Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Brown  But do some of the dog clubs standards actually better the breed? I watched this documentary and found it to be very troubling. It seems with some breeds the standards caused genetic issues to be reinforced. King Cavalier Spaniel head size causing seizures, Pugs bulging eyes and curled tails, German Shepard's slopped back causing hip problems, Rhodesian Ridge back's Ridge skin disorder, Bulldogs large head causing breathing and natural birth problems. I feel genetic testing should become a more important factor in breed standards if we truly want to better the breed. Pedigree Dogs Exposed - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The United Kingdom pedigree-dog industry has faced criticism because certain aspects of dog conformation stipulated in the UK Kennel Club breed standards have a detrimental impact on dog welfare. A review of conformation-related disorders was carried out in the top 50 UK Kennel Club registered breeds using systematic searches of existing information. A novel index to score severity of disorders along a single scale was also developed and used to conduct statistical analyses to determine the factors affecting reported breed predisposition to defects. According to the literature searched, each of the top 50 breeds was found to have at least one aspect of its conformation predisposing it to a disorder; and 84 disorders were either directly or indirectly associated with conformation. The Miniature poodle, Bulldog, Pug and Basset hound had most associations with conformation-related disorders. Further research on prevalence and severity is required to assess the impact of different disorders on the welfare of affected breeds." Source Asher L, Diesel G, Summers JF, McGreevy PD, Collins LM.
Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, Potters Bar, Herts AL9 7TA, UK. |
It sounds like this was an epidemological study? That video came out oh what 4 to 5 yrs ago now. There is another thread on here I linked and typed about this video.
And I concur with you about Breed clubs getting much more serious about health testings, prior to earning Master Breeder awards, or Top Dog awards, and even earning Championships. All CH's can be provisional until the dog full matures and all the health tests can be done.
But we are a very large step away from this .......
I will point out that no-one studies mixes. Doing an epidemicological study on the extent of HD, ED, immune system problems, heart, thyroid, LS.
Studies that only look at "purebred" often don't delineate out the progeny from health tested parents. And they don't check for purebred accuracy.
Also as there are precious few actual real studies on mixes, the public gets the mistaken impression that mixes are healthier than pure breeds. The answer is who knows? I don't. THere are not enough studies done with a large enough or meaningful enough sample to come to any reasonable conclusion.
But I can tell you in a busy city, when I am driving or walking my dogs around, I see enough sickle hocks, limping front or rear - enough to suspect dysplasia. Rocking backs, and poorly muscled dogs. And I see this every day, more than once per day.
Let me go to a dog park, and my observations increase exponentially. The bulk of these dogs are obvious mixes.
It is also at the time of "purebred Dogs Expoused" the English expose, there were some valid concerns expressed about one-sided reporting.
No reputable breeder should endorse breeding un-healthy dogs. And no breed club either.
While this expose portrayed some breeds with extreme presentation of one or another aspect of anatomy, there are over 300 breeds being registered in clubs today.
I do agree with Woogie Man that on the face of it there is nothing in the YOrkie Std that encourages extreme breeding practices.