Quote:
Originally Posted by blitz  Um, of course you know we're talking about Yorkies here where liver shunt is a major problem, not a 30 year old female with no remarkable history.
I'm not even suggesting that it is irresponsible for breeders not to have BAT done. However, I want to be convinced why we should not have it done to every single Yorkie. |
Yes, of course I realize this. The breeder who doesn't have it done was talking about dogs with no history in their lines. (at least that is what I gathered, I might have misunderstood) That is what I was comparing to no 'family history.'
I'm not disagreeing that the test is a good idea. I certainly feel that breeders are not doing enough testing. I'm just pointing out that the mere fact that it is prevelant doesn't necessarily necessitate the testing of every dog. In the US, diabetes is much more prevelant in Mexican Americans, blacks, and American Indians. But it is not reasonable or necessary for every single person in those groups to automatically do a fasting test. They are tested when they show some sign or symptom, or when a routine test indicates otherwise.
I agree that there is no compelling reason NOT to BAT every Yorkie. But I also feel there is no compelling reason TO BAT every Yorkie, in the absence of any indication there might be a problem.....Assuming there is great familiarity with the bloodline(s), and the other precautions already mentioned in this thread. (Please note I am not referring to breeding two dogs you know nothing about, without testing.) Since BAT won't tell you if you have two dogs with recessive genes, you could still produce offspring with liver shunt anyway. I would venture to say that the risks of either would be comparable.
Again, just my opinion.