IMHO... every puppy from every litter (pet or breeding stock)from every breeding that is registered needs be tested, the whole magilla, each breed has its own issues with too many shared problems ie. HD


IMHO.. untill every dog is tested results are not enough, dna testing for hips is the way to go. because both parent ofa scores good nothing says the offspring will, alot of disapointment, I could test my girls, but they have matured, they will probably throw better pups than any health tested dog

every dog with the prefix Kingman will be prelimed at 4 mo, I will pay for testing of puppies, pet or show potential placed by me. good or bad results, it will be submited to public record
I am even going to do the fluffy dna test just for fun

will I worry about buying tested puppies.....No way, not untill tests prove something

"dna testing for hips is the way to go"

That would work if hips were purely a genetic thing. They're not. Environmental aspects can and do play a huge role. Overweight, over-exercised pups can wind up with bad hips, hence why several breeders now don't give a full hip warranty just partials. Most breeders I have looked in to want a second opinion and a verifiable report on the physical condition of the dog in combination with x-rays. While most people won't run a marathon on concrete with a 6month old pup, some people will and act shocked when the dog is crippled.

That being said I wouldn't buy a pup from non x-rayed parents. Genetics aren't all the picture but they're certainly a part of it. Crappy hips bred to crappy hips are probably going to throw crappy hips somewhere down the line. Two parents with good hips won't always toss pups with good hips but I'd like to stack the deck in my favor. It also lets me know that the breeders put thought and money into it before hand and it's not just a "Let's make puppies for the kids!" decision.

"I could test my girls, but they have matured, they will probably throw better pups than any health tested dog"

That doesn't make any sense to me and is completely impossible to prove.

As for what needs to happen with health testing... eh. The horse is already out of the barn on that one. There will always be breeders who don't health test or who just don't care. It's up to the buyer to discern the good from the bad and be aware of what they're getting into in the first place.

Am I misunderstanding you? Are you saying that your bitches are not health-tested but that they will probably produce better than health-tested breeding stock? That is pretty darn naive.

I personally feel that it is completely irresponsible not to test for all health tests pertinent for one's breed. Does not mean if the results are poor for one of the tests that you cannot necessarily breed that animal but at least have the kahunas to "own" those results and state the reasons why you feel the animal's strengths in other areas supercede its weaknesses.

Nothing pisses me off more than people in my breed spout nonsense about how the are responsible breeders with an eye towards breeding to benefit the breed and then they do not test their breeding stock for one or more health issues. Pure laziness (at best) in my book.

Once again, my thoughts have not been conveyed into words very well.

I fully understand HD as genetic and environmental, IMHO environmental can be broken into many sub categories, exercise, nutrition, confinement, to name the most influential

HD DNA based testing is not something I expect to see in my life, the amount of data needed is monumental, but it is being explored

Am I naïve? By definition “with (1)natural or (2)unaffected simplicity in thought….”

#1 yes #2 no

This forum has helped me to realize some of my opinions were well constructed delusions,

I really seem to be putting my foot in my mouth lots, but if that is my cost to learn, more importantly to adjust my thinking I will continue until I am asked not to.

“but at least have the kahunas to "own" those results” …….Alright

 Quote: Ingrid Rosenquist

at least have the kahunas to "own" those results .

Delilah goes in thursday at 2.30 for ofa hips and elbows

 Quote: Ingrid Rosenquist

Does not mean if the results are poor for one of the tests that you cannot necessarily breed that animal ........ state the reasons why you feel the animal's strengths in other areas supercede its weaknesses.

if you have time to expand I would appreciate your opinion on this statement.....lets use hips as an example

would you breed a borderline, assuming it is a great specimin, excellent temperament, all other tests clear?

I do not know if I would breed a borderline. I am not being coy but I find that while I could say at this point that I would not I am not sure if I was put in the position to make that choice if I would or would not. It would depend alot on the lineage of the dog (consistent solid hips going back several generations etc) and how imperative it was to my breeding program that this dog be used. However, I would not consider it unless all other health tests came out well and the dog was structurally and tempermeantally suited to be bred.

If I did decide to do so I would likely be more cautious about placing the dogs in homes that want to breed. I would also make it entirely clear to prospective owners as to the status of hips on the parents and that getting a pup from the litter came with the potential for dysplasia.

Dysplasia is difficult since the mode of inheritance is still a big guess. Likewise in my breed we have deafness issues in which the mode of inheritance is unknown at this time. I would never breed a bi-laterally deaf dog but a unilateral deaf dog (deaf in one ear)? Maybe, maybe not.

Another issue we have in my breed is PRA of which there is a DNA test for. A = clear of PRA, B = carrier of PRA, and C = affected with PRA.

A+A= All As
A+B= As and Bs
B+B=As, Bs, and/or Cs
B+C= Bs and Cs
A+C= All Bs
C+C= All Cs

There are some breeders that believe a C should never be bred as it cannot produce a Clear. However, the experts in the disease advised our breed not to through the baby out with the bathwater meaning that a C could benefit the breed in other ways. My current bitch is an A. I could have easily bred her to my champion performance titled male that is also an A (both are OFA Good, elbows normal, bi-lateral hearing) and produced all As which is what many breeders do because the pups are easier to sell.

Instead, I bred her to a C male meaning that all the pups were Bs. I do not regret doing so. The C male was a better match for my bitch and he has quite a bit (IMO) to offer the breed but because of the C status many people will not use him. My perspective is if people like me who have A dogs do not use C dogs, our breed could lose some very nice qualities that the C dogs can add to the gene pool.

Good luck with your girl's xrays :-)

 Quote: Ingrid Rosenquist

#1 our breed could lose some very nice qualities that the C dogs can add to the gene pool.

#2 Good luck with your girl's xrays :-)

#1, thank you, perspective is something gained, you have it through experience I am still building opinion. I do agree with the last statement, IMHO a breed could be damaged by being to selective, as well as not selective enough

#2 ya, I am very apprenhisive of my girl being forced into an alpha roll by straingers, but want to avoid anestic, I had phoned around a bit and this place is one of the few in alberta that trys first with out....

anybody with tips to help it go as easy as possible on Delilah, when I had Pisa prelimed she had to be muzzled, which suprised me as she is pretty cool with people