PDA

View Full Version : Pedigree Dogs Exposed: Three Years On



Margaret C
25th February 2012, 03:33 PM
PDE was shown in August 2008 and had an extraordinary impact. The BBC dropped coverage of Crufts, the Kennel Club amended 78 breed standards and three in depth reports ( one jointly commissioned by the KC and Dogs Trust ) agreed that there were grave welfare issues in the way pedigree dogs are bred and a Dog Advisory Council was set up.

Many Cavalier owners, some of them members of this forum, saw the film and realised for the first time that the quirky traits they saw in their pet were symptoms of a painful inherited neurological condition called Syringomyelia.

I appeared in PDE1 and Jemima Harrison asked to film another interview with me last year. According to an article in 'Radio Times' Cavaliers will be featured again in PDE2.
I do not know if any of my interview will make it to the film ( Jemima will have hours and hours of interviews to choose from ) but I do rather hope so.

For those that have not seen PDE1, it is on YouTube in 6 parts. Cavaliers appear in two parts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pm17MesMFRc and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4vyn14kIt4&feature=related

PDE2 is being shown on Monday, on BBC4, at 9pm.

RodRussell
25th February 2012, 07:35 PM
Well, of course, we all will just have to wait and see (and I'll have to wait a bit longer than those of you in the UK, as even the on-line version is not available outside of the UK).

I focused primarily on the cavalier when watching PDE, and I found no fiction in those segments. PDE interviewed Simon Swift, the veterinary cardiologist for the UK’s Cavalier Club, who spoke only the facts about mitral valve disease (MVD), as did Clare Rusbridge, the UK’s leading veterinary neurologist on syringomyelia (CM/SM). The video of the little cavalier thrashing about, howling in agonizing pain from syringomyelia, was not fiction and no, her medications had not been withheld before that video was made. Maybe the interview with the CKCS breeder, holding the champion in her arms, was a gotcha moment, but that is what happens on a lot of television documentaries.

A recently expressed criticism of Jemima Harrison has been that she should devote her attention to other dog issues, like exposing puppy farms. Some even claim that PDE has driven responsible CKCS breeders from the fancy, forcing the pet buyers into the arms of the puppy farmers. To me, if responsible breeders have packed it in, it is not because of PDE, but due to CM/SM and MVD. Yes, PDE highlighted the existence of CM/SM and MVD and the agonizing pain and/or agonizing deaths which some affected dogs suffer. But, if PDE had an impact due to its CM/SM and MVD segments, it should have been to drive pet buyers away from the breed entirely, not away from the responsible breeders and into the arms of the puppy farmers.

While a lot has come to light about CM/SM since PDE debuted in 2008, most of what we have learned has had nothing to do with PDE; it as been due to neurological research. Over 50 neurological research articles about CM/SM in our breed have been published since PDE, and over 90 articles about MVD, and while they have served to educate us more and more about CM/SM and MVD, none of those studies have relied upon any information dug up by PDE. CM/SM and MVD research have been on a fast track for the past ten years, and PDE has had nothing to do about any of it (apart from possibly inducing charities to contribute funds to the research).

The overriding problem for the CKCS is that it suffers from two very widespread and extremely devastating genetic disorders, MVD and CM/SM, and if a television show happens to shed light upon them, then we all should be grateful and not hostilely dismissive.

Another criticism has beeen that Miss Harrison only focuses on the negative and not on the positive things the KC and the Cavalier Club have done. I suspect that PDE2 will discuss positive steps these clubs have taken since PDE1. But if CM/SM and early-onset MVD remain widespread, and very, very few CKCS breeders are doing anything about it -- like testing and following breeding recommendations -- then certainly not enough is being done.

The Cavalier Club's chairman told us three years ago that "There are many members who are still not prepared to health check their breeding stock, and of those who do, it would appear that many would not hesitate to breed from affected animals." So, this is not just a puppy farmer problem. But, if PDE2 discusses this shortfall of following breeding protocols, then surely it would be informing its viewers that they should stay away from the puppy farmers who could care less about testing for anything at all. So, PDE2's criticism of CKCS breeders should weigh more heavily against the puppy farmers than against the responsible breeders who do test and follow those protocols.

What really has driven responsible breeders from the CKCS has been the statistics showing that up to 95% of cavaliers may have CM and over half may have SM. And, as I noted above, that information came not from PDE, but from the extensive neurological research undertaken over the past ten or so years.

Sabby
25th February 2012, 09:58 PM
Jemima is having an Q&A time on PDE 2 facebook Group that week sometime.

Kate H
25th February 2012, 10:33 PM
Rod wrote: The video of the little cavalier thrashing about, howling in agonizing pain from syringomyelia, was not fiction and no, her medications had not been withheld before that video was made.

Yes, but what the programme didn't say was that the dog was put to sleep a few hours after the video was made, that the video was deliberately taken by the dog's owners to show the effects of SM and had been available on the internet for some time before PDE. The implication was that this was the norm for dogs with SM, whereas the evidence of the members of this forum is that this is not so - yes, some SM dogs do have pain that becomes uncontrollable, and even if this is a minority it is still too many, but most will lead fairly normal lives. I am NOT saying that this in any way excuses the level of SM in the breed - 'fairly normal lives' does not mean pain-free lives, and breeders that knowingly risk inflicting pain on the dogs they breed should be condemned - if they kicked their dog and seriously injured it, the RSPCA would take them to court, but SM is just as much a serious injury. I am simply saying that even if one agrees with much of PDE, it is also true that a fair amount of editorial manipulation was going on. Investigative documentary makers start out with a thesis they want to prove, and it must be a constant temptation to see (or look for) only what proves their thesis. This is why people in many breeds got so angry with PDE (apart from those with a guilty conscience or their heads in the sand!) - they felt that there was another side - breeders who work hard to breed healthy dogs - and this was not, in their view, given fair coverage.

Kate, Oliver and Aled

anniemac
25th February 2012, 10:54 PM
Does anyone know if any other breed clubs besides BG and cavaliers are scanning? I know not all breeders are and I disagree with Rod about very few. I'm impressed with the number who are in Canada especially in their regional club. I think there are more and more in UK and more (slowly) in USA. There have been grants from the AKC and i am sure other regional clubs. many breeders have contributed to research.

Without dog shows, i feel it would hurt advancements in research. THATS what i care about. We will not find an answer today (besides scanning and following recommended protocols). I thought I read that the BVA suggested Japanese chins also?

We have learned a lot in 3 years thanks to people here with Rupert's fund, FTR, breed clubs around the world and to breeders submitting their scans. I don't know how changing breed standards (if that's the focus) could change any of that.

I have heard a lot of things and if someone does not buy a cavalier because they think their skull is too small then fine. My parents will not because of Ella and not PDE. I try to say that there are breeders who are researching lines, scanning, but there are no guarantees. It's depressing but I hope people still realize that breed clubs do more than if we did not have them.

anniemac
25th February 2012, 11:18 PM
I'm sorry that I'm in a mood today. Elton is yelping and shaking his head and I still can't figure out what's wrong. I just get frustrated sometimes.

Tania
25th February 2012, 11:31 PM
We purchased two Cavaliers in 2007, we were very naive! Our dogs were heart and eye checked but I had never heard of sm.

We looked forward to sharing our life with these two little charmers.

When PDE was advertised we watched it because we knew Cavaliers were going to be featured not because there was any big problem. We were shocked at the health problems highlighted but so was our vet !

We watched the poor little Cavalier screaming in pain but we were intelligent enough to realise this poor dog was suffering acute symptoms. (This was not the norm)

Molly did not show any screaming/scratching symptoms but I knew watching PDE she had sm. I could feel myself going hot as I watched PDE with one eye and Molly with the other.

If PDE had not been aired Molly would now be DEAD.

A junior vet at our practice remarked "I remember syringomyelia vaguely from my Uni days" Most of the Cavaliers they see now are properly diagnosed thanks to PDE.

A great number of Cavaliers are now on pain medication and have quality of life. These same dogs (including Dougall (cm)) would be suffering if PDE had not been shown.

Thank you Jemima for saving the life of my Molly and saving Dougall from a life of pain.

anniemac
25th February 2012, 11:38 PM
Tania,

I feel the same way about the book "For the Love of Ollie". Actually Rod's website brought me to that book so thank you Rod and Ollie for saving Ella from more pain.

Sabby
25th February 2012, 11:59 PM
Totally agree with Tania. If it wasn’t for PDE things would still be the same then three years ago.

I know that what they showed on PDE was extreme and a lot of dogs do live a decent life with pain medication but I wouldn’t call that a good life for the dog or owner I call it a flipping nightmare. Sorry nobody should have this kind of worry, trips to the cardiologist, vets (I see my vet more often than my husband) all the way to London to the neurologist because I want the best for my dogs. Trial and error with medication. It is a nightmare and then you see the advert for Crufts “ Happy Healthy fit for function dogs” Who is the KC kidding? I think they truly believe what they are saying themselves.
There are still not enough breeders that follow the MVD protocol set 10 years ago so how many will follow the SM guidelines.

Karen and Ruby
26th February 2012, 01:42 AM
Ruby was diagnosed only because of PDE. Who knows how much longer she may have suffered with out it! I watched in horror, like Tania said, because I had a cavalier and knew at that stage she had a murmor. I knew in a second that Ruby had SM and so did my family. My sister called and said, thats Ruby, thats her symptoms!
So thank you Jemima for saving my babies life!!

Karen and Ruby
26th February 2012, 01:43 AM
Ruby was diagnosed only because of PDE. Who knows how much longer she may have suffered with out it! I watched in horror, like Tania said, because I had a cavalier and knew at that stage she had a murmor. I knew in a second that Ruby had SM and so did my family. My sister called and said, thats Ruby, thats her symptoms!
So thank you Jemima for saving my babies life!!

RodRussell
26th February 2012, 02:38 AM
... I am simply saying that even if one agrees with much of PDE, it is also true that a fair amount of editorial manipulation was going on. Investigative documentary makers start out with a thesis they want to prove, and it must be a constant temptation to see (or look for) only what proves their thesis. This is why people in many breeds got so angry with PDE (apart from those with a guilty conscience or their heads in the sand!) - they felt that there was another side - breeders who work hard to breed healthy dogs - and this was not, in their view, given fair coverage.

PDE should not be blamed or held responsible for failing to show that some breeders are not as bad as others are. The main accusations against PDE were that the content was nothing but lies, and the producer was filled with hate, and she manipulated the filmed dogs so that their pain and agony would be exaggerated. Those accusations were the real lies.

If members of the purebred dog community felt that they did not get a fair shake in PDE, then they should have produced their own documentary, showing how dedicated they and the KC and the breed clubs have been in discouraging breed standards which produce genetic deformities, and showing how the judges refuse to put up dogs which are obviously deformed, and showing how the KC and the breed clubs require breeders to health test their breeding stock, and how the KC has imposed mandatory breeding guidelines on certain breeds, like the MVD and SM breeding protocols for the cavalier.

Why did not those members of the purebred dog community produce such a documentary? I cannot imagine what has been holding them back, with all of their good works they surely must have done, to so inform the UK dog-loving public. Instead, the KC produced an Internet video called "Dogs -- A Healthy Future", in which the head of the KC, Steve Dean, lies that "the whole ethos of the Kennel Club is the health and welfare of dogs." And in it the KC lies further when it claims that it is "working to eliminate inherited diseases," and "the Kennel Club has always taken the lead in addressing the problem of inherited diseases." What's the word? Oh, yes, TOMMYROT!!!, that's the word. TOMMYROT!!!

merello
26th February 2012, 08:34 AM
We'll be watching this with interest on Monday night and myself and Paul have posted various links to promote the show on our FB pages. It's televised 2 years to the day that we lost Sonny to MVD and on Friday the rescue dog we took on in April 2010, Kaley, was diagnosed with CHF and we had a dreadful day as in the morning our vet thought we might lose her. Well said Rod!!

Kate H
26th February 2012, 04:33 PM
Reading the breed notes in Our Dogs every week, I don't ever remember anyone actually saying that PDE was all lies and skewed - where did you read that, Rod? The main accusation was that it was unbalanced, which can be said about very many documentaries on all sorts of subjects made by passionate people. I don't necessarily agree with the critics, but neither do I agree with everything Jemima Harrison says just because she is Jemima Harrison (any more than I would necessarily agree 100% with anyone else making a documentary on a subject about which I was quite knowledgeable)..

In Pekes, for example, numbers being bred and shown have dropped astronomically in the last 30 years, mainly because people have voted with their feet and refused to breed or buy the monstrosities that show Pekes have become. The same is true in Bulldogs, I think. But I don't remember anything being said about this - an uninformed viewer could have got the impression that producing show Pekes was a large and thriving industry (and that this is what all Pekes are like today), instead of a few dinosaurs clinging on to power, to the detriment of their poor dogs. Away from the show ring, there are breeders quietly continuing to produce old-type Pekes, with longer noses and without the huge coats - a friend of mine has a beautiful, active, healthy cream one, though she had to search patiently to find it and join a waiting list to get a puppy from this breeder. By all means attack the show breeders - they deserve it - but it isn't the whole picture, and a good point could have been made that not all Pekes are like this - even today they can be like the happy, active, healthy dog that I was given on my 10th birthday. The contrast would have been even more damning to the show people. It's a matter of balance. A similar telling contrast could have been made between working and show Labradors and working and show Cockers, which almost look like different breeds.

Kate (aka Devil's Advocate!), Oliver and Aled

RodRussell
26th February 2012, 05:27 PM
Reading the breed notes in Our Dogs every week, I don't ever remember anyone actually saying that PDE was all lies and skewed - where did you read that, Rod? The main accusation was that it was unbalanced, which can be said about very many documentaries on all sorts of subjects made by passionate people. I don't necessarily agree with the critics, but neither do I agree with everything Jemima Harrison says just because she is Jemima Harrison (any more than I would necessarily agree 100% with anyone else making a documentary on a subject about which I was quite knowledgeable)..

I have read a lot more than Our Dogs' breed notes, and in fact, I seldom read those, except occasionally the cavalier page, unless someone mentions that an article is worth reading. I have not saved copies of all of the attacks, but I have read many of them over the past 3+ years, and "unbalanced" was about the weakest that I remember. For example, here is what the chairman of the board of the American Kennel Club called PDE: A "piece of sensationalist fiction and tabloid journalism masquerading as a documentary", and he called on the BBC to do a documentary called “Jemima Harrison Exposed”.


In Pekes, for example, numbers being bred and shown have dropped astronomically in the last 30 years, mainly because people have voted with their feet and refused to breed or buy the monstrosities that show Pekes have become.

I had not heard that, but I hope word about it gets over here in the US. Too bad that word had not arrived earlier this month, before a judge who I know and consider a friend picked a mutant Peke named Malachy as best in show at the Westminster Kennel Club show. When a best-in-show judge picks a dog, she is choosing the dog that comes the closest, among all of the other breed representatives in the ring, to its breed standard. Was Malachy a closer match to the Peke breed standard than all of those other group winners were to their standards? If so, then there is something terribly wrong with the Peke breed standard.

I realize that the Westminster KC show is not in the UK, but is there any difference between the Peke standards in the two countries? I have not yet checked, but if Malachy stands a chance of winning in the UK, then all of that voting with feet has not sent a message to the Peke breed club.


... Away from the show ring, there are breeders quietly continuing to produce old-type Pekes, with longer noses and without the huge coats - a friend of mine has a beautiful, active, healthy cream one, though she had to search patiently to find it and join a waiting list to get a puppy from this breeder. By all means attack the show breeders - they deserve it - but it isn't the whole picture, and a good point could have been made that not all Pekes are like this - even today they can be like the happy, active, healthy dog that I was given on my 10th birthday. The contrast would have been even more damning to the show people. ...

Then those non-show Peke breeders and fanciers should embrace PDE, because PDE's focus is the breed ring, along with the KC, the breed clubs, the judges, and, of course, the show breeders. If you read Jemima Harrison's blog -- http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com -- you will find that she highlights and praises the counter-culture purebred breeders who produce dogs that look like the show winners of decades ago, back before the craziness took over that has produced the mutant champions of today.

Margaret C
26th February 2012, 09:27 PM
PDE should not be blamed or held responsible for failing to show that some breeders are not as bad as others are.


'Watchdog' programmes highlight bad builders and unscrupulous plumbers and 'Panorama' programmes expose careworkers that abuse those in their care.

Good builders and trustworthy careworkers do not blame the messenger & complain that it is unfair to disclose poor practice, they are much more likely to put the blame where it lies. They disassociate themselves from those that act disgracefully & express their disgust that such people tarnish the reputation of good practitioners.

It is such a shame that reputable breeders do not speak out about those that they are quick enough to condemn in private. Instead they collude to protect and defend those that bring the whole breeding community into disrepute.


If members of the purebred dog community felt that they did not get a fair shake in PDE, then they should have produced their own documentary, showing how dedicated they and the KC and the breed clubs have been in discouraging breed standards which produce genetic deformities, and showing how the judges refuse to put up dogs which are obviously deformed, and showing how the KC and the breed clubs require breeders to health test their breeding stock, and how the KC has imposed mandatory breeding guidelines on certain breeds, like the MVD and SM breeding protocols for the cavalier.

The Kennel Club and the Cavalier Club both refused invitations to appear in the programme. The Cavalier Club has this statement on their website:

The Cavalier Club & PDE 2

The Cavalier KCS Club offers the following: The Cavalier Club has decided not to take part in the programme other than to give the following statement which we request is read out in its entirety:

"The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Club has continued to support by its actions, the health and well being of this much loved breed. We have worked with the Kennel Club and the BVA with regard to its new CM/SM scheme and its accompanying explanatory advice leaflet. We have raised funds for specialist veterinary equipment and are sponsoring vital veterinary research into Mitral Valve Disease at the Royal Edinburgh Veterinary Hospital."

Brian M
26th February 2012, 09:59 PM
Hi
I can watch all the terrible news that appears on T.V. about the ongoing atrocities in Syria and all/any other disasters that happen
to mankind on this planet of ours, but I cannot watch any programmes or read any news that relate to any form of animal cruelty.
So I admit I have never viewed P.D.E. though of course I am aware of its content and thank the makers for all the improvements in health and welfare that have occured as a direct reasult of it, and I will no doubt record P.D.E. 2 but I am unsure whether I will be brave enough to actually watch it,though I did enjoy my amateur boxing days so am not averse to a bit of blood and guts so long as its the human type and not from any animal ,is there anybody else with similar thoughts .

RodRussell
26th February 2012, 10:18 PM
... The Cavalier Club has this statement on their website:

"... We have worked with the Kennel Club and the BVA with regard to its new CM/SM scheme and its accompanying explanatory advice leaflet."

Help me here. Exactly WHAT new CM/SM scheme? Here is what the BVA has on its website about the so-called scheme:


BVA/KC chiari malformations/syringomyelia (CM/SM) scheme

The new BVA/KC Chiari malformation/Syringomyelia (CM/SM) Scheme will launch in January 2012. Full details will be posted shortly on the website but Procedure Notes and submission Certificates are now available from the CHS office. Telephone No. 0207 908 6380.

Notice anything odd about that notice? Here are a couple of clues:

(1) This notice was first posted by the BVA on February 1, 2012.

(2) No such "launch" has yet taken place.

And, here is the full content of what the KC has on its website about the scheme:


.

sins
27th February 2012, 12:45 AM
What the british media are saying about PDE 2.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106592/Leading-vet-calls-pugs-bulldogs-ban-pedigree-dogs-struggle-breathe.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

http://www.express.co.uk/features/view/304550/In-pursuit-of-beauty

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/petshealth/9105682/Crufts-hit-by-row-over-health-of-pedigree-dogs.html

Sins

Sabby
27th February 2012, 11:01 AM
What Jemima says in the Express is right. “The Kennel Club is just tweaking; it is fiddling while Rome burns.

Kate H
27th February 2012, 12:11 PM
Rod - the new scheme seems to have more or less started - Cambridge University Vet School are charging £200 for a mini-scan plus £100 for certification under the new BVA/KC scheme. Whether they are sending the scans to the panel for assessment and then letting them accumulate until the scheme is really up and running isn't clear, but the neurologists seem to be taking it for granted that the scheme is startiing if not now then pretty soon. Clare Rusbridge says she is stopping giving second opinions on scans as this will now be done by the panel (she's not stopping discussing particular cases, just the routine look). Chestergates say on their info that their scans are accepted for the BVA/KC scheme. The KC are probably so busy with Crufts that they haven't got round to updating their website for health schemes! (And Cavaliers, of course, are only one among many - other breeds have got new tests starting up.)

Kate, Oliver and Aled

sins
27th February 2012, 12:30 PM
Yes,the scheme is up and running.
The BVA/KC forms have been distributed and scanning days have been organised.
Holly is being scanned at Downs Vets,Bristol under the new scheme on 13 th March and booking forms currently being filled out.
There is no independent assessments at this venue,all scans will be sent to the BVA panel for reading and the results of KC registered dogs will be published.
The BVA/KC SM scheme is open to all breeds and to dogs from other countries.
In the event of overseas Kennel Club reg dogs,the scan will still be read by panellists,the BVA cert will be issued but obviously results not published.
This will be the official definitive cert,standardised scans and a consensus opinion from the panel.
Obviously,where independent assessments are given at other venues,submission to the panel may be optional and many will scan outside of the scheme,either because of the cost of the extra £100 or the wish to keep scan results confidential.
Perhaps the KC want to make a bit of a splash and launch the scheme at Crufts??
Sins

Kate H
27th February 2012, 03:47 PM
Sins wrote: Perhaps the KC want to make a bit of a splash and launch the scheme at Crufts??

Could well be - for the last couple of years they've had a health section, with people from AHT and similar giving advice and information. Aled's having a mini-scan in May (no sign of SM, just checking him out) but as he's a rescue without a pedigree his result won't be very useful (except to me, of course!). Good news that the scheme's running - just wish it wasn't so expensive that it could put people off.

Kate, Oliver and Aled

anniemac
27th February 2012, 03:53 PM
Sins wrote: Perhaps the KC want to make a bit of a splash and launch the scheme at Crufts??

Could well be - for the last couple of years they've had a health section, with people from AHT and similar giving advice and information. Aled's having a mini-scan in May (no sign of SM, just checking him out) but as he's a rescue without a pedigree his result won't be very useful (except to me, of course!). Good news that the scheme's running - just wish it wasn't so expensive that it could put people off.

Kate, Oliver and Aled

Removed

RodRussell
27th February 2012, 04:31 PM
... Perhaps the KC want to make a bit of a splash and launch the scheme at Crufts??

Perhaps, but that is not what they have claimed. They have claimed that they would announce this thing in January. And since then, silence from the KC and nothing more than a footnote on the BVA website. What is KC's problem???

Tania
27th February 2012, 08:35 PM
Thanks for highlighting.:thmbsup:

Kate H
27th February 2012, 08:59 PM
Perhaps we should just be thankful it's got off the ground at all, considering some of the opposition to it last year! And of course, we think Cavaliers all- important, but for the BVA and the KC ours is only one of several new health tests that are arriving around now (you really do need to read the breed notes in Our Dogs :lol: - between the boring show results there's a lot of useful information!).

Kate, Oliver and Aled

Karlin
27th February 2012, 09:18 PM
I am sure there will be plenty of discussion after tonight's broadcast (happening now!) as there will again be focus on cavaliers.

Soushiruiuma
27th February 2012, 10:30 PM
Does anyone know when this will be available to those of us not in the UK?

kimy27
27th February 2012, 11:08 PM
I just finished watching this. God, these breeders make me furious. Theses poor dogs. That poor pug at the end made me so upset. What is wrong with these people? These dogs can't even BREATH properly. What's it going to take for things to change?

Tania
27th February 2012, 11:10 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01cqp75/Pedigree_Dogs_Exposed_Three_Years_On/

On i player.

Nicki
27th February 2012, 11:18 PM
Hoping to watch this on iplayer tomorrow [we do not have a tv aerial so couldn't watch it tonight - my doggie chiropractor was here anyway :)]. It sounds like it was quite distressing to watch :(

I hope that it did feature some of the good things that came out of the 1st program - things have changed dramatically, although obviously there is still a long way to go...


None of us want to think of our beloved breed changing, but there were always going to be problems eventually with a closed registry. I think this comment from the Telegraph article is really significant, I didn't realise they could do this

"We can use DNA sequencing to identify other breeds that can be used to introduce new genetic diversity into populations." Dr Sarah Blott, head of quantitative genetics at the Animal Health Trust

I was concerned about people arbitrarily using other breeds without an official recognised program, but hopefully this is something that could be developed in time.

Karlin
27th February 2012, 11:29 PM
People outside the UK cannot get BBC shows on the iPlayer without an international annual subscription and that doesn't include all programmes (oops just realised this service apparently not launched yet? But is coming).

When it runs elsewhere depends on when and if other markets buy rights through the BBC.

However expect it to start popping up on YouTube in chunks (and disappear and be reposted) going on experience with PDE.

RodRussell
27th February 2012, 11:38 PM
I watched it. I think we will have to wait to see if it has enough impact on the dog-owning and dog-loving public to force breeders to get real about following the MVD and CM/SM breeding guidelines, which in the case of the UK would include allowing scan results to be publicly available.

I think that Jemima has neutralized the accusation that her shows are not balanced, but I am sure her critics will come up with another argument to replace that one, or just scream "unbalanced" anyway.

MadeleineSarah
27th February 2012, 11:43 PM
I thought the piece on Dalmatians was very interesting. But as she said the rest of the Dalmatian breeders are far from ok with what she has done. I just can't see any justification for not improving the health of any breed. Absolutely stupid!

Sabby
27th February 2012, 11:49 PM
She mentioned all the changes that have been made and she did say there have been plenty of changes. At the end she also said that the KC can’t (or won’t) reinforce things like mandatory health testing as it wants to keep the breeders happy. Well I knew that anyway but what does it tell you.
And is nobody listening to all these experts on PDE, they are all highly qualified people. The surgeon that operated on the pug said that it is highly unethical to breed dogs that can’t breathe. No expert needs to tell me that it is common sense.

anniemac
27th February 2012, 11:54 PM
I watched it. I think we will have to wait to see if it has enough impact on the dog-owning and dog-loving public to force breeders to get real about following the MVD and CM/SM breeding guidelines, which in the case of the UK would include allowing scan results to be publicly available.

I think that Jemima has neutralized the accusation that her shows are not balanced, but I am sure her critics will come up with another argument to replace that one, or just scream "unbalanced" anyway.

How? I mean did you watch it?

Autaven
28th February 2012, 12:36 AM
I just finished watching it after being on the fence as to whether to or not - purely because the last one upset me so much (and I didn't even have a Cavalier then!).

A few tears later and I'm just thinking about it all. I always thought it was quite one sided as we all know there are good breeders out there (though who knows how many) but I think she did point out the things which the kennel club has put in place for encouragement which was fair enough. I think everything was true, it's just getting others who aren't in the dog world but who are buying and breeding puppies involved that is a big problem. (among other things of course!)

Brian M
28th February 2012, 09:33 AM
Hi
Any comments or thoughts on Part Two ,surprised there are not quite a lot already or do you think Part Two suffered a bit from lack of impact
and due you think nothing really new was said regarding Cavalier owners ,as most of us already knew about the developments J.H. commented on .
Look forward to reading all your thoughts please.

I managed to watch it up to the appearance of the Dalmation then Poppy opened one eye then that was my lot ,but its all recorded to be watched
again when the girls are all fast asleep .

milly
28th February 2012, 10:55 AM
I watched pedigree dogs exposed 2 last night and I can only describe it as a horror show. What those breeders in the kennel club are doing to these dogs to achieve 'desirable traits' is nothing short of immoral. When they showed pictures of some breeds and how they have changed in a matter of decades it was truly shocking (ie the bulldog for example) It is very telling that some of the vets who perform surgery to try and alleviate the problems related to this type of breeding say that a lot of their work nowadays is undoing the damage this unsavoury genetic breeding leads to. and its not just cavaliers ... As the owner of two cavaliers (with health problems unfortunately). I can honestly say hand on heart that I will never buy another pedigree dog. The most telling statement about the cavalier was that "this breed has gone from creation to ruination in 100 years." So sad and deeply disturbing.

Sabby
28th February 2012, 10:59 AM
I watched pedigree dogs exposed 2 last night and I can only describe it as a horror show. What those breeders in the kennel club are doing to these dogs to achieve 'desirable traits' is nothing short of immoral. When they showed pictures of some breeds and how they have changed in a matter of decades it was truly shocking (ie the bulldog for example) It is very telling that some of the vets who perform surgery to try and alleviate the problems related to this type of breeding say that a lot of their work nowadays is undoing the damage this unsavoury genetic breeding leads to. and its not just cavaliers ... As the owner of two cavaliers (with health problems unfortunately). I can honestly say hand on heart that I will never buy another pedigree dog. The most telling statement about the cavalier was that "this breed has gone from creation to ruination in 100 years." So sad and deeply disturbing.

You summed it up perfectly. Not much more to say. Sometimes I really can’t understand human nature for money and greed.

Autaven
28th February 2012, 11:38 AM
Kennel Club are doing a live Q&A just now if anyone wanted to comment;

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/4188

Hopeful4now
28th February 2012, 12:14 PM
The blonde breeder, Beverly I think her name was, was just despicable. I mean, I am only saying this based on the facts in the video, but if what was said was true, she should be banned from ever touching a dog again.

Brian M
28th February 2012, 12:18 PM
Hi

Thanks for the link am trying to follow .

anniemac
28th February 2012, 12:42 PM
I can honestly say hand on heart that I will never buy another pedigree dog.

That's very sad. Of course with two ill cavaliers you may have that opinion, my parents will not buy a cavalier due to Ella because she had CM/SM and now problems with Elton. I think it's sad. I fear you are not alone and my opinion is the Great thing about pedigree dogs is you know what genetic health problems one has, temperament, and if you spend time you can find breeders who will work to eliminate or lessen chance.

Everyone will feel differently.

milly
28th February 2012, 01:22 PM
That's very sad. Of course with two ill cavaliers you may have that opinion, my parents will not buy a cavalier due to Ella because she had CM/SM and now problems with Elton. I think it's sad. I fear you are not alone and my opinion is the Great thing about pedigree dogs is you know what genetic health problems one has, temperament, and if you spend time you can find breeders who will work to eliminate or lessen chance.

Everyone will feel differently.

Of course it is wonderful that some breeders are working to health test their animals and eliminate this genetic russian roulette that many breeders are playing. However, I fear it will be some time before real progress is made as the kennel club is so resistant to change. I applaud those people in PDE2 who had the courage of their convictions to appear and take a stand against these practices eventhough in many instances it led to their ostracisation. All of us who own and care for dogs should follow their example and speak out against these practices when and where we can.

Karen and Ruby
28th February 2012, 02:27 PM
I posted a question asking why the new schemes and old health screening programs haven't been made mandatory for Cavaliers. No reply! Surprise surprise!

Autaven
28th February 2012, 02:45 PM
I asked a couple of questions as well about mandatory screening. They said before they left that all questions that haven't been answered on the live chat will be answered and posted onto their website at the end of the day. Waiting!

Sabby
28th February 2012, 03:27 PM
Of course it is wonderful that some breeders are working to health test their animals and eliminate this genetic russian roulette that many breeders are playing. However, I fear it will be some time before real progress is made as the kennel club is so resistant to change. I applaud those people in PDE2 who had the courage of their convictions to appear and take a stand against these practices eventhough in many instances it led to their ostracisation. All of us who own and care for dogs should follow their example and speak out against these practices when and where we can.



The "powerful people" portrayed in the segment on Boxers are the people who are running dogdom in the UK - there are a few in every breed - not the KC. The health of pedigree dogs will never change with them at the helm. These people are not dog lovers...they love what dogs have done for them.

In every organisation it is always those at the top who make it a success or failure. If people like this permeate a breed then nothing will change. The KC has no power...that is becoming increasingly evident...they have no power because they have a conflict of interest..pure and simple. They will not bite the hand that feeds them.

Sabby
28th February 2012, 03:30 PM
Totally agree with this

In every organisation it is always those at the top who make it a success or failure. If people like this permeate a breed then nothing will change. The KC has no power...that is becoming increasingly evident...they have no power because they have a conflict of interest..pure and simple. They will not bite the hand that feeds them.

The "powerful people" portrayed in the segment on Boxers are the people who are running dogdom in the UK - there are a few in every breed - not the KC. The health of pedigree dogs will never change with them at the helm. These people are not dog lovers...they love what dogs have done for them.

milly
28th February 2012, 03:37 PM
Thanks for enlightening me .. it seems like such a complex issue with no easy answers. just felt so sad and angry to see all those dogs suffering needlessly last night; I really hope that somehow the message portrayed in PDE2 will get through to those who have the power to end this pain and suffering that so many dogs have to endure in the name of 'beauty'.

RodRussell
28th February 2012, 03:59 PM
The UK Kennel Club's response -- http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/4189/23/5/3 -- amazes me. the KC claims it is powerless to do anything about the genetic problems and washes its hands of responsibility. It blames the lack of regulation of dog breeding:


Unfortunately, there is very little regulation of dog breeding in this country and the Kennel Club has no legislative power but runs its Assured Breeder Scheme to support responsible breeders.

Excuse me, KC, but you ARE a regulator of dog breeding in the UK. You, KC, have the power to regulate registrations of litters, and you have the power to regulate breed standards.

But, KC refuses to acknowledge that its breed standards are a part of the problem.


Sadly, some breeders continue to breed dogs to achieve a particular look that is not supported by the Kennel Club’s Breed Standards. Caroline Kisko, Kennel Club Secretary, said: “The Breed Standards for pedigree dogs, which have been agreed with the veterinary profession, including the BVA, make it absolutely clear that breeding dogs with exaggerated features, such as overly short noses and heavy wrinkles, is not acceptable.”

So, KC denies that its breed standards, and its judges which put up the mutants, are the problem. It wants us to believe that the mutants are all due to the non-KC puppy farmers.

Finally, KC actually calls upon Parliament to take control.


In the absence of legislation, there is no obligation on breeders to take note of the Breed Standards which promote healthy dogs.

I never, ever, have heard of an organization like the KC actually wanting government to force it to do the right thing. Goverment regulation never is a solution. It is too heavy-handed and will apply its rules across the board to all breeds, regardless of differences. Government will not fine-tune its rules to recognize breed distinctions.

KC has the power to solve these problems, and yet KC claims it cannot and wants the government to do it. Unbelieveable!

Then, KC proceeds with its lies:


Dog shows are the only forum where it is possible to see whether dogs are being bred with exaggerations. Judges are trained to only reward healthy dogs and to make absolutely sure that this happens the Kennel Club will be introducing veterinary checks from Crufts this year onwards.

Imagine, thinking we will fall for such drivel! Judges are putting the mutants up! Hasn't KC noticed that fact?

*Pauline*
28th February 2012, 04:48 PM
Ruby was diagnosed only because of PDE. Who knows how much longer she may have suffered with out it! I watched in horror, like Tania said, because I had a cavalier and knew at that stage she had a murmor. I knew in a second that Ruby had SM and so did my family. My sister called and said, thats Ruby, thats her symptoms!
So thank you Jemima for saving my babies life!!

Same story here. I took Dylan to the vet the day after PDE. Jemima was the only person who phoned me to say sorry about Dylan's diagnosis and Margaret came with me for the scan and result.

There are a handful of good breeders out there though. But sadly, as I now have 2 affected dogs, I dare not take the chance on another Cavalier :(

Nicki
28th February 2012, 07:47 PM
I haven't managed to watch it yet, we do not have a TV aerial connection [only watch DVDs] and I have been trying to watch it on i-player but it is heavily oversubscribed and our broadband speed so low that it is impossible to watch :( Currently trying to download it to watch later, we're now at 10% - only another 4 1/2 hours to go so I guess I won't be watching it tonight :(


It sounds like it was rather disappointing?


Thank you for your comments Rod - very thought provoking and shocking - the KC are in charge until they need to do something and then all the excuses fly out - we should have expected it following their attitude to puppy farming :(

Nicki
28th February 2012, 08:13 PM
There were two other threads open on this topic and it was getting rather confusing, so I have copied all the posts over to this one and closed the other two.

In case of any confusion, as the posts appear in the order they were originally posted, I have left the other threads in tact

http://www.cavaliertalk.com/forums/showthread.php?40902-Pedigree-Dogs-Exposed-2-on-tonight!

http://www.cavaliertalk.com/forums/showthread.php?40880-PDE2-(-next-Monday)-will-interest-anyone-with-a-SM-affected-cavalier

Kate H
29th February 2012, 11:18 AM
Rod wrote: Excuse me, KC, but you ARE a regulator of dog breeding in the UK.

But only a limited one. The KC can regulate those breeders who choose to register their dogs with the KC (and yes, they should do FAR more than they do). But they have absolutely no power whatsoever in law to regulate any breeder who doesn't register dogs with them - which unfortunately includes many, if not the majority, of puppy farmers and backyard breeders, and Jo Public who thinks it would be nice for their bitch to have puppies and use the dog up the road (and yes, I have been asked if they could use Oliver!).

Until parliament stepped in and started getting involved in breeding legislation, the only organisation with authority over non-KC registering breeders was the RSPCA, who seem to be more occupied with cocking a snook at the KC and prosecuting old men who are too frail to exercise their dogs properly (the RSPCA could have saved a lot of time and money if they'd simply sent someone round to tell him about the Cinnamon Trust, a charity that exists to help the elderly with their pets, but the RSPCA doesn't seem to know the meaning of the word co-operation).

Kate, Oliver and Aled

AT
29th February 2012, 01:05 PM
Was a bit dissapointed that most of the cavalier bits where repeats, I was horrified by the poor pug wth its gooey nose wrinkle.

All I seem to be hearing at the moment is why didnt they pick on the puppyfarmers & leave us show people alone. Just because someone is worse does not give breeder licence to do what they want. I know puppyfarmers who look down on other puppyfarmers for not meeting their meagre standards!
Secondly puppyfarm dogs are not a seperate breed , they are from the same foundation stock as show cavaliers ( and often on a couple of generations removed from champions) so its pointless saying all the dogs with health problems are from puppyfarms.
The only difference between breeders is those that health test and those that dont , If the dogs are not health tested the only difference between show bred dogs and puppyfarm dogs is cosmetic appearence.

All those breeders who do test their dogs and breed the healthiest dogs they can have my admiration ,You are in a completely different league to those who dont be they show or pet breeders.

RodRussell
29th February 2012, 03:38 PM
...The KC can regulate those breeders who choose to register their dogs with the KC (and yes, they should do FAR more than they do). ...

But the KC is denying that it has any such power to regulate any breeders, at all. Is it lying to itself, or is it a fraud? Only two choices here.

penquite
29th February 2012, 06:10 PM
I posted a question asking why the new schemes and old health screening programs haven't been made mandatory for Cavaliers. No reply! Surprise surprise!

Hi Karen
I have been intouch with the Kennel Club and been told that there were hundreds of questions and they are still trying to answer them all. They will be up on the KC site as soon as possible

BIZA
29th February 2012, 06:38 PM
I have had cavs for over 25yrs now and love the breed but i am wondering if i will ever get another one with all the health problems. Pip was pts aged 6 yrs and it is devastating. I know i have been really lucky up to now and the ones i have had except Pip have all lived to over 10 yrs and Pigs was nearly 16yrs and did agility until she was 12yrs.The ones i have now are all x breeding bitches that are all around 12yrs with Emily being at least 15yrs and luckily no signs of SM but they do have heart murmers but none on pills yet. I really hope that the breeders that are doing all the health checks etc will manage to convince the so called breeders to change there minds and start taking the health of the cavs seriously and between everyone they can save this lovely breed

Karlin
29th February 2012, 06:56 PM
AT said:


The only difference between breeders is those that health test and those that dont , If the dogs are not health tested the only difference between show bred dogs and puppyfarm dogs is cosmetic appearence.

All those breeders who do test their dogs and breed the healthiest dogs they can have my admiration ,You are in a completely different league to those who dont be they show or pet breeders.

Hear hear -- a great comment and I couldn't agree more. :D

Vet and neurologists say again and again they see NO DIFFERENCE IN FREQUENCY of either MVD or SM between show breeder and puppy farm dogs. I certainly have seen little when running Irish Cavalier Rescue for many years or in the dogs here on the board that end up with either condition. So this is a total red herring and breeders should know it -- after all their own official club cardiologist has made exactly this point about SHOW dogs -- NO change in incidence of MVD in nearly two decades *because so few adequately test or follow the MVD protocol*.

I know Jemima is extremely committed to fighting puppy farms as well -- but in a one hour programme, editing choices have to be made and the topic is too vast to be have been more than touched upon in PDE2 had it been included. Perhaps that will be another programme that will be commissioned. Breeders have rightly noted that the KC has not really done much to address puppy farms and many club, health focused breeders can cite well known puppy farmers who register all their pups with the KC. The KC 'kite mark' is unfortunately virtually meaningless -- signifying only the barest minimum of 'perhaps' a breeder having care, health and welfare priorities. The current registration process, and the nearly toothless and meaningless Assured Breeders Scheme (which practically no club breeders ever sign up for, but known puppy farms in the past, have -- great for duping buyers!) MUST be changed if the KC is to be anything more than an outmoded private club.

The KC may have limited LEGAL power to enforce certain possible approaches to require better breeding practice, but they could do any range of things immediately to make a vast difference and they simply do not bother.

I agree with Rod: they could make registration *meaningful*. They could require meaningful testing and results on dogs before they can be given championships so it isn't just outward health (that can be medicated for) that is (sometimes... :rolleyes: ) considered. They could require Assured Breeders Scheme CKCS breeders to MRI, cardiologist test and do dry eye/curly coat DNA testing on all breeding stock -- and list these tests for the breed, NOT just the very easy/cheap eye test which is all they care about right now. :sl*p: They could actually inform ALL breeders of health issues in each breed by mail when returning registration documents. They could try to get health schemes in place in less than the years and years it seems to take them right now. Any end of things they COULD but DO NOT do...

Autaven
29th February 2012, 10:55 PM
I hear you all on the legal side of things. I all ever hear the Kennel Club say is that they don't have any legal rights, yet I never heard of them attempting to get any?

Just a kind of follow up question for everyone who watched. What do you all think about them saying the Cavalier has no future? It upsets me beyond words to think this and maybe I'm in denial after hearing the recent study saying 70% had SM. Just wanted to know what you all thought in the vain hope you would see a chance that these dogs won't disappear.

eg93
29th February 2012, 11:02 PM
Just watched the documentary on Youtube. The surgery at the end with the pug was just too much for me. I cried through most of it. I can't believe what has happened to all of these breeds. It is so sick and makes me feel so bad. Looking over at my little girl I feel very blessed that we have not encountered any major health problems yet. She is only a year so of course things could be waiting for us down the road but right now she is happy and healthy and I am so thankful for that every moment. There are so many people on this message board doing so much good for Cavaliers. You guys rock and I cannot tell you how grateful I am. From the bottom of my heart - thank you.

RodRussell
1st March 2012, 03:41 AM
... Just a kind of follow up question for everyone who watched. What do you all think about them saying the Cavalier has no future? ... Just wanted to know what you all thought in the vain hope you would see a chance that these dogs won't disappear.

The likelihood of finding a cavalier puppy in the US that won't develop a heart murmur before its fifth birthday or won't have Chiari-like malformation and syringomyelia, is pretty much nill. Some US cavalier breeders have known about the MVD breeding protocol since 1998 and the SM breeding protocol since 2005, and most all of them have ignored at least one, if not both of them. For nearly all of them, these two protocols (which in fact are significant compromises from what the geneticists really think needs to be done) were just the starting points for watering down. They call it "moderation" or "not throwing the baby out with the bath water". How clever they are!

The researchers have studied the statistics for those watered down, moderated breeding guidelines, and they report that they have not worked. Nonetheless, we find these US breeders following the same worthless breeding protocols, time after time. (What is the definintion of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?)

For the rest of the US breeders, well they just don't even know about these real breeding protocols. In the US, We have two national breed clubs, one in the AKC and one out of it. Both of them refuse to recommend that their members follow either protocol. In fact, both of them recently have concocted phony MVD breeding protocols which no panel of cardiologists has ever approved, and neither club has even acknowledged the existence of the SM breeding protocol.

So, with breed clubs like those two, the CKCS is on an unstoppable downward slide. The end result in the US probably will be generation after generation of sickly cavaliers, with high price tags and even higher vet and medicine bills. Surely that cannot go on very long, and then we will have none.

eg93
1st March 2012, 04:07 AM
The likelihood of finding a cavalier puppy in the US that won't develop a heart murmur before its fifth birthday or won't have Chiari-like malformation and syringomyelia, is pretty much nill. Some US cavalier breeders have known about the MVD breeding protocol since 1998 and the SM breeding protocol since 2005, and most all of them have ignored at least one, if not both of them. For nearly all of them, these two protocols (which in fact are significant compromises from what the geneticists really think needs to be done) were just the starting points for watering down. They call it "moderation" or "not throwing the baby out with the bath water". How clever they are!

The researchers have studied the statistics for those watered down, moderated breeding guidelines, and they report that they have not worked. Nonetheless, we find these US breeders following the same worthless breeding protocols, time after time. (What is the definintion of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?)

For the rest of the US breeders, well they just don't even know about these real breeding protocols. In the US, We have two national breed clubs, one in the AKC and one out of it. Both of them refuse to recommend that their members follow either protocol. In fact, both of them recently have concocted phony MVD breeding protocols which no panel of cardiologists has ever approved, and neither club has even acknowledged the existence of the SM breeding protocol.

So, with breed clubs like those two, the CKCS is on an unstoppable downward slide. The end result in the US probably will be generation after generation of sickly cavaliers, with high price tags and even higher vet and medicine bills. Surely that cannot go on very long, and then we will have none.

Wow. That is bleak.

Karlin
1st March 2012, 05:05 AM
The likelihood of finding a cavalier puppy in the US that won't develop a heart murmur before its fifth birthday or won't have Chiari-like malformation and syringomyelia, is pretty much nill

Statistically that is not quite right, surely. There's a 50% chance of finding a puppy that will not have a murmur by age 5, and somewhere between 30% and less of finding a puppy that will never get SM, going on current research figures, though there's close to 0% chance of finding a puppy that won't have CM --despite what some US neurologists in particular seem to be grading... and the 'clear of CM' interpretations are coming from more or less the same few people in the US, raising questions on how they are interpreting. Responsible breeders should get a second opinion from Nick Jeffrey as he is out in the US now. Of course very mild CM (to the point where some miss it), is almost certainly better than more noticeable CM-- but it is not 'clear'.

But it is true that all of these are absolutely unacceptable, horrific statistics for a breed. And it is also important to keep in mind that the 70% with SM, from the huge, 555 cavalier sample, were cavaliers primarily from UK show breeders participating in scanning programmes, who themselves believed the dogs to be asymptomatic. There would be a higher percentage of affected cavaliers generally, by the time they are mature, if you include the symptomatic cavaliers. In other words -- general levels of incidence in the breed would be greater than 70%. Very depressing and why it is so important to keep fighting to raise awareness, encourage puppy buyers never to buy from non-testing breeders, push for research and breeder responsibility -- and the creation of a body that can actually do something for all dogs.

I don't know if the cavalier is finished as a breed yet -- many researchers feel there is still a chance to address this IF breeders do something -- but that chance is fast receding. I do think 70% with SM, and the almost certainty of all getting MVD at unacceptably young ages (which in my own experience so far has been worse to deal with than 3 with SM), really does now raise the question of the ethics of continuing to breed -- especially without following the MVD and SM breeding protocols and when so many breeders still only vet test hearts and don't MRI at all. The cost of responsible breeding cannot be an excuse not to breed responsibly.

I do think cavaliers are now a major crisis breed, but the clubs and KC mostly act as if it's (literally...) business as usual. Neither require even heart testing before breeding. :( The UK club cardiologist has pushed for years for the UK club to make cardiologist testing a centrepiece of breeding. Makes you wonder how bad things have to get before clubs and the KC believe it is time to step in and mandate for health on behalf of the dogs, rather than the freedom of breeders to make any crappy breeding decision they want no matter the impact on the entire breed.

Autaven
1st March 2012, 02:53 PM
The Kennel Club has answered a couple of our questions in the CKCS from their live Q&A session.

I asked the second one, think we were asking more or less the same kind of thing. I think they've just answered a massive question when they say the Show Ring is for 'external' conformation and 'internal' health problems are for breeding alone. But surely both of them should be equal. I also had no idea the Cavalier wouldn't be in the top 15 high risk breeds. Surely we should be?

Karen: I appreciate that health inspections will be given to best in breed winners at crufts this year but what about the dogs that have health issues that can't be discovered by the naked eye.
The Cavalier for example! If the KC stipulated for this breed that they must show a valid MRI certificate to win their group etc it would go a very long way to help the future of a dying breed. And make the new BVA/KC scheme a MANDATORY test to be an assured breeder. There are no mandatory health tests for one of the sickest breeds we have!!!!!!!!
The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel is not one of the 15 high profile breeds. It is neither practical nor sensible to insist that health tests are carried out prior to showing since the show ring is about the (external)
conformation of the dog while the (internal) health checks are relevant when considering breeding from a dog. So it makes sense to ensure that the show ring deals with conformation while prior to breeding (i.e. and to avoid passing conditions on to future generations) health tests should be carried out – as required under the Kennel Club’s Assured Breeder Scheme. However a lot of work is being done outside of the show ring to address the problem of syringomyelia in conjunction with the veterinary profession and at the Kennel Club Genetics Centre at the AHT. For more information
about the work at the AHT visit http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/11698/KCGC-mid-term-report-final-.pdf. The Syringomyelia test is relatively new and as such is currently on the
recommended list for the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel. However it is in discussion to go onto the mandatory list for Assured Breeders.


Amanda: In terms of the breeds requiring testing, if the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel is included in this at Crufts 2012 then does that mean the winning dog will be required to have had a MRI scan to diagnose for Syringomyelia? As if not surely a winning dog could be getting put through with this health issue, and therefore no doubt go on to produce who knows how many puppies.
The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel is not one of the 15 high profile breeds. It is neither practical nor sensible to insist that health tests are carried out prior to showing since the show ring is about the (external) conformation of the dog while the (internal) health checks are relevant when considering breeding from a dog. So it makes sense to ensure that the show ring deals with conformation while prior to breeding (i.e. and to avoid passing conditions on to future generations) health tests should be carried out – as required under the Kennel Club’s Assured Breeder Scheme. However a lot of work is being done outside of the show ring to address the problem of syringomyelia in conjunction with the veterinary profession
and at the Kennel Club Genetics Centre at the AHT. For more information about the work at the AHT visit http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/11698/KCGC-mid-term-report-final-.pdf As there is a health test available for Syringomyelia we stress that every dog should take this before breeding, at the moment the Kennel Club is in discussions to make this test mandatory for Assured Breeders. This is where the Mate Select tool is invaluable, the Mate Select tool is available to all and breeders as well as puppy buyers should use Mate Select to find out the health test results of a
dog before breeding from it or buying one of their puppies

Davecav
1st March 2012, 03:36 PM
I think in this instance the Kennel Club is right in their answers as far as showing is concerned. MRI scanning for SM is recommendied to be done before breeding and has the age gone up to 3yrs as the age? It was 2.5yrs. So as far as the show ring is concerned, then no Cavalier could win a top prize until they have had a scan (So that would be 2.5 - 3yrs old)

Where I totally disagree with what the KC are appearing to drag their feet with, is I think all health tests should be mandatory and clear before breeding and no pups should be registered from parents that do not have the required certificates. This way they wouldn't need the Assured Breeders scheme, that at the moment is meaningless to most people anyway!

Will the Kennel Club rush to do the above? I don't think so, because the Assured Breeders Scheme brings in revenue, and KC Registrations bring in Loads of revenue, firstly when the breeder registers their pups, and then again when the puppy buyers pay £15 for change of ownershi[p.

In the end they don't want to discurage breeders from registering litters. that is why they are happy to take money from puppy farms, even when the animals are kept in appalling conditions.

penquite
1st March 2012, 03:42 PM
where abouts on the site did you find the answers please or were these original questions posted and answered on the day?

Davecav
1st March 2012, 04:14 PM
To Sue
Did you mean my post? I was answering the post before mine from Autoven where the Kennel Club had replied to a couple of questions.
If you didn't mean me, then just ignore this. :)

Autaven
1st March 2012, 04:19 PM
If you meant me they posted it on their Facebook page, this isn't all of them though just the first batch they've got through. Here is the link;

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/12711/Q-and-A-from-web-chat.pdf

RodRussell
1st March 2012, 04:28 PM
... It is neither practical nor sensible to insist that health tests are carried out prior to showing since the show ring is about the (external)
conformation of the dog while the (internal) health checks are relevant when considering breeding from a dog. ...

And hence the problem which the KC cannot even recognize.

Autaven
1st March 2012, 04:36 PM
Exactly. I think it's such a hypocritical thing for them to say after going on and on about dogs who are 'Fit for life, fit for purpose'. This just takes them 10 steps back in my eyes.

They've made themselves sound like a very old fashioned business in the answer, with 'it's just not practical, nor sensible'. I really beg to see how it wouldn't be actually.

Karlin
1st March 2012, 06:03 PM
Wow. Is that a depressing answer from the KC, or what? It so pinpoints the HUGE problem: that they just refuse to connect inward health to 'fit for purpose' and 'healthy dogs' -- they are more concerned about outward conformation to standards they themselves were forced to change for many breeds following PDE. :( For many of these breeds, the big problems are not visible in the showring! Many in the cavalier world were astonished that they do not consider the CKCS to be under threat -- how bad do things need to get; how painful in what proportion of dogs? Already it is clear that a certain proportion of early death and compromised life is considered perfectly OK for this breed. We are too ready to accept they die before they should, a certain number will suffer pain from CM/SM, and a certain number will struggle with MVD years before other breeds would. Both MVD and SM are very distressing and costly for owners to manage, and the burden falls primarily on pet owners who buy the majority of puppies.

You asked great questions BTW. :)


Where I totally disagree with what the KC are appearing to drag their feet with, is I think all health tests should be mandatory and clear before breeding and no pups should be registered from parents that do not have the required certificates. This way they wouldn't need the Assured Breeders scheme, that at the moment is meaningless to most people anyway!

Yes very much agree; though would like to see clear certs as mandatory at least for a dog to get a championship as others have proposed before.

Charlifarley
1st March 2012, 06:27 PM
The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel is not one of the 15 high profile breeds.




Does this mean that there are 15 breeds worse off than CKCS? It doesn't bear thinking about what they are suffering from, does it?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Autaven
1st March 2012, 06:37 PM
After a look around the Kennel Club website I finally found their apparently 15 high profile breeds. They are;

Basset hound, bloodhound, bull dog, Chinese Crested, Chow Chow, Clumber Spaniel, Dogue de Bordeaux, French bulldog, German Shephard, Mastiff, Neapolitan Mastiff, Pekingese, Pug, St.Bernard, Shar Pei.

It is completely shocking the Cavalier isn't included in this list. Especially after they were one of the main breeds bashed in PDE1. Does the Kennel Club honestly think they aren't as bad? Maybe because on the 'external' appearances the Cavalier doesn't go to the extremes like other breeds? It's unbelievable.

Kate H
1st March 2012, 07:43 PM
I think they are concentrating on breeds where health defects are clearly obvious, and are primarily due to construction - breathing problems, folds of skin, drooping eyes, wobbly hind legs, etc. So judges have been instructed to remove from the ring any dog in these breeds with obvious health problems, and Best of Breeds in these breeds have to have a veterinary examination before going for Group judging. This is going to be difficult enough to work in these breeds, so how can you do that with Cavaliers? SM is a neurological disease, though with physical symptoms, it often doesn't show except to a very sharp eye, it can only be definitively diagnosed with an MRI, it is a progressive disease - so a dog showing a clear certificate now could still develop SM later or be a carrier, even if a clear MRI certificate had to be shown to the judge before Best of Breed was awarded... So the KC have started where - in theory - they can take some action because clear evidence is in front of the judge. Not easy to be so clear with SM.

Kate, Oliver and Aled

SophieLightyear
1st March 2012, 11:12 PM
I am actually watching this as I type this. I tried to watch the first one before getting Benji but seeing that poor cavalier in pain just broke my heart. Now I kind of feel terrible that I bought a cavalier especially with the news that Benji may well have SM.

Some if these people are heartless. How can they not want to change & help to protect these loyal, faithful & truly beautiful animals?! And I mean that for all the breeds shown on the show & every other breed not mentioned. The love a person feels for a pet is like no other. As for breeders who don't care what problems their puppies have & only think about the money they'll get for them, they sicken me!

Karen and Ruby
2nd March 2012, 12:53 AM
Thanks for posting the replies! I'm shocked at what they wrote, how can a dog be fit for function when it can't run about or walk even on a bad day. When they can't bend down to eat or drink with out having bowls raised up. Can't wear a collar as it agrivates symptoms. It says it all really... External looks and confirmation before health. As long as it suits their pockets, nothing will change!

Soushiruiuma
2nd March 2012, 03:45 AM
Clare Rusbridge says she is stopping giving second opinions on scans as this will now be done by the panel.

Kate, Oliver and Aled

My dogs are still young (and won't be used for breeding), but I had always intended having Clare give a second opinion on any MRI of my cavaliers. I'm assuming she'll still be doing a few second opinions for people outside the UK.

Soushiruiuma
2nd March 2012, 04:18 AM
Also, how do I search for the new PDE. I'm getting videos reading chapters of Tess of the d'Ubervilles, and other literature when I search "pedigree dogs exposed three years on".

Kate H
2nd March 2012, 11:06 AM
I think what Dr Rusbridge meant was that she is often asked to look at MRIs and grade them, to confirm or query a diagnosis, or its level of severity. That's what she feels the panel can now do (leaving her with more time to do other things like her own research!), but she will continue to look at MRIs where there is a question of treatment, of long-term prognosis etc - as she did recently for Dagny and her owner by telephone to France.

Kate, Oliver and Aled

Karen and Ruby
2nd March 2012, 12:02 PM
Also, how do I search for the new PDE. I'm getting videos reading chapters of Tess of the d'Ubervilles, and other literature when I search "pedigree dogs exposed three years on".

Rod posted a link to You tube either earlier on in this thread or on one of the others associated with PDE 2 x

RodRussell
2nd March 2012, 02:12 PM
Rod posted a link to You tube either earlier on in this thread or on one of the others associated with PDE 2 x

I think that the YouTube versions have been removed. Maybe others will be put up. They must be unauthorized bootleg copies which YouTube deletes once it checks them out.

So, I would keep checking from time to time, or go to http://www.passionateproductions.co.uk/shop.htm and buy it.

Davecav
2nd March 2012, 04:56 PM
Thanks for posting the replies! I'm shocked at what they wrote, how can a dog be fit for function when it can't run about or walk even on a bad day. When they can't bend down to eat or drink with out having bowls raised up. Can't wear a collar as it agrivates symptoms. It says it all really... External looks and confirmation before health. As long as it suits their pockets, nothing will change!

I think that if a Cavalier was showing signs of pain in the show ring it would be withdrawn, as judges now have to agree to penalise anything that is dentrimental to soundness, health and well-being of a dog.

Not all Cavaliers have SM. Many are in fact healthy and have been tested, and are being shown, and are happy little dogs.

Karlin
2nd March 2012, 05:34 PM
Yes, it is important to remember there are tested, happy cavaliers out there. :)

On the issue of what is seen in the ring -- I could show my Leo and no one would know he has pain days and SM as the meds will mask it. At the same time, I talk privately to show people and many say they regularly see scratching cavaliers in the ring that do not seem to be 'just scratching' in a normal way.

And judges have definitely given championships to dogs that were known in show circles to have SM, including one that in one well known case in the UK, was actively scratching in the ring the day it was given his championship -- a decision which disturbed many breeders including many who would not normally see eye to eye with me on anything! Shortly after that dog was sold on out of the country to be used at stud. The judge either was utterly ignorant of SM and its symptoms in the breed they are supposed to be expert in, or chose to totally ignore such obvious signs and give a championship they knew would make the dog desireable as a stud, to pass on those sick genes. :( I wonder which?

But no one will break the code of silence.

Margaret C
2nd March 2012, 05:51 PM
There have been many known SM affected dogs shown. Making up Champions and breaking breed records were what motivated the owners.

Karen and Ruby
2nd March 2012, 05:58 PM
If I gave Ruby enough drugs she could easily go un noticed. In fact she leads a pretty normal life thanks to the meds she has.

Sabby
2nd March 2012, 06:47 PM
If I gave Ruby enough drugs she could easily go un noticed. In fact she leads a pretty normal life thanks to the meds she has.

Harley & Eboney the same. People sometimes don't believe me that they are symtomatic. They run around like lunatics if I let them, but if i miss Ebonys pain relieve by an hour I know about it.

Karlin
2nd March 2012, 08:01 PM
Incidentally, a formal comment on PDE 2 from the BSAVA (main British vet association) website:


Vice President Mark Johnson said “We are supportive of the changes that the Kennel Club has made so far, and applaud them in allowing the introduction of new genes into certain breeds as demonstrated by the registration of the LUA Dalmatian. I support the introduction of the “Mate Select” scheme but believe that the Kennel Club should adopt the Advisory Council on Welfare in Dog Breeding recommendation and not register puppies with a coefficient of breeding (over 5 generations) greater than 12.5%.”

Well: that would mean a LOT of current and recent litters from well known breeders would NOT get KC registration! That's why the KC and breeders will oppose with tooth and nail every attempt to move towards any kind of meaningful health measures. That's why the public, and their vets, needs to take up this fight for REAL change.

http://www.bsava.com/News/AdviceNews/PedigreeDogsExposedThreeyearson/tabid/1592/Default.aspx

The full statement on their website:


BSAVA comments on Pedigree Dogs Exposed – three years on
The programme shown at 9pm, BBC4 on 27th February was the follow up to Pedigree Dogs Exposed made by Jemima Harrison, first shown in 2008.

Commenting on the BBC programme President Andrew Ash said “Jemima Harrison has highlighted an important issue. It is essential that veterinary surgeons, dog breeders and the general public no longer accept that breeding for extremes of conformation or knowingly from animals with inherited disease is an acceptable practice. The programme highlighted two main areas of concern, firstly the small genetic pool that exists in many breeds and secondly continued breeding for extremes of body shape. Both these areas must be addressed urgently. A civilised nation must agree that it is not acceptable to breed dogs that cannot function as dogs. ”

He went on to say that “BSAVA supports the health schemes that are now available to owners as steps in the right direction. However it is difficult to believe that health schemes are going to be sufficient in themselves to tackle these problems rapidly and effectively. It is particularly perverse to be promoting health schemes and yet continuing to allow the registration and showing of progeny with Coefficients of Inbreeding as high as 47.5% or where the animal concerned is known to have failed a screening test (significant in that breed)”

Vice President Mark Johnson said “We are supportive of the changes that the Kennel Club has made so far, and applaud them in allowing the introduction of new genes into certain breeds as demonstrated by the registration of the LUA Dalmatian. I support the introduction of the “Mate Select” scheme but believe that the Kennel Club should adopt the Advisory Council on Welfare in Dog Breeding recommendation and not register puppies with a coefficient of breeding (over 5 generations) greater than 12.5%.”

BSAVA supports the BVA in their call for a radical review of all breed standards to ensure that they actively protect the health and welfare of the dog. However it is important to remember that inherited disease is not just a problem of purebred dogs and BSAVA supports the introduction of legislation that seeks to improve the health and welfare of all dogs.

Margaret C
2nd March 2012, 11:57 PM
Well: that would mean a LOT of current and recent litters from well known breeders would NOT get KC registration!

In that category, according to the latest list of registrations, there is a litter with a COI of 33.2% ( and no eye test results for either parent ) and another litter with COI of 17.9% ( and a Sire under 2 years of age )