Quote:
Originally Posted by cally930  But isn't testing puppies useless because you really can't get a good reading unless they are 6 months of age? I know that there is an initial test done earlier than the 6 month mark - but what does that prove if its inaccurate on its own? |
Even so, if there's a chance that it can be detected at an earlier age--even if you know a re-test will be needed to be 100% certain, wouldn't that be better from the aspect of being able to let potential owners know. Or if a pup did come back with positive test results at an early age, then the breeder could hold them until they were older and more concrete test could be conducted.
Furthermore, what would be the alternative? Have the new owners take on the responsibility of having them tested when they are older?
It's all the more reason to have had the adults (for several generations back) tested and to have a good overall knowledge of their medical histories. Sure, it may show up out of the blue anyway, but you are still GREATLY reducing the chances of having it happen.