|
Donna, I've seen that argument too and it's still only someone's conclusions, no more weighty than any others. Most dogs in bad pain won't eat and refuse nourishment entirely and I wonder if they are materially that different as neonates. I have always read and heard that neonates studied for pain response always show the lack of any true ability to process pain response beyond the immediate acute stage due to the inability of the nervous system to carry the message and the brain to properly process it in a mammal so infantile and that endorphins aren't even that functional as infants. Probably only the heart rate, seeking of nourishment and ability to settle are the only true indicators of pain or the lack thereof and often that can be party due to the nature of the animal. When my Jilly dislocated her shoulder, I wanted pain medicine for her to bring home and the ER vet at the time refused it, saying her heart rate and respiration was entirely normal and she couldn't be in pain as dogs in bad pain had rapid heart rates and respiration. Still, since she was a full-grown dog and did have the ability to feel pain, heart rate of not, I left there with pain Rx for her. Had she been only 3 days old, I might have believed that vet. Newborn pups cannot see, hear, smell that well, regulate their body temperatures, coordinate muscles and nerves to walk, eat regular food or do many things due to lack of sophistication of those systems to process the incoming signals yet and much of their development has to continue after birth to create a functional animal. I know we circumcise boys as newborns and they get nothing for pain as they are thought too young to hurt very successfully, according to most scientific studies of newborns. |
Quote:
The Whole Truth About Tail Docking | The Smart Living Network (BTW, I'm not an anti-tail-docking activist. I'm just presenting a body of evidence. My Bella had her tail docked before I got her and before I knew about the issues involved with tail docking.) |
Here's a direct link to the Australian research article I mentioned in my last post: Anti-Docking Dogs' Tails and Dog Ear Cropping - Vet Study |
To be fair, let me post a website of an organization that supports tail docking: Tail docking - the case for tail docking Their arguments in favor of tail docking are (1) it reduces tail injuries in the docked breeds, (2) it improves hygiene in long-haired breeds like Yorkies, and (3) it maintains breed standards. Of course, they don't cite any research in favor of any of these conclusions (except for some anecdotal information on tail injuries in Swedish dogs following a ban on tail docking), and if you do a Google Scholar search for research articles on tail docking, the preponderance of scholarly articles oppose tail docking... |
Quote:
I've lifted neonates to look at a toenail, clear its mouth or otherwise tend it and had it yell its head off the entire time it was being fiddled with. I accidentally stepped on another's little paw in the nursery once and nothing was said by the little baby. I've seen a breeder snip the webbed toes of an infant that just yawned while she did it. When being mentored, I saw Dobie pups never stir when a tail was docked. Most I saw settled within a minute though and most just cuddled back up with littermates and went to sleep. Older puppies in crates yell their heads off all night without worry. Vets give the okay to many breeders to release their puppies for sale and new homes at 6 weeks and people take 6 week old puppies from their mothers and stick them in pens, sometimes even in basements, and shush them when they yell. No one worries about their emotional pain or distress but frets over a neonate's pain? I don't see an AMVA statement about that subject. Vets give the okay for Bulldog breeders to breed their bitches knowing the dam will need a C-section to delivery her pups. Seems unethical to clear for breeding dogs that have to have surgery to reproduce a puppy. Vets haven't said anything about the unethical breeding of teacup and ultra-mini dogs as far as I can tell. There is a lot about vet medicine I just don't understand or necessarily agree with about breeding and treatment of young puppies and some misbehaving dogs. Don't get me wrong, I rush my dog to a vet at the first sign of trouble but that doesn't mean I agree with them about everything or even this issue. I for one am so glad my dog came with his tail docked and dews removed and has even a 3 - 5% less chance of injuring those areas because of it! I prefer the look of a docked tail and glad I don't have to trim a dewclaw on each foot once a week!!! I'll keep looking for that type pup to purchase in the future until I see sufficient reason to change. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
The studies are only as good as the people writing it and obviously the people for docking must have a pretty good argument and clout because no legislation to end docking has passed or even been given serious consideration |
Nancy posted this in another docking thread The title of the article you quoted is “Why the Tail Docking of Dogs should be Prohibited”, this is a paper that describes one side of the argument only, which in my opinion is just to sway someone’s opinion in one direction only, not a good way to find the truth. There have been studies to determine the pain involved in tail docking. Here’s another point of view: Tail Docking - The Fritsch Report Since the classic research by Adolph Portman (1944/1990), which verified the work of Herder, Gehlen and Plessner, the validity of the Altricial/Precocial differentiation in animals has become a well-established scientific fact. More recently, this gained new attention with research on artificial intelligence in information-processing systems ('Altricial self-organising information-processing systems', Aaron Sloman & Jackie Chappell, School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, UK). Briefl y, animals belonging to the Altricial group (dogs, cats, some birds, rodents, etc.) are born relatively immature, with a nervous system not fully developed. They have very little feeling of pain during the fi rst fi ve days after birth. The blood circulation and the bones of the tail are relatively undeveloped or 'primitive'. This is in contrast to animals in the Precocial group (pigs, sheep etc.), which are born fully developed. Performed on altricial neonatal puppies, 3 days postpartum, the procedure is regarded as significantly less intrusive than toe-clipping in rodents for laboratory identification. In the event the procedure is to be undertaken on other than neonatal animals, there must be a strong scientific c reason for using this technique and the procedure must be done on an anesthetized animal (Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1996). Tail docking in neo-natal puppies is certainly far less intrusive and painful than the shortening or docking of tails in Precocial pigs and lambs, because the latter have a fully developed threshold of pain. . http://www.k9alliance.com/resources/...-FactSheet.pdf Since docking was banned in Sweden in 1989, there has been a massive increase in tail injuries amongst previously docked breeds. Within the 50 undocked Pointer litters registered in that year with the Swedish Kennel Club, 38% of dogs suffered tail injury before they were 18 months old and two years later, by 1991, the number of individuals with tail injuries had increased to 51% in the same group (Gunilla Strejffert, Report to the Swedish Breed Council for German Shorthaired Pointers, 1992, Borlange, Sweden). Even more alarming is the fi nding that only 16% of injury cases had improved, 40% showed no improvement and more than half of dogs with tail injuries had regressed during the two year period! An ad hoc survey amongst owners of English Pointers in South Africa, also a shorthaired breed, indicate that at least one out of fi ve English Pointers suffers from some sort of tail injury during their life. The English Pointer’s tail is traditionally not docked mainly because of a relatively short tail in proportion to its body, with a lower risk of tail injury (Fig 2). A docking ban is no cure at all If tail damage occurs during adulthood it often does not heel well or does not heal at all. This is mainly due to the injury being constantly banged against objects, poor blood circulation in the tail and constant licking and chewing by the dog (Fig 6). The healing process can be painful and protracted with considerable distress to the dog. Injuries often result in necrosis of the tail tip. This can sometimes be treated with partial amputation but secondary problems can occur in the healing process, which actually makes it necessary to amputate the tail several times before the healing process is achieved. A docking ban is no cure at all If tail damage occurs during adulthood it often does not heel well or does not heal at all. This is mainly due to the injury being constantly banged against objects, poor blood circulation in the tail and constant licking and chewing by the dog (Fig 6). The healing process can be painful and protracted with considerable distress to the dog. Injuries often result in necrosis of the tail tip. This can sometimes be treated with partial amputation but secondary problems can occur in the healing process, which actually makes it necessary to amputate the tail several times before the healing process is achieved. It's not just working dogs Sweden banned tail docking over ten years ago. Swedish veterinary reports indicate that 17% of Boxers are Swedish veterinary reports indicated that 17% of Boxers are sustaining tail injuries in and around the home environment. Wagging tails cannot be immobilised, and these injuries frequently result in tail amputation. FACT SHEET 5 damaging their long tails in and around the home environment. While less than the 51% incidence of tail damage sustained by pointer breeds in Sweden following the ban on tail docking, 17% still highly signifi cant. The damage range from broken tips to total fractures further up the tail, just distal to the point where docking would normally be carried out. Because treatment of the injury does not address the aetiology, the injuries keep recurring and frequently end up requiring amputation. Conclusion Tail docking of the gundog breeds is practised not for cosmetic reasons but to prevent serious injury. Field working is a human induced activitiy for which we must accept the responsibility. It is our duty to prevent distress in our animals. From the veterinary point of view, no scientifi c studies have been submitted to show why the docking of gundogs' tails are benefi cial. Indeed, the treatment of tail injuries in adult dogs is a costly, protracted and repetitive process compared to docking — and, in conclusion, infi nitely more painful and stressful to the very animal whose welfare we seek to protect. After all, the reason for tail docking is a cornerstone of good medicine and animal care. It is called: Prophylaxis. Policy Statement It is the policy of the undersigned organisations that 1. From a professional veterinary point of view, failure to dock and clip in the prescribed manner the tails and dew-claws of specifi c gundog breeds intended for fi eld work, is considered unethical; and 2. From a legal point of view, such failure is regarded as constituting animal cruelty. |
For safety reasons? How many members have had their undocked tails injured? For hygenic reasons in long coated breed? Why weren't my maltese tail docked. Or my golden retriever? As for pain control in neonates that is a fairly new field. I remember just 10 years ago fighting fo pain medicine for a post-op neonatal heart repair. Pain is pain. |
Part two Tail Docking - Pain Felt by Puppies Tail Docking - The Fritsch Report There follows a letter from Prof. Dr. R. Fritsch, Leader of the Clinic of Veterinary Surgeons, Justus-Lieberg-University, to the German Kennel Club. Quote I have been asked by the German Kennel Club to give a professional opinion on the following questions: • Will the removal of the tail and dew claws without anaesthetic on a four day old puppy, cause considerable pain? • Is it necessary from the veterinary point of view, to shorten the tail or amputate the dew claws of certain breeds of dogs? The docking of tails and the removal of dew claws in puppies less than 4 days old without anaesthetic, is not connected with any serious pain in such a way that it cannot be allowed from the point of view of the protection of animals. The reason for this is (there are two expressions in German for which there is no English equivalent: "Nestfluchter" which means a young bird or young animal which very soon will leave its nest or its mother and therefore will have to find its own food; and "Nesthockern" which means a young animal that stays for a long time in the nest with its mother and is fed by her) the new born puppy belongs to the Nesthockern, in contrast with the horse, cow, sheep, pig and goat which are regarded as Nestfluchter. The animals in the Nesthockern group are born relatively immature, completely naked, blind, deaf, very immobile and very helpless. Their nervous system at birth is not even fully developed. There are still cell divisions in the brain and some of the nervous threads are not fully developed. In psychological tests, it has been determined that the time between the nervous impulse and reaction (chronaxie) takes 3-4 times longer than it would in an adult. After about 10-14 days, when the animals eyes are opened (until then it has been more like an embryo) it is possible to determine the normal value of the impulse. In 1941, Volkhov determined that animals, at this period of life, had very little feeling of pain. The conscious feeling of pain is still not very likely at that age. Schmidker wrote in his doctorate in 1951 about the feeling of pain in new-born puppies: "Incomplete development of the nervous system at the time of birth and the very high chronaxie value in connection with the fact that the animal is not able to react effectively to pain, gives us every reason to believe that the actual feeling of pain is very low in the new-born of this group of mammals (dogs). In other words, at this age and biological condition, it would have no absolute meaning to talk about pain". You therefore do not have to worry or fear that the dog will be made to suffer pain or psychological pain, if the tail has been docked or the dew claws removed, in the first few days after birth. It is completely different though, with the Nestfluchter (animals which leave their nest or mother just after birth). In these animals, the nervous system id fully developed just after the moment of birth. All senses that serve to get rid of enemies and pain are fully developed. One can neither from physiological knowledge nor from just observation, say that these young animals feel a lot less pain than adults. It would therefore be a contradiction in the law, for the Protection of Animals, to permit the shortening or docking of tails in pigs and lambs without anaesthetic, because they have fully developed threshold of pain, and , at the same time, forbid the docking of dogs. It is absolutely certain that the docking of tails on small lambs and pigs and also the castration of young pigs, goats and calves during their first days of life, will cause considerable pain if done without an anaesthetic. However, from the point of view of the docking of dogs, whose nervous system is not fully developed during the first few days of life, is completely acceptable from the point of view of the protection of animals. The removal of dew claws is necessary in order to avoid later damages and illnesses. It is also recommended to dock the tails inbreeds which have long thin, weak and sparsely coated tails, in order to avoid later sickness and damage. At the same time tails should be docked in breeds that are used in such a way that there is a risk of injury to a tail e.g. hunting dogs. It is beneficial to avoid painful; injuries and therefore in the interest of the PREVENTION OF CRUELTY to animals. The dew claw is the rudimentary first toe. They are often injured and the nail can grow into the skin causing considerable inflammation. The dog can easily catch them on different objects because they just hang on the side of their paws a non-functioning objects and can therefore damage themselves quite seriously. It is therefore in the interests of the law to recommend that these claws are removed as early as possible. Their removal is best done in the first week with a little clip with scissors. The dogs tail on the other hand, whether it be in kennels or around the home, is in constant danger of damage by being hit against hard objects like walls, fences, tables, chair legs, radiators and of being trapped in doors. These injuries usually result in sores at the tip of the tail, which do not heal well because there is a poor blood circulation in this part of the tail. By licking and chewing, the dog makes the condition worse and the skin and tissue will die. These conditions of necrosis of the tip of the tail is often seen in Great Danes and Dalmatians. German Shepherds are also often seen in veterinary surgeries. This can sometimes be treated with partial amputation but secondary problems can occur in the healing process because the very poor blood supply is not conducive to this. This actually makes it necessary to amputate the tail several times before the healing process is achieved. Hunting dogs are in great danger of damaging their tails when thrashing through thick undergrowth and young forest. Only tails that are thick and covered with long hair are protected, such as those of the wolf and fox. Apart from the dangers that the dog is constantly confronted with in the human environment (as well as the fact that they have less hair than the wild dog) many breeds have a very lively temperament which often cause tail tip damage in the course of their exuberance, e.g. an undocked Boxer will constantly be subject to injury when using its tail when he expresses happiness. As far as the behaviour of dogs is concerned, I cannot see that their ability to express happiness should in any way be altered by the docking of the tail. From the veterinary point of view, therefore, there is absolutely no reason why the banning of the docking of dogs tails should be beneficial to them. In actual fact, it would be detrimental to their well-being if docking was abolished. Tail docking protects the dog as it is done to avoid problems with tail injuries and subsequent painful treatment that would often occur. It is called Prevention!! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Consider that genetic testing in dogs is still in its' infancy. Consider who funds research? Usually drug companies and other vested interests. Why research into the benefit or not of tail docking? There is little obvious to me pharmalogcial benefit either way. Consider also that memory is the "gentlest" of truths. That vets and the veterinary industry are very slow to computerize, and there is no National Health Database that reports incidence of certain types of injuries or disease. I find it a matter of surprise that either the nerve bundles have or have not grown into the tail at vertebral 3 or not. Surely for crying out loud we can delineate irrefuteably if so, and if all afferent and effervent nerves are present. Then there is the question of how dogs perceive pain, where are their pain centers in the brain? If given (which I don't know is proven yet), the nerves are fully formed into the tail, does the brain actually receive the and process the pain signals. And yes there can be crying when tails are docked, but hey every heard a newborn cry just out of the birth canal? I am not aware in my venue yet, of any perceived "stump" problem with a tail, but my breed that I breed do not drastically dock the tails, we leave 3-5 vertebrae. I think if one is to argue that perceived pain is the main drawback for docking and cropping, then in North AMerica they should ban spaying and neutering, because for sure in those operations and after care there is pain, and btw known health risks from this procedure. And this is major surgery for both sexes! And yet we promote these procedures, despite the pain, despite the risks, despite future down the road health concerns. I will tell what I do know and feel, is that given a choice, to have to amputate a tail in later life and given a choice to dock at 3days old, I would never ever hesitate to dock at 3days old. I don't know if the German Study of increase in tail injuries is valid or not. Until and unto such time as I have concrete Cochrane like studies of valid research into neuronal development of canines, and pain, and also documented "injuries" from vet performed tail docking; I will not change my mind about docking. I think that the ASPCA and other like organizations that promote spaying and neutering at the same time as they want to ban docking of a 3day old tail, to say the least is inconsistent, given their or so altruistic aim to avoid pain to a small puppy. By six months old which is the usual timeframe to spay/neuter we all can agree that nervous system is intact and basically fully functioning. Anyhow just my thoughts. I think that a consistent point of view, if your point of view is to avoid pain based on human predilections, then ban crop dock dew claw removal and spaying and neutering. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2003 - 2018 YorkieTalk.com
Privacy Policy - Terms of Use