In the context of breeding, what tests do you rely upon and why?

[Elaine]

I was having a discussion with a breeder recently, about what tests to do, what tests to require, etc. .. so I'll ask here, in the context of breeding, what tests do you rely on and why?

[sorthund]

Bump! Are there no breeders here? great subject.

--Charlotte--

[Elaine]

In no particular order, we rely upon an OFA evaluation (or prelims if the dog/breeder/bloodline is proven and credible) and a Vet Gen vWD test. After the decision in Skaer v Babbitt, we are careful not to make any claims at all about perfection. Even before Skaer, we would never ever ever put a Holter result in a stud dog advertisement or a litter advertisement... in part because it is misleading and in part because some poorly informed judge might make a finding like the hideous fiasco in Skaer.

The defendant in Skaer v Babbitt was pro se (she represented herself). I don’t need to expand on why that is never a good idea. It seems apparent that Babbitt failed to convey to the judge that there is no such thing as a DCM free pedigree in Dobermans. As a scientific fact, with incomplete penetrance, no breeder can credibly claim that their bloodline is DCM free. From the decision it is apparent that the judge suffered form several misconceptions, including believing that dog breeders re-OFA their dogs before EVERY breeding. The court decision actually underlined the word EVERY :(

Worse still, at the time of the decision in the case Skaer’s dog was medically fit-as-a-fiddle, yet the judge considered Skaer “damaged” because she can not now claim that her dog is genetically perfect. (I guess that will hurt her future semen sales, because she will not be able to claim "Come One and All, I Have the Perfect Dog." :rolleyes:)

What the judge did not understand is that NO DOG of any bloodline or any breed IS GENETICALLY PERFECT!!! For that matter, no living creature is.

[tosca]

For me, I do OFA hips; vWD DNA test; and thyroid tests - plus brucellosis. I don't do holter tests; they're diagnostic, not predictive and I feel offer a false sense of security when breeding animals that are far younger than the average age of onset of DCM. Rather, I look to the longevity and health in my pedigrees as predicators of what I can anticipate.

[sorthund]

sorry to sound stupid, what is brucellosis? I guess I could just google it...;)

[andyhilt27]

kinda like a doggy STD if I remember correctly.

[andyhilt27]

oh and sorthund.......Look at my posts! You can not sound more stupid than I do. :cool:

[sorthund]

Lol!! I did look it up though....

http://www.vetinfo.com/dencyclopedia/debrucel.html

[tosca]

Yep, you likely already have your answer - but it's important to test for it prior to breeding 'cause you don't know for certain if your dog/bitch may have brucellosis - if they do, it can cause sterility.

[sorthund]

How far in advance should or can you test for it. I mean if they have it, then you can save your time (lots of it) looking for that "perfect" stud. Do you re-test before each breeding?

[Kalecho]

For me, I do OFA hips; vWD DNA test; and thyroid tests - plus brucellosis. I don't do holter tests; they're diagnostic, not predictive and I feel offer a false sense of security when breeding animals that are far younger than the average age of onset of DCM. Rather, I look to the longevity and health in my pedigrees as predicators of what I can anticipate.
I understand what you're saying, but perhaps we should be doing these tests to make sure that the dog doesn't have DCM at the time? Even if it's not diagnostic is it not a good idea to make sure the dog doesn't have the disease? At what age will it show on a holter monitor, and is this true in every case? Just a question, not a challenge, I have never used a holter monitor either. Cardio has not struck any of my dogs, so far so good, but I know it could happen.

[robinb]

Kalecho, I'm not a breeder but have owned the breed for over 35 years, and lost two of my four beloved dogs to DCM. In the context of buying a puppy, clear cardio testing on a 3 or 4 year old would mean next to nothing to me. I completely agree with both Elaine and Tosca that the current testing for DCM (holter/echo) is diagnostic only. On at least one other internet board some people thinly disguise these tests on young breeding stock as just a tad more than what they are, thus distorting the truth somewhat for the pet buying public. Furthermore, Elaine is correct that advertising the 'clear cardio' results on a breeding pair could come back and bite one in a court of law. Given the reality that 7.5 to 8 years is the median age for the onset of DCM, then it seems to me that the testing of 3 or 4 year olds, with current testing technology, is not all that productive in getting a handle on the disease in the context of breeding. Testing is great but lets not confuse or distort the current tests into something more than diagnostic as they don't predict DCM in breeing stock. JMHO

Robin

[Kalecho]

Kalecho, I'm not a breeder but have owned the breed for over 35 years, and lost two of my four beloved dogs to DCM. In the context of buying a puppy, clear cardio testing on a 3 or 4 year old would mean next to nothing to me. I completely agree with both Elaine and Tosca that the current testing for DCM (holter/echo) is diagnostic only. On at least one other internet board some people thinly disguise these tests on young breeding stock as just a tad more than what they are, thus distorting the truth somewhat for the pet buying public. Furthermore, Elaine is correct that advertising the 'clear cardio' results on a breeding pair could come back and bite one in a court of law. Given the reality that 7.5 to 8 years is the median age for the onset of DCM, then it seems to me that the testing of 3 or 4 year olds, with current testing technology, is not all that productive in getting a handle on the disease in the context of breeding. Testing is great but lets not confuse or distort the current tests into something more than diagnostic as they don't predict DCM in breeing stock. JMHO

Robin


Robin, yes, I understand that it isn't predictive, but will problems not show on a Holter Monitor test before a certain age? That is my question, certainly we wouldn't breed a dog that shows a trend towards developing DCM, will it show on say a two year old? If it does then maybe we should be holtering our dogs just to make sure the dog doesn't have the disease, not to predict that the dog won't pass it on.

[Elaine]

certainly we wouldn't breed a dog that shows a trend towards developing DCM, will it show on say a two year old? If it does then maybe we should be holtering our dogs just to make sure the dog doesn't have the disease, not to predict that the dog won't pass it on.
I have several problems with what you are advocating. One is this, a dog that has DCM may not pass it on. We have absolutely no clue why some offspring of DCM dogs DO NOT develop DCM. It is entirely possible that these individuals are of the greatest value to the breed because they have some mechanism that inhibits DCM. These individuals may turn out to be the most valuable dogs to our breed.

Holter your dogs till the cows come home... but do not advertise your DCM status in your stud dog ad or a puppy ad unless you like being sued.

[tosca]

Robin, yes, I understand that it isn't predictive, but will problems not show on a Holter Monitor test before a certain age? That is my question, certainly we wouldn't breed a dog that shows a trend towards developing DCM, will it show on say a two year old? If it does then maybe we should be holtering our dogs just to make sure the dog doesn't have the disease, not to predict that the dog won't pass it on.

Here's the issue I have with Holter testing - many of those who are testing young breeding stock state they are 'cardio clear.' That, to me, a misleading statement. Further, what some breeders are failing to acknowledge that while they are Holter testing young breeding stock, stating they are cardio clear, they are NOT disclosing the status of the parents and grandparents of the young 'cardio clear' breeding stock. That is the hypocrisy of the whole DCM matter.

People need to look at the pedigrees - you can test 'til you're blue in the face, but if you have multiple parents/grandparents/great-grandparents who have died of DCM, and who have sired/produced multiple offspring who have died of DCM, or have DCM, the likelihood of developing DCM is high, regardless of any testing you may do on 3 year old breeding stock.

It is well known by all those who study DCM that the onset is frequently not until well after the 'normal' breeding age - between 6-8 years of old. It is also well known that many who do develop DCM show no symptoms and exhibit no abnormal test results, prior to that age. Therefore, to test breeding stock at 3-4 years of age, then state they are 'cardio clear' and breed away, knowing that parents and grandparents, etc., have been diagnosed with DCM is ill advised, at the very best.

[andyhilt27]

I hope I don't start a huge argument........I for one am concerned with coat color genotypes. How is this health related??? I don't want to produce dilutes. I know some may have had great successes with them but the reality is that there are a lot of skin problems with dilutes. Coat color genotypes are very important to me. Just my opinion.

[tosca]

Andy, coat color types are easy - just do the DNA test offered by HealthGene. If your bitch doesn't carry dilution; you won't get it. While many dilutes may have coat issues; that does not by any means guarantee you won't have coat issues with a red or black. There are many many factors involved in health; color is not a health problem.

[andyhilt27]

Certain health tests are indeed easy. I have read reports that as many as 90% of blues suffer from CDA. CDA is not health related? In my opinion CDA is health related and I refuse to produce a dilute. vWd is easy to test for and not enough breeders are doing it at the same token. Cathy I respect your views and am in no way trying to insult or attack you. I am just stating my views. I also understand that some reds and blacks may also suffer from skin problems. In any case a thyroid test should be done to rule that out.

[andyhilt27]

Also on the subject of DCM, what can we do???? Elaine I understand your stance on it. But is there anything in terms of breeding that can be done? What studies are currently being done to better understand this disease? I will google for now......

[Kalecho]

I have several problems with what you are advocating. One is this, a dog that has DCM may not pass it on. We have absolutely no clue why some offspring of DCM dogs DO NOT develop DCM. It is entirely possible that these individuals are of the greatest value to the breed because they have some mechanism that inhibits DCM. These individuals may turn out to be the most valuable dogs to our breed.

Holter your dogs till the cows come home... but do not advertise your DCM status in your stud dog ad or a puppy ad unless you like being sued.

Ealine, I'm not trying to advocate anything and I am sorry if it appears that way. I'm just trying to keep an open discussion going and at the same time trying to learn along the way. None of us know how to totally breed away from cardio as we have no DNA marker for it, it's all a matter of trying our best to do the right thing. I personally don't believe in using dogs for breeding that have more than one dog that was diagnosed with or has died from cardio close up in the pedigree nor would I want to linebreed on it. By closeup I mean within three generations. That is my feeling on it and my opinion. As far as a holter monitor or EKG, I am in the middle on that and would like to learn what is the best thing to do. I would not breed a dog that tests positive on an EKC or Holter Monitor, I am sure of that, just trying to determine here if it's the smart thing to do to test younger breeding stock. Actually I don't think anything is wrong with advertising your dog as cardio clear if he is shown to be clear of that disease as long as it states at the time. In other words if it states So and So was found to be clear of cardio on such and such a date. There is nothing misleading about that.
Please cut me a little slack here as I am only trying to learn and maybe help others by having a discussion about different viewpoints and breeding practices geared towards trying to keep this disease from killing our dobermans.

[Kalecho]

Here's the issue I have with Holter testing - many of those who are testing young breeding stock state they are 'cardio clear.' That, to me, a misleading statement. Further, what some breeders are failing to acknowledge that while they are Holter testing young breeding stock, stating they are cardio clear, they are NOT disclosing the status of the parents and grandparents of the young 'cardio clear' breeding stock. That is the hypocrisy of the whole DCM matter.

People need to look at the pedigrees - you can test 'til you're blue in the face, but if you have multiple parents/grandparents/great-grandparents who have died of DCM, and who have sired/produced multiple offspring who have died of DCM, or have DCM, the likelihood of developing DCM is high, regardless of any testing you may do on 3 year old breeding stock.

It is well known by all those who study DCM that the onset is frequently not until well after the 'normal' breeding age - between 6-8 years of old. It is also well known that many who do develop DCM show no symptoms and exhibit no abnormal test results, prior to that age. Therefore, to test breeding stock at 3-4 years of age, then state they are 'cardio clear' and breed away, knowing that parents and grandparents, etc., have been diagnosed with DCM is ill advised, at the very best.

Tosca, I totally agree with you about pedigrees amd breeding dogs that don't have cardio close up nor linebreeding on it, to do so in my mind is asking for disaster. I would like to learn more about just how many young dogs will show problems on a holter monitor or an EKG and I feel that if it is even a small minority maybe we should be doing this test to ascertain that the dog does not have cardio in addition to breeding wisely in relation to the pedigree backround. I think i've said all I can say about this, hopefully you understand that I am in no way arguing with you, I agree with you, I'm just questioning if we should be doing these tests as an additional tool.

[valkyrie1]

Kalecho,
You might want to check out the DCM info at the University of Guelph site. Here is the link:

http://www.ovc.uoguelph.ca/ClinStudies/ogrady/holter/holterfaqs.htm

They have some interesting facts about it and being able to diagnose it, even with a Holter. I think this section best addresses your question:


"All dogs that are destined to develop DCM and congestive heart failure manifest a time chart (or time line) that goes through three stages. The first stage is characterized by the absence of symptoms of heart disease and a normal heart on all clinical tests (including echocardiography, ECG, Holter, and other tests). The second stage, we are calling occult DCM, is characterized by the absence of symptoms of heart disease but evidence of DCM based on clinical tests (especially echocardiography, ECG, or Holter). The third stage, we are calling overt DCM, is characterized by symptoms of heart failure and evidence of DCM based on clinical tests."


So my impression of the problem is this -
the average onset is 7.5 years old.
There is an average 2 year window between the second stage where symptoms usually occur and can be diagnosed with the tools we currently have and the third stage which includes the symptoms of heart failure.

So it is highly likely that you will get clear results in a Young Dog who may later be dignosed with DCM - as they are more than likely in the Stage 1 as defined above.

IF that is the case then I would say the pedigree tells us much more than the testing of young dogs.

Sue L

[Kalecho]

Kalecho,
You might want to check out the DCM info at the University of Guelph site. Here is the link:

http://www.ovc.uoguelph.ca/ClinStudies/ogrady/holter/holterfaqs.htm

They have some interesting facts about it and being able to diagnose it, even with a Holter. I think this section best addresses your question:


"All dogs that are destined to develop DCM and congestive heart failure manifest a time chart (or time line) that goes through three stages. The first stage is characterized by the absence of symptoms of heart disease and a normal heart on all clinical tests (including echocardiography, ECG, Holter, and other tests). The second stage, we are calling occult DCM, is characterized by the absence of symptoms of heart disease but evidence of DCM based on clinical tests (especially echocardiography, ECG, or Holter). The third stage, we are calling overt DCM, is characterized by symptoms of heart failure and evidence of DCM based on clinical tests."


So my impression of the problem is this -
the average onset is 7.5 years old.
There is an average 2 year window between the second stage where symptoms usually occur and can be diagnosed with the tools we currently have and the third stage which includes the symptoms of heart failure.

So it is highly likely that you will get clear results in a Young Dog who may later be dignosed with DCM - as they are more than likely in the Stage 1 as defined above.

IF that is the case then I would say the pedigree tells us much more than the testing of young dogs.

Sue L

Yes, that totally answers my question and thank you very much for your input! It tells me that testing a young dog for all practical purposes will tell us virtually nothing. I think we are all on the same page in that the pedigree is the most important thing to base breedings on in regards to cardio. Thanks again for explaining. It also makes it clearer that advertising clear of cardio on a young dog is misleading.

[Elaine]

... I would say the pedigree tells us much more than the testing of young dogs.

Sue L

Sorry, but I (respectfully) totally disagree with you, for several FUNDAMENTAL reasons. What you are suggesting is that we make breeding decisions based on guess work, assumptions and a whole lot of very questionable theories that are NOT remotely grounded in credible science. And, given that there is incomplete penetrance with DCM, what a dog died of is completely irrelevant to what it will transmit.

At present science is focused on treating DCM, it is not focused on how it is transmitted and/or how to prevent transmission. We are not anywhere near understanding the transmission of DCM. We need credible published peer reviewed science to guide us, not well meaning, good intentioned, but ultimately misleading guess work.

When people advocate that we rely upon what they claim a “pedigree” tells us about DCM, they are essentially suggesting that we rely upon anecdotal information at best. Very few breeders autopsy their dogs, and if they do, it is only one or two dogs in a pedigree. Most people haven’t a clue about the DCM status of their dog when it dies. And, even if the dog dies of a heart attack, cancer, blunt force trauma or something other than DCM, that does NOT mean the dog would not have succumbed to DCM if it has lived longer. Also, with incomplete penetrance, a DCM free dog can transmit the disease. And, since science doesn’t have a clue why some littermates get DCM and some do not, we have no credible reason to eliminate a dog from breeding population based solely on DSM status of dogs in a given pedigree. The DCM free littermate of the DCM dog may be the most valuable dog to our breed, because that dog may have the ability to inhibit DCM. We simply do NOT have enough science about the transmission of DCM to make claims about it.

Even more on point, we have absolutely ZERO reason to make an assumption that absent evidence of a DCM related death in the pedigree, the dog is DCM free and will not transmit DCM. Unless each and every dog in the pedigree is autopsied (and I mean each and every freaking dog), we haven’t a clue about the true DCM status of a pedigree. It is naive and misguided to make any claim at all about the DCM status of a pedigree, even if the dogs are long lived. A dog can contract DCM at an advanced age... and dogs can transmit it without ever being symptomatic. How many times have we heard breeders sheepishly come forward and say, “Opps, I was wrong all these years, we just confirmed DCM in our dogs... so, we have it too.”

I think that one of the reasons we struggle with DCM (and other disorders) is that we so desperately want there to be answers (even when there aren’t any), that we basically make up a protocol to suit what we’re breeding. We approach eliminating disorders from a gene pool from a very flawed perspective, often guided by medical professionals who haven’t a clue what they are advocating. We have not been successful eliminating DCM because our approach in not grounded in science and it is flawed in its inception.

[tosca]

Sorry, but I (respectfully) totally disagree with you, for several FUNDAMENTAL reasons. What you are suggesting is that we make breeding decisions based on guess work, assumptions and a whole lot of very questionable theories that are NOT remotely grounded in credible science. And, given that there is incomplete penetrance with DCM, what a dog died of is completely irrelevant to what it will transmit.

At present science is focused on treating DCM, it is not focused on how it is transmitted and/or how to prevent transmission. We are not anywhere near understanding the transmission of DCM. We need credible published peer reviewed science to guide us, not well meaning, good intentioned, but ultimately misleading guess work.

When people advocate that we rely upon what they claim a “pedigree” tells us about DCM, they are essentially suggesting that we rely upon anecdotal information at best. Very few breeders autopsy their dogs, and if they do, it is only one or two dogs in a pedigree. Most people haven’t a clue about the DCM status of their dog when it dies. And, even if the dog dies of a heart attack, cancer, blunt force trauma or something other than DCM, that does NOT mean the dog would not have succumbed to DCM if it has lived longer. Also, with incomplete penetrance, a DCM free dog can transmit the disease. And, since science doesn’t have a clue why some littermates get DCM and some do not, we have no credible reason to eliminate a dog from breeding population based solely on DSM status of dogs in a given pedigree. The DCM free littermate of the DCM dog may be the most valuable dog to our breed, because that dog may have the ability to inhibit DCM. We simply do NOT have enough science about the transmission of DCM to make claims about it.

Even more on point, we have absolutely ZERO reason to make an assumption that absent evidence of a DCM related death in the pedigree, the dog is DCM free and will not transmit DCM. Unless each and every dog in the pedigree is autopsied (and I mean each and every freaking dog), we haven’t a clue about the true DCM status of a pedigree. It is naive and misguided to make any claim at all about the DCM status of a pedigree, even if the dogs are long lived. A dog can contract DCM at an advanced age... and dogs can transmit it without ever being symptomatic. How many times have we heard breeders sheepishly come forward and say, “Opps, I was wrong all these years, we just confirmed DCM in our dogs... so, we have it too.”

I think that one of the reasons we struggle with DCM (and other disorders) is that we so desperately want there to be answers (even when there aren’t any), that we basically make up a protocol to suit what we’re breeding. We approach eliminating disorders from a gene pool from a very flawed perspective, often guided by medical professionals who haven’t a clue what they are advocating. We have not been successful eliminating DCM because our approach in not grounded in science and it is flawed in its inception.

Agreed re: desperately wanting answers, but given that DCM is also a human condition and there are no DNA gene markers in humans, it is highly unlikely that we will see a marker for dobermans any time soon, I believe.

Now, with regard to pedigrees - I call foul. I don't feel that personal knowledge of date/cause of death of the animals within ones' pedigree would be considered anecdotal. Rather, this is where some effort and research is involved, beyond breeding to the well-advertised stud dog of the moment.

Further, breeding to an extremely young stud dog is equally as foolish as breeding to a dog whose parents/grandparents have knowingly died of cardio.

No easy answers to this problem, and no easy tests - but - some knowledge, experience, and research are definitely a step in the right direction.

[tosca]

Certain health tests are indeed easy. I have read reports that as many as 90% of blues suffer from CDA. CDA is not health related? In my opinion CDA is health related and I refuse to produce a dilute. vWd is easy to test for and not enough breeders are doing it at the same token. Cathy I respect your views and am in no way trying to insult or attack you. I am just stating my views. I also understand that some reds and blacks may also suffer from skin problems. In any case a thyroid test should be done to rule that out.

Andy, CDA is not a 'disease' and no one is asking you to produce dilutes. You can easily rule out the probability of producing dilutes by performing the HealthGene coat color DNA test - simple.

Further, if you think that all coat issues in reds and blacks are related to thyroid, well, you're simply wrong - it's just not that easy.

I wish you luck in your quest for the perfect dog, Andy. When you locate one, please let us know.

[robinb]

Andy,

I'm not trying to get this very good thread off subject but some skin-coat issues can be resolved through the best feeding regiment and a non-toxic environment.

Case in point; a good friend of mine adopted a older black female rescue Dobe girl about 18 months back. This wonderful old girl had a terrible thin, dull, flackey, raw in spots, skin-coat. The new owner spared no expence with vet work. Her thyroid came back borderline and because of her terrible coat they did put her on thyroid meds. Sure, she improved somewhat from the meds, antibiotics, skin meds, better food and a non-toxic house and yard. But her coat was still a mess. At my suggestion, the owner put her on a raw food and vitamin regiment very similiar to Cathy's. Now this old girl has a beautiful full gleaming coat as nice as any show dog. They were at my house Christmas Eve and we had Santa hats on her and my young healthy gleaming male, when I sent the pictures out I made sure to tell people (even Cathy) who was who. Although Cathy might have figured it out! Her coat is that nice now. I'm not saying that all coat issues are food related but this old girl's was.

[andyhilt27]

Andy, CDA is not a 'disease' and no one is asking you to produce dilutes. You can easily rule out the probability of producing dilutes by performing the HealthGene coat color DNA test - simple.

Further, if you think that all coat issues in reds and blacks are related to thyroid, well, you're simply wrong - it's just not that easy.

I wish you luck in your quest for the perfect dog, Andy. When you locate one, please let us know.
I in no way said that thyroid issues are the root all of skin problems! I simply stated that tests should be done to rule that out. It could be a simple solution to an often complex problem. Perfect dog???? No, I am just on a quest for healthy dogs. Period. What is the title to this thread? Does it say "health" tests? It asks what tests you rely on as a breeder and why. The definition of disease straight from dictionary.com: "a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment." I beg to differ on the subject of CDA. It is a mutation of the hair follicle correct??? Cancer is a mutation is it not? Cancer is a disease correct? Cathy I was merely answering the thread's question and I do not appreciate your condescending bullshit response. Responses like that make me want spay my bitch and be done with dog show world all together. Carry on with your little fraternity of dobermans as care not to take part anymore.:mad:

[tosca]

Cathy I was merely answering the thread's question and I do not appreciate your condescending bullshit response. Responses like that make me want spay my bitch and be done with dog show world all together. Carry on with your little fraternity of dobermans as care not to take part anymore.:mad:


With a response like this, Andy, perhaps the breed will be better off if you didn't take part any longer. I, for one, certainly do not appreciate your response and find your use of inappropriate language highly offensive. If you truly wish to learn, I suggest you do so and refrain from your brash, uneducated replies.

[andyhilt27]

Cathy......I love you.:D

[valkyrie1]

Elaine,

I understand your point about not really knowing what the Cardio Status of all the dogs in the pedigree are.

I suspect that I might not have been clear enough in my response.

I was replying specifically to the question of Holter Testing YOUNG dogs and using that as an indicator for the probablility of Cardio in the future.

How many young dogs have had normal Holters and then been found to have Cardio as they age? I think many of us could come up with a list of dogs. The information currently available indicates that affected dogs will test Normal for some period of their life.

So if you have (2) 2 (ish) year old males that you are thinking of breeding to and you know that dog A's sire died of cardio, and he has produced at least some dogs who have been diagnosed with Cardio, and dog B's pedigree has no KNOWN cardio for 3 generations, and substantial longevity as well - would that weigh in your decision making? And if so - how?

I can tell you it would in mine. My response to the two Holters both being clear is _ Gosh I hope so - they are 2 years old! I personally would hedge my bet and go with the greater longevity.

Please do not take this as anything other than my explaining my position.
Thanks
Sue L

[andyhilt27]

Are the estimates of 50% of all dobermans will fall victim to DCM correct?

[andyhilt27]

Cathy, I can see how some of my responses may not be to your liking. I apologize ma'am. But please don't throw bricks in a glass house. I do have one uneducated question. Ok maybe more than one. :D Why are the dilutes recognized colors in the AKC? It is to my understanding that in the past they could not breed it out. There were no tests available in the good old days to determine the coat color genotype. They are naturally occurring recessive genes. Cathy you have a lovely fawn bitch! There is absolutely no disputing that! My question is if it is really in the best interest of the breed to produce the dilutes? I read all of the dispute about the albinos (mutation I know). Where is the concern for producing dilutes? I am sorry but I choose not to advocate dilutes. This leads me to a new thread before I am banned.

[tosca]

Cathy, I can see how some of my responses may not be to your liking. I apologize ma'am. But please don't throw bricks in a glass house. I do have one uneducated question. Ok maybe more than one. :D Why are the dilutes recognized colors in the AKC? It is to my understanding that in the past they could not breed it out. There were no tests available in the good old days to determine the coat color genotype. They are naturally occurring recessive genes. Cathy you have a lovely fawn bitch! There is absolutely no disputing that! My question is if it is really in the best interest of the breed to produce the dilutes? I read all of the dispute about the albinos (mutation I know). Where is the concern for producing dilutes? I am sorry but I choose not to advocate dilutes. This leads me to a new thread before I am banned.

Hello, Andy - apology accepted, thank you.
I do not know why the AKC recognizes the four colors; black, blue, red, fawn. I was not involved in that decision. However, those 4 colors do exist in all countries - simply some countries do not allow breeding of the dilutes and will cull.
I do not set out to breed dilutions; rather, I set out to breed the best I can. Do note that I purposely avoided stud dogs who carry dilution when breeding my fawn bitch. I have Emma because she is fawn - and - because nobody wanted her. I showed both of her parents to Top 20 conformation status; her sire to Best in Show and her dam to Best in Specialty Shows, as well as multiple group wins. Both are outstanding examples of dobermans, in my opinion. Emma is also an outstanding example of a doberman; to eliminate her from my breeding program simply because of her color would be wrong, in my opinion.
If breeders focus on only one factor - say, elimination of vWD, for example, you significantly reduce the gene pool available for breeding. Everyone has their preferences - mine are to produce the most sound, both physically and mentally, dobermans I can who also conform to the standard as I interpret it. Were I to choose something to run from and avoid at all costs, dilution would not be it - rather DCM would be, and that's difficult at best.
Further, not all dilutes have coat/skin problems. They do not have temperament issues; they are not inbred; they do not have eyesight problems - all these are associated with white dobermans. Agreed that you run a high risk of color dilution alopecia with dilutes, thus my efforts to avoid producing dilutes. I do not promote fawns and blues, but I do believe that a quality fawn or blue should be recognized and not eliminated simply due to their coat color.

[andyhilt27]

Cathy, I noticed your last breeding was with Gunther. He is a #1 black right? What are your views on dilutes being at a higher risk for DCM? I don't know that there is evidence either way. Also are all DCM cases in your opinion genectically related??? I have read that not all human cases are. Anyone else feel free to answer as well. Also Cathy, You wanna be my buddy?:D

[Elaine]

Elaine,

I understand your point about not really knowing what the Cardio Status of all the dogs in the pedigree are.

I suspect that I might not have been clear enough in my response.

I was replying specifically to the question of Holter Testing YOUNG dogs and using that as an indicator for the probablility of Cardio in the future.

How many young dogs have had normal Holters and then been found to have Cardio as they age? I think many of us could come up with a list of dogs. The information currently available indicates that affected dogs will test Normal for some period of their life.

So if you have (2) 2 (ish) year old males that you are thinking of breeding to and you know that dog A's sire died of cardio, and he has produced at least some dogs who have been diagnosed with Cardio, and dog B's pedigree has no KNOWN cardio for 3 generations, and substantial longevity as well - would that weigh in your decision making? And if so - how?

I can tell you it would in mine. My response to the two Holters both being clear is _ Gosh I hope so - they are 2 years old! I personally would hedge my bet and go with the greater longevity.

Please do not take this as anything other than my explaining my position.
Thanks
Sue L
And I am only expressing an opinion, specifically my opinion. I am not saying that there is a right or wrong, and clearly good people can disagree on this. Our feeling is that at some point doing a Holter on a young dog is silly. Arthur compares it to doing a pap smear on a 13 year old. In general, it is a waste of money (unless you have specific reason to feel the need to medicate a given dog). Our concern is that the result gives a breeder a false sense of confidence. As for all these supposedly “Cardio-free long-lived” pedigrees, sorry I think it is total baloney... even if 100% of the dogs in the three generation pedigree were autopsied at death (which they are not), at present we have no way credible of knowing if the dog might not have died of DCM had it lived longer. And, there is incomplete penetrance. Asymptomatic dogs can transmit the disease. And we do not understand why some dogs with DCM in the pedigree live long full lives. We do not know they have some inhibitor for DCM.

We need credible peer reviewed science to guide us, not guess work and well intentioned theory.

So, I object to the Holter test used in the context of a stud dog ad or a puppy ad. People are using the Holter test result to imply something positive about a dog’s ability to transmit DCM, which is misguided at best. A Holter Test should be used to decide whether or not to medicate the dog... it should not be used to suggest that a dog is less likely to transmit DCM. I think that suggestion is misleading and could form the basis of liability in a court of law, should - god forbid – a dog in the pedigree develop DCM at some point in life.

In May of 2008 we are still pretty free to make whatever claims we want to make about our dogs and our breeding programs. But with decisions like Skaer v. Babbitt, we need be aware of the impressions we are making with our advertising. Breeders can get creamed in a court of law if we have an ignorant judge and a motivated plaintiff (and that pretty much sums up most litigation).

We absolutely cringe when we see things like JuD’s “Holter your dogs” signature line. She’s selling the Holter monitor for god’s sake. Of course she wants us to use her product. If her concern was truly for the welfare of the dog, and if it were grounded in science, she might just as well advocate doing an MRI on every single dog. According to a recent test, 100% of all clinically normal dogs had a cervical abnormality upon being MRIed. One hundred percent of clinically normal dogs!!! One hundred percent.. i.e., all of them... had an abnormality!!! One hundred percent!!! So, I'll sign this my posts "MRI your dog" ... and it would be as irrelevant to what the dog will transmit as a Holter test.

But again, this is just my opinion, or Arthur's and my opinion. Others feel differently, and we respect that. We are not breeding for a pet market, nor are we breeding to make some guarantee that our dogs will live 14 years. I come from Great Danes- eight - ten years is a good life, and I would have no complaints.

[andyhilt27]

Arthur compares it to doing a pap smear on a 13 year old.

We need credible peer reviewed science to guide us, not guess work and well intentioned theory.

I absolutely love Arthur's analogy and am extremely jealous I did not come up with it myself!:D

I completely agree on the science aspect.

[andyhilt27]

Has anyone read this??? Just a question!!! I am NOT stating my views in the form of a question! Please don't beat me for this one.

Increasing Hereditary Health Problems in the Breeding of Purebred Dogs: A Comparative Overview Using Dobermans in Germany, Europe and in the USA as Examples
by Dr. Reinhard Haberzettl

http://www.uniteddobermanclub.com/breed/Doberman_hereditary_3681FE.pdf

[Elaine]

Has anyone read this??? Just a question!!! I am NOT stating my views in the form of a question! Please don't beat me for this one.

Increasing Hereditary Health Problems in the Breeding of Purebred Dogs: A Comparative Overview Using Dobermans in Germany, Europe and in the USA as Examples
by Dr. Reinhard Haberzettl

http://www.uniteddobermanclub.com/breed/Doberman_hereditary_3681FE.pdf


We scanned it, it is chock full of speculation and inaccurate assumptions... it does not rise to the level of credible medical science... not remotely.

I think we need to understand the difference between well-meaning theory... and medical/ scientific fact. Veterinary medical science has limitations, some of which have profound negative consequences for our dogs. How many of you remember vets giving horrendous nutritional advice... e.g. that a Great Dane puppy needed a high protein Growth Formula plus a Pet Cal and a Multi vitamin; or that puppies need 7 way combined shots (a series of four, starting at 6 weeks); or that we should push to get our puppies on solid food ASAP... "the earlier the better"; or that antibiotics are “the magic bullet”... I could go on.:mad:

When I reflect back on this kind of medically unsound garbage I often wonder if any of us ever had a vet call to apologize for the damage they have done... or for getting it completely wrong.

Actually, back in about 1986 I remember a vet did call to say that he had been wrong to vehemently insist that I raise my Great Dane puppies on a 28% Growth formula plus the pet cal and the multi vitamin. 1986. That was the last time a vet apologized for getting it wrong. Unfortunately, that was not the last time they got it wrong. :mad:

[andyhilt27]

Dr. Reinhard Haberzettl has his doctorate in biology and masters in animal genetics. Hardly a quack DVM(not all are quacks!). I understand his theories may be just that...theories. Most scientific facts start out as theories until sound evidence is proved don't they? How would one prove that breeding practices may be the reason for the DCM epidemic?


"polygenetic but mostly autosomally (incompletely) dominant (partly X-chromosomal)" Is this therory or fact? I have no idea....What do you think?

Is inbreeding to blame for the astromical numbers of DCM cases in your opinion? I have yet to form an opinion on inbreeding or linebreeding. I hope to form one with more research.....:D

[Rauschund]

I do OFA Hips, MSU Thyroid, and vWd on all dogs after the age of 2. then prior to breeding I do T3 & T4 levels for thyroid, brucellosis tests, and an echo on the bitch to make sure she is in good shape for breeding at this time. I rely on pedigree and family history for the most part on longevity.
CaroleAnn
www.rauschund.com