Quote:
Originally Posted by amyazer  SHes not a biologist! Every doctor ive met says mixed breeds are better health wise and my research...im not talking about breeders and how they breed bad lines because you can breed a bad line in a pure breed and mixed breed...however mixed breeds have lesser health issues its proven...breeders that r saying its soo wrong to breed mixed breeds is because they want people to continue buying pure breeds! what would akc do if mixed breeds where suddenly what people wanted... for people that r soo intelligent your closing your eyes! |
A biologist studies living organisms and their mechanisms for working in certain environments. A geneticist is a biologist who studies genetics, the science of genes,
heredity and
variation of organisms. I believe I'd rather have a person with a knowledge of genetics, heredity and variations over biology any day trying to predict the best pairings of dogs to determine health and conformation. And someone with a healthy understanding of genes and heredity and variations in breeding is truly best qualified to speak about how to choose and predict the qualities of puppies of a particular breeding of two dogs over someone who knows veterinary medicine, unless that vet sub-specialize in genetics in dog breeding.
Many vets don't have a good understanding of the genetics of breeding dogs that a breeder does and if you hang around here, you will come to understand that. I've seen so many posts on YT of teacup breeders who have actually stated that their vet told them their tiny female was fine to breed to any tiny male and apparently never counseled against the unsafe aspects of breeding a female weighing under 5 lbs. or genetic probability of outcomes of the puppies at all. Never spoke to it! I've seen so many other posts about unwise advice supposedly passed on by vets - and received enough of my own by more than one vet out of his depth, to know that vets aren't always wiser than breeders who are well-versed in the genetics of dog breeding.
Any unwise statement by a "doctor" or vet that goes against acceptable current, conventional wisdom that a breeder of a long, healthy, happy line of purebred dogs, each pairing health-tested for possible inheritable medical conditions and judged acceptable for breeding with another dog based on a planned genetic map for probable outcomes in the plan of correcting faults and perpetuating strong points in the puppies; and prefers mixing breeds and assumes those puppies will be healthier - is silly because it's unproven. Until you provide the credible "proof" you are talking about and proof in such volume as to override current conventional wisdom or there are a substantial amount of credible studies to prove what you say the vets/doctors said about mixed breeds having healthier pups, I think we'd all be wiser to stick to the puppies of the kind of purebred, health-tested and carefully planned breeding outlined above that consistently produces healthy dogs.