Latest News On Syringomyelia In Cavalier King Charles Spaniels.

[Jed]

Jessie

You take the one pup out of 4 which is not an 'a' and cull it (not the parents)and only breed on with any 'a'

So, you keep all pups until minumum of 6 months, max of approximately 2.5 years, and knock off any which are not "A"?

Wouldn't you keep your pick of the litter, send the others to pet homes desexed (so no chance of passing SM on if they are affected) then have the dog you kept scanned if you wish to use that dog in your breeding program? If this dog is not an 'A' then it is desexed as per the breeding protocol guidelines of not breeding with anything other than an 'A'.

And what to you say to the owner of the 25% affected by syringo, when the owner phones you to ask why the dog is airscratching and bunny hopping? You have to tell them that even though you tested, and the dogs you bred with were graded A the dog they own may have syringo. It is going to cost a minimum of $1000 to have him diagnosed. The prognosis is going to be that he is on gabapentin for life, has an operation, or is put down. You cannot offer to replace their dog with a syringo free pup because YOU CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT.

And that, my dear, is why so many breeders no longer breed.

There is NO definitive test. NONE AT ALL. EVEN BREEDING DOGS GRADED A DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT NO PUPS WILL HAVE SM.

But won't it reduce the number of affected pups if only 'A' dogs are bred with? Doesn't it make sense if the research so far suggests that breeding only 'A' produces 1 in 4 affected and breeding with anything else produces more than 1 in 4, then wouldn't any decent breeder want to go with the best odds? If the only test available, even if not definitive, is to MRI breeding stock then shouldn't that at least be tried?

Yet people like Bet Hargraves make it seem that breeders must test - and that will guarantee pups unaffected by SM.

I'm not trying to shit stir, it just seems to me from a pet owners perspective that if the 'medical experts' who are the ones doing the studies suggest that breeding with only 'A' graded dogs will get the least number of pups affected then why would breeders not be all for scanning their breeding stock and only using 'A'dogs?

edit - oops didn't mean to have size so big like I was shouting

Holly Milo, no one has said that breeders were not all for scanning their breeding stock. Jessie said that, no one else. You have the wrong impression I think. Please see my answer above.

[JESSIE]

Jed you have intimated throughout this entire thread and given much energy to explaining why breeders will not or can not scan You said that this is why they are no longer breeding. If having to scan breeding dogs and not using any which are not A is the reason why breeders are no longer breeding then good riddance That bit of informative news demonstrates motivations other than those they have purported to Questions arise as to steps they may have avoided in addressing other genetic diseases in the breed Most notably is MVD They are no loss to the breed

I am an Australian purebred breeder and disclosure of that or what breed I have is not remotely relevant for me to be involved in this conversation They are transparent and inequitable questions but predictable

Rebanne if a breeder will choose not to MRI scan and only breed “As” they have to inform the owners that there is a high risk of their dog having SM because scanning is something they have chosen not to do It is a recognised genetic disease of the breed in this country If you only breed scanned A dogs then you inform them that there is still a one in four chance but you are following recommended protocols doing all you can to get it right. As a potential pet owner I know which breeder I would prefer.

Due to the current distance issues and expense scanning all pups is not feasible Other breeders are testing for hip scores and various other polygenic diseases inherent in their breeds prior to breeding Cav breeders should be no different They need to ensure that the dogs they use for the purposes of breeding are only ‘A’

Shortstep accusing those who tell the truth ‘animal rights’ is an old ploy and easily seen through In my case nothing could be further from the truth Assumptions that the incidence is less in this country are reasonably argued There is no denying it is in some dogs in this country Any breeder who seriously wanted to breed for the betterment of the breed should want to be involved in ensuring it is not spread and become a bigger problem for the breed as in the United Kingdom This is more reason not less for all breeders to scan breeding dogs and only use A parents.

[HollyMilo]

Can either of you not shit stirrers show me where someone said that they refuse to test their dogs or that they are breeding dogs with scores lower than 'A".

The only place I have seen that said is by the not shit stirrers.

Where did I say that anyone was refusing to test their dogs?

All I did was ask what I feel are sincere questions. If you can't answer them shortstep then ignore my post.

[Jed]

Speaking of making assumptions and then finding your were wrong.

For some time, when people said this is Australia and things are different here, I used think that was just an excuse (as mentioned by Jessie), not sure if I ever said how I felt. But at any rate it come to mind again now and is time to clear this up.

Over the last couple of years I have found a couple of cases where there is clear evidence that isolated gene pools (in Australia) are different to other gene pools.

In one case enough genetically different from northern hemi gene pool as to be notable.

In another case a disease present in one geographical group of dogs and can not be found in the other group (with DNA testing).

So yes it can be very different situation in isolated gene pools of dogs around the world.

It is too bad there is not more listening going on instead of attacking.

It certainly could be that the OZ cavs have a lower rate of carriers or even a different expression pattern of this disease, in either case this could be very helpful in fighting the disease. Could it be that the way to improve cavs in right here in OZ?

Oh that right I forgot, I am just some nasty uncaring dino dog breeder, so take it for what it is worth.

Shortstep, this is for you. Firstly, what are these "dinos" you are breeding? Can I buy one??

Different gene pool here to the UK.

Lots of breeders have never seen SM. And that is quite genuine. I haven't seen it, but I am not a big time or famous breeder, so I don't count. But people tell me stuff.

I was fortunate enough to be given a lot of notes by one of our "older" breeders - and they were illuminating. I wonder if the "answer" will be found in Cavaliers in this country and in NZ. Maybe.

Breeders are working hard to eradicate MVD and SM. People like Bet who intimate that it is all the fault of breeders are not doing the breed any favours. Witness the semi hysterical posts by Jessie as proof.

What Bet is doing is helping the government to make up it's mind to ban the breeding of Cavaliers. The information she is disseminating supposedly for puppy buyers is not easily understood, and abridged and easy to understand versions of it (including the truth) are on every Cav club website in Aust. And people who do not look at the Cav Clubs websites before buying are not likely to be reading here.

Who is reading here is animal rights (Jessie?) governments, councils, and those with a vested interest in getting rid of dogs. Including Bet Hargraves. No one has any problem with posters coming here with THE TRUTH.

If people assumed that either Delcara or I were advocating not doing our best for our breed, in every way possible, they do need comprehension lessons.

Edited November 14, 2010 by Jed

[Jed]

Jed you have intimated throughout this entire thread and given much energy to explaining why breeders will not or can not scan You said that this is why they are no longer breeding. If having to scan breeding dogs and not using any which are not A is the reason why breeders are no longer breeding then good riddance That bit of informative news demonstrates motivations other than those they have purported to Questions arise as to steps they may have avoided in addressing other genetic diseases in the breed Most notably is MVD They are no loss to the breed

I am an Australian purebred breeder and disclosure of that or what breed I have is not remotely relevant for me to be involved in this conversation They are transparent and inequitable questions but predictable

Rebanne if a breeder will choose not to MRI scan and only breed “As” they have to inform the owners that there is a high risk of their dog having SM because scanning is something they have chosen not to do It is a recognised genetic disease of the breed in this country If you only breed scanned A dogs then you inform them that there is still a one in four chance but you are following recommended protocols doing all you can to get it right. As a potential pet owner I know which breeder I would prefer.

Due to the current distance issues and expense scanning all pups is not feasible Other breeders are testing for hip scores and various other polygenic diseases inherent in their breeds prior to breeding Cav breeders should be no different They need to ensure that the dogs they use for the purposes of breeding are only ‘A’

Shortstep accusing those who tell the truth ‘animal rights’ is an old ploy and easily seen through In my case nothing could be further from the truth Assumptions that the incidence is less in this country are reasonably argued There is no denying it is in some dogs in this country Any breeder who seriously wanted to breed for the betterment of the breed should want to be involved in ensuring it is not spread and become a bigger problem for the breed as in the United Kingdom This is more reason not less for all breeders to scan breeding dogs and only use A parents.

This post makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Every sentence contradicts another.

Rebanne if a breeder will choose not to MRI scan and only breed “As You are not abreeder.

That's totallly nonsensical. You have NFI. If you look like animal rights, write like animal rights, jump up and down like animal rights, you are animal rights. I agree with Shortstep, who in my opinion is right a lot more often than wrong.

[JESSIE]

Then give 2 simplistic responses How many cavs have you scanned for SM before you bred them?How many cav breeders do you know who scan before they breed?

[Jed]

I am not interested in responding to idiots and animal rights loonies who do not understand the written word, and answer with abuse based on what they thought they saw.

And who are too above skanky breeders they couldn't be bothered responding to questions put to them several times. Go outside and continue singing to the burrs, I think, that is more use than what you are trying to do here. Good luck, the Noogooras are the bigger ones, by the way. Have a good day

[Dellcara]

for those of you who may not have read it .. here are some points from the current recommended protocol published in the UK;

"The aim of these recommendations is to reduce the incidence of symptomatic syringomyelia in the breed not to create litters of puppies guaranteed not to have SM as the chance of producing an affected dog cannot be predicted without knowing the inheritance."

"Therefore until the genetic defect is determined it is recommended that dogs with syringomyelia be used if they are valuable in another genetic sense e.g. good heart."

"any unscreened dog should be assumed to be "D" (and a "D" can be bred to an "A")

[LizT]

Then give 2 simplistic responses How many cavs have you scanned for SM before you bred them?How many cav breeders do you know who scan before they breed?

How many cases of genuine diagnosed SM (and not epilespy or the more common "I think my dog may have SM because he scratches alot" cases) are you actually aware of in this country? Then compared that to the ratio of the very popular breed?? The few and far between cases that I personally know of have actually come down from lines imported from the U.K.

[LizT]

for those of you who may not have read it .. here are some points from the current recommended protocol published in the UK;

"The aim of these recommendations is to reduce the incidence of symptomatic syringomyelia in the breed not to create litters of puppies guaranteed not to have SM as the chance of producing an affected dog cannot be predicted without knowing the inheritance."

"Therefore until the genetic defect is determined it is recommended that dogs with syringomyelia be used if they are valuable in another genetic sense e.g. good heart."

"any unscreened dog should be assumed to be "D" (and a "D" can be bred to an "A")

That's very interesting Dellcara, it highlights the importance of not focusing on the one single issue and looking at the big picture.

[JESSIE]

Then give 2 simplistic responses How many cavs have you scanned for SM before you bred them?How many cav breeders do you know who scan before they breed?

How many cases of genuine diagnosed SM (and not epilespy or the more common "I think my dog may have SM because he scratches alot" cases) are you actually aware of in this country? Then compared that to the ratio of the very popular breed?? The few and far between cases that I personally know of have actually come down from lines imported from the U.K.

Purporting this is not answer to the questionThe scan results given earlier in this thread demonstrate that it is a known genetic disorder in the breed in this country This is incontrovertible

[JESSIE]

for those of you who may not have read it .. here are some points from the current recommended protocol published in the UK;

"The aim of these recommendations is to reduce the incidence of symptomatic syringomyelia in the breed not to create litters of puppies guaranteed not to have SM as the chance of producing an affected dog cannot be predicted without knowing the inheritance."

"Therefore until the genetic defect is determined it is recommended that dogs with syringomyelia be used if they are valuable in another genetic sense e.g. good heart."

"any unscreened dog should be assumed to be "D" (and a "D" can be bred to an "A")

That's very interesting Dellcara, it highlights the importance of not focusing on the one single issue and looking at the big picture.

And highlights the need to know the status of at least one of the parents

[Steve]

Interesting . So at the end of the day its still coming down to profiling your pedigree - knowing what you have and what you might get and use that knowledge to achieve the goals for that litter. Scanning is only part of the answer.

[LizT]

Then give 2 simplistic responses How many cavs have you scanned for SM before you bred them?How many cav breeders do you know who scan before they breed?

How many cases of genuine diagnosed SM (and not epilespy or the more common "I think my dog may have SM because he scratches alot" cases) are you actually aware of in this country? Then compared that to the ratio of the very popular breed?? The few and far between cases that I personally know of have actually come down from lines imported from the U.K.

Purporting this is not answer to the questionThe scan results given earlier in this thread demonstrate that it is a known genetic disorder in the breed in this country This is incontrovertible

No one is disputing the existence of the condition. Just wondering why there is so much emphasis being placed on this single issue? You would think that CKCS are screaming in the streets and at the parks in agony the way some are carrying on. In 30 years my Vet, who has treated thousands of CKCS has seen one genuine case of SM. Meanwhile the cases of MVT have been exeedingly high.

[Dellcara]

Interesting . So at the end of the day its still coming down to profiling your pedigree - knowing what you have and what you might get and use that knowledge to achieve the goals for that litter. Scanning is only part of the answer.

EXACTLY Steve.

[LizT]

Interesting . So at the end of the day its still coming down to profiling your pedigree - knowing what you have and what you might get and use that knowledge to achieve the goals for that litter. Scanning is only part of the answer.

Exactly Steve, it goes back to the breeder doing his homework and understanding the history of his breeding, just like the old days before the advent of medical science, which is a wonderful 'tool', but not the only answer to the problem.

[JESSIE]

Though scanning needs to be part of this

[JESSIE]

Jessie,just because you know how to use a lot of big words which you can express so eloquently(as do I-Dux of my school!!) it doesnt mean you know what the hell you are talking about.When you have been a breeder for a few years,then maybe you can express your opinion .

NO ONE is denying health problems that cavs have,but testing alone will NOT guarantee the problem can be obliterated,that is what Jed and Dellcara are trying to get across to the people who are not breeders themselves.

If testing alone were all that was necessary to eliminate diseases,HD as an example wouldnt be expressed in a dog that is bred from parents,grandparents etc that are all tested.0:0 to 0:0 doesnt guarantee a pup wont one day be affected.

Sometimes,a breeder of many years experience that knows their lines inside out and back to front,keeps track of health in the puppies they breed,are as ethical as they come(JED )are of more use to a breed,and have more knowledge in their little finger,than most people have on this entire forum and you want them to stop breeding because they question the use of being told who to mate their dog to, to reduce(although from the results,1 in 4 pups would still be affected anyway)SM?

That shows how much you DONT know about dog breeding.No one except the puppy farmers would want to breed this breed anymore,and according to the vitriolic outbursts on here ,I dont blame them.Goodbye Cavalier King Charles Spaniels.

Perhaps informing you that I have been breeding cavies longer than Jed that I have been a member of this forum longer than Jed will give me the right of free speech without assumption working at every turn I am happy to be told which dog NOT to mate if only I could find ONE other than my own which has been scanned that could be used for breeding

[Dellcara]

if only I could find ONE other than my own which has been scanned that could be used for breeding

not sure I understand what you mean by the above?

[Are You Serious Jo]

Good luck cav people, you really need it Shame this thread can't disappear before it does more damage.