[MyFairLacy]

Originally Posted by BakersDozen

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.

LS has been known to skip 10 generations. Not too many breeders will know the complete history of EVERY dog in a pedigree up to 10 generations back..that is a LOT of dogs. And what if there was an unethical breeder that owned one of those dogs that didn't fully disclose all info? There may be a LS dog in the pedigree that no one knows about...

And what if the dog is asymptomatic? It happens... The asymptomatic LS dog might be bred and pass on the defect.

A BAT is so easy and pretty inexpensive. It causes no adverse affects on the dog. There are no negatives to BAT a dog...well, unless it turns out that a dog does have a shunt and a breeder is forced to spay/neuter a dog they have a lot of time/money invested in. But an ethical breeder would want to know that so that they wouldn't go on to produce more with the defect. I see only positives by doing a BAT.

Seriously...why NOT do it? The only reasons I can see not to do it is because a breeder is afraid it is there and doesn't want to stop breeding the dogs, the breeder doesn't want to take the time or spend the money to do it, or because they don't know any better. Everyone here KNOWS how common LS is and how serious it can be. So again...why not do it?