Questions For Owners Of Hd Dogs

[sandgrubber]

In my breed (Labrador) there is very strong pressure for hip and elbow testing . . . and Labs are often regarded as a breed particularly affected by HD (not supported by statistics). I ask this out of curiosity about how seriously HD scoring is taken in other breeds . . . also out of curiosity about the ability of radiography to predict whether a dog ends out suffering from HD.

[VizslaMomma]

My replies are for Vizslas.

All of our dogs, including the bitches were tested for HD.

Scores were low for all of them.

The older dogs spent time in both the USA & the UK when they were young. It was preferable to have them tested for the few litters produced.

Not requried for registration. More owners are having their dogs scored, especially overseas. We are becoming more serious in Australia as regards HD and 'proper' breeding practices.

Maybe for part 2, you could ask if HD is done by breeders at their discretion ( or similar).

Puppy is not old enough yet. If he manages to get his Championship points, he too will be scored.

:D

Edited January 20, 2015 by VizslaMomma

[Staffyluv]

Zig is a rescue (staffy cross, although more amstaff sized at 25kg).

We only did the x-rays because he kept coming up lame.

He wasn't scored but at just 3 years old, he has quite significant wear on his right hip joint.

You can also see on the x-ray how the ball doesn't sit in the joint right at all. The left one has minimal wear and doesn't really appear to be an issue.

We see a chiro monthly and this has made a big difference to how he moves over all.

He also swims at home in our above ground pool. Apart from that, I just let him do most things other dogs do (although I try to limit the jumping).

I think it should be mandatory to health test breeding dogs but there is no way to police that in BYBs - as I tend to rescue, it is always going to be something that I might get caught with.

[The Spotted Devil]

Field bred ESS - not particularly common and there's not a lot of data.

I have hip/elbow scored Em because the technology is available. She compares admirably with her relatives and is well below breed average (mostly show ESS).

The current thoughts I'm getting from the veterinary community is that it is good at predicting whether an individual dog will get HD but pretty average at predicting whether that likelihood will be inherited.

[bianca.a]

Not sure if this is what you are after but my male (GSD) was bred from hip scored (and every other test available) dogs and at 10 months he was diagnosed with severe HD. One specialist I saw who does pennhip scoring rated Coopers hip at 80/90. SO anywhoo Coop has had bilateral total hip replacements before age 3.

[YippeeGirl]

We have three German Shepherds so obviously are familiar with HD. Our male is a pet and has never been x-rayed but we suspect he has HD of some grade. Our two girls are/were show dogs so were both x-rayed.

I'm not the one who does the showing but I think you have to pass the hip and elbow x-rays to be able to pass breed survey, which means you can be awarded an excellent in the open classes at speciality shows. Our youngest got hers done at around twelve months and very surprisingly failed. We showed her up until she would have been in open class and then retired her. I know of a few other dogs she used to show against that also failed either their hips or elbows.

I do wonder when people don't turn their x-rays in for scoring because they know their dogs will fail, does this have an affect on the numbers? Like does it sort of disguise just how prevalent this disease is in particular breeds such as German Shepherds? A lot of pet dogs are never checked unless they show lameness or other symptoms. So when you look at the numbers/percentages they produce for how many dogs in a specific breed are affected by dysplasia, is this really a true figure?

Edited January 21, 2015 by YippeeGirl

[Airedaler]

There are many problems with declaring a dog has HD. Out of a score of 53:53 what do you consider HD affected. Strictly speaking my dog with a score of 1:2 has HD as does a dog of significantly worse scores.

IMO there are flaws with the whole system.

Some of which are - different readers/scorers = different results. We know this because the same x-rays have been sent to different scorers and come back with quite different scores.

Environmental factors - we know that young dogs that are over exercised, jump, kept on slippery surfaces and so on are more likely to be effected.

Again, IMO if x-rays are done it should be mandatory to score them as is with PennHip. A local Vet looking at the x-rays and declaring HD may well be accurate, particularly in obvious cases BUT it does nothing to help determine what is an accurate breed average. I would like to see mandatory scoring and a registry of those scores for every breed.

I know of dogs whose sire and dam had scores of 0:0 and litter mates of each had very low scores for the breed but some of the progeny (in pet homes) had less than satisfactory scores. Environmental factors?

We have been x-raying for HD for over 30 years and yet in many breeds there has not really been any drastic reduction in the prevalence of the condition. In some cases this may be because breeders ignore those scores when they are less than satisfactory and continue to breed from them but I don't think that is the case in the majority of cases - at least in my breed.

What does a breed average really mean? In Australia the breed average for Airedales is just under 13, so I'm told but in the UK it is closer to 17. Does that mean a good dog in UK should not be bred from in Australia?

Years ago one of my Vets and I were discussing the HD situation and his comment to me was that as a breeding criteria he would put HD as 4th on the list. 1st was temperament, 2nd heart and I've forgotten what the third one was.

I've not done the poll because I don't have a dog that suffers from HD.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Airedaler

[sandgrubber]

I've not done the poll because I don't have a dog that suffers from HD.

I didn't do the poll either because, though I have a 5 yr old who has HD based on radiographs, shows absolutely no clinical signs. I have known other such dogs. The whole problematique is dicey. Bad hips from clear parents, pretty common. Radiographically bad but clinically no problem, pretty common. Breed statistics are biased. Testing isn't uniform. Environment, accidents, and genetics can all affect outcomes.

I wish this whole mess were clearer! In my breed, I'm happy to test and that testing is required to register pups . .. but I fear that the strong pressure to use only very low scores is warping breeding practices away from dogs with some radiographic imperfections though no health problems, and great temperament/working ability/conformation. It's so much easier to use a number than subjective statements . . . and so easy for numbers to take over the selection process. As it is, people will shy away from, say, a dog with 6:8 scores . . . though the same dog, scored by a different evaluator or using a different set of Xrays, might have been a 3:2 . . . even if a dog with 6:8 scores is unlikely to show any but very mild clinical signs of HD.

p.s. a dog with a 2:1 hip score, technically speaking, has radiographic HD, but is very unlikely to suffer from clinical HD

Edited January 23, 2015 by sandgrubber