Spay and Neuter: When and If ever?

[ColesMommy01]

Originally Posted by pstinard

Thank you . I love ceviche! Can I have some?

Of course! We'll have plenty, my son hates it *sigh* six year olds

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by ColesMommy01

*pats on back*
There will always be proponents and opponents for s/n. Those who advocate for it definitely have their reasons why they've come to their decisions while ppl who question the procedures or won't have it done on their pets definitely have their reasons for doing so as well. There are benefits to alter and also drawbacks. Same as for keeping pets intact. Spay and neuter is not a one size fits all for every owner, breed, or individual pet imo. I do find it interesting how s/n isn't pushed in so many countries and they also don't have a stray overpopulation issue. I enjoy reading these studies and hearing the interpretations. Now I'm off to catch up on RHOA and make ceviche.

I don't think it is true that we are the only country with animal over population and neglect/abuse.

As for the countries who don't have such issues, it may have something to do with laws. I don't know. I don't look at others...I get enough thrown in my face on a daily basis that is going on here. I have often said that had I known then what I know now, I may not have been involved in rescue. It is a horrible world for so many defenseless beings. What I do to help seems meaningless at times...it is downright heartbreaking. I answer all of the YHR emails and it takes all I have some days to respond to some of them.

Our country is horrible imo regarding animal welfare. The state I live in is so bad that I am frankly ashamed at what is allowed at times.

I agree that there is no one size fits all; but, I would hope that the people who choose not to s/n are responsible which of course that is only but a dream. Not to say that everyone who does s/n are responsible because that is not true either. It all comes down to the fact that animals are not protected by our laws.

I cannot stop anyone from what they post on this forum....I can only post my opinions and hope and pray they listen because I do think that sometimes we need to look at the population and think long and hard about what we are advocating if indeed it is animal welfare we are concerned with.

[megansmomma]

Originally Posted by ColesMommy01

*pats on back*
There will always be proponents and opponents for s/n. Those who advocate for it definitely have their reasons why they've come to their decisions while ppl who question the procedures or won't have it done on their pets definitely have their reasons for doing so as well. There are benefits to alter and also drawbacks. Same as for keeping pets intact. Spay and neuter is not a one size fits all for every owner, breed, or individual pet imo. I do find it interesting how s/n isn't pushed in so many countries and they also don't have a stray overpopulation issue. I enjoy reading these studies and hearing the interpretations. Now I'm off to catch up on RHOA and make ceviche.

This statement is not accurate. Do you remember just a short time ago what happened in Russia during the Olympics?

Street dogs in Moscow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here is an article about strays in the Caribbean

Stray Dogs Impact on Tourism in the Caribbean|Cathy Kangas

Italy....

Italy targets stray dogs after fatal attack - Telegraph

http://www.esdaw.eu/stray-animals-by-country.html"]Annually number of abandoned [/URL]and homeless companion animals (stray animals) by country - There is no European (EU) central statistics on this, the information is in each country. Some countries have no control or statistics on the number of abandoned or homeless companion animals located in the country, therefore the following figures (¤) are estimated from our contacts in Europe. Moreover, wandering dogs and crosses national borders in neighboring countries with many abandoned dogs.

Number of abandoned and homeless animals in Europe is estimated to be 100 million animals.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

All I can say is that perhaps some of the people who want to "educate" others about the risk of s/n should focus their efforts on a forum where you say these risks are are not an issue. As it is, yorkies ARE at risk of mammary tumors and pyometra.....so I see no reason for people to keep harping on this one study.

Exactly! Amen!

[megansmomma]

South America

Stray Dogs of South America - The Travel Gear Reviews

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by ColesMommy01

*pats on back*
There will always be proponents and opponents for s/n. Those who advocate for it definitely have their reasons why they've come to their decisions while ppl who question the procedures or won't have it done on their pets definitely have their reasons for doing so as well. There are benefits to alter and also drawbacks. Same as for keeping pets intact. Spay and neuter is not a one size fits all for every owner, breed, or individual pet imo. I do find it interesting how s/n isn't pushed in so many countries and they also don't have a stray overpopulation issue. I enjoy reading these studies and hearing the interpretations. Now I'm off to catch up on RHOA and make ceviche.

There are MANY other country's that have dog over population and or dogs dying very young from lots of things they don't do to help the pets. It's pretty obvious you want to breed so not sure why you try to pretend to hide it. I just hope you listen enough to know not to breed the new puppy until she has had her second heat and is above 5 pounds. No mater who the owner is it not safe for an under 5 pound female to be unfixed and in a house with a male who is also unaltered. My question just becomes will you own it or will you call it an accident. Hmmmmm. Science certainly shows there is more risk for a female who is not breeding to be left intact and taking that risk is unfair to the the dog and what they more then likely will have to suffer.

[ColesMommy01]

Originally Posted by megansmomma

This statement is not accurate. Do you remember just a short time ago what happened in Russia during the Olympics?

Street dogs in Moscow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Here is an article about strays in the Caribbean

Stray Dogs Impact on Tourism in the Caribbean|Cathy Kangas

Italy....

Italy targets stray dogs after fatal attack - Telegraph

http://www.esdaw.eu/stray-animals-by-country.html"]Annually number of abandoned [/URL]and homeless companion animals (stray animals) by country - There is no European (EU) central statistics on this, the information is in each country. Some countries have no control or statistics on the number of abandoned or homeless companion animals located in the country, therefore the following figures (¤) are estimated from our contacts in Europe. Moreover, wandering dogs and crosses national borders in neighboring countries with many abandoned dogs.

Number of abandoned and homeless animals in Europe is estimated to be 100 million animals.

I meant some countries not all. Of course some countries have overpopulation just like the United States, but there are some countries who do not push for spay and neuter and their overpopulation is lower than ours. I want to know why is that so. There are always going to be studies promoting alteration as well not promoting. It would be nice to see an unbiased(this is highly unlikely) study with JUST Yorkshire Terriers. So far I've only seen studies including larger breeds which is helpful but things effect larger breeds differently and at different rates than smaller breeds. Pet overpopulation is a good reason to s/n but I don't think it should be the only reason (unless an owner is unable to be responsible), mammary cancer is a good reason to spay but is it 100% that your pet will get it?, is it guaranteed your female will get pyometra? Sure removal of the uterus will nix her getting it, but what happens when you take away her hormones which are there for reason and serve a function? There has to be a negative impact to spaying/neutering when we remove these hormones that play such a vital role. We sometimes see this in human women when they have their sexual organs removed. Not many pet owners are up to the task of having an intact pet within their home though so for the majority of people s/n the benefits outweigh the negatives and it should be done. I just happen to think if one is responsible they should research and come to a decision themselves.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by ColesMommy01

I meant some countries not all. Of course some countries have overpopulation just like the United States, but there are some countries who do not push for spay and neuter and their overpopulation is lower than ours. I want to know why is that so. There are always going to be studies promoting alteration as well not promoting. It would be nice to see an unbiased(this is highly unlikely) study with JUST Yorkshire Terriers. So far I've only seen studies including larger breeds which is helpful but things effect larger breeds differently and at different rates than smaller breeds. Pet overpopulation is a good reason to s/n but I don't think it should be the only reason (unless an owner is unable to be responsible), mammary cancer is a good reason to spay but is it 100% that your pet will get it?, is it guaranteed your female will get pyometra? Sure removal of the uterus will nix her getting it, but what happens when you take away her hormones which are there for reason and serve a function? There has to be a negative impact to spaying/neutering when we remove these hormones that play such a vital role. We sometimes see this in human women when they have their sexual organs removed. Not many pet owners are up to the task of having an intact pet within their home though so for the majority of people s/n the benefits outweigh the negatives and it should be done. I just happen to think if one is responsible they should research and come to a decision themselves.

Hormones can be linked to cancer.

[ColesMommy01]

Originally Posted by Lovetodream88

There are MANY other country's that have dog over population and or dogs dying very young from lots of things they don't do to help the pets. It's pretty obvious you want to breed so not sure why you try to pretend to hide it. I just hope you listen enough to know not to breed the new puppy until she has had her second heat and is above 5 pounds. No mater who the owner is it not safe for an under 5 pound female to be unfixed and in a house with a male who is also unaltered. My question just becomes will you own it or will you call it an accident. Hmmmmm. Science certainly shows there is more risk for a female who is not breeding to be left intact and taking that risk is unfair to the the dog and what they more then likely will have to suffer.

Do you have a problem with me I'm not aware of? Why bring what I do, which has never and will more than likely never effect you into this conversation? Hmmmm. I guess because you're trying to make a point. Did you make it? My pets don't suffer, far from it. My opinions and actions may be very different from yours, but believe me I love my pets just as much as you love Callie. What you stated was uncalled for. If I do plan to breed should I run that by you first? Did you ever stop to think that just because you feel a certain way doesn't mean others have to feel the same? Many others may and do share your sentiment regarding s/n but there are others who'd like to learn more on the subject and how it's effecting our pets. I'm an adult so I don't know of this "hiding" thing you speak of. Should I tell you what I fed my son for breakfast because if I don't tell you that it could be misconstrued as "hiding" too.

[gemy]

Originally Posted by SirTeddykins

These are both excellent posts because this is the REAL reason we should consider spaying and neutering. I think gemy (who will correct me if I'm wrong) is not in any way suggesting that pets should not be spayed or neutered. But, I think she is against the exaggeration of the health benefits which are touted (unscientifically most of the time) along with the procedure.


With every procedure, there is a risk/benefit analysis which must be made. This is true for humans and animals.


I would be extremely disappointed if anyone here was arguing on anything other than scientific merit because spaying and neutering should be advocated but for the RIGHT reasons. Misleading people into thinking there are health benefits is just wrong. And, for the record, I'm not suggesting that anyone on this forum is doing this.. but the institutions which use scare mongering for compliance have resulted in a lot of confusion amongst pet owners even though I'm sure this all began with good intent.


BUT, pretending that there is not an overpopulation problem which results in the deaths of many animals is equally wrong.


We keep talking about reputable sources and pointing to various institutions. But, my vet is a vet with a professional opinion and I do not believe his opinion is any less valid than another vets opinion which agrees or disagrees with his own. SO, the argument can't really be about who is reputable, who isn't, etc. It comes down to what we know and what we THINK we know and what we FEEL.


I FEEL it is wrong to let millions of dogs run around intact and overpopulating areas by doing what is natural and then being fatally punished for that. Therefore, I KNOW that the only way to prevent these needless deaths is to spay and neuter.


I KNOW it is wrong to let millions of pet owners believe that their dogs are going to live longer lives if they are spayed/neutered. There are so many other things which affect longevity. Genes AND environment come into play with cancer development.


This is why I say that this article is a useful guide ONLY. It cannot be construed as TRUTH. It doesn't matter that the incident rate of mammary tumors are so high within this SINGLE study. There are hundreds of confounding variables which may have led to this result. AND, although the research itself may not have been biased, the publication by the INSURANCE company has meant that there is NOT a balanced view. I have already said why this is having worked in insurance for ten years.


I think we are all adding to our body of knowledge here and I hope that everyone feels like they can agree to disagree or learn to grow or just ignore the info and do what they do...


I would be disappointed if there was any hidden agenda and I strongly feel that it is not the case. Again, this is an opportunity to learn from each other and I think we shouldn't fight it - we should embrace it. These are real issues which affect all of us, personally, and it would be a shame if the only result we had from discussing it was polarization.


I just want to add that no one is dismissing personal experience. Not from my point of view..


However, there are two sides. There is personal experience and there is scientific evidence. Sometimes, the two have to be separated in order to have a meaningful discussion which addresses each issue completely. That is not dismissive of either science or experience. It just ensures that the discussion remains balanced for both sides.


I hope you all have a great day today. I'm off to type up my research re: the brain/mind health benefits of exercise on rats and pups who have been addicted to ethanol. Fun times!

What I am for is the judicious decision of WHEN or if ever in some cases to spay and neuter, more research to understand the impacts of s+n by breed type. We need to separate out the real and un-biased facts of promoting and giving our dogs the best chance of a healthy life, which would include when we s+n, when and how often to vaccinate, appropriate and timely vet care, exercise, feeding and training.


I was attracted to the Swedish study because of its sheer number of subjects. A very very large database of all breed types. And the fact that Sweden has a long history of not neutering and yet apparently no pet overpopulation problem......


It is as everything I post here a mere nugget of research that adds to the volumne of health information we have on dogs.


WE need to differentiate between societal goals no matter how altruistic and the health of dogs. If s+n at six months or so old is NOT in the best interest of this breed of dog, then when - if ever? Is there an alternative to s+N and the answer is yes of course there is. But the vet community needs to see the need to secure that training in order to offer real choices by breed to each individual pet owner.


.

[ColesMommy01]

Originally Posted by gemy

What I am for is the judicious decision of WHEN or if ever in some cases to spay and neuter, more research to understand the impacts of s+n by breed type. We need to separate out the real and un-biased facts of promoting and giving our dogs the best chance of a healthy life, which would include when we s+n, when and how often to vaccinate, appropriate and timely vet care, exercise, feeding and training.


I was attracted to the Swedish study because of its sheer number of subjects. A very very large database of all breed types. And the fact that Sweden has a long history of not neutering and yet apparently no pet overpopulation problem......


It is as everything I post here a mere nugget of research that adds to the volumne of health information we have on dogs.


WE need to differentiate between societal goals no matter how altruistic and the health of dogs. If s+n at six months or so old is NOT in the best interest of this breed of dog, then when - if ever? Is there an alternative to s+N and the answer is yes of course there is. But the vet community needs to see the need to secure that training in order to offer real choices by breed to each individual pet owner.


.

I'm an advocate for tubal ligation. Keeps hormones functioning but removes the possibility of being impregnated. Also, I hear they have birth control for dogs, but I can barely get my two to take their hw meds. If the bc is an every day pill like one of the human equivalents it'd be out. Do they have shots like the Depo? Going to look....

[pstinard]

Anyway, getting back to that Swedish insurance records study showing that unspayed female dogs (Yorkies included) have a significantly increased chance of developing mammary tumors and pyometra...

Here is a study that validates the methodology used in that study:

Scopus - Cookies Disabled <--This link has the abstract.

A. Egenvall, B.N. Bonnett, P. Olson, A. Hedhammar
Validation of computerized Swedish dog and cat insurance data against veterinary practice records

Prev. Vet. Med., 36 (1998), pp. 51–65

The link I gave should have the abstract.


Evidently the methodology used is widely accepted by the veterinary community, because I came across a 2015 study analyzing Japanese insurance records:


Breed, gender and age pattern of diagnosis for veterinary care in insured dogs in Japan during fiscal year 2010


Breed, gender and age pattern of diagnosis for veterinary care in insured dogs in Japan during fiscal year 2010.


Mai Inouea,
A. Hasegawab,
Y. Hosoic,
K. Sugiurad
Preventive Veterinary Medicine, In press.


This latter study included 10,622 Yorkies, and found that Yorkies were in the top 5 breeds at risk for the following major categories of illness: Digestive, Musculoskeletal, Dental, Hepatobiliary and pancreatic, and Neuromuscular. Hepatobiliary and pancreatic is especially interesting, since many Yorkietalk dogs have had liver and pancreas problems. The dogs at greater risk than Yorkies for liver and pancreas problems are: Maltese, Miniature Schnauzer, and Papillon. Pomeranian come next after Yorkies. These data are consistent with what we already know about Yorkies, both anecdotally, and from other kinds of studies.

I've sent PDF's of both articles to Gail (Gemy).

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by ColesMommy01

Do you have a problem with me I'm not aware of? Why bring what I do, which has never and will more than likely never effect you into this conversation? Hmmmm. I guess because you're trying to make a point. Did you make it? My pets don't suffer, far from it. My opinions and actions may be very different from yours, but believe me I love my pets just as much as you love Callie. What you stated was uncalled for. If I do plan to breed should I run that by you first? Did you ever stop to think that just because you feel a certain way doesn't mean others have to feel the same? Many others may and do share your sentiment regarding s/n but there are others who'd like to learn more on the subject and how it's effecting our pets. I'm an adult so I don't know of this "hiding" thing you speak of. Should I tell you what I fed my son for breakfast because if I don't tell you that it could be misconstrued as "hiding" too.

Anything involving dogs effects me. Anything to do with the breed I love effects me. It's very easy to see your going to breed yet you say the female is only going to reach 4 pounds and that concerns me. It may not seem like much but a pound is a big deal in a small dog and it's not reputable to breed a female under 5 pounds so I do hope you don't put this little babies life in jeopardy. The only reason to breed should also be to better there breed. You also should not breed a yorkie with temperament issues like your male has. People need to know the truth and the truth is for sure females are in danger if not fixed and science proves it. Life lessons prove it. Yep I love my dog so much I was not willing to risk cancer or poymentra.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by ColesMommy01

I'm an advocate for tubal ligation. Keeps hormones functioning but removes the possibility of being impregnated. Also, I hear they have birth control for dogs, but I can barely get my two to take their hw meds. If the bc is an every day pill like one of the human equivalents it'd be out. Do they have shots like the Depo? Going to look....

Depo has been proven to have very bad side effects and not safe. The bc for dogs has not been proven and like bc pills for humans it can come with some very serious side effects. None of this will help prevent poymentra which is a death sentence.it also is not going to prevent mammary cancer and may actually increase the chances. The main point of spay and neutering is not necessarily just to prevent pregnancy these other health issues need to be looked into.

[pstinard]

Originally Posted by ColesMommy01

I'm an advocate for tubal ligation. Keeps hormones functioning but removes the possibility of being impregnated. Also, I hear they have birth control for dogs, but I can barely get my two to take their hw meds. If the bc is an every day pill like one of the human equivalents it'd be out. Do they have shots like the Depo? Going to look....

Tubal ligation won't affect the rates of mammary tumors and pyometra, because the hormones (mammary tumors) and uterus (pyometra) are left intact. I'm just saying...

I believe that there are birth control injections for dogs--I'm not sure how widely used and accepted they are.

BTW, in answer to a previous comment, no, the chances of mammary tumors and pyometra aren't 100% in unspayed dogs, but do they really need to be? I think that a 20 to 40% risk is quite high enough for me to decide to spay my own dog(s). (Bella has already been spayed.)

If this thread turns into an all-out food fight, please send the ceviche my way .