[megansmomma]

Originally Posted by gemy

I emailed the Skepvet on the study design for Viszlas: Here in is his Here in is his response the bolding is mine.

skeptvet says:
June 20, 2014 at 4:44 pm

The problem with recall bias and with misclassification of different kinds in studies that use similar methods is a well-recognized source of error. It is not something unique to this study, nor does it automatically invalidate the results. However, it is an uncontrolled source of bias that potentially reduces the internal and external validity of the trial. Similarly, the limitation to one breed clearly does reduce the extent to which we can generalize the results to other breeds or mixed breeds. Again, that doesn’t mean the results aren’t worth considering, but it does mean we cannot reasonably use the results of this one trial to dramatically alter our understanding of the risks and benefits of neutering or our specific practices. It is one bit of evidence out of hundreds of studies with its own strengths and weaknesses, and it must be evaluated in that context.
Automatic neutering of all dogs of both sexes at 6 months of age is absolutely an arbitrary practice with little in the way of evidentiary support. The trick is that when we reject such an arbitrary, non-evidence-based practice we be careful not to replace it with another.

Gail, again you only posted a portion of his response. Let me share the rest so we are all on the same page in his response.

I have used it on my own pets when it was sold under another brand name. One advantage or disadvantage is that the testicle still produces a reduced amount of hormone. I will be interesting what the company uses to promote a possible benificial effect of leaving 50% hormone production.
G McLarnon says:
June 20, 2014 at 2:43 pm
Let me start here. First the study was designed and partially funded by Viszla owners to be a study about their breed. Which for those that participated in the survey would I would think tend to make them more attuned to give correct answers. If their memory is faulty they have their medical records to rely upon. Most dog owners do not forget the date of death of their dog, nor if indeed they were told if that beloved dog had cancer, and when they were told this. And indeed if they were “incentivized” it would be to give accurate information. After all who is going to be funding future studies????

An on line survey can contain with-in certain cross checks to help validate the information.

The anonymous part as described might just well be, that the contributors were told that their contributions were anonymous.

To bring up the fact that this study can’t be necessarily attributed to the larger dog population because it was designed and directed to only one breed, well hey maybe yes maybe not, but the study was designed to look at Viszlas.

cancer is a big issue in dogs, and not just for the Viszla breed but for many breeds.

Now this study showed some surprising results on pyrometra and mammary tumours, but is also surprising to me, in not only this study, but in other recent studies , why is there not any reference to the “hallmark” studies, that of “course” must have been done, before the veterinary medical community decided that 6mths old across all breeds is the optimal time to spay or neuter for the “HEALTH”
G McLarnon says:
June 20, 2014 at 2:54 pm
I don’t know why the study designers and funders decided to only look at a few things that were negative, and not to what is the benefits.. but gosh hey here is a thought mayhap the rates of cancer;skin,and other problems in Viszlas was what they wanted to look at.

So it remains in this and many other studies conclusions including your analysis, that one as a dog owner need to truly discuss the risks and benefits for their dog of this breed and the timing of same for s/n. And it behooves the vet community to come up with and train for alternatives to OVE and Castration, to truly give pet owners a “choice” in this decision
G McLarnon says:
June 20, 2014 at 3:52 pm
And one other comment where is the learned discourse, on what studies can be attributed to the larger dog population as a whole? What is the criteria, how was it developed, based upon what assumptions?
skeptvet says:
June 20, 2014 at 4:44 pm
The problem with recall bias and with misclassification of different kinds in studies that use similar methods is a well-recognized source of error. It is not something unique to this study, nor does it automatically invalidate the results. However, it is an uncontrolled source of bias that potentially reduces the internal and external validity of the trial. Similarly, the limitation to one breed clearly does reduce the extent to which we can generalize the results to other breeds or mixed breeds. Again, that doesn’t mean the results aren’t worth considering, but it does mean we cannot reasonably use the results of this one trial to dramatically alter our understanding of the risks and benefits of neutering or our specific practices. It is one bit of evidence out of hundreds of studies with its own strengths and weaknesses, and it must be evaluated in that context.

Automatic neutering of all dogs of both sexes at 6 months of age is absolutely an arbitrary practice with little in the way of evidentiary support. The trick is that when we reject such an arbitrary, non-evidence-based practice we be careful not to replace it with another.
skeptvet says:
June 20, 2014 at 4:46 pm
I have this very kind of complex, nuanced discussion with owners every day, and I think more and more vets are doing so. Unfortunately, both vets and owners tend to want simply, broadly applicable general rules, and biology is just too complex for that to be a reliable strategy.
skeptvet says:
June 20, 2014 at 4:46 pm
I’m afraid I don’t understand your question.