Thank you for an very informative post. It has certainly given me more information on the DNA testing available. I haven't seen much lately about the original 17 EIC pups. How are they doing?
Hips score. Now they are all well and good, but are wereally talking about a true Medium here? Of all Labradors bred, how many that are registered are actually hips scored? and therefore is the breed average of 16 a true average? It can't be. So unless every single lab puppy born and registered is hips score, you are never going to have a true breed average score. Controvertial I know.
I bred my bitch with a hip score of 15 to a dog with 0:0 score. The 2 I have kept will be tested genetically and hips/elbows when they time is right. That doesn't mean I am going to breed from them, it's just so I know what my bitch progeny are healthwise.
" edited to add: Do remember that I am not criticising anyone else's breeding when I descibe ours. "
Dom, having been breeding nearly 20 years I fully agree with that statement in your reply and each to their own on the lengths they do or don't go to.
Your paragraph that said this:
" There is a spread of hip quality in the puppies in a litter, hereditarily based on the quality of the parental hips. Some are better, and some worse, with the majority clustered around the parental level. If the parental level is at or towards the very best, then that statement is actually impossible, as there is little or no room for improvement. Therefore a superb pair of parents will produce puppies that are .... etc etc...."
Can you tell me what research you base this on? Have you scored many of your whole litters and based it on? You speak it like its proven scientific fact, but infact there are MANY grey areas surrounding hips, scores and how they follow on and show themselves. We all have 'theories' and 'hunches' after breeding for a good few years and reading umpteen breed record supplements and Joan Macann hip score books, but its all just theory... isn't it? Research is ongoing of course but as yet nothing has been fully proven or we would all be doing it I do find it difficult to swallow reading stuff written on here like its scientific fact when its actually your opinion. Sorry, but thats a bit dangerous isn't it....?
Listen good luck to you if you sell on dogs with such good scores as 9, 10, 11 etc. You truely do have the most stringent requirements I have ever heard a commercial kennel have with so many dogs. Hats off to you. Sadly the vast majority of us who have 3, 5, 7 max dogs at a time have to use the sensible option of breeding to improve with what we have. And many of us have produced years of consistantly low scores and sound dogs. Its just as we do with the DNA results we choose to use. No difference whatsoever. Don't chuck out a Carrier, just mate it to a clear and KEEP a clear and use breeding endorsements on the rest.
I suppose the real difference comes in the numbers you keep and the amount of litters you breed to the rest of us. You can be magnificently selective, even if I feel you are on a bit of a hiding to nothing BEING so selective, myself I do appreciate that is not my business, I would just hate it to be based on scientific evidence that just doesn't exist - or does it?
Di
____________
The boys!
Read: Wylanbriar Dog Blog on the website: Updated! 1st February 12´!
Martin, I take your point: not much on the recent pages is about the EIC pups. Apologies! We should move the discussions about other stuff elsewhere.
The current situation of those pups is that the support structure of hon vet; hon training advisor; hon coordinator is in place, and the first of those pups has left for its new home. 2 more are chosen and waiting here for their owners to return from holiday before collection.
A couple of offers of homes have been turned down regretfully on the grounds of suitability, so there are 2 black bitches still awaiting the right people. We have some ideas for four of those 2, which means that we could find ourselves with not enough affected puppies to go round!!!
We are planning the programme of study that will follow them, and again there are some pretty good ideas that are not yet firm enough to comment on.
In the meantime, all are just ordinary bouncing 8 1/2 week old puppies. We can tell which they are as long as the scanner battery isn't running low. Otherwise we can't without checking them all over (2 white hairs on right rear heel, etc.).
All of the puppies are now coming up to 9 months old, and the first round of health questionnaires is about to be mailed out to all of their owners, including the N/EIC carriers and the N/N clears to allow us to see whether anything that emerges is confined to the EIC/EIC affecteds.
Pleased to say that while we have had a few contacts for support for problems of varying severity, almost all is quiet. We haven't had any contacts that relate to EIC or similar symptoms.
All of the EIC/EIC affecteds are homed with families who have shown us that they can offer the pup a calm, disciplined and moderately active life (rather than frantic or artery-cloggingly-sedate).
This is the earliest that we could expect to see any symptoms of EIC, so no news is... no news. We won't be holding a carnival to celebrate, yet.
We are thinking that we might widen the group a little, to include owners of other labs that are tested as EIC/EIC affected. This would let us be sure that all of the questions we should be asking are being asked - we think they are. If you have a tested EIC/EIC affected and would like to be included, please let us know as a reply rather than a PM.
It is of course very early days, and as we know - 80% of genetically affecteds experience collapse before the age of 4 - most of them having their first collapse around the age of 2.
It's excellent that you are trying to continue to support the new owners and I think your offer to include other EIC affected lab owners the opportunity to join your group is a very good idea.
However, in reality, I think it likely that you will get a few coming forward to join, probably from in the "pet dog" community. Sadly so many of the "show" owners are in denial and seem to be keeping their results under wrap
Thank you for taking this very responsible stance - please keep us informed of how things go.
Could I ask a question Dom (and just to remind you this is coming from someone that does EIC test and will not breed affecteds). I also no longer want to get involved in any heated debates on the subject. I do what I do and others can do what they want/like!
Why have the pups been placed in specifically calm homes? Surely as any sort of "experiment" the pups should be placed in a normal mix of pet/working homes with busy lives etc. etc. ?
I believe that these puppies have probably been very carefully placed (and quite rightly so) in order to try to minimise the likelihood of collapses. Obviously their welfare has to come first.
But from the survey/experiment point of view - you are quite right - any feedback regarding these dogs will not be truly representative of the overall picture. For that to happen there would need to be a large sample of dogs living "normal" lives in all sorts of backgrounds. And that's not going to happen unless testing becomes widespread here, as in the rest of the world, and owners are open about their results. Utilising DNA testing and properly using this information within breeding programmes could mean that conditions like EIC could be eradicated within a few generations.
At the end of the day - these puppies ought never to have been produced, and Dom is picking up the pieces in the best way possible.
This brings us full circle back to the whole debate of EIC testing - and like Jill - I'm getting rather weary of it - so don't intend to start yet another rant
I've said it all over and over again.
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink
Last night's TV programme showed the way that some breeders (and I'm not pointing any fingers here) know that genetic conditions exist in their lines and choose to ignore the fact, putting their own vanity before the welfare of the dogs.
Yes, June, we have to put the welfare of these pups at the top of the priority list. Jill, you are right, too, in scientific terms.
We decided that this was not to be a proper scientific experiment, for that reason. However, we think that the families who have them are representative of the "typical" pet home, with the more active homes screened out. A significant number of our puppy owners come to us specifically because they want to minimise the chance of problems when they do fell running, or other extremely strenuous activities.
What we would regard as a great outcome of the followup would be to find that EIC/EIC puppies can have a good life with the right (intensive and time consuming) support from the breeder. That would be the right balance between the disincentive to breed them and the realisation that by testing you don't brng the world crashing down around you - in fact you are better off.
However, as good scientists we won't be massaging the findings to show this if it turns out to be worse.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
I do find it difficult to swallow reading stuff written on here like its scientific fact when its actually your opinion. Sorry, but thats a bit dangerous isn't it....?
We should move the discussions about other stuff elsewhere.
