Health Testing? - Page 2

Blitzen, I personally do not rely on all these tests for several reasons.  1) some of them are very new and thus not entirely accurate (DM), 2) some of them "test" for things that are basically obvious to the naked human eye anyway and 3) along with #2 I think too many people use these tests to substitute for actual knowledge and experience with their lines and the health of their dogs and are dumbing down the process of carefully breeding dogs.  I care more about the 5 generation pedigree than *just* the health test of the sire and dam.  Most of these things we are obsessively testing for are polygenic anyway.  I'd much rather have a breeder say, "I have owned and bred this line for 5 generations and have not had a dog with DM," than a breeder import a dog, breed it, and tell me that the dog is supposedly DM clear because of a new test (that has already been proven incorrect).  Also if we were to *only* breed GSDs that passed every single one of a dozen tests we would only be further bottle-necking the genetic pool.  When I buy a dog I buy it accepting full responsibility for anything that might happen.  I don't have this attitude that the breeder is responsible for every possibly sickness or condition.  A dog is a dog.  If I'm not convinced the lines are healthy then I just don't buy the dog, tests or no tests.

Health tests like DM are not meant to eliminate dogs from breeding programs. They are a tool that tells a breeder that a dog may or may not develope or produce a dog that will suffer from DM sometime in the future.  The OFA is the first to say - do not elminate any dogs from breeding programs based only on the DNA DM results. The goal is to not produce anymore at risks. Personally, I would not elminate an at risk, but I would not breed it to another at risk or a carrier. I err on the side of caution with DM recognizing the test is not perfect.

As far as thyroid tests and cardiac monitoring, I do it. I've known of more than one GSD that suddenly dropped dead due to a cardiac event. I consider that test to be as valuable to the dog itself as it is to the progeny. If my dog would have been diagnosed with insufficient cardiac function, it would have given me a heads up that could have been a life saver for that dog. It would have eliminated her from a breeding program. The results of a thyroid scan can also provide valuable information for the dog.

I wish I knew the breed well enough to be confident that I could breed to or purchase a dog from a GSD breeder (of any line) from dogs that have not been health checked. I do not; few days pass that someone isn't here complaining about the poor health of a dog they have purchased from a breeder who frequents this board. When I see the same breeder coming here time after time patting him or her self on the back for never having bred a dog that wasn't healthy, it makes me realize that I need a lot more information before I'd take any GSD breeder at his or her word. That information would be in the form of proof of health tests. Some don't even OFA their breeding stock or xray and ignore any negative results blaming it on something environmental or an imagined injury.

VKGSD from what I know of you here, you are an honest person who would voluntarily eliminate an unhealthy dog from a breeding program. To that end maybe you don't need to test you dogs for health issues you have never seen. However, I don't think it's wise to assume that others are as honest or ethical as you are.

vkgsd, I was trying to figure out how to word my thoughts on this thread, but you said it so good that I can't add much to it. I would much rather look at what I can see, in linage, what has been produced than see a lab result that is only that, a lab report. While perfect health has to be considered, ability, temperment, and nerve does not show up on a lab report.

I heard a story of dogs working the border where the dogs were on cable that would extend a 1/4 mile. these dogs only job was to protect and guard that strip. Dogs were used until aproximately 10 years old. Autopseys were done on hips and elbows after death and some didn't even have a head on the femur bone. These dogs never acted as though they were in pain. The desire to work over rode the discomfort of being dysplastic.

While good health is a must I would say it is only a part of the equation to be considered in a mating. Some may (not all) use all these health test as a crutch to promote and sell dogs that are lacking in working ability. Some people have a tendency to go to extremes to validate what they have , or don't have. JMO

Hank

True, Hank, and some don't test their dogs in any way before breeding them and find a million reasons for justifying not doing anything - my dogs don't get that, why should I? Titles don't mean squat, my dog is a great worker.  I guess most experienced dog people aren't going to drink that Kool Aid, but a lot of newbies will. In the end it always come down to the same old - ethics.

Ha,ha, I agree Jenni78!
Coming from Germany, I find it horrible how some people here in North America are paranoid about all those available health tests!
Germany tests for breed DNA, hips/elbows. That's it.

Many tests show genetic predisposition to something, but it is not profen that this predisposition is actually changing the dog's health.

To each his own. I don't test becasue I'm paranoid. I do it because I think it's the right thing to do.

Blitzen, And there is nothing wrong with testing. It is not a indictment against people who do. My point is, it is good as long as it don't become nothing more than a tool to over look other things to be considered in a mating. Same as titles or sport. these are all good things, but at the same time it is not the only means for selection when it comes to qualifying a dog for breeding.

Hank

I agree, Hank.

Health tests like DM are not meant to eliminate dogs from breeding programs. They are a tool that tells a breeder that a dog may or may not develope or produce a dog that will suffer from DM sometime in the future.  The OFA is the first to say - do not elminate any dogs from breeding programs based only on the DNA DM results. The goal is to not produce anymore at risks. Personally, I would not elminate an at risk, but I would not breed it to another at risk or a carrier. I err on the side of caution with DM recognizing the test is not perfect.

But the problem is people do.  We've seen it here on this very forum.  There was one puppy that had mega-E, both dogs have been bred before and have not produced and people were calling for culling the sire and dam from breeding.  One of my dogs has a mega-E littermate and as far as I know his parents have not produced it before or since and I'm not going to cull my dog because of that.  People see that a dog might be a DM carrier and freak out.

I wish I knew the breed well enough to be confident that I could breed to or purchase a dog from a GSD breeder (of any line) from dogs that have not been health checked.

For me it is not about OFA tests but about the overall health.  Just because the breeder isn't paying all the money to send samples hither, thither, and yon for "health certificates" does not mean they don't know the health of their lines or make it a top priority.  If health is the top priority for the buyer then they need to act on that and find breeders that really know the health of their dogs, not just the sire and dam that they put together but the health of their lines.

VKGSD from what I know of you here, you are an honest person who would voluntarily eliminate an unhealthy dog from a breeding program. To that end maybe you don't need to test you dogs for health issues you have never seen. However, I don't think it's wise to assume that others are as honest or ethical as you are.

For the record I have never bred a dog (my GSDs are/were spayed female I obtained as a retired breeding dog and since then have been males) but I do appreciate the compliment!

I am not saying that health testing is bad or has no value, but just from what I see lately, buyers are placing way too much emphAsis on these one-time tests and not enough emphasis on finding breeders that have a "big picture" knowledge of the health of their lines.  In general I think too many "breeders" are people who throw two decent dogs together but have no grasp of how the pedigrees interact with regard to health and temperament.  JMHO

I do x-ray hips and elbows of ALL my dogs (even my neutered rescue mutt!).  For me that's a given because 1) it is cheap 2) it is easy to do, 4) it is good instant feedback for the breeders, and 3) it is fairly objective, there's no real "test", I just look at the x-rays with the vet and we can clearly see if there are problems or not.  I x-ray at 6-8 months and then get an a-stamp or OFA at 12-24 months (except for my mutt who I x-rayed at 5 years just to have a baseline).

Just curious if anyone knows if the KNPV line breeders/owners do any health testing? I never see them mention hips and elbows, or any types of disease. Seems like they mainly focus on working ability. The dogs appear healthy.