Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's my two cents...we took what was basically a strong healthy animal and bred it into a genetic mess. BNull terriers have OCD problems, Shar Pei's have chronic skin problems because of their wrinkles. German shepherds can develop degenerative myelopathy (MS for dogs). Other purebred can develop epilepsy, hip displasia, wobblers syndrome. The larghe breeds and deep chested breeds can get bloat, a fatal twisting of the stomache and intestines. The daschund has spinal problems because of it's length, hounds get chrojnic ear infections. Need I go on? This experiment in genetic engineering has all but ruined the canine.
I much prefer a natural dog or a mutt. They tend to be healthier overall with less genetic diseases and defects.
And mutts never have illnesses, genetic or other? I guess that the mixed breed who belonged to a neighbor of mine several years ago didn't really have Addison's Disease. Or the Puggle I used to see in the dog park didn't have CherryEye. And my last male dog, a Springer, didn't live until 2 weeks short of his 16th birthday without any genetic diseases - he did get "wobblers", or vestibular disorder, at age 13, and recovered from it. And his half-sister, who I also owned, lived until age 14.5. Epilepsy is a problem in many breeds; but so far as I know, no one has discovered the mode of inheritance. And mutts can get hip dysplasia.
In my opinion, no dog, purebred or mixed-breed, is immune to genetic diseases. Their health depends on their genes, and of course nutrition and care, and often just luck.
I am not saying that purebreds are healthier than mixed-breeds, or vice versa. But there are many purebreds who have healthy and long lives. Just because a dog is a purebred does not mean the dog will automatically have a range of diseases. Some breeds are healthier than others, but I've known a Bulldog who lived to 11; also a pair of intact male Irish Wolfhounds who also made it to 11 (that breed doesn't usually live that long). If you don't want the possibility of back problems, don't get a Dachshund or Basset or Corgi. (that leaves you hundreds of breeds) I grew up with an Irish Setter, a breed supposedly prone to Bloat, and he never had that condition. I wouldn't recommend a Shar Pei to anyone except someone with deep pockets; due to those skin problems, but most purebreds don't have it that bad. You can always try to research the less popular breeds; though they will often take longer to get than a Lab or a Beagle.
And mutts never have illnesses, genetic or other? I guess that the mixed breed who belonged to a neighbor of mine several years ago didn't really have Addison's Disease. Or the Puggle I used to see in the dog park didn't have CherryEye. And my last male dog, a Springer, didn't live until 2 weeks short of his 16th birthday without any genetic diseases - he did get "wobblers", or vestibular disorder, at age 13, and recovered from it. And his half-sister, who I also owned, lived until age 14.5. Epilepsy is a problem in many breeds; but so far as I know, no one has discovered the mode of inheritance. And mutts can get hip dysplasia.
In my opinion, no dog, purebred or mixed-breed, is immune to genetic diseases. Their health depends on their genes, and of course nutrition and care, and often just luck.
I am not saying that purebreds are healthier than mixed-breeds, or vice versa. But there are many purebreds who have healthy and long lives. Just because a dog is a purebred does not mean the dog will automatically have a range of diseases. Some breeds are healthier than others, but I've known a Bulldog who lived to 11; also a pair of intact male Irish Wolfhounds who also made it to 11 (that breed doesn't usually live that long). If you don't want the possibility of back problems, don't get a Dachshund or Basset or Corgi. (that leaves you hundreds of breeds) I grew up with an Irish Setter, a breed supposedly prone to Bloat, and he never had that condition. I wouldn't recommend a Shar Pei to anyone except someone with deep pockets; due to those skin problems, but most purebreds don't have it that bad. You can always try to research the less popular breeds; though they will often take longer to get than a Lab or a Beagle.
I wouldn't recommend a Shar Pei from most sources either - they are very unique, wonderful dogs, however, there are a lot of health issues in most lines in the US (Shar Pei/Lab mix didn't preclude me from a host of Shar Pei issues with my "Mutt" Tuck). I have heard it said (tongue in cheek) the key to a successful veterinary practice is to ensure there is a Shar Pei breeder in the vicinity!
I have a breeder who I will get my Shar Pei from when Tuck eventually passes. Her dogs average 13 YO life spans, and have no history of FSF or skin issues (although with the Shar Pei genetics it is always possible) - however, she is a very skilled breeder with a significant investment in line health histories. She breeds for health and temperament as her primary objective, conformation is a distant third consideration.
I know I will pay through the nose for the pup, because of her meticulously researched lines and healthy breeding practices. Even with the premium she charges, I don't think she makes much, if any, money on the dogs (very low volume operation, and she is pretty restrictive about who she will sell to) - more a labor of love for the breed.
It was inaccurate and not humorous to spread misinformation even if it's done in a funny way.
What is the point of this video. People should avoid pure breds (which are also in shelters) and adopt a mix which could end up as sick as any pure dog but they won't be expecting that if they but into this BS.
I don't know anyone who talks about pure breeds as if they are natural, we acknowledge them as being selectively bred by man for specific purposes and traits. With the exception of a few land race breeds that developed more by some natural selection and pressure.
90% of dog breeds were created in the last 100yrs? I don't know if I believe that. They should have given a source. It is true that as people had more money and time they were able to breed more dogs for companionship, looks, etc instead of working / necessity.
The Pug is very old breed as is the Pekingese and Shih Tzu so by trying to be funny they made themselves look ignorant. The Pug wasn't created in Britain. Companion breeds have actually existed a long time not just working breeds. Shar Pei are one of the older breeds too. Though many modern show dogs have been bred with excessive wrinkle and this is the problem with some breeds. The one in the video actually didn't appear to be over wrinkled. The Corgi is a working, herding breed that dates back to 1100s so it's not a new breed either nor was it created for simple amusement.
Certain breeds do have a high frequency of specific issues but pointing out those and ignoring the healthier breeds or the fact that mixes can suffer from genetic disease is biased and ignorant.
Bulldogs 100yrs ago were similar to what they look like today, so how does he man they are a healthy breed. Not to mention all their problems could be cured by out crossing?! Was he high when they made this. The crosses can end up end with the same diseases as the bulldogs and people have already created bulldog crosses which can have genetic health issues. He thinks bulldog crosses won't suffer from hip dysplasia a common polygenic disease found even when crossing high rate to low rate.
I don't agree with the end either, not only are pups not for everyone but getting a mutt pup isn't a guarantee to have a happy healthy dog.
Here's my two cents...we took what was basically a strong healthy animal and bred it into a genetic mess. BNull terriers have OCD problems, Shar Pei's have chronic skin problems because of their wrinkles. German shepherds can develop degenerative myelopathy (MS for dogs). Other purebred can develop epilepsy, hip displasia, wobblers syndrome. The larghe breeds and deep chested breeds can get bloat, a fatal twisting of the stomache and intestines. The daschund has spinal problems because of it's length, hounds get chrojnic ear infections. Need I go on? This experiment in genetic engineering has all but ruined the canine.
I much prefer a natural dog or a mutt. They tend to be healthier overall with less genetic diseases and defects.
I don't like what has happened with the modern Bull Terrier.
Not all Shar Pei have the skin issues.
A good GSD breeder will test their dogs for Degenerative Myelopathy and Hip Dysplasia; considering mixed breeds can suffer from both what is your point?
Mixed breeds suffer from epilepsy, hip dysplasia and wobblers. Dogs of any breed or mix can suffer from bloat it is just more commonly seen in deeper chested dogs. That would mean that the likelihood would also be higher for deep chested mixes too.
There are healthy breeds and good breeders who have health as a priority. Maybe people should research lines and find a good breeder if they want a pure bred you know instead of going to a byb getting a dog with epilepsy or bad hips. It's that simple.
"The researchers found that the prevalence of 13 of the 24 genetic disorders was approximately the same in purebred dogs as in their mixed-breed counterparts. Ten were found more frequently among purebred dogs, and one such disorder was more common in mixed-breeds.
The data also indicated that the more recently derived breeds or those breeds that shared a similar lineage were more susceptible to certain inherited disorders. For example, four of the top five breeds affected with elbow dysplasia were the Bernese mountain dog, Newfoundland, mastiff and Rottweiler — all from the mastiff-like lineage. This suggests that these breeds share gene mutations for elbow dysplasia because they were descended from a common ancestor."
I've worked professionally with dogs my entire life. People on the internet that say things like "purebreds are overbred" (whatever that means), or mutts live longer, are blowing hot air.
If you believe that, you must also believe that humans are purebred or inbred because we are absolutely riddled with disease that strikes both babies and adults. The only difference in purebred vs mutt is predictability.
My thousands of mixed breed clients came down with illnesses just as much or more than purebreds. Temperament issues are much worse in mixed breeds - of course, many are also wonderful.
Here is the real difference between mutts and purebreds: A mutt has no know genetic health background and temperaments are unpredictable from 1 dog to the next. A person may adopt a mutt and have no idea if it will outgrow their needs, have baggage from past lack of socialization, or an activity level or temperament that conflicts with their needs. The genetic health background and longevity of their ancestors is unknown, untested, and a gamble.
A purebred dog from a real, reputable breeder has a very predictable temperament due to selective breeding for 100s or thousands of years. It is a dog that can be responsibly chosen by a buyer taking into consideration their family dynamics and lifestyle, known breed characteristics, size, and temperaments. Certain health conditions in purebreds can be tracked more closely because they are purebred, you can buy a puppy that has generations of genetically health tested ancestors behind it that are clear of more common issues in the breed. Responsibly bred and tested k9s are much less likely to succumb to these illnesses due to ethical breeding. This is why you find genetic specialists, and dna health testing booths set up at 100s of dog shows around the country each year.
A mutt is a crap shoot.
There is nothing wrong with anyone who has a preference until you start belittling their owners, judging them, or trying to lay on some guilt trip because they don't choose the type of dog you prefer. It's really none of your business.
Here's my two cents...we took what was basically a strong healthy animal and bred it into a genetic mess. BNull terriers have OCD problems, Shar Pei's have chronic skin problems because of their wrinkles. German shepherds can develop degenerative myelopathy (MS for dogs). Other purebred can develop epilepsy, hip displasia, wobblers syndrome. The larghe breeds and deep chested breeds can get bloat, a fatal twisting of the stomache and intestines. The daschund has spinal problems because of it's length, hounds get chrojnic ear infections. Need I go on? This experiment in genetic engineering has all but ruined the canine.
I much prefer a natural dog or a mutt. They tend to be healthier overall with less genetic diseases and defects.
Unless the mutt descended from a long line of mutts...thus greatly diluting some of the genetic contributions of the original purebreds involved...genetically a mutt is is nothing more than a combination of the genes from each of it's purebred or multi-breed parents. So mutts can easily suffer from inherited health problems for all but the breed specific recessive traits since those require two copies of the gene, one from each parent. Recessive traits caused by genes common to the general canine population can be a problem in mutts.
For example, PRA (Progressive Retinal Atrophy) is autosomal dominant in Mastiffs and sex-linked in Samoyeds and Siberian Huskies. That means it only takes one copy of that gene to cause complete blindness in those breeds. That copy can come from anywhere in the mutt's background if he has any Mastiff or Sammy or Husky mixed in.
We can find statistics for heritable disease in purebreds since responsible breeders use that data to reduce the incidence of such disease in their breeding programs. The same is not true for the incidence of heritable disease in the mixed breed population...there is no data because nobody cares. There are few intentional responsible breeders of mixed breed dogs beyond dogs bred for flyball and working dogs bred for herding and other jobs where the dog's ability to work and to continue working is paramount. One might offer up Labradoodles and the like but those breeders do not qualify as responsible breeders in my book since they promote their dogs as non-shedding but produce many dogs that shed. To the dismay of their new owners who shelled out huge sums for their ideal dog. And understandably...it takes much more than throwing two dogs together to create a consistently reproducible trait. However, my point is that we know about diseases in purebred dogs whereas we don't know about them in mixed breed dogs. That doesn't mean they do not occur.
I completely agree that we have undeniably ruined an inexcusable number of breeds by selecting for extreme phenotypic traits. The unstable GSD sloping rear assembly in pursuit of the flashy flying trot for the show ring, disc problems in long-backed Doxies and Corgies, breathing problems in the brachycephalic breeds, fracture-prone bones in the Italian Greyhound and the fact that Bulldogs cannot deliver naturally due to their massive heads are but a few that come to mind.
I love my very natural purebreds of choice...that Australian Shepherd (more and more breeders are declining to dock tails now) and the Icelandic Sheepdog.
Unless the mutt descended from a long line of mutts...thus greatly diluting some of the genetic contributions of the original purebreds involved...genetically a mutt is is nothing more than a combination of the genes from each of it's purebred or multi-breed parents. So mutts can easily suffer from inherited health problems for all but the breed specific recessive traits since those require two copies of the gene, one from each parent. Recessive traits caused by genes common to the general canine population can be a problem in mutts.
For example, PRA (Progressive Retinal Atrophy) is autosomal dominant in Mastiffs and sex-linked in Samoyeds and Siberian Huskies. That means it only takes one copy of that gene to cause complete blindness in those breeds. That copy can come from anywhere in the mutt's background if he has any Mastiff or Sammy or Husky mixed in.
We can find statistics for heritable disease in purebreds since responsible breeders use that data to reduce the incidence of such disease in their breeding programs. The same is not true for the incidence of heritable disease in the mixed breed population...there is no data because nobody cares. There are few intentional responsible breeders of mixed breed dogs beyond dogs bred for flyball and working dogs bred for herding and other jobs where the dog's ability to work and to continue working is paramount. One might offer up Labradoodles and the like but those breeders do not qualify as responsible breeders in my book since they promote their dogs as non-shedding but produce many dogs that shed. To the dismay of their new owners who shelled out huge sums for their ideal dog. And understandably...it takes much more than throwing two dogs together to create a consistently reproducible trait. However, my point is that we know about diseases in purebred dogs whereas we don't know about them in mixed breed dogs. That doesn't mean they do not occur.
I completely agree that we have undeniably ruined an inexcusable number of breeds by selecting for extreme phenotypic traits. The unstable GSD sloping rear assembly in pursuit of the flashy flying trot for the show ring, disc problems in long-backed Doxies and Corgies, breathing problems in the brachycephalic breeds, fracture-prone bones in the Italian Greyhound and the fact that Bulldogs cannot deliver naturally due to their massive heads are but a few that come to mind.
I love my very natural purebreds of choice...that Australian Shepherd (more and more breeders are declining to dock tails now) and the Icelandic Sheepdog.
I knew I was going to cause a firestorm when I made that statement, and the example of the english bulldog, and others you gave only serves to strengthen my stance on the subject. Groups like the AKC and others while touting they work to enhance breeds, are actually ruining them by their "standards". No, not all purebreds are prone to genetic disorders, and, no, not all mutts are exempt from them. But people will go out of their way to drop $1,500.00 or more into a purebred pup from a pet store or disreputable breeder and completely ignore what's already out there in rescue groups and animal shelters. There are millions of dogs put down every year because of human ignorance.
We as dog owners need to step up and demand better from the breeders and stop buying these problem prone dogs until the so-called "standards" are changed for the benefit of the dog. There is absolutely no excuse for breeding the English bulldog into the mess that it is. The same goes for the other dogs who suffer because somebody thought a thinner body or longer legs would look better, never mind the problems it caused, or a longer doxie or corgi is cuter, never mind the disc problems.
The English bulldog used to have a muzzle, and it was bred out of the breed. The Doberman was bred with the greyhound to "refine" the breed, and it resulted in cranial pressure so bad it drove some dogs mad with pain. The chinese crested, who cannot go out into the sun because it has no protective coat, herding dogs who are dumped because and uneducated owner can't understand why it nips at people's heels. When the movie 101 dalmations came out, people rushed to get dalmations, who can be born deaf (genetics again) and are not always the sweet liittle muffins they were on the screen. See where I'm going with this? Mankind is the dog's worst enemy. we created the dog, and we treat it like crap.
There was a line from Jurassic park "Just because we can doesn't mean we should." We bred hunting dogs to be independent, yet people who have no business owning them often give them up because they say they're untrainable. We breed terriers to be vermin hunters, yet we pitch fits when they dig up the yard. We breed these traits into the dogs, then lament when they exhibit what was bred into them. This is why I start to twitch when people go for a purebred dog and leave the mutt because it isn't as pretty.
As for the docked ears and tail, I honestly think that is an abomination. There is absolutely no medical reason to do this to a dog. I have a mini fox terrier pup I rescued, and I will no no way dock her tail. There is no reason for it, why do we do it? One word: asthetics.
...and don't get me started about cats. WTH is up with the hairless sphinx?
I knew I was going to cause a firestorm when I made that statement, and the example of the english bulldog, and others you gave only serves to strengthen my stance on the subject. Groups like the AKC and others while touting they work to enhance breeds, are actually ruining them by their "standards". No, not all purebreds are prone to genetic disorders, and, no, not all mutts are exempt from them. But people will go out of their way to drop $1,500.00 or more into a purebred pup from a pet store or disreputable breeder and completely ignore what's already out there in rescue groups and animal shelters. There are millions of dogs put down every year because of human ignorance.
We as dog owners need to step up and demand better from the breeders and stop buying these problem prone dogs until the so-called "standards" are changed for the benefit of the dog. There is absolutely no excuse for breeding the English bulldog into the mess that it is. The same goes for the other dogs who suffer because somebody thought a thinner body or longer legs would look better, never mind the problems it caused, or a longer doxie or corgi is cuter, never mind the disc problems.
The English bulldog used to have a muzzle, and it was bred out of the breed. The Doberman was bred with the greyhound to "refine" the breed, and it resulted in cranial pressure so bad it drove some dogs mad with pain. The chinese crested, who cannot go out into the sun because it has no protective coat, herding dogs who are dumped because and uneducated owner can't understand why it nips at people's heels. When the movie 101 dalmations came out, people rushed to get dalmations, who can be born deaf (genetics again) and are not always the sweet liittle muffins they were on the screen. See where I'm going with this? Mankind is the dog's worst enemy. we created the dog, and we treat it like crap.
There was a line from Jurassic park "Just because we can doesn't mean we should." We bred hunting dogs to be independent, yet people who have no business owning them often give them up because they say they're untrainable. We breed terriers to be vermin hunters, yet we pitch fits when they dig up the yard. We breed these traits into the dogs, then lament when they exhibit what was bred into them. This is why I start to twitch when people go for a purebred dog and leave the mutt because it isn't as pretty.
As for the docked ears and tail, I honestly think that is an abomination. There is absolutely no medical reason to do this to a dog. I have a mini fox terrier pup I rescued, and I will no no way dock her tail. There is no reason for it, why do we do it? One word: asthetics.
...and don't get me started about cats. WTH is up with the hairless sphinx?
I agree with pretty much everything you said but would like to clarify a few things.
A breed standard is the "Bible" of breeding and conformation showing. The purpose is to preserve each breed's unique characteristics, not to produce the most natural, healthy and structurally balanced dog. Changing a standard rarely occurs and it will never be influenced by what the general public desires or buys. The process takes many, many months of accumulating input from specialty breed club members, assessing that input, formulating changes then voting on the changes by the entire breed club membership and then often back again to the drawing table where the entire process repeats itself. All this done by volunteers with full time jobs, families and other responsibilities. The people directly involved in this process are primarily dedicated responsible breeders who breed few litters and place most of their pups in show, breeding and performance homes. So they are not influenced by the general public's puppy buying habits.
It is not the AKC that writes the breed standards. It is the specialty club (national breed club) for each breed. The AKC merely approves the standard based on the format, clarity and terminology used in order to ensure a document that is easy to read and use. http://images.akc.org/pdf/breeds/gui..._standards.pdf
Of course you wouldn't dock your rescue pup's tail! Docking is done when the pups are 2-4 days old and no reputable vet would do it any later. But I understand the intent of your comment and agree with it.
Fun factoid: Just because you see a dog of a breed known for docked tails with a very short tail does not always mean it was docked. For example, some OES and Aussies are born with very short tails. About 50% of the lines in Aussies produce dogs with natural bob tails (NBT) and about 20% of Aussies are born with NBTs.
I knew I was going to cause a firestorm when I made that statement, and the example of the english bulldog, and others you gave only serves to strengthen my stance on the subject. Groups like the AKC and others while touting they work to enhance breeds, are actually ruining them by their "standards". No, not all purebreds are prone to genetic disorders, and, no, not all mutts are exempt from them. But people will go out of their way to drop $1,500.00 or more into a purebred pup from a pet store or disreputable breeder and completely ignore what's already out there in rescue groups and animal shelters. There are millions of dogs put down every year because of human ignorance.
People like that and the breeders are a huge part of the problem. I wouldn't say that it's related to the topic of health. I always try to encourage people who only want a pet and don't care to go to a reputable breeder to adopt. If you are going to a byb it's the same thing. So save a life instead of supporting a breeder.
People also spend that kind of money on mixes. I seem some one bragging about their unique "Morkie" they paid $1,800 for. There are currently Labradoodle in my paper $800 and an online ad for $2,000.
The issue isn't really about pure beds it's about irresponsible breeding.
Quote:
We as dog owners need to step up and demand better from the breeders and stop buying these problem prone dogs until the so-called "standards" are changed for the benefit of the dog. There is absolutely no excuse for breeding the English bulldog into the mess that it is. The same goes for the other dogs who suffer because somebody thought a thinner body or longer legs would look better, never mind the problems it caused, or a longer doxie or corgi is cuter, never mind the disc problems.
The English bulldog used to have a muzzle, and it was bred out of the breed. The Doberman was bred with the greyhound to "refine" the breed, and it resulted in cranial pressure so bad it drove some dogs mad with pain. The chinese crested, who cannot go out into the sun because it has no protective coat, herding dogs who are dumped because and uneducated owner can't understand why it nips at people's heels. When the movie 101 dalmations came out, people rushed to get dalmations, who can be born deaf (genetics again) and are not always the sweet liittle muffins they were on the screen. See where I'm going with this? Mankind is the dog's worst enemy. we created the dog, and we treat it like crap.
There was a line from Jurassic park "Just because we can doesn't mean we should." We bred hunting dogs to be independent, yet people who have no business owning them often give them up because they say they're untrainable. We breed terriers to be vermin hunters, yet we pitch fits when they dig up the yard. We breed these traits into the dogs, then lament when they exhibit what was bred into them. This is why I start to twitch when people go for a purebred dog and leave the mutt because it isn't as pretty.
That's an irresponsible breeder and owner problem. It doesn't really come down to responsible breeder issue. Also things like THIS video and people who say stuff like it you know it's just arbitrary when breed can matter. Not every breed works for everyone so breed can matter. If you get a dog that fits your life more then it will be less stress. Problem is most people don't research breeds they are also not willing to put the time in with their dog. Like they think it's born fully trained or something. So they get rid of the dog when it's now a problem. Responsible owners don't do this. When it comes to responsible breeding side they make sure you know the breed and if it still doesn't work out they take the dog back not let him/her get dumped in a shelter.
Quote:
As for the docked ears and tail, I honestly think that is an abomination. There is absolutely no medical reason to do this to a dog. I have a mini fox terrier pup I rescued, and I will no no way dock her tail. There is no reason for it, why do we do it? One word: asthetics.
Even if it's far from the most common reason some times it's done for medical reasons.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
