YorkieTalk.com Forums - Yorkshire Terrier Community

YorkieTalk.com Forums - Yorkshire Terrier Community (https://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Yorkshire Terrier Discussion (https://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/general-yorkshire-terrier-discussion/)
-   -   Spay and Neuter: When and If ever? (https://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/general-yorkshire-terrier-discussion/234713-spay-neuter-when-if-ever.html)

SirTeddykins 03-11-2015 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 4537308)
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.


.


Thanks for clarifying, Gemy.


For me, I can't abide all of the spins put on the interpretation of this study to suit the individual 'spinners' and the emotion makes me want to run far away.


I do not feel inclined to educate individuals re: how to interpret research results and how to not get freaked out by results which are almost meaningless in isolation. The latter part is definitely not within my social skill set which, admittedly, is severely lacking.


But, thanks for what was a potentially interesting thread!

:thumbup:

ColesMommy01 03-11-2015 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirTeddykins (Post 4537598)
Thanks for clarifying, Gemy.


For me, I can't abide all of the spins put on the interpretation of this study to suit the individual 'spinners' and the emotion makes me want to run far away.


I do not feel inclined to educate individuals re: how to interpret research results and how to not get freaked out by results which are almost meaningless in isolation. The latter part is definitely not within my social skill set which, admittedly, is severely lacking.


But, thanks for what was a potentially interesting thread!

:thumbup:

Agree. I've found when looking at studies and data it's best to try to remove emotion from what you're interpreting. Only then can one look at things objectively and make an unbiased decision imo. Good Morning!

ladyjane 03-11-2015 05:53 AM

Real, scientific facts as they are, I will continue to s/n yorkies that come to me intact at six months .. of course that is for puppies which I don't always have. :) I will also advocate for it whether you all think it is emotional or whatever you think.

I have seen what I believe are personal agendas (Heaven only knows what they are, but I believe they are) all over the place on this thread....and in my mind it is not what I believe is in the best interest of this breed that has clearly been almost destroyed by bad breeding. Call in unscientific as you may...emotional as you may. I call it responsible. :)

ladyjane 03-11-2015 06:20 AM

And...finally I must say that the question of "when" is very well answered in real research; but for some reason I feel that is being ignored here.

If spaying a female yorkie before the first heat leaves an almost zero chance of mammary tumors and pyometra is astounds me that anyone would still be questioning it. Until research shows something that is MORE harmful than that due to spaying before 6 months I would hope that others would be a bit more judicious in where to discuss this. Of course I know that probably isn't going to happen, but I can always suggest it.

Now, I will leave the thread for you all to answer this because I know you want it to end up as you wish it to be.....BUT I implore you to do some reading about pyometra and mammary tumors...and do take a look at the video I posted and ask yourself if you would want to put your beloved pet through that. It always amazes me that people can ignore things with dogs that I know full well they would think twice about putting their own bodies through.

Emotional? Darn straight...makes me sick to my stomach. I have seen it over and over and over through the years....the suffering of defenseless tiny beings because people did the things they did for whatever reason ... that surely was not in the best interest of that poor baby.

ladyjane 03-11-2015 06:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ColesMommy01 (Post 4537602)
Agree. I've found when looking at studies and data it's best to try to remove emotion from what you're interpreting. Only then can one look at things objectively and make an unbiased decision imo. Good Morning!

I believe Phil did that. :)

megansmomma 03-11-2015 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirTeddykins (Post 4537598)
Thanks for clarifying, Gemy.


For me, I can't abide all of the spins put on the interpretation of this study to suit the individual 'spinners' and the emotion makes me want to run far away.


I do not feel inclined to educate individuals re: how to interpret research results and how to not get freaked out by results which are almost meaningless in isolation. The latter part is definitely not within my social skill set which, admittedly, is severely lacking.


But, thanks for what was a potentially interesting thread!

:thumbup:

If you really want to see agendas take a look at the old Parti VS Standard Yorkie threads. :rolleyes: There was plenty of studies in genetics involved in those very heated discussions. When I say this thread is mild you have no idea.

ColesMommy01 03-11-2015 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladyjane (Post 4537665)
I believe Phil did that. :)

Phil is great!

ColesMommy01 03-11-2015 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by megansmomma (Post 4537666)
If you really want to see agendas take a look at the old Parti VS Standard Yorkie threads. :rolleyes: There was plenty of studies in genetics involved in those very heated discussions. When I say this thread is mild you have no idea.

*shudders* Those threads that shan't be named. Makes me want to curl up in a fetal position and rock myself to sleep

SirTeddykins 03-11-2015 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladyjane (Post 4537658)
Real, scientific facts as they are, I will continue to s/n yorkies that come to me intact at six months .. of course that is for puppies which I don't always have. :) I will also advocate for it whether you all think it is emotional or whatever you think.

I have seen what I believe are personal agendas (Heaven only knows what they are, but I believe they are) all over the place on this thread....and in my mind it is not what I believe is in the best interest of this breed that has clearly been almost destroyed by bad breeding. Call in unscientific as you may...emotional as you may. I call it responsible. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladyjane (Post 4537664)
And...finally I must say that the question of "when" is very well answered in real research; but for some reason I feel that is being ignored here.

If spaying a female yorkie before the first heat leaves an almost zero chance of mammary tumors and pyometra is astounds me that anyone would still be questioning it. Until research shows something that is MORE harmful than that due to spaying before 6 months I would hope that others would be a bit more judicious in where to discuss this. Of course I know that probably isn't going to happen, but I can always suggest it.

Now, I will leave the thread for you all to answer this because I know you want it to end up as you wish it to be.....BUT I implore you to do some reading about pyometra and mammary tumors...and do take a look at the video I posted and ask yourself if you would want to put your beloved pet through that. It always amazes me that people can ignore things with dogs that I know full well they would think twice about putting their own bodies through.

Emotional? Darn straight...makes me sick to my stomach. I have seen it over and over and over through the years....the suffering of defenseless tiny beings because people did the things they did for whatever reason ... that surely was not in the best interest of that poor baby.

Hiya,


Your agenda, I understand perfectly and it's admirable. x Yes, it's emotional and that's to be expected. Perhaps I should have said that I don't like when things get PERSONAL.


I don't know if there is an agenda other than information, education and interesting discourse on a forum full of YT lovers. If there is anything more than that, I certainly don't know about it and wouldn't have participated on this thread (or any other) if it was made to incite people.


I don't like confrontation. I like freedom of speech, information and a talk which ends up in everyone learning something from each other!


If things become anything more than that - well, I'm emotionally unequipped and too low on time!

gemy 03-24-2015 09:00 AM

Another Study not new news 2003 first publish date
 
Immunohistochemical characterization of canine prostatic carcinoma and correlation with castration status and castration time - Sorenmo - 2003 - Veterinary and Comparative Oncology - Wiley Online Library




Veterinary and Comparative Oncology, March, 2003. 10.1046/j.1476-5829.2003.00007.x
Immunohistochemical characterization of canine prostatic carcinoma and correlation with castration status and castration time

K. U. Sorenmo, M. Goldschmidt, F. Shofer, C. Goldkamp, J. Ferracone
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to characterize canine prostate cancer using immunohistochemical staining specific for acinar and urothelial/ductal tissue and correlate these results with the dogs' castration status/castration time. Seventy dogs with prostate cancer were included, 71% were castrated and 29% were intact. Compared with an age-matched control population, castrated dogs were at increased risk of prostate cancer, odds ratio 3.9. Immunohistochemical staining was performed on 58 cases. Forty-six of the 58 stained positive for cytokeratin 7 (CK 7) (ductal/urothelial origin) and one of the 58 stained positive for prostate-specific antigen. Dogs with CK 7-positive tumours were younger when castrated than dogs with CK 7-negative tumours, 2 versus 7 years (P = 0.03); dogs castrated at ≤2 years of age were more likely to be CK 7-positive (P = 0.009). These results show that most canine prostatic carcinomas are of ductal/urothelial, androgen-independent origin. This is consistent with the epidemiological findings, showing increased risk in castrated dogs. Canine prostate cancer may, therefore, not be a realistic model for the human disease.
Figures

No figures found.

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/dat...ABAAEAAAIBRAA7 Figure 1 | Immunohistochemistry, validation of staining specificity. (A) Normal control prostate in an intact male dog: strong positive staining with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in acinar tissue, ×300; (B) normal prostate of neonatal dog (21 days): negative staining with PSA, ×150; (C) normal prostate in a mature castrated dog: strong positive staining with cytokeratin 7 (CK 7) in prostatic ducts, ×300; (D) normal prostate: strong positive staining of prostatic ducts with CK 7, no staining of acinar tissue, ×300; (E) normal prostate of neonatal dog (21 days): strong positive staining of prostatic ducts with CK 7, ×150; (F) normal bladder epithelium: strong positive staining with CK 7, ×300

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/dat...ABAAEAAAIBRAA7 Figure 2 | Immunohistochemistry, canine prostatic carcinoma. (A) Strong positive staining with cytokeratin 7 (CK 7) in a male castrated dog, ×300; (B) weak multifocal staining with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in an intact male dog, ×300; (C) negative staining with CK 7 in an intact male dog, ×300.



Share this article

Share full-text access to this article. Anyone you share the following link with will receive complimentary access to this article.
Shareable Link

Share my highlights and notes



Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on Google+

Share on LinkedIn


Where this article has been shared

Powered by Altmetric.com




My Notes

pstinard 03-24-2015 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 4542168)
Immunohistochemical characterization of canine prostatic carcinoma and correlation with castration status and castration time - Sorenmo - 2003 - Veterinary and Comparative Oncology - Wiley Online Library




Veterinary and Comparative Oncology, March, 2003. 10.1046/j.1476-5829.2003.00007.x
Immunohistochemical characterization of canine prostatic carcinoma and correlation with castration status and castration time

K. U. Sorenmo, M. Goldschmidt, F. Shofer, C. Goldkamp, J. Ferracone
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to characterize canine prostate cancer using immunohistochemical staining specific for acinar and urothelial/ductal tissue and correlate these results with the dogs' castration status/castration time. Seventy dogs with prostate cancer were included, 71% were castrated and 29% were intact. Compared with an age-matched control population, castrated dogs were at increased risk of prostate cancer, odds ratio 3.9. Immunohistochemical staining was performed on 58 cases. Forty-six of the 58 stained positive for cytokeratin 7 (CK 7) (ductal/urothelial origin) and one of the 58 stained positive for prostate-specific antigen. Dogs with CK 7-positive tumours were younger when castrated than dogs with CK 7-negative tumours, 2 versus 7 years (P = 0.03); dogs castrated at ≤2 years of age were more likely to be CK 7-positive (P = 0.009). These results show that most canine prostatic carcinomas are of ductal/urothelial, androgen-independent origin. This is consistent with the epidemiological findings, showing increased risk in castrated dogs. Canine prostate cancer may, therefore, not be a realistic model for the human disease.
Figures

No figures found.

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/dat...ABAAEAAAIBRAA7 Figure 1 | Immunohistochemistry, validation of staining specificity. (A) Normal control prostate in an intact male dog: strong positive staining with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in acinar tissue, ×300; (B) normal prostate of neonatal dog (21 days): negative staining with PSA, ×150; (C) normal prostate in a mature castrated dog: strong positive staining with cytokeratin 7 (CK 7) in prostatic ducts, ×300; (D) normal prostate: strong positive staining of prostatic ducts with CK 7, no staining of acinar tissue, ×300; (E) normal prostate of neonatal dog (21 days): strong positive staining of prostatic ducts with CK 7, ×150; (F) normal bladder epithelium: strong positive staining with CK 7, ×300

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/dat...ABAAEAAAIBRAA7 Figure 2 | Immunohistochemistry, canine prostatic carcinoma. (A) Strong positive staining with cytokeratin 7 (CK 7) in a male castrated dog, ×300; (B) weak multifocal staining with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in an intact male dog, ×300; (C) negative staining with CK 7 in an intact male dog, ×300.



Share this article

Share full-text access to this article. Anyone you share the following link with will receive complimentary access to this article.
Shareable Link

Share my highlights and notes



Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on Google+

Share on LinkedIn


Where this article has been shared

Powered by Altmetric.com




My Notes

Only 70 dogs in the study, mostly larger breeds. Here is the concluding paragraph of the study:

"Despite the fact that early castration may not protect against prostate cancer, there may be other advantages associated with castration such as behaviour modification and prevention of other diseases of the prostate and testes (Krawiec, 1989; Krawiec & Heflin, 1992; Neilson et al., 1997). In addition, castration is also advocated in the US as a means to control the pet population (Olson & Moulton, 1993; Stubbs & Bloomberg, 1995; Howe, 1997). Nevertheless, the results from this study clarify the discrepancies regarding canine prostate cancer and its hormonal association. Further studies are warranted to study the mechanisms involved in the possible protective effects of testicular hormones against prostate cancer development in dogs."

Here is the info on the breeds in this study:

"Information regarding signalment and clinical data was available on 70 dogs, 35 from the biopsy population and 35 from the necropsy population. The median age was 10 years (range 5–18.5 years). Twenty-eight dogs were mixed breeds: seven German shepherds, five Labrador retrievers, four German shorthair pointers and several other pure breeds were represented with one to two cases each. Most dogs with prostate cancer in both the biopsy as well as the necropsy population were castrated, with 49 (70%) being castrated and 21 (30%) being intact. The median age of castration was 2 years (range 2–14 years). Information regarding castration age was missing in five cases. Compared with the neuter status in a control population of frequency age-matched dogs with other tumours (39% castrated versus 61% intact), it was found that there was an increased risk of prostate carcinoma in castrated dogs: OR = 3.9, P < 0.0001, 95% CI = 2.3 to 6.8."

pstinard 03-24-2015 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pstinard (Post 4542195)
Only 70 dogs in the study, mostly larger breeds. Here is the concluding paragraph of the study:

"Despite the fact that early castration may not protect against prostate cancer, there may be other advantages associated with castration such as behaviour modification and prevention of other diseases of the prostate and testes (Krawiec, 1989; Krawiec & Heflin, 1992; Neilson et al., 1997). In addition, castration is also advocated in the US as a means to control the pet population (Olson & Moulton, 1993; Stubbs & Bloomberg, 1995; Howe, 1997). Nevertheless, the results from this study clarify the discrepancies regarding canine prostate cancer and its hormonal association. Further studies are warranted to study the mechanisms involved in the possible protective effects of testicular hormones against prostate cancer development in dogs."

Here is the info on the breeds in this study:

"Information regarding signalment and clinical data was available on 70 dogs, 35 from the biopsy population and 35 from the necropsy population. The median age was 10 years (range 5–18.5 years). Twenty-eight dogs were mixed breeds: seven German shepherds, five Labrador retrievers, four German shorthair pointers and several other pure breeds were represented with one to two cases each. Most dogs with prostate cancer in both the biopsy as well as the necropsy population were castrated, with 49 (70%) being castrated and 21 (30%) being intact. The median age of castration was 2 years (range 2–14 years). Information regarding castration age was missing in five cases. Compared with the neuter status in a control population of frequency age-matched dogs with other tumours (39% castrated versus 61% intact), it was found that there was an increased risk of prostate carcinoma in castrated dogs: OR = 3.9, P < 0.0001, 95% CI = 2.3 to 6.8."

This part has me scratching my head:

Compared with the neuter status in a control population of frequency age-matched dogs with other tumours (39% castrated versus 61% intact), it was found that there was an increased risk of prostate carcinoma in castrated dogs: OR = 3.9, P < 0.0001, 95% CI = 2.3 to 6.8.

Are they saying that overall, there is a higher percentage of other classes of tumors in intact dogs than in castrated dogs?

gemy 03-24-2015 10:09 AM

Dang it did I get the full free article? And you are right a very small sample size - but does the Study clarify the discrepancies between....?


Lets not yet go there for behavioural stuff - many more recent studies challenge this thought to be of benefit....


Damn it all we have loads of on line medical records from hospitals all across USA and Canada - can't we somehow do a huge database scientific study? Do it right do it once - gawd stats available on 500,000 dogs or so?? I salivate.


I think one of the most dangerous ideas out there is that s+n is going to improve a poor temperament dog. Certainly in my breed it is very dangerous to believe this. As if castrating a dog is going to deal with your failure to train properly!! And or the fact that your dog has some serious issues.

gemy 03-24-2015 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pstinard (Post 4542205)
This part has me scratching my head:

Compared with the neuter status in a control population of frequency age-matched dogs with other tumours (39% castrated versus 61% intact), it was found that there was an increased risk of prostate carcinoma in castrated dogs: OR = 3.9, P < 0.0001, 95% CI = 2.3 to 6.8.

Are they saying that overall, there is a higher percentage of other classes of tumors in intact dogs than in castrated dogs?


Shoot I don't know - I know for some specific cancers like hemangiosarcomas it is off the charts for GR's in S+N dogs and where did they ever get stats on 61% intact dogs here in North America? Also osteosarcomas of castrated dogs across most large breeds are of a big concern. Next concern osteopaedic conditions. Generally speaking worse for the males than females - as at least the females have some off-setting benefits ie pyrometra and breast tumours (again for many breeds of dogs but not all)


Are they quoting /referring to some other research that can be looked up?

pstinard 03-24-2015 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 4542210)
Dang it did I get the full free article? And you are right a very small sample size - but does the Study clarify the discrepancies between....?

No, the study doesn't clarify the discrepancies between rates of various types of tumors associated with castrated vs. intact dogs. This study mainly shows that higher testosterone levels aren't associated with prostate cancers in dogs as they are in humans. The cause of prostate cancer in dogs seems to be different from the cause in humans. I will send you the full article as a PDF :).

Quote:

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 4542210)
Lets not yet go there for behavioural stuff - many more recent studies challenge this thought to be of benefit....


Damn it all we have loads of on line medical records from hospitals all across USA and Canada - can't we somehow do a huge database scientific study? Do it right do it once - gawd stats available on 500,000 dogs or so?? I salivate.


I think one of the most dangerous ideas out there is that s+n is going to improve a poor temperament dog. Certainly in my breed it is very dangerous to believe this. As if castrating a dog is going to deal with your failure to train properly!! And or the fact that your dog has some serious issues.

I'm not a behaviorist, so don't worry, I won't go there :D.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2003 - 2018 YorkieTalk.com
Privacy Policy - Terms of Use


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168