DM Testing - Page 1

Bearing in mind that there are now a test to identify carriers & sufferers of DM & AF, would it then be possible, should somebody purchase a puppy that goes on to develop either of the conditions, to sue the breeder if the parents were not tested?

If breeder guarantees against those diseases, I suppose you may have a case

What does your contract state?  

Something to keep in kind is that even if both parents do not have the AF modifying gene the pup from the litter can still develop the disease. A dog with the AF modifying gene is 5 times more likely to develop AF than the average dog, but any dog can potentially develop AF. I hope I am making sens

The DM gene is different. If the dog is a DM carrier or DM clear he/she will not develop the disease. Here is table regarding breeding and DM below that may be of help:

Parents                  Offspring
Normal x normal = 100% normal
Normal x carrier = 50% normal, 50% carrier
Normal x at risk = 100% carrier
Carrier x carrier = 25% normal, 50% carrier, 25% at risk
Carrier x at risk = 50% carrier, 50% at risk
At risk x at risk = 100% at risk

I really need to add to this, but I don't have time right now. Maybe someone else will pick up on this or I will add more later.

Just because there is a test for DM (for example), doesn't mean it's 100% accurate for all DM types nor would it mean that the breeder is required to do the testing. What is covered in the health guarantee would only be the factor if the dog gets one of the said diseases, not whether the parents were tested or not.

Lily problem is different countries different laws - but here as you probably already know if there is a test available and breeder doesnt do it - pups go on to develop condition then yes unless the puppy owner knew there was a test available and parents werent tested and still went ahead with purchase unlikely then they would have a case!
But as you probably already know there have been many cases of disception - ie pup owner asks about say hip scoring breeder states they have been done and are acceptable distracts purchaser and doesnt reveal the results and they were not breed worthy and purchaser doesnt know untill they get their reg that the parents shouldnt have been bred - pup then develops hd yes breeder can be sued

It would all depend on individual circumstances - but as already stated AF can be caused by other reasons than genetics - entire, obese males with close tail sets are at most risk

for those in the US in the UK breeders do not normaly give health guarentees

Wildmoor
I am interested as to where the information that entire obese males with close set tails are most at risk comes from. 

My understanding was that the close set tail idea was a myth that was dispelled years ago, along with amputation of the tail that often went with it as an attempted solution.  Whether heritable or not I understood that the determination had been made that AF is an immune mediated disease. 

I was involved in a drugs trial for AF many years ago, and came into contact with a wide range of GSDs that were suffering from AF. They were all sexes, shapes, and sizes, but I don't remember a single one that I would describe as obese. Plus, all GSDs have a close tail set!

I want to add that even if the parents are tested/screened for everything under the sun that doesn't mean one or more of the pups can't get one or more of the diseases. Dogs with parents, grandparents and great-grandparents, etc. that have good hips and elbows end up with dysplasia.  Dogs with parents that are AF clear end up with AF. Even with DM, I've heard recently there have been a few cases of DM symptomatic GSDs that received clear or carrier on the U of Missouri DNA DM test, yet necropsy perfomed when the dogs passed indicated, indeed, the dogs had DM. So, I guess false negatives do occur. Nothing in life is perfect and medicine is not an exact science. 

All of that said,  IMO, the testing needs to be done because it is the best we have right now and if all breeders did significant testing and bred accordingly it would make a huge difference in the breed, in time.

As a buyer of a puppy it is up to you to educate yourself and to make sure that the parents of your potential puppy have been tested for DM and AF, as well as other screenings, if this is important to you, which it should be. But, I don't think any breeder, even with doing all the tests/screenings, can truly guarantee their pups will not get any diseases- it's unrealistic. BUT, IMO, if a breeder is doing all the necessary testing/screenings (there is another thread on this and this is controversial) and their dogs have been deemed healthy by a vet, the breeder has done his/her utmost to try and breed for healthy pups.

What Wildmoor says here - 'as you probably already know if there is a test available and breeder doesnt do it - pups go on to develop condition then yes unless the puppy owner knew there was a test available and parents werent tested and still went ahead with purchase unlikely then they would have a case' - is wrong.

If there are 127 or 1001 health tests available a breeder is not liable simply because he/she does not carry out those 127 or 1001 tests. Rather more is necessary to establish legal liability than Wildmoor seems to think.

In the U.S., the first question asked in court would be "if you knew there was a test for DM, why didn't you have it done before purchase".

But also here, anyone can sue over anything.