OFA and BARF - Page 2

hexe: you do what you want with your dogs, i will do the same with mine. I'm not trying to 'prove' or 'disprove' anything. Nor am i trying to validate any study since i was not part of any study except for my own personal observations on my own dogs and breeders i know that follow a similar protocol. I'm just offering information which you seem to have missed the entire point of. this should be a share and share alike form where people can learn from one another. Just because i don't breed 100 dogs a year does not make what i've seen invalid. it just means i'm not a damn puppy mill. It means on my scale, in my program, it's working for me. Take it or leave it

Shaila, what bothered me about your posts on this subject was that you really didn't present it as 'just your opinion'--you made a statement of absolute fact: Quote: "Breeders that feed a HIGH quality diet and also supplement with Vit-C on a DAILY basis, who also don't allow their breeding stock / puppies to become overweight or over exercised and put this into their puppy contracts definately HAVE A MUCH LOWER RATE OF CHD than the average breeder." Yes, this is a forum for discussion and sharing. Too often, like many Internet forums, it also becomes a place where theories and notions are presented as if they were bona-fide, documentable, scientifically-reproducible *facts*. That can lead folks astray, and it can have disastrous results. I didn't miss the point of your statements--I simply don't care to see opinions dressed up as data. I happen to be a vet tech as well, and have seen the overweight dogs and the inadequately nourished dogs, too. Guess the practitioners I've worked with are wild radicals, because we routinely discussed--and aggressively attacked--weight and nutrition issues with our clients, and we promoted 'preventative wellness care' over 'fix 'em up when they're sick' medicine...and still do. As for whether or not "what you've seen" is invalid, I never said it was...so long as it's presented in that context: what you've seen, personally, under what are still very limited conditions. It may well be that ten years from now, you'd be able to refer to 26 litters under your present regimen and not a bad hip in the bunch...and that, too, will supply additional support to your observations. But for the moment, there's no documentation to support that raw-fed dogs are healthier, happier, better, bigger, longer-lived or anything else but raw-fed...and there's no documentation that vitamin C supplementation actually does a damn thing for dogs. Oh, and it doesn't take production of 100 dogs a year to make one a puppy mill--breeding solely for the purpose of selling puppies is what makes a puppy mill. If a breeder isn't keeping at least one pup from their litter, then that litter was conceived and whelped for the cash, not the breed. And *that* smacks of puppy mill--so it's not a numbers game, it's a cash game.

I agree that we need to be careful about what we state is fact. Unfortunately all we can go on with raw food is our own experiences. It would be great if there were INDEPENDENT studies done on dog nutrition. I feed raw and so far all three of my dogs are thriving very well on it. I am always watching and re-evaluating what I do with my dogs. I do blood tests regularly and regular stool samples. My dogs regularly travel with me. Their stools are consistent, their teeth are great and no stomach problems. Until it can be shown that there is a better way to feed my dogs, I will continue. However, we need to be careful we don't become snakeoil salesmen - those who say feeding raw solves all health problems or blame everything on commercial dog food or vaccine reactions do everyone a disservice.

It is important to remember that the veterinary profession defines Hip Dysplasia as poor conformation of the hip joint and rates it according to various standards Penn-Hip, OFA etc...It is pretty well agreed to be a genetically transferred condition although its genetic makeup is complex. We also have to remember that not all dogs confirmed with dysplastic (malformed) hips will not develop the clinical signs. The evidence shows that comemrcial foods have a tendency to produce fast growing dogs and also make it easier to get overweight and obese dogs which are two risk factors for showing the clinical signs of HD. Raw food diets when properly balanced rarely produces obese dogs and produce puppies that grow more slowly thereby reducing the chances of the dogs exhibiting the clinical signs of hip dysplasia. Remember is both cases the hips still liik bad and can be identified with x-rays so you can still avoid breeding affected digs. You are just allowing them to have a nicer pain free life which is not coddling the dog. GSD4dogs: Studies are expensive, therefore commercial dog food companies are the only ones able and willing to conduct them and they sure are not going to run a study on raw food that will prive that its better than commercial food. The same goes for Vet Universities that are greatly funded by dog food companies.

sorry for the typos the "i" is too close to the "o". "Prive" = "prove" "Liik bad" =look bad and "not all dogs with HD will develop clinical signs"

Caroline, I agree. However, we all (or most of us) regularly donate to charities, including Dog Health Foundations. If enough of us pushed, we could get independent studies on food and other important canine health issues. And it is not all bleak - as little as 5 years ago, you were discounted as crazy if you fed raw or didn't vaccinate - and just look at this conversation! We need to keep talking.

GSD4dogs would like to contact you please. Looking for info on your Jaguar dog Thanks Tammyc@pwgrosser.com

Since I bought my first purebred dog 35 years ago, many theories have been offered on HD, the mode of inheritance, and environmental factors effecting its development. Vit C supplements have been used for over 35 years, keep the puppy in a crate and it will never develop HD, feed a specific food, don't allow the puppy access to a slippery floor, don't allow it to climb stairs, being fat makes a dog dysplastic etc, etc.. As far as I know, none of the above or anything else has ever been proven to prevent or "cause" HD. The bottom line advice is the same as always - breed the best to the best, avoid borderline or mildly dysplastic breeding stock, don't breed dogs with dysplastic litter mates whenever possible and never breed dogs with severely dysplastic littermates. Do depth pedigree analyses whenever possible. In the case of imports, take the ZW ratings seriously. It is a very valuable tool IMO. There could be a higher than expected incidence of HD in some litters due to the frequent use of NZ rated or mildy dysplastic dogs. I think many breeds get a higher percentage of good hips than we get in our GSD's, but generally they use only clear stock, no borderlines or milds. I doubt the day will ever come when there is no more HD since it is a multifactored mode of inheritance, but I think the percentage might be lowered with more judicial selection of breeding stock.

I wanted to add to my post that IMO it is easier in most other breeds to select for good hips. They don't breed for the performances traits so necessary in the GSD, a pretty dog that moves well is what they care about. There are so many other issues with GSD's that hips might not be able to be assigned the high priority with some of you as it is with breeders who don't trial and title their dogs. The AKC line breeders get a much higher percentage of normal hips than do those of you breeding from SV lines I think, but there again, the bar is much lower to compete in an AKC show; it's all about cosmetics. It's hard to get everything right in an SV dog, the expectations are so high. Not saying they shouldn't be, just offering up another way to think about HD and why the seemingly high incidence in the SV line GSD.

Very sorry, I thought this was a new thread, just looked at the date.