Why do people say Champion dogs have the healthiest pups, when AKC encourages looks over health?
Examples would include the English Bulldog and it’s many health problems, malamutes with deep chests (bloat), german shepherds with roach backs, etc. Does it really matter if a dog is health tested for eyes/ hips if the standard can create undesirable health traits?
The Show "industry" has ruined the Doberman and the GSD. The show Doberman is afflicted with deep chests, including an exaggerated forechest (?), ewe necks, over-angulated rears with exaggerated reach (which is an energy waster) and a wimpy temperment.
The "show" GSD is a frog dog. Its not even an option.
The only test I required when I got my last Doberman was vWD.
So short answer: No, the current standard of health testing means very little to me.
*********************************
Add: Here’s a detailed look at a Boxer Cardio protocal for testing (link attached) – you may have to choose "cached" version to read it. I’ve copy pasted the summary .
The health testing of any breeder (BYB or otherwise) is only valuable when viewed within a statistically large sample that spans at least 3 generations and this sample would have to expand outside of the breeders own stock to be credible.
If you health test your dam but do not disclose the results of her sibling what risk does your puppy have? In this cardio testing protocal – its 50%. I should also note that to my knowledge, no breeder of Dobermans (cardio is a common problem in the breed) health tests for this.
They find out when the dog drops dead at 5 years of age. By then the dog may have sired a few hundred puppies if its at stud – and those puppies carry the problem through to their offspring.
Until breeders (or breed clubs) agree to track all dogs history and publish their records, its the forest for the trees. Breeders can spend money, do health testing, claim to be responsible – but in the end, they contiue to produce sick dogs because they operate in secret silos.
No breeder can make an informed opinion about the health of sire or dam if they are not given all the facts.
Talk is cheap – results matter.
******************************************************
Preliminary risk assessment
Before considering breeding control procedures the following points should be noted:
1. Animals at risk of developing and transmitting the disease are those with affected ancestors defined as either those that suffered BCM orthose known to transmit it.
2. The level of risk of an affected ancestor passing BCM on to its descendents depends upon the distance back in the pedigrees (see below).
3. Checking on the health of siblings of ‘in-line’ ancestors (those between the affected ancestor and the subject dog) can greatly aid assessment of risk to the individual.
Therefore, the first action should be screen relatives of risk animals in the pedigree.
Level of risk
When the sire or the dam are:
Proven transmitters or clinically affected animals 100% risk
Sibs of above 50%
1st generation progeny 50%
2nd generation progeny 25%
3rd generation progeny 12%
4th generation progeny 6%
5th generation progeny 3%
Breeding recommendations
***************************
@ AnneB: Why? Because the AKC and CKC is the foundation which pure bred dogs is built on. It is the customer facing entity for all puppy buyers and breeders. It is the cement that binds us together. Right now, you can register any dog and I don`t think it even has to have a pulse.
The registry had value 100 years ago with a handful of breeders who got together and developed the breed. The world has changed. We are now breeding globally. Multiple registries don’t make sense. And for me, without health testing as a criterion for registration, the AKC/CKC is a source of embarrassment. It has no commercial value and its function is for the most part irrelevent.
It is a cash cow that has been milked past its prime.
*************************
AnneB: You are technically correct, but I still dont concur, because the CKC mandate is the promotion of purebred dogs, through obedience trials and conformation show events. Why promote something then relinquish all control over its quality control to another party (breed clubs). I dont register my dog with the DPCC breed club – nor am I required to. So, breed clubs *for me* mean nothing. Until health checks are a prerequisite for registration, its more wasted space. Anyway, its an interesting problem and I appreciate your point of view.
***************************
ETA: Just checked the Doberman Club of Canada website. Next to nill requirements to join – and only a handful of breeders registered. Nothing more than an old boyz club. If this is the future of Dobermans – we’re screwed.
Your right for those and many other reasons i don’t like show dogs
References :
Very valid question AKC sets size standards for dog’s for conformation but health is a deep subject with them. I would go to their website and ask them this question. In fact I would love to see the answer they give you.
References :
I am one of those people that shouts and screams about health screening, but there are a few cases where I would agree with what you are saying.
In my breed – absolutely NO. In rescue and seeing hundreds we see a huge difference between the byb unscreened dogs and the healthy screened registered dogs. That isn’t to say that there won’t be some byb dogs that do end up fine, of course, but in general it is not the case.
I do believe that there are a few breeds that need looking into such as the shepherd, the bulldog and the cavalier but as I am not in those breeds then I am not close enough to comment further really.
References :
The akc doesn’t care. And many dogs shouldn’t have pediigrees but do. The breed standard is completly being overlooked. Other countries do a much better job then many of us americans do and its sad that breeders are out for profit and. Not trying to really better the breed.
References :
The Show "industry" has ruined the Doberman and the GSD. The show Doberman is afflicted with deep chests, including an exaggerated forechest (?), ewe necks, over-angulated rears with exaggerated reach (which is an energy waster) and a wimpy temperment.
The "show" GSD is a frog dog. Its not even an option.
The only test I required when I got my last Doberman was vWD.
So short answer: No, the current standard of health testing means very little to me.
*********************************
Add: Here’s a detailed look at a Boxer Cardio protocal for testing (link attached) – you may have to choose "cached" version to read it. I’ve copy pasted the summary .
The health testing of any breeder (BYB or otherwise) is only valuable when viewed within a statistically large sample that spans at least 3 generations and this sample would have to expand outside of the breeders own stock to be credible.
If you health test your dam but do not disclose the results of her sibling what risk does your puppy have? In this cardio testing protocal – its 50%. I should also note that to my knowledge, no breeder of Dobermans (cardio is a common problem in the breed) health tests for this.
They find out when the dog drops dead at 5 years of age. By then the dog may have sired a few hundred puppies if its at stud – and those puppies carry the problem through to their offspring.
Until breeders (or breed clubs) agree to track all dogs history and publish their records, its the forest for the trees. Breeders can spend money, do health testing, claim to be responsible – but in the end, they contiue to produce sick dogs because they operate in secret silos.
No breeder can make an informed opinion about the health of sire or dam if they are not given all the facts.
Talk is cheap – results matter.
******************************************************
Preliminary risk assessment
Before considering breeding control procedures the following points should be noted:
1. Animals at risk of developing and transmitting the disease are those with affected ancestors defined as either those that suffered BCM orthose known to transmit it.
2. The level of risk of an affected ancestor passing BCM on to its descendents depends upon the distance back in the pedigrees (see below).
3. Checking on the health of siblings of ‘in-line’ ancestors (those between the affected ancestor and the subject dog) can greatly aid assessment of risk to the individual.
Therefore, the first action should be screen relatives of risk animals in the pedigree.
Level of risk
When the sire or the dam are:
Proven transmitters or clinically affected animals 100% risk
Sibs of above 50%
1st generation progeny 50%
2nd generation progeny 25%
3rd generation progeny 12%
4th generation progeny 6%
5th generation progeny 3%
Breeding recommendations
***************************
@ AnneB: Why? Because the AKC and CKC is the foundation which pure bred dogs is built on. It is the customer facing entity for all puppy buyers and breeders. It is the cement that binds us together. Right now, you can register any dog and I don`t think it even has to have a pulse.
The registry had value 100 years ago with a handful of breeders who got together and developed the breed. The world has changed. We are now breeding globally. Multiple registries don’t make sense. And for me, without health testing as a criterion for registration, the AKC/CKC is a source of embarrassment. It has no commercial value and its function is for the most part irrelevent.
It is a cash cow that has been milked past its prime.
*************************
AnneB: You are technically correct, but I still dont concur, because the CKC mandate is the promotion of purebred dogs, through obedience trials and conformation show events. Why promote something then relinquish all control over its quality control to another party (breed clubs). I dont register my dog with the DPCC breed club – nor am I required to. So, breed clubs *for me* mean nothing. Until health checks are a prerequisite for registration, its more wasted space. Anyway, its an interesting problem and I appreciate your point of view.
***************************
ETA: Just checked the Doberman Club of Canada website. Next to nill requirements to join – and only a handful of breeders registered. Nothing more than an old boyz club. If this is the future of Dobermans – we’re screwed.
References :
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/roy.starling/abythorn/health.htm
no one said CH dogs have the healthiest puppies, but people who breed CH are more likely to get their genetic screenings done, unlike bybers. It does matter, as does type and temperament. The standard is written by the national breed club- not by the AKC. They are merely a registration body.
References :
AKC doesn’t encourage looks over health, the standard is determined by the Breed clubs not the AKC. When a specific look is preferred over a possible health problem it’s because that was the choice of the breed club that establishes the standards for the breeds, then simply turns them in to the AKC. Blame the clubs, not the AKC
References :
good breeders health test for all they can before breeding
ones in it for the money don’t care what they do.
References :
AKC does NOT encourage looks over health..actually quite the opposite. They want breeders to health test, they want breeders to be responsible, they even have the canine health foundation to encourage breeders to get tested and get a CHIC # on their dogs.
AKC has absolutely nothing ot do with breed standards of any breed.This comes from the parent club. The parent club is the one that sets the standards for a breed.They dictate what the breed should be, how it should look, etc NOT the AKC. AKC is only a registering body for the breed clubs.
People really should go to the AKC site and really browse it, read the information that is there , check out the canine health foundation, and a lot of other educational places on the site…you might be amazed at what you could learn..
References :
years of experience
Sorry, but you are blaming the wrong group. If there is an issue with health in a breed, you should go after the parent breed club. THEY are the ones who set the standards for their breed, not the AKC.
This is where everyone gets confused. The AKC is a purebred registry, nothing more. They do not regulate, they do not dictate, they only register purebred dogs. So why should they be held accountable for bad breeding?
ETA: I beg to differ. The BREED CLUBS are the foundation that purebreds were built on. THEY establish a breed standard. THEY wrote their breeder code of ethics.
ETA: Last time I checked, there were still breed clubs in the US who have no interest in being recognized by the AKC. You are talking like the AKC came first and the breed clubs second. That may be the case for some breeds, but not all of them. In the three breeds I am interested in and own, the breeders I know who belong to the parent breed club are the most severe, strict, and perfection-driven people I know. They want dogs that can work and live up to the standard that enables them to excell at the job they were bred to do.
I am not saying that every breeder who belongs to the breed club is awesome, but that is the standard the club hopes their breeders will live up to, and they do throw breeders out when they discover unethical practices. I also know a few breeders who have turned other breeders in for unethical practices.
It must be a little different in Canada.
In my profession, it is mandatory for me to know who to hold accountable for each facet of the business. If I blame and rail on the wrong people, I don’t get the desired result, which is improvement.
In my world its called "doing the deep dive" to get to the root cause of an issue and then resolving it. Scratching the surface gets you nowhere.
References :
AKC doesnt encourage anything. AKC is only a registration service. BREED CLUBS write those standards, not the kennel club.
Breed clubs have standards that include health testing and only breeding dogs that are disease free.
Not all show-breeders are members of the breed club, and not all of them do the health testing. Its from these show-breeders that you see problems. These are not reputable breeders.
A shepherd from a proper breeder does not have a roach back. A well-bred bulldog does not have health issues, despite its appearance. Bloat can occour in ANY dog, so that isnt really much of an argument.
References :
actually AKC has standards. they actually go look at breeders and pick certain breeders to show on their breeder list. but there are some that do have issues. just like in people. people are born with diseases and stuff are they not? so it’s not just dogs.
a properly bred bulldog will have NO or very little health issues. people do not understand or know anything about the breed before giving advice and they get their facts wrong and thats how false info on breeds gets around.
english bulldogs DO NOT have many health problems. just those bred wrong. a lot are bred wrong yes. people just breed to breed thinking they know what they are doing.
no english bulldog has champ bloodlines. thats a scam. it’s how they get money. have you ever seen a bulldog win the westminster? NO. thats the only dog show worth bragging over. anything else doesn’t really count. i could have a dog thats champ in local shows and claim champ bloodlines. winning best in show does not make it a champ overall.
to become an AKC breeder they must fill out forms and be checked out by a represenative they send out. they then look over where the dogs are bred and they look at how well they are cared for and a bunch of other stuff. then if approved they become an akc breeder.
References :