Quote:
Originally Posted by pstinard  Now I WILL take issue with this... Those studies cited are from peer reviewed journals and written by veterinarians at research institutions. They are NOT written by animal rights groups. And the articles cited DO weigh the pros and cons of tail docking--they are not one-sided rants. The fact that there are very few research articles pointing to the advantages of tail docking speaks to the fact that there is very little evidence to support it, certainly not a preponderance of evidence. If tail docking had miraculous health benefits, the veterinary researchers would be the first the write about it I assure you. |
Consider that genetic testing in dogs is still in its' infancy. Consider who funds research? Usually drug companies and other vested interests.
Why research into the benefit or not of tail docking? There is little obvious to me pharmalogcial benefit either way.
Consider also that memory is the "gentlest" of truths. That vets and the veterinary industry are very slow to computerize, and there is no National Health Database that reports incidence of certain types of injuries or disease.
I find it a matter of surprise that either the nerve bundles have or have not grown into the tail at vertebral 3 or not. Surely for crying out loud we can delineate irrefuteably if so, and if all afferent and effervent nerves are present.
Then there is the question of how dogs perceive pain, where are their pain centers in the brain? If given (which I don't know is proven yet), the nerves are fully formed into the tail, does the brain actually receive the and process the pain signals.
And yes there can be crying when tails are docked, but hey every heard a newborn cry just out of the birth canal?
I am not aware in my venue yet, of any perceived "stump" problem with a tail, but my breed that I breed do not drastically dock the tails, we leave 3-5 vertebrae.
I think if one is to argue that perceived pain is the main drawback for docking and cropping, then in North AMerica they should ban spaying and neutering, because for sure in those operations and after care there is pain, and btw known health risks from this procedure. And this is major surgery for both sexes! And yet we promote these procedures, despite the pain, despite the risks, despite future down the road health concerns.
I will tell what I do know and feel, is that given a choice, to have to amputate a tail in later life and given a choice to dock at 3days old, I would never ever hesitate to dock at 3days old.
I don't know if the German Study of increase in tail injuries is valid or not.
Until and unto such time as I have concrete Cochrane like studies of valid research into neuronal development of canines, and pain, and also documented "injuries" from vet performed tail docking; I will not change my mind about docking.
I think that the ASPCA and other like organizations that promote spaying and neutering at the same time as they want to ban docking of a 3day old tail, to say the least is inconsistent, given their or so altruistic aim to avoid pain to a small puppy.
By six months old which is the usual timeframe to spay/neuter we all can agree that nervous system is intact and basically fully functioning.
Anyhow just my thoughts. I think that a consistent point of view, if your point of view is to avoid pain based on human predilections, then ban crop dock dew claw removal and spaying and neutering.