My vet says that it should be done before the first cycle because it lowers the risk of cancer and other issues. What are your thoughts? Thanks

Jon

We have had tons of threads on this topic. Try the search function for more than you probably ever wanted to know . Most of us on here agree that a dog should NEVER be altered before growth is complete. The cancer thing is, IMO, a scare tactic by the vets to get every animal neutered asap. While I understand that homeless pets are a huge problem, I feel that vets need to do what is best for that particular animal's health. Here's a good article on early spay/neuter: http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html

 Quote: Jon Lee

My vet says that it should be done before the first cycle because it lowers the risk of cancer and other issues. What are your thoughts? Thanks

Jon

Actually, spaying before the first cycle DOES almost totally eliminate all possibility of mammary tumors, which are sometimes malignant.

BUT there are huge drawbacks.

There are four hundred and thirty-two thousand million posts on the subject here. If you rely only on your new thread, you will miss 99% of the info available on the forum.

I'll see if I can get you started.


EDIT: I see that the wealth of info has been pointed out.

 Quote: jenni williams

Most of us on here agree that a dog should NEVER be altered before growth is complete.

Then I guess that I am all alone out here in the rain with my little flag that says "If this is a pet and you cannot protect her from oops pregnancies, then spay her."

Here are the first few a search returned:

http://leerburg.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/165265/page/1/fpart/1

http://www.leerburg.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/123070/page/1/fpart/1

http://www.leerburg.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/4140724/site_id/1#import

http://www.leerburg.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/4160054/site_id/1#import

 Quote: connie sutherland

Then I guess that I am all alone out here in the rain with my little flag that says "If this is a pet and you cannot protect her from oops pregnancies, then spay her."

No! I'll stand with you! But I have a billboard. (As a rescuer, I just had to have a litter of puppies neutered at 13 weeks. I know, it's not ideal... but you just can't always trust adopters to do what they say they will).

If you are 110293747% sure you are experienced enough to prevent a litter, leave her intact until she is mature. Your vet, if they are anything like where I live, will charge almost double for a "mature spay" but your dog's health is worth it.

If there is the teensiest possibility of pregnancy, spay her.

I've had bitches spayed at 6 months and bitches spayed when they were over 2 years and I can honestly say I didn't notice a difference. (All my dogs are pets, not working dogs).

 Quote: connie sutherland

 Quote: jenni williams

Most of us on here agree that a dog should NEVER be altered before growth is complete.

Then I guess that I am all alone out here in the rain with my little flag that says "If this is a pet and you cannot protect her from oops pregnancies, then spay her."

Nope Connie, I am standing out here with you.

If I am going to alter, I wait until they are two or older. However, I take extra precaution when I have bitches in heat here. I have an intact male here so we have built a kennel run for the females when they go into heat. If two go into heat at the same time then the male is kept in the "Fort Knox" kennel.

You just have to be diligent and make sure your female does not get put into a position of being able to breed. If yo cannot or do not think you can do this, then I would alter early. OR if there were health conditions that required it.

 Quote: connie sutherland

 Quote: jenni williams

Most of us on here agree that a dog should NEVER be altered before growth is complete.

Then I guess that I am all alone out here in the rain with my little flag that says "If this is a pet and you cannot protect her from oops pregnancies, then spay her."

"Most" and "Before growth is complete" were fairly important in that statement.

Is it really that hard to keep an eye on a dog until it's physically mature people? Guess I come from the nasty school of thought that believes that if you can't safely and surely provide what that animal deserves for OPTIMUM health and longevity, you needn't have a pet.

Don't we agree that early spay and neuter are risky to that animal? Naturally (although I really ought to know better than to assume by now) everyone realizes it depends largely on the breed/size exactly how much damage can be done.

I have 2 altered animals and 6 unaltered...and no babies. Oh, and I don't have any kids either, and I'm unaltered. Again, this is a responsibility issue; why do animals always have to pay for irresponsible humans? Simon's mother is pregnant again, I just heard. Turned 1 in August, now on her second litter. Simple case of opening a door that should've been kept shut. I guess they could spay her, but in truth, I don't think they should even OWN dogs. Seems like people would rather jeopardize the dog's well-being than exercise some control.

 Quote: Jenni Williams

Is it really that hard to keep an eye on a dog until it's physically mature people? Guess I come from the nasty school of thought that believes that if you can't safely and surely provide what that animal deserves for OPTIMUM health and longevity, you needn't have a pet.

People have been spaying and nuetering their pets early for a LONG time Jenni and providing excellent care to them for the rest of their lives as well. I do not think it is fair that you try and IMPLY that people should not own pets because they alter too early, not something I agree with, but certainly not something to chastise them for.
And yes, it is a nasty school of thought to think like that.

 Quote: Jenni Williams

Don't we agree that early spay and neuter are risky to that animal?

Why, YES. Yes we do, but you can only give advice and hope they follow it, not berate them for non conforming to a certain way of thinking.

 Quote: Jenni Williams

(although I really ought to know better than to assume by now)

Pretty much.

 Quote: Jenni Williams

I have 2 altered animals and 6 unaltered...and no babies. Oh, and I don't have any kids either, and I'm unaltered. Again, this is a responsibility issue; why do animals always have to pay for irresponsible humans?

People are trying to do the responsible thing by altering. Sometimes they do not know any better.
Glad to hear no one is pregnant at your house. Kudo's to you. I have two intact females and an intact male and have never had an issue either.

 Quote: Jenni Williams

Simon's mother is pregnant again, I just heard. Turned 1 in August, now on her second litter. Simple case of opening a door that should've been kept shut. I guess they could spay her, but in truth, I don't think they should even OWN dogs. Seems like people would rather jeopardize the dog's well-being than exercise some control.

They should spay her and be done with it and provide her an excellent pet life. Period. If they are abusing her, starving her AND breeding her then I can see that they should not have a dog, but if they are caring for her properly otherwise then spaying her should be an option.

1. I think it might be better not to speak for "most of" 10,000 people.

2. I believe that many people who have pets do NOT sufficiently protect unspayed females..... which is, in fact, obvious by the millions of dogs who enter shelters every year in this country....

3. "NEVER (capitalized) before growth is complete" means that there's probably a year and a half or two years of possible pregnancies before spaying.


All the things said from "Is it really that hard to keep an eye on a dog until it's physically mature people?" to "Seems like people would rather jeopardize the dog's well-being than exercise some control." are statements about an ideal world that does not exist.

You said "Most of us on here agree that a dog should NEVER be altered before growth is complete."

and I said "If this is a pet and you cannot/will not protect her from oops pregnancies, then spay her."

In other words, I disagree that a dog should NEVER be altered before growth is complete. I think that if the owner cannot be responsible for diligent protection until full growth, the dog should be spayed.

That's my OPINION.

While this board is populated with a lot of very responsible and very diligent owners, I STILL cannot say, in good conscience, that "a dog should NEVER be altered before growth is complete."

This is a public board (for reading purposes).

On a publicly read board, my personal opinion was that the statement had to be qualified.