blinders on) or refuse to admit they might be wrong, or else the progeny would NOT receive an automatic clear! That progeny would be followed to see if it did, in fact, test clear, or indeed develop DM or produce DM dogs, when bred. Automatic clears should be out of the question, at this stage of the research. I dont like presumptions, when dealing with such a horrible disease. We dont need broad brush speculation- we need cold hard facts. This whole thing is very premature, as no follow-ups have been done. There is no reason this sod1 test should be floated around like the gospel, when the science behind it is so flawed and geneartions have not been tested.
--- >"Yet- tested they will be"
Breeders are claiming to have DM free lines and litters because their sire and dam tested clear- is that not also premature? How can these claiims be made, without a follow up???? That assumes that the SOD1 is the sole cause of DM. Please tell me no one is naive enough to believe that... I dont have a great deal of faith in humanity, but that would destroy the few shreds I have left... Ya dont think they should wait till the follow up has been done, if this is correct science to proclaim progeny clear and say they will not produce future dogs with DM??? ????? How can one run to the finish line , when they havent even gone halfway down the field yet, or even learned to walk???? This is just nuts :( No- I take that back- its just plain irresponsible! They are setting themselves up for a class action lawsuit, when this SOD1 is proved to be a non issue in the big picture of a dog developing DM. Again, they have not proved a causual relationship- only a casual relationship. The ramifications of their proclamations are frightening.
Last, but not least, the OFA is promoting a test they dont understand. I called the OFA and spoke with Dr Keller. I asked him pointed questions about the disparity between the diagnostic test results and the etiologies of ALS vs DM. He could not answer my questions- he had no knowledge of it. How can an organization with the status of the OFA- a supposedly trusted organization, be promoting a test it does not understand? If they dont understand it, how do they know it is correct or good science???? Because the AKCCHF says so??????? Pfffffffffffff. Peer reviews are judged by researchers of guess what organization? Duuuuuuuuuh- The AKCCHF.... LOL! There's a hole in the bucklet, dear Liza, dear Liza.......
by marjorie on 21 February 2012 - 06:55
|---> So, Marjorie, you don't believe in the University of Missouri research? Is that what this is about?|
No, beetree, I do not believe in the U of Missouri research for OUR breed of dog! ( I dont know enough about DM of other breeds to weigh in on that, so I wont). However, I emphatically do not believe it is valid research in relation to DM of the GSD. The GSD has its own unique DM. All breeds get a chronic and progressive degeneration of the spine, but that does not mean they are all the same DM. Diagnostic tests say DM is an autoimmune disease, while ALS is a motor unit disease. DM of the GSD does not fit the criteria of a motor unit disease- not by any stretch of the imagination. Test results are 180 degrees apart.