Desexing My Pup

[Willem]

Personally every time my bitches come into season I am tempted to desex my male dog (but alas I show him) because he loses the plot. I keep them as separated as humanly possible, exercised separately, male dog goes to work with husband (on the farm) for the day & he's in his crate in the house while I exercise the bitches outside.

He's a whiny hormonal mess. How is that better than not being a slave to hormones?

Note - he's still well behaved and will do what he's told, but he gets a really crazy look in his eye & can't sit still/relax

if he is one of the unlucky ones that get an early cancer due to de-sexing or joint and ligament problems he won't be relaxed either.

Our family has always had male dogs and all have been desexed. To be honest they have all passed in old age and none of them have had cancer as you state Willem. Me personally, would always have my dogs, either male or female desexed because, even though I buy them through registered breeders, have no desire to show or breed with them. The decision is ours as a family and I envisage this decision will continue

just to clarify this: I never have stated that all dogs that have been de-sexed will end up with cancer - however, based on recent studies there are strong hints that de-sexing will increase risk regarding cancer and ligament issues significantly.

[Willem]

And Willem please work on not assuming you know more than everyone on this forum. There are a lot of very experienced breeders, rescuers & vets on here, it would do you good to open yourself to learning instead of just forcing your opinion down people's throats.

it is totally up to you what you put down your throat, really, I don't give a damn - if you don't want to read what I publish here just put me on the ignore list, I'm absolutely happy with this.

[twodoggies2001]

And Willem please work on not assuming you know more than everyone on this forum. There are a lot of very experienced breeders, rescuers & vets on here, it would do you good to open yourself to learning instead of just forcing your opinion down people's throats.

it is totally up to you what you put down your throat, really, I don't give a damn - if you don't want to read what I publish here just put me on the ignore list, I'm absolutely happy with this.

Not nice :

[persephone]

Personally every time my bitches come into season I am tempted to desex my male dog (but alas I show him) because he loses the plot. I keep them as separated as humanly possible, exercised separately, male dog goes to work with husband (on the farm) for the day & he's in his crate in the house while I exercise the bitches outside.

He's a whiny hormonal mess. How is that better than not being a slave to hormones?

Note - he's still well behaved and will do what he's told, but he gets a really crazy look in his eye & can't sit still/relax

if he is one of the unlucky ones that get an early cancer due to de-sexing or joint and ligament problems he won't be relaxed either.

Our family has always had male dogs and all have been desexed. To be honest they have all passed in old age and none of them have had cancer as you state Willem. Me personally, would always have my dogs, either male or female desexed because, even though I buy them through registered breeders, have no desire to show or breed with them. The decision is ours as a family and I envisage this decision will continue

My last 4 male dogs were all castrated -

None had cancer

two lived into old age , two had catastrophic health emergencies and were PTS.

All were VERY active - and one only had a luxating patella - due to an injury sustained as a youngster . It was surgically fixed, and he never had a relapse.

I have had pet bitches who were speyed ..these all lived into old age with no cancer or joint problems

Willem - can you show us what cancers and when desexed dogs get ?

[Willem]

And Willem please work on not assuming you know more than everyone on this forum. There are a lot of very experienced breeders, rescuers & vets on here, it would do you good to open yourself to learning instead of just forcing your opinion down people's throats.

it is totally up to you what you put down your throat, really, I don't give a damn - if you don't want to read what I publish here just put me on the ignore list, I'm absolutely happy with this.

Not nice :

the only thing I do here is providing / sharing information - it is totally, absolutely totally up to everyone what he / she takes from it, and whether they think the information in the links I provide have some merits or not. Others are keen to claim the opposite and contradict my comments heavily, however, they are very reluctant to come up with something substantial....and that's ok too. I don't 'force' anyone to believe what I share here - everyone is entitled to his / her own opinion. If the questions I ask here, or the information I provide here, are inconvenient for some readers, they don't have to read it, they can even put me on their 'Ignore List' and that's absolutely fine with me.

[twodoggies2001]

And Willem please work on not assuming you know more than everyone on this forum. There are a lot of very experienced breeders, rescuers & vets on here, it would do you good to open yourself to learning instead of just forcing your opinion down people's throats.

it is totally up to you what you put down your throat, really, I don't give a damn - if you don't want to read what I publish here just put me on the ignore list, I'm absolutely happy with this.

Not nice :

the only thing I do here is providing / sharing information - it is totally, absolutely totally up to everyone what he / she takes from it, and whether they think the information in the links I provide have some merits or not. Others are keen to claim the opposite and contradict my comments heavily, however, they are very reluctant to come up with something substantial....and that's ok too. I don't 'force' anyone to believe what I share here - everyone is entitled to his / her own opinion. If the questions I ask here, or the information I provide here, are inconvenient for some readers, they don't have to read it, they can even put me on their 'Ignore List' and that's absolutely fine with me.

It's the aggressive and rude way you reply to posters. Your knowledge may have merit but try to be nice. :)

[Willem]

Personally every time my bitches come into season I am tempted to desex my male dog (but alas I show him) because he loses the plot. I keep them as separated as humanly possible, exercised separately, male dog goes to work with husband (on the farm) for the day & he's in his crate in the house while I exercise the bitches outside.

He's a whiny hormonal mess. How is that better than not being a slave to hormones?

Note - he's still well behaved and will do what he's told, but he gets a really crazy look in his eye & can't sit still/relax

if he is one of the unlucky ones that get an early cancer due to de-sexing or joint and ligament problems he won't be relaxed either.

Our family has always had male dogs and all have been desexed. To be honest they have all passed in old age and none of them have had cancer as you state Willem. Me personally, would always have my dogs, either male or female desexed because, even though I buy them through registered breeders, have no desire to show or breed with them. The decision is ours as a family and I envisage this decision will continue

My last 4 male dogs were all castrated -

None had cancer

two lived into old age , two had catastrophic health emergencies and were PTS.

All were VERY active - and one only had a luxating patella - due to an injury sustained as a youngster . It was surgically fixed, and he never had a relapse.

I have had pet bitches who were speyed ..these all lived into old age with no cancer or joint problems

Willem - can you show us what cancers and when desexed dogs get ?

I provided 5 links to scientific studies in my post #80 - I'm very, very reluctant to summarize the findings of them on my own as everyone will tell me then, that these findings would be just my opinion. All these studies are scientific based, not blogs or opinions from an individual. And all the studies come to the conclusion that early de-sexing will increase health risks (it is not only cancer) and ligament and joint issues. I will keep my dog entire - would this be a guarantee that she will never has to cope with one of the issues? ...of course not. Nor is it scientific evidence if someone had 10 de-sexed dogs and none of them had cancer or ligament issues. I know people who lived nearly for 100 years despite that they have been heavy smokers - individual cases don't proof anything.

Conversely, regarding to the 5 studies I listed, no one here came up with a recent study that would a) contradict the finding of the mentioned studies, and b) verify that de-sexing has no negative health effects.

But again, everyone is entitled to take from this information provided in this thread whatever he / she wants.

Eta: and I'm still waiting for a reasonable answer why we classify cropping of ears and docking of tails as animal cruelty, but at the same time we have no scruple to justify cutting a dog's ball off or remove the uterus following our desire for more convenience. We even accept it as a measure to manipulate the hormones to gain an advantage in a sporting competition like agility - and at the same time people wonder about the dodgy trainings methods adopted by some parts of the greyhound industry.

Edited October 19, 2016 by Willem

[Willem]

quote:

“… potential health problems associated with spaying and neutering have also been identified, including an increased risk of prostatic cancer in males; increased risks of bone cancer and hip dysplasia in large-breed dogs associated with sterilization before maturity; and increased incidences of obesity, diabetes, urinary tract infections, urinary incontinence, and hypothyroidism.” ...

and this quote is from...?...supersize, surprise ...http://www.dogsports.com/rethinkingspayneuter.html

[ish]

[And all the studies come to the conclusion that early de-sexing will increase health risks (it is not only cancer) and ligament and joint issues.

But we aren't talking about EARLY desexing, we are talking about desexing at maturity

[angelsun]

and I'm still waiting for a reasonable answer why we classify cropping of ears and docking of tails as animal cruelty, but at the same time we have no scruple to justify cutting a dog's ball off or remove the uterus following our desire for more convenience.

The reasonable answer is that many of us do not believe that cropping ears and docking tails is cruelty. The politicians and ARF deemed this to be the case. Castration of male animals has never been deemed cruel regardless of the methods used in recent past history. The arguement is not apples and apples but more of an ability to have a choice. The choice to crop and dock has been removed from us here in Australia. There are many people that do not desex their animals for various reasons, few if any are because they believe the proceedure to be cruel. This is their right to have the choice to desex or not. They are still fortunate to have that ability of choice with a proceedure.

Castration of animals has occured for many generations for many reasons. None of which are for cosmetic enhancements like docking and cropping. In some cases however it has been proven (in the horse racing game) that gelding a non winning stallion can improve their ability on the track. Cropping ears has not improved my breeds ability to hunt. Castrating a years male lambs becomes genetically acceptable so to allow them to graze without risk of impregnating their own mothers and degrading the breeding stock over time. This means economic strength on various levels. Not to castrate could in effect over time, result in a high economic loss for the stockman. Castrating dogs that do not or will not meet the breed standard does a similar thing, in that an undesirable trait that has occured will not be reintroduced to the gene pool. This can benefit a given breed where a catastrophic genetic abnormality could threaten the breed entirely.

The sterilization of female animals is not as common place in the history of animal husbandry due to the fact it is a more complex proceedure. Once again, the decision to desex a female is a choice that some owners make for various reasons. Yes, desexing is more convenient from the average pet owners perspective. No messy heat cycles, no chances of unwanted litters which can jeopardise the life of the bitch. Yes the veterinarian practices consider the spey of a bitch a more painful and longer healing proceedure than a castration of a male, however they do administer pain relief unlike a mere thirty years ago where you picked up your dog/bitch from the vet without antibiotics or pain relief and they told you to take the stitches out in a week.

As for the studies mentioned. It's easy to compile figures based either on single breeds or voluntary submissions and claim they are accurate. I could also pull a series of figures together from my breed database stating that red versions of my breed are more aggressive and are euthanised more than the black and tan version. I could cite numbers from a database of over 6000 dogs and documented proof of euthanasia and vet reports as to why they were put down. Back that up with various stats connected to the dogs in question that come from complaints of aggression at public events such as show or trials to concur that red ones are in fact statistically more likely to be aggressive and be euthanised because of it at an earlier age than the other colour. BUT......this is the big one......if I selectively pulled these results out and put them in the right order or pie chart, I could make anyone believe them. (shall we remember the unproven paper stating innoculation of children meant they would become autistic) The reality of the data I mention, is that the RED dogs in question, came out of specific pedigrees, and there were black ones with the same issues.....BUT.....the specific kennel preferred the red colour and as such bred far more of that colour than the blacks so the reds simply outnumbered them.......and the aggression becomes linked more and correctly so, to the pedigree and not to the colour. Colour becomes an interesting secondary marker. It's easy to manipulate data to take one side of an arguement over an other.

[Maddy]

Eta: and I'm still waiting for a reasonable answer why we classify cropping of ears and docking of tails as animal cruelty, but at the same time we have no scruple to justify cutting a dog's ball off or remove the uterus following our desire for more convenience. We even accept it as a measure to manipulate the hormones to gain an advantage in a sporting competition like agility - and at the same time people wonder about the dodgy trainings methods adopted by some parts of the greyhound industry.

Can't you honestly not understand how thoroughly wrong and idiotic this example is? Desexing a dog is not at all like strapping a live animal to a lure arm and allowing dogs to tear it to pieces. It also cannot be compared with doping dogs with amphetamines to the point of heart failure. Singling out the tiny minority of people who desex for "performance" reasons is absurd in itself; pretending that desexing is somehow analogous to serious animal cruelty demonstrates exactly how little you actually understand. The vast majority desex in an attempt to be responsible owners. They are not lazy, they are not stupid, they are trying to do the right thing. Climb down off your more-natural-than-thou high horse (which apparently eats kibble when convenient to you) and go back to collecting roadkill or something.

[sheena]

Willem you are being very rude. Just in case you didn't know.

why?...because I call a spade a spade?

Not at all; you come in boots and all and are so forceful with your answers that, I for one, skip over your posts as they are frequently worded to be hurtful and humiliating

A pity as you may have posted some pertinent, interesting info which I would miss out on when I skip your posts; because of the likelihood of feeling bullied and stupid.

Yes I agree ...I find him a "bit" Extreme & don't bother reading his post any more. I agree with the others that the best time to desex is after the dog has matured. Also, if you intend to compete in any of the ANKC disciplines then your dog will need to be desexed unless you have papers from the breeder to show it is registered on either mains or limited.

[DogsAndTheMob]

I wish it was that simple, Willem. Every time this subject comes up for discussion, I use Google Scholar to browse through the literature, but the evidence on both sides seems to be weak and inconsistent.

There is a hierarchy of evidence for medical and veterinary research. Meta-analyses and reviews based on multiple, well-designed randomised controlled trials are best, followed by well-designed randomised controlled trials. I have seen very few randomised controlled trials of desexing -- not surprisingly, as I doubt if many owners would be willing to leave their dog at the vets, unsure whether they would be collecting an entire pet or a neutered one at the end of the day. Most research on desexing uses epidemiological or retrospective cohort methodologies, which are generally regarded as providing fair to poor evidence.

In addition, you need to consider bias, confounding and causality. As an example of confounding, my urban colleagues' pets are usually desexed, my rural neighbours' working dogs are usually entire, and I'm not sure about the hunting dogs I see on Friday nights, heading up the highway in cages on the backs of utilities. I'm sure the owners of these three groups manage their dogs' health and behaviour quite differently, and studies that fail to account for such demographic differences (i.e. many studies) are likely to produce spurious results.

The studies you linked to are interesting, but here are just a couple of comments:

There are questions about causality in the Golden Retriever study; were dogs lame because they were desexed, or desexed because they were showing signs of lameness? The study also had an interesting way of allocating months of health to entire vs neutered status - see point 4 in Dr Barker's comments.

Despite the statistically significant link between some cancers and desexing found in the Visla study, the study was unable to demonstrate any affect of neutering on longevity. This would suggest either that the cancers were insignificant in their affects on the population (perhaps due to low incidence) or that other risks flowed in the opposite direction. It's worth noting, also, that this study does not advise against desexing, it merely suggests that veterinarians should discuss possible risks with their clients.

Overall, I have not found anything in the literature on which I would base a decision, either way. My next female dog will probably be desexed, because neither seclusion during oestrus nor false-pregnancy after oestrus seems to be a happy experience. In addition, I adopted an aged dog with pyometrium, whose health ruled out desexing, and I don't want to see another bitch endure that.

My feelings about desexing my male dogs are more ambivalent; I've owned entire dogs that have lived to extreme old age without problems, and those that I've had desexed have seemed to have been in pain for a week or more afterwards -- more so than the bitches, actually. I'll probably opt for late-life desexing to avoid prostate cancer; I don't see the logic in desexing at six months to avoid a problem that might occur many years later.

Edited to add: My observations as a one-time dog training instructor suggest that dog-to-dog aggression can be a problem in some entire male dogs. I would opt for de-sexing (and have done so in the past) if I had any concerns that my teenage male pup was inclined to be be sharp or bossy towards other dogs. I'd do so sooner rather than later; you can't put the genie back into the bottle.

Edited October 22, 2016 by DogsAndTheMob

[persephone]

There seems to have been a cleanup ....