Warning biewer owners/buyers!!!!

[donna1134]

That, Izzy, goes back to the politics.. the testing and the lab are not part of politics. We need to know, be it mutt or purebred what we, as a whole, can do to improve the quality of these dogs and if there is a test that is not known, then please share it... Put a bunch of puppies in a roomfull of toys and they will all play together... they get along, it is the owners who do not... and, at this point, who cares? Let us test our puppies and dogs with this new test, send it to this lab and have a better understanding of what can go wrong in any breed... I do not think that is asking too much of any person.... Donna

[Pruett]

Originally Posted by donna1134

That, Izzy, goes back to the politics.. the testing and the lab are not part of politics. We need to know, be it mutt or purebred what we, as a whole, can do to improve the quality of these dogs and if there is a test that is not known, then please share it... Put a bunch of puppies in a roomfull of toys and they will all play together... they get along, it is the owners who do not... and, at this point, who cares? Let us test our puppies and dogs with this new test, send it to this lab and have a better understanding of what can go wrong in any breed... I do not think that is asking too much of any person.... Donna

No it doesn't go back to politics, it goes back to the last time we told your club the name of a lab that we were working with and they harassed them until they almost quit working with us. Then they went on a smear campaign against them that is still echoing through out the waves of cyber space, and you want what?

If you want to test your dogs it is very easy. Email BTRA and order a swab kit. By the way, how many members have ordered the JRD tests that I told your club about?

[Nancy1999]

I take the problems with puppy mills very seriously, and I think it's wrong of you to suggest that just because someone is in another club, they are in a puppy mill registry. I don't think you should throw the word around lightly, and many of us are really concerned about the breeding conditions of puppy mills. This isn't about prestige or saying my dog is from xyz registry, it's about extreme abuse of dogs.

[TeahsPet]

I agree wholeheartedly Donna1134!!! It is about the dogs.

[lgoodall]

I prsonally think Biewers are adorable. I love their coloring. I thought they were Yorkies bred by German breeders trying to achieve a variation in color. I thought they were still Yorkies. Do Biewers have more potential health problems than refular Yorkies? My goodness! With our American Yorkies, we have to deal with AAI, Liver Shunt, Laxating Patella, Colapsed Trachea, etc. I bought Tucker from a good breeder, but he had AAI. The breeder had never had the problem before. His brother and sister were fine. I don't understand all the fuss about Biewers, Iguess I'm just uninformed. Tucker's Mom

[Micah my love]

Originally Posted by lgoodall

I prsonally think Biewers are adorable. I love their coloring. I thought they were Yorkies bred by German breeders trying to achieve a variation in color. I thought they were still Yorkies. Do Biewers have more potential health problems than refular Yorkies? My goodness! With our American Yorkies, we have to deal with AAI, Liver Shunt, Laxating Patella, Colapsed Trachea, etc. I bought Tucker from a good breeder, but he had AAI. The breeder had never had the problem before. His brother and sister were fine. I don't understand all the fuss about Biewers, Iguess I'm just uninformed. Tucker's Mom

I personally think most of the fuss is about clubs not being united into one instead of 3 or 4

I own Biewers and love everyone of them, I don't think they have anymore health problems than any other breed. all of mine seem to be very healthy
and have been tested for Ls & Lp except 1 he will be when he is 1 yr old

[csagan001]

Originally Posted by IRMaxine

Hello Gail!! Yes, I definitely believe in testing. However I do not do tests that are not validated for the Biewer breed. I do not make statements that my dogs have been tested clear and free of diseases or as carriers with tests that are not valid for this breed- When the marker or mutation is not found on the Biewer dna it does not mean they are free and clear of the disease- I can not find a laboratory that have not done enough testing on the Biewer breed to identify the markers/mutations.
Please share with us the name of the laboratory you are using that have made all of these break-thrus?
What specific diseases are they testing the Biewers for?
What mutations have been identified for the Biewer breed?

Here is what I learned so far:
The lab has tested “at least” 25 dogs for each of the markers they claim cause disease in specific breeds. (Note that in doing similar testing on humans, pharmaceutical labs do the tests thousands of times.) 25 dogs is less than that required for minimal statistical analysis by at least 17%. As a result, their statistics cannot be relied upon for decision making. In other words, their error rates are far too high for any useful conclusions regarding any specific dog to be made.

The DNA studies completed so far, and there have been surprisingly few of them are looking for “markers” only. A marker is not what most people think it is. The canine genome consists of 2.4 billion “letters” (each letter is the “name” of a particular protein). A marker is only an indicator that a specific sequence of letters, within one of the dog’s 39 chromosomes is correlated with a particular trait.

For example consider this: I am going to buy a used car. I know that the used car has 75,000 miles on it, and I can see that it is highly polished and has good tires. I cannot see the inner workings of the engine or the transmission. However, I can take it for a compression test. The compression test will let me know the health of the engines cylinders and its valves. So, I have the compression test done and discover that one of the cylinders has a different reading from the others. From this information I determine that the engine MIGHT need some costly repairs in the near future. However, what I did realize was that the compression test was given to a car that uses various numbers of cylinders, depending on the work load asked of the engine (yes, there are cars like this—Honda calls it i-VTEC—it saves lots of gas. The compression test is nothing but a marker. Depending on the car it is used on, the testing methods, and other factors, it may give information useful to the used car buyer. However, in this example, it gave the used car buyer information that led to an incorrect conclusion.

Ok, using this same idea for dogs—If I have a great Dane, and I research its DNA for longevity characteristics, I may come to the conclusion that a specific “marker” is present for great Danes that live longer than others. This marker may not be the cause of long lives, it may merely be present for a majority of dogs that live a long time. Since longevity is not caused by a single gene—that is, it is caused by the relationships of many genes (term: “polygenetic”)—the marker does not tell the whole story. It is merely the indicator that “long life genes” may be present.

If you then look for this gene in a completely different breed, say a Maltese, I might find it. Does that mean that the Maltese with the marker present will live longer? Answer: No. Remember: longevity is based on many genes working together in a specific fashion, and that the marker we found in our original research was based on great Danes. To utilize the marker in Maltese means that we need to test a bunch of Maltese dogs and cross compare the results. Since doing this takes time, and costs money, the results are slow in coming.

All that is fine and good, but what does it tell us about using a DNA test as an indicator of probability of disease in the future, for a beagle, if the test was developed on a schnauzer? Answer: Nothing. A test developed on one breed is largely useless for other breeds unless it can be statistically validated.

The company has not statistically validated their tests for any breeds except the ones that they claim. So, the tests that are being conducted on the Biewers are completely bogus. They cannot be used to ascertain the probability of any specific dog becoming ill. As a matter of interest, the tests should not be used on the breeds for which they have been validated. This is because they only tested 25 dogs of each breed. They need to test at least 900 dogs (that would give them 30 groups of 30 dogs each….enough for a valid statistical and very meaningful study.)

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by csagan001

Here is what I learned so far:
The lab has tested “at least” 25 dogs for each of the markers they claim cause disease in specific breeds. (Note that in doing similar testing on humans, pharmaceutical labs do the tests thousands of times.) 25 dogs is less than that required for minimal statistical analysis by at least 17%. As a result, their statistics cannot be relied upon for decision making. In other words, their error rates are far too high for any useful conclusions regarding any specific dog to be made.

The DNA studies completed so far, and there have been surprisingly few of them are looking for “markers” only. A marker is not what most people think it is. The canine genome consists of 2.4 billion “letters” (each letter is the “name” of a particular protein). A marker is only an indicator that a specific sequence of letters, within one of the dog’s 39 chromosomes is correlated with a particular trait.

For example consider this: I am going to buy a used car. I know that the used car has 75,000 miles on it, and I can see that it is highly polished and has good tires. I cannot see the inner workings of the engine or the transmission. However, I can take it for a compression test. The compression test will let me know the health of the engines cylinders and its valves. So, I have the compression test done and discover that one of the cylinders has a different reading from the others. From this information I determine that the engine MIGHT need some costly repairs in the near future. However, what I did realize was that the compression test was given to a car that uses various numbers of cylinders, depending on the work load asked of the engine (yes, there are cars like this—Honda calls it i-VTEC—it saves lots of gas. The compression test is nothing but a marker. Depending on the car it is used on, the testing methods, and other factors, it may give information useful to the used car buyer. However, in this example, it gave the used car buyer information that led to an incorrect conclusion.

Ok, using this same idea for dogs—If I have a great Dane, and I research its DNA for longevity characteristics, I may come to the conclusion that a specific “marker” is present for great Danes that live longer than others. This marker may not be the cause of long lives, it may merely be present for a majority of dogs that live a long time. Since longevity is not caused by a single gene—that is, it is caused by the relationships of many genes (term: “polygenetic”)—the marker does not tell the whole story. It is merely the indicator that “long life genes” may be present.

If you then look for this gene in a completely different breed, say a Maltese, I might find it. Does that mean that the Maltese with the marker present will live longer? Answer: No. Remember: longevity is based on many genes working together in a specific fashion, and that the marker we found in our original research was based on great Danes. To utilize the marker in Maltese means that we need to test a bunch of Maltese dogs and cross compare the results. Since doing this takes time, and costs money, the results are slow in coming.

All that is fine and good, but what does it tell us about using a DNA test as an indicator of probability of disease in the future, for a beagle, if the test was developed on a schnauzer? Answer: Nothing. A test developed on one breed is largely useless for other breeds unless it can be statistically validated.

The company has not statistically validated their tests for any breeds except the ones that they claim. So, the tests that are being conducted on the Biewers are completely bogus. They cannot be used to ascertain the probability of any specific dog becoming ill. As a matter of interest, the tests should not be used on the breeds for which they have been validated. This is because they only tested 25 dogs of each breed. They need to test at least 900 dogs (that would give them 30 groups of 30 dogs each….enough for a valid statistical and very meaningful study.)

Finally an explanation that makes sense......Based on your explanation, I agree the tests that are been conducted are bogus. I'm of the opinion that monies would be better spent working with those vets/labs that are working on breed specific diseases.

As you explained it, then having all the tests on a particular Breed Specific Club gives the unsuspecting public with a false sense of security.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

Finally an explanation that makes sense......Based on your explanation, I agree the tests that are been conducted are bogus. I'm of the opinion that monies would be better spent working with those vets/labs that are working on breed specific diseases.

As you explained it, then having all the tests on a particular Breed Specific Club gives the unsuspecting public with a false sense of security.

This is my take on it too. I think it also gives breeders a false sense of security as well!

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

This is my take on it too. I think it also gives breeders a false sense of security as well!

I don't think that it gives breeders a false sense of security, I think they are well aware of what diseases plague the Biewers and what tests are valid. That and I'm sure that they know that there are no DNA markers that will identify whether their dogs are carriers or not. It's as it is in the Yorkshire Terrier.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

I don't think that it gives breeders a false sense of security, I think they are well aware of what diseases plague the Biewers and what tests are valid.

I got the idea that some of them really believed that this meant that their Biewers were healthier or less likely to be carriers. Maybe it was just a sales pitch.

[csagan001]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I got the idea that some of them really believed that this meant that their Biewers were healthier or less likely to be carriers. Maybe it was just a sales pitch.

Ihope it's just a sales pitch, because then, those breedere--from that club would KNOW that they are telling lies.

What really scares me is when people are so ill-informed that they don't even know that they are telling lies. It is this type of person that is truly dangerous.

That does not mean that telling lies is ok--I just think it is better to be a liar and know that you're a liar, than to be stupid.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I got the idea that some of them really believed that this meant that their Biewers were healthier or less likely to be carriers. Maybe it was just a sales pitch.

Could be. But, I would think that those that are really involved in the breed, those that are working hard to have the breed recognized by AKC and the Biewer History, breeding, genetics really are aware of what's going on.

[IRMaxine]

Originally Posted by csagan001

Here is what I learned so far:
The lab has tested “at least” 25 dogs for each of the markers they claim cause disease in specific breeds. (Note that in doing similar testing on humans, pharmaceutical labs do the tests thousands of times.) 25 dogs is less than that required for minimal statistical analysis by at least 17%. As a result, their statistics cannot be relied upon for decision making. In other words, their error rates are far too high for any useful conclusions regarding any specific dog to be made.

The DNA studies completed so far, and there have been surprisingly few of them are looking for “markers” only. A marker is not what most people think it is. The canine genome consists of 2.4 billion “letters” (each letter is the “name” of a particular protein). A marker is only an indicator that a specific sequence of letters, within one of the dog’s 39 chromosomes is correlated with a particular trait.

For example consider this: I am going to buy a used car. I know that the used car has 75,000 miles on it, and I can see that it is highly polished and has good tires. I cannot see the inner workings of the engine or the transmission. However, I can take it for a compression test. The compression test will let me know the health of the engines cylinders and its valves. So, I have the compression test done and discover that one of the cylinders has a different reading from the others. From this information I determine that the engine MIGHT need some costly repairs in the near future. However, what I did realize was that the compression test was given to a car that uses various numbers of cylinders, depending on the work load asked of the engine (yes, there are cars like this—Honda calls it i-VTEC—it saves lots of gas. The compression test is nothing but a marker. Depending on the car it is used on, the testing methods, and other factors, it may give information useful to the used car buyer. However, in this example, it gave the used car buyer information that led to an incorrect conclusion.

Ok, using this same idea for dogs—If I have a great Dane, and I research its DNA for longevity characteristics, I may come to the conclusion that a specific “marker” is present for great Danes that live longer than others. This marker may not be the cause of long lives, it may merely be present for a majority of dogs that live a long time. Since longevity is not caused by a single gene—that is, it is caused by the relationships of many genes (term: “polygenetic”)—the marker does not tell the whole story. It is merely the indicator that “long life genes” may be present.

If you then look for this gene in a completely different breed, say a Maltese, I might find it. Does that mean that the Maltese with the marker present will live longer? Answer: No. Remember: longevity is based on many genes working together in a specific fashion, and that the marker we found in our original research was based on great Danes. To utilize the marker in Maltese means that we need to test a bunch of Maltese dogs and cross compare the results. Since doing this takes time, and costs money, the results are slow in coming.

All that is fine and good, but what does it tell us about using a DNA test as an indicator of probability of disease in the future, for a beagle, if the test was developed on a schnauzer? Answer: Nothing. A test developed on one breed is largely useless for other breeds unless it can be statistically validated.

The company has not statistically validated their tests for any breeds except the ones that they claim. So, the tests that are being conducted on the Biewers are completely bogus. They cannot be used to ascertain the probability of any specific dog becoming ill. As a matter of interest, the tests should not be used on the breeds for which they have been validated. This is because they only tested 25 dogs of each breed. They need to test at least 900 dogs (that would give them 30 groups of 30 dogs each….enough for a valid statistical and very meaningful study.)

Thank you csagan001 for your posting- You have clearly stated what I have been trying to say all along- We need accurate information concerning this breed and a sharing of all pertinent facts by those that love this breed- Not someone using scare tactics to discredit reputable breeders by making false claims.

And I want to thank all of those interested persons who kept this important thread alive and kept it on the subject!!!

[scrapindee]

I think this is a very important topic. Gee litter mates are called two different things: Biewers or Biewer Terriers....depending on who is selling puppies. I don't think the Mars Test is accurate. I met several animal genetists on the K-9 cruise all of whom were in agreement that the Mars test was not developed to distinguish a new breed much less determine purebreeds.