Spay and Neuter: When and If ever?

[SirTeddykins]

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.


.

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!

[ColesMommy01]

Originally Posted by SirTeddykins

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!

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]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by ColesMommy01

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]

Originally Posted by SirTeddykins

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!

If you really want to see agendas take a look at the old Parti VS Standard Yorkie threads. 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]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

I believe Phil did that.

Phil is great!

[ColesMommy01]

Originally Posted by megansmomma

If you really want to see agendas take a look at the old Parti VS Standard Yorkie threads. 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]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

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.

Originally Posted by ladyjane

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]

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]

Originally Posted by gemy

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]

Originally Posted by pstinard

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]

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]

Originally Posted by pstinard

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]

Originally Posted by gemy

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 .

Originally Posted by gemy

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 .