PDA

View Full Version : Charlie is bring neutered tomorrow



xoxHannaHxox
18th September 2012, 12:11 AM
He is almost 7 months and I feel like this is the right time for him although I wish we didn't have to do it at all.

I've been lying awake worrying when I need sleep! I'm afraid he will hate me for leaving him there and I know he will be crying loads when I leave :(

Just needed to share, I worry about everything and anything all the time!

RodRussell
18th September 2012, 12:35 AM
Seven months is much too young to castrate. He needs those hormones to grow properly. especially his bones. I'd wait a year.

pkt89
18th September 2012, 02:38 AM
http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2012/08/15/new-dog-sterilization-technique.aspx

I saw an article that neuter can be done via injection instead of surgery. Link is above.

Kitty

DZee
18th September 2012, 06:54 AM
If you research......most Veterinarians ( even those well-known & respected) will say between 6 - 12 months of age.
Even Animal Behavorist ~ Victoria Stilwell suggests earlier rather than later.

No research is perfect, and no experience is absolute. In reality, there are very few definite "right" answers. The best answer to most questions is to find a Vet who you trust to tell you the whole story and make your decision based on the pro's & cons of that information.
Early neutering is a controversial topic. A very few uncontrolled studies have shown a link with early neuters (before 14 months of age) and some forms of cancer and joint problems. Both the joint problems and the cancers that they have linked are relatively common in large-boned dogs, so the challenge is to prove whether the early neuter actually caused an increase in the incidence. There have been no studies that prove this. Waiting to neuter seems to offer fewer advantages for smaller dogs than larger ones.

Spaying females before 6 months is less controversial than neutering; preventing the first heat nearly eliminates the risk of breast cancer which is much more common than bone cancer.

....also.... we have always brought our dogs home the same day after their surgery. IF you discuss this with your Vet..most of the time they will be agreeable. The office itself usually closes at 6 p.m...& the dogs are left till morning w/ no supervision. So therefore bringing them home w/ YOU being able to monitor it throughout the night is far better IMO. Should there be a problem ( which most likely there will NOT be)..there is always an emergency number to call.
We also opted for the lazer surgery which is far less invasive..and they heal much quicker. They didn't really even need the cones. ( Honestly..dogs are not so stupid as to lick open their stitches. We have NEVER had ANY of our dogs over the last 30 yrs. even try!)

RodRussell
18th September 2012, 07:17 AM
If you research......most Veterinarians ( even those well-known & respected) will say between 6 - 12 months of age.
Even Animal Behavorist ~ Victoria Stilwell suggests earlier rather than later.

No research is perfect, and no experience is absolute. In reality, there are very few definite "right" answers. The best answer to most questions is to find a Vet who you trust to tell you the whole story and make your decision based on the pro's & cons of that information.
[COLOR=#4D4D4D]Early neutering is a controversial topic. A very few uncontrolled studies have shown a link with early neuters (before 14 months of age) and some forms of cancer and joint problems. Both the joint problems and the cancers that they have linked are relatively common in large-boned dogs, so the challenge is to prove whether the early neuter actually caused an increase in the incidence. There have been no studies that prove this. Waiting to neuter seems to offer fewer advantages for smaller dogs than larger ones.

Spaying females before 6 months is less controversial than neutering; preventing the first heat nearly eliminates the risk of breast cancer which is much more common than bone cancer. ...

I totally disagree with you on this. I don't think you've done your homework, and you are making very risky assumptlons without sufficient research. But, go ahead. Take that big risk. Risk hindering the dog's development to maturity. I would never take that risk with a cavalier. The breed has too many genetic strikes against it as it is. Ignore these experts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18052800

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2011/02/17/dangers-of-early-pet-spaying-or-neutering.aspx?np=true

This one is on the falsehood that early spaying eliminates the risk of mammary cancer:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1748-5827.2011.01220.x/full

Here is an AKC podcast released just this month: Early Spay and Neuter. In this podcast we hear from Dr. Benjamin Hart, a distinguished professor emeritus and active researcher at the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine. Dr. Hart is a diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists and discusses his CHF-funded research into the health implications of spay and neuter in Golden Retrievers, the results of which he and his research team have just submitted for publication.

http://www.akcchf.org/news-events/multimedia/podcasts/early-spay-and-neuter.html

DZee
18th September 2012, 09:53 AM
It's a bit offensive to assume if we choose to have our dog neutered or spayed prior to maturity we obviously don't care if our beloved pet/s are at risk.
There is still a lot yet totally understood on this subject..as it is still controversial.
I guess it's a little like politics...depends on who you are listening to.
It's sad that we cannot have an exchange of thoughts without being made to feel we are complete idiots.
I too have done research & my statements were made on everything I have ever read.
Perhaps all the reasons given for many years as to WHY to neuter & spay are just complete myths???
.. I don't honestly know.
All I shared in my previous posts came from well known Vet (experts) as well.
I pretty much copied what they had wrote.
Obviously there has been some new discoveries regarding this.

Yes..Dr. Hart speaks of the advantages of waiting regarding LARGER breeds ( his research was w/ golden retrievers).
There is still not significant evidence that it benefits a smaller breed to wait till sexual maturity.

Here is where I got what you obviously consider (mis) information....

http://www.cesarsway.com/askthevet/basicadvice/best-age-to-neuter-or-spay

http://www.akcchf.org/canine-health/your-dogs-health/determining-the-best-age-at.html

http://www.petmd.com/blogs/dailyvet/2009/July/30#.UFgNw7KPWeE

Bellybob
18th September 2012, 11:15 AM
I agree DZee, just had my lovely Sasha spayed at 8 mths after having two bitches not spayed who went on to suffer with Mammory Tumours, its the best decision for Sasha's future health as far as i am concerned x

Karlin
18th September 2012, 12:01 PM
Rod, I think you can make your personal point about believing the growth plate/maturity argument without offending people by arguing they (have) put their dogs at risk (certainly no more so than by not neutering!). Even these studies indicate 'risks' are pretty darn tiny. And they are challenged by other studies. And in some the study group of dogs was TINY -- sometimes just 10 dogs. Not very statistically significant.

Overall, I feel those studies cited are misleading in how they are used as an argument against neutering. There are significant differences in actual likelihoods of any dog having any serious issues over a lifetime from neutering (that comparative study, if you delve into it, reveals tiny fractional increases on the con side of neutering for various problems, while the preventative protection of neutering is for diseases that have huge potential impact -- such as mammary tumours).

I strongly feel that in many ways the larger arguments for neutering are the behaviour/management issues (which can directly lead to increased deaths, greater than what is accounted for by health issues, I would wager) and welfare reasons. Ask any vet or anyone in rescue: there's a far greater death risk or abandonment risk to any dog left intact simply from the innate behaviours of intact dogs. Neutering generally prevents/resolves the potential behavioural problems that cause owners to abandon, put down, sell on or send to the pound, an intact dog. It also eliminates the primary cause of dogs roaming and/or escaping -- males roaming after females in heat, or females escaping while in heat to get to males -- the end story of which is often a dog lost forever or killed by a car or other accident. Typically these dogs are young, going through puberty/first heat. and owners cannot manage them, are ignorant of risks, or choose not to.

Having talked to many pound personnel over the years, they say they get dogs handed in for behaviours owners could have limited or ended simply by neutering. Most surrendered dogs in pounds worldwide can be pts immediately or within 24-48 hours. The reclaim rate for dogs is also very low at pounds worldwide. They also say they often bring in whole posses of dogs, consisting of one female in heat being assaulted by a crowd of fighting males. Around 90% of the male dogs in pounds here are unneutered males. Most of the females are not spayed. Very often they are in heat. Many of the behaviours are harder to manage if the dog is neutered (males ion particular) after they start eg at later than about 9-10 months.

If people are persuaded by the argument about growth plates they can simply wait to neuter til their dog is one-ish but by waiting two-three heats to spay a female, the lifetime risk of mammary tumours, half of which are malignant, rises to 25%.

As for NAIA. I cannot take seriously any argument from that lobby organisation that has led the drive to prevent any productive work being accomplished on puppy mills because they feel breeders never should be subject to any kind of inspection (not in any workable way). In the past I've seen them send out warnings to breeders in specific areas to indicate there may be a raid on those wonderful responsible breeders with over 100 dogs in breeding cages. :( These often were passed around the old CKCS L-list. NAIA to me, are a breeder led lobby at the bottom of the barrel in having any right to moralise about dogs on any issue whatsoever. :x Oh, and that Mercola vet. The same one who recently chirped away about the things you need to adjust for with your flat-faced breeds, who have just a few little issues due to those flat faces people bought them for -- rather than taking the chance to discuss what you yourself have so well argued about the snub faces being a serious health risk and the flat face, which leads to eyeballs falling out of shallow skulls and serious breathing difficulties, maybe being a feature we should take a stance on for the dogs' sake. :( In despair at a vet industry that just rubberstamps the status quo health issues most easily prevented by not breeding for such features, I sent that Mercola article on to a few researchers, who were pretty disappointed that vets like this cater to their clients and audience and do not take the initiative to highlight a far more serious issue than might ever be encountered in an early spay. And unsubscribed from their nerwsletter.

xoxHannaHxox
18th September 2012, 12:17 PM
When I woke up this morning to read the first reply I was pretty shocked and Charlie had his appointment at 9am. I stuck to my decision as I had done all the research beforehand and decided based on his growth and behaviour (especially roaming issues!!) that this was around the right time to do it along with a trusted vet's advice. We also took Harry in at around this time in his life and never had any problems re: that department. I also considered his ability at 7 months to be able to bounce back pretty quickly from his op with hopefully no negative physical or emotional repercussions.

I was upset leaving him but he seemed ok and I pick him up at 6:20.

Sorry for sparking a heated debate :(

Karlin
18th September 2012, 12:26 PM
Don't apologise; it is always a good debate to have because people are often confused and worried and the issue comes up regularly. :thmbsup:

If people wish to wait til their dog is a year or so that is entirely a personal choice. There are to me, significant health reasons not to wait longer than after a single heat for a female for those who choose to wait. But I think evidence AGAINST neutering before one is inconclusive.

The AKC Canine Health Foundation article I think gives a good conclusion -- there are good reasons to spay a female and to spay after 6 months and before first heat. With males you can balance out the pros and cons on the health arguments -- but the writer fails to return to one of the strongest initial arguments in the article, the behavioural issues.

In my experience it is unwanted male behaviours coupled with the drive of an intact male to roam that argue for neutering, as well as preventing unwanted litters and more pound deaths, not the health issues that are primary.

I do not think it responsible to look at neutering only as a health discussion -- if anything, the behaviour issues leading to higher risk of death, and the welfare issues, are even more persuasive.

BTW of all the cavaliers I took out of the pounds here in Ireland over the years, most of them males, I can only recall one that was neutered.

MomObvious
18th September 2012, 01:37 PM
I agree don't apologize the when to neuter is still up for debate. Personally I think people being passionate about their opinions is good for the breed. After all we all want what is best for our dogs, the breed and ourselves. There is obviously both positive and negatives on both sides of this issue. The bottom line is it comes down to what's right for you and your dog. It reminds me of the breastfeeding issue in humans......do what works for you and your baby even if its a furbaby :)

I'm sure Charlie will be fine. I know it makes for a hard day. Sending happy thoughts!!!!

waldor
18th September 2012, 01:42 PM
I have always spayed and neutered our dogs at that 6 - 8 months age, per our veterinarian's recommendation. He was graduated from a well-respected vet school and I trust him on that. The dogs all lived to a ripe old age, too.

Every one of the dogs we had spayed/neutered came home that afternoon, groggy of course, and were back to normal by the next morning. The vets now have a better anesthesia, so the dogs come 'round much faster than they did twenty years ago.

I never fawn over any dog that goes for day surgery or procedure. My attitude (around the dog) is "business as usual" so that the dog doesn't pick up on any emotional trauma. We humans sometimes, without realizing it, teach the dog to be afraid of the vet. The decision is yours to take. Your dog won't hate you and he won't be crying when you leave, if you take the same approach. This way, in the long run, you are doing your dog a huge favor. He won't be afraid of the vet, who is really his friend. Our dogs never looked back when dropped off at the vet for the day; tails are wagging because mom is not upset and the staff will love on them.

All my dogs have loved going to the vet because I treat it like a trip to the park. Our Shih Tzu would almost fall asleep in my lap at the vet's!

Brian M
18th September 2012, 02:09 PM
Hi
I can't really comment as my four are all girls and the only intact males in our group are Luke and myself and Luke is far too young
and I am far too old to do any damage though Luke is now a faster runner than me .But back to a serious comment, with the girls I
always believed the appropriate time for them was midway between their first and second season would that still be considered the
best time. I do agree that sometimes a heated debate can be good as it gives an opportunity for others to read and educate from
the researched comments from both sides .

Karlin
18th September 2012, 03:13 PM
Brian, no, most vets would recommend before the first heat as does that AKC Canine Health article by a vet. If you wish to do otherwise it falls outside the general recommendation but you may feel persuaded by other arguments. But the majority vet and welfare opinion, whether people have differing views or not, is very definitely not to wait for a dog to have a heat and thus have an 8% risk of the most common, and commonly malignant, canine tumour in bitches.

RodRussell
18th September 2012, 04:03 PM
I consider premature neutering to be a very big mistake, healthwise for cavaliers. I consider this subject as important as the need for cavalier breeders to follow the MVD and SM breeding protocols.

There may be other reasons for it, like controlling assumed future bad behavior (for the convenience of owners with a lack of patience), but when you cut off one of a puppy's most important hormone producers prior to maturity, you risk interfering with the full development of the dog's immune system and its structural growth. By forcing the immune system to compensate for missing ingredients, you are getting that cavalier off to a very bad start in life. And the argument that early neutering only interferes with the growth of bones in larger breeds is bogus. It is like arguing that only cavaliers with small skulls will have Chiari-like malformation.

You may criticize the sources of some information, such as NAIA, but the content remains valid. And it is interesting that the most recent study, issued this year, finds that there is no valid evidence that early spaying reduces a bitch's risk for mammary cancer. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1748-5827.2011.01220.x/full

The problem with neutering is that if you find later on that you have made a mistake, it is too late to reverse it.

meljoy
18th September 2012, 05:33 PM
I asked about neutering recently on the forum and had some very helpful advice.
Leo is an intact lad who will be 6 years old next month. I was asking over a behavioural issue which thankfully hasnt been repeated.

My question is is it ever too late to neuter?

RodRussell
18th September 2012, 05:39 PM
... My question is is it ever too late to neuter?

I don't think so, except if the dog's health -- like advanced MVD -- would be affected by the procedure.

We had a 10 year old male castrated a couple of years ago. He had a low grade MVD murmur, and his bloodwork allowed it. He had no bad consequences from the operation.

DZee
18th September 2012, 05:59 PM
To Rod..to Karlin..to everyone.
I sincerely apologize for any drama here on the forum.
I came to this forum awhile back because of my love for dogs. And also because I had a new Cavalier puppy and was anxious to talk w/ others who owned them as well. I was searching for a fun and casual atmosphere. I truly would love to stay...but I do not want to feel I cannot state an opinion if it is contrary to perhaps someone elses for fear of being slammed. I obviously do not know all there is to know about dogs. I am still learning things. So please bear with me.
But if I can say this..I am not stupid concerning them either. We have owned and trained animals for many years.
Thank you Karlin for being a "peacemaker".
.and again...Rod.. I am sorry my post offended you.

meljoy
18th September 2012, 05:59 PM
I don't think so, except if the dog's health -- like advanced MVD -- would be affected by the procedure.

We had a 10 year old male castrated a couple of years ago. He had a low grade MVD murmur, and his bloodwork allowed it. He had no bad consequences from the operation.

Thanks Rod, thats good to know....although Leo may not agree icon_whistling

RodRussell
18th September 2012, 06:04 PM
To Rod..to Karlin..to everyone.
I sincerely apologize for any drama here on the forum.
I came to this forum awhile back because of my love for dogs. And also because I had a new Cavalier puppy and was anxious to talk w/ others who owned them as well. I was searching for a fun and casual atmosphere. I truly would love to stay...but I do not want to feel I cannot state an opinion if it is contrary to perhaps someone elses for fear of being slammed. I obviously do not know all there is to know about dogs. I am still learning things. So please bear with me.
But if I can say this..I am not stupid concerning them either. We have owned and trained animals for many years.
Thank you Karlin for being a "peacemaker".
.and again...Rod.. I am sorry my post offended you.

Dzee, you did not offend me. I just didn't agree with what you wrote, and because there was a very short time constraint -- the dog's appointment set for the next day -- I wanted the owner to understand that there are valid downsides to many veterinarians' love affair with premature neutering.

Just because a lot of vets are in favor of early neutering does not impress me by itself. Consider that 90% of vets who are delegates to the American Veterinary Medicine Association voted last month to condemn feeding raw food to dogs and cats. That fact just proves either their ignorance or their bias, or both. My hat is off to the other 10%.

RodRussell
18th September 2012, 06:09 PM
Thanks Rod, thats good to know....although Leo may not agree icon_whistling

I know of a golden retriever that was a very good agility dog that was neutered at about 4 years. He was very well-endowed, and after the procedure, he nearly doubled his speed in the agility ring. So, there can be unexpected upsides to neutering, too.

pkt89
18th September 2012, 06:27 PM
I look at spaying/neutering in a simple viewpoint. It is not a natural thing to be done to dogs. We did it to control the population and for our conveniences (easier to handle, less behavior issues...) which I agree. However since it is unnatural, dogs should be close to or fully developed before it was done. I had my Bee neutered at 1 year old.
Kitty

godblessthem
18th September 2012, 07:32 PM
Rod
i have wondered for a long time what the effect of the presence or absence of hormones has on the bone growth/size of the Cavalier skull. If early neutering before growth plates are closed effects the long bone growth of young Cavaliers, how would this effect the actual growth capacity of the skull to allow room for a growing brain ?

Has there been any research on this ? It really makes me wonder what are the real pros and cons are for early or later neutering in terms of healthy skull growth for a growing brain. I do know genetics play a big part here , but my question what is the importance of these hormones on the potential boney growth and size of the skull to allow more room for the brain in Cavaliers.

Thanks to all for any input or opinions.

Karlin
18th September 2012, 08:17 PM
Funny, this question is nearly the same to one posed by a breeder in the same part of the country as you, on the SM email list today. icon_nwunsure

I will post the same answer here that I posted to a similar discussion there.


Well, the vast bulk of information from the scans done on breeder cavaliers in the UK -- where breeders say about half have come up at some point with SM in their own discussions in the past -- would all be of intact dogs. And almost all the cavaliers in the 550+ sample used for one study on incidence would have been breeder MRIs of their intact breeding dogs, mostly from the UK and Nehterlands, not pets. So you can likely assume those figures from that study all primarily apply to intact animals, not spayed animals. You could email Clare Rusbridge on this.

In addition in the UK and Europe it is far less common to spay or neuter pets so I would wager the majority of all the cases of SM reported in the UK are in intact animals.

I thought the issue of growth plates had been responded to by the researcher doing the foetal tissue research who said that all indications are that the changes take place as early as during foetel development and that the brain seems to keep growing beyond what will fit the skull well before the age at which animals would be neutered. Maybe I am recalling an email or a question at one of the SM events but it did come up. Perhaps direct a question to the researcher, Imelda McGonnell.


if the main problem was neutering, then you would see syringomyelia across a vast range of breeds, instead, it seems to be confined to toy breeds (deliberately bred to have smaller skulls) and especially those with flatter faces (where several research projects now have indicated that breeding for a flatter face causes very strange things to happen with the internal organization of organs in the skull–with one result perhaps being the high incidence of PSOM in Cavaliers, and another possibly being a mangling of the communication between the growing skull and the growing brain, so that the skull fails to adequately accommodate the size of the brain in almost every single cavalier.

As syringomyelia is almost certainly–because of the points I note above– far better documented in intact dogs than in neutered dogs, I would find it very difficult to believe that neutering could have any significant role in causing this problem at the developmental stage when it occurs.

Brian M
18th September 2012, 08:28 PM
Hi
I just listened to this podcast by Dr Benjamin Hart ,thanks to Jill Scandoli for posting on the ckcs-sm yahoo group page ,he seems to think an early
spay/neuter is not appropriate ,thoughts pls.
Karlin your answer totally surprised me as I would take a risk for myself but never ever with the girls health ,so it proves again a lively debate can be
so helpful to learn .

http://www.akcchf.org/news-events/multimedia/podcasts/early-spay-and-neuter.html

RodRussell
18th September 2012, 08:32 PM
Rod
i have wondered for a long time what the effect of the presence or absence of hormones has on the bone growth/size of the Cavalier skull. If early neutering before growth plates are closed effects the long bone growth of young Cavaliers, how would this effect the actual growth capacity of the skull to allow room for a growing brain ?

Has there been any research on this ? It really makes me wonder what are the real pros and cons are for early or later neutering in terms of healthy skull growth for a growing brain. I do know genetics play a big part here , but my question what is the importance of these hormones on the potential boney growth and size of the skull to allow more room for the brain in Cavaliers.

Thanks to all for any input or opinions.

I agree with Karlin's comments in answer to your question. The ratio of theg growth of the cavalier's hind brain to the hind skull seems to be determined in the womb.

Karlin
18th September 2012, 08:39 PM
Brian, then you must never have read any of the posts or discussion here before on this topic as many times I've posted links to these statistics! :lol: So cannot understand why you are "totally surprised"!

Ah, yes, Jill always has something to post -- and there will always be vets with a different opinion -- but it is not the general recommendation at this time *as the podcast actually highlights) and you asked for the general recommendation. The researcher actually notes that little is still understood as relates to early or late neuter, to gender or to specific breeds (if there's a small risk of a cancer in a breed then increasing risks fourfold may remain a negligible risk compared to health benefits of a spay, say.)

And of course you make some personal risk choices with your dogs :) -- you do so if you feed them raw bones, for example. There are documented risks. You have to weigh up what risks you think are important. On spays, the statistics are quite longstanding that waiting til after the first heat introduces an 8% lifetime risk of mammary tumours which eventually rises to 24%. For me, even 8% is a fairly high risk for a tumour that half the time, is malignant. For you it was clearly not as great a risk when you decided to weigh up mammary tumours against what some argue about growth plates ands other risks. That was a choice that you made on your dogs' behalf -- as we all do all the time, eve in selecting a chew.

Brian M
18th September 2012, 08:49 PM
Hi Karlin

This is Nicki's post dated 10 Jan 2010 "quote I agree with the above, Cavaliers are so prone to Pyometra which can be very dangerous; also spaying dramatically reduces the risk of mammary tumours.

If there are coat changes, they can be managed - and as Karlin says, a small price to pay. Something like the Mars Coat King or furminator are good for removing dead hair - some people opt to have their dogs clipped.

You want to aim for about half way between seasons, so if they come in 6 monthly {which is about the normal gap}, yes 3 months is correct.

Some people do advise spaying early - personally I think around 12 to 15 months is the best time, by then they are physically mature."


And Bruce H 22nd Dec 2005 "quote We try to convince our puppy people to wait til their puppy is a year old or so before S/N. But primarily because we like to see the growth plates closed. I agree 100% with what Laura said about that on the other forum. However, many times we lose to the pressure vets put on people to S/N before the first season. "

Could be why I am confuse .

Rgds

bri

Karlin
18th September 2012, 09:03 PM
As I said: the issue has been discussed many many times here. Evidence is conflicting. And as I said: I think most such discussions ignore the welfare and behaviour issues that actually cause MORE deaths than say a possible link in some breeds to higher risk of a sarcoma. A heck of a lot more dogs die because owners don't like the dog marking and send it to the pound, or their unspayed bitch had an unwanted litter so puppies are pts, or a roaming intact male strays a mile away from home and ends up dying in a pound the family never thought to look in or is run over.

I would wager many more dogs die every month in pounds in Ireland for reasons directly and indirectly related to *not* neutering than ever suffer an illness over a lifetime due to neutering.

Oreo
18th September 2012, 09:56 PM
. . . .On spays, the statistics are quite longstanding that waiting til after the first heat introduces an 8% lifetime risk of mammary tumours which eventually rises to 24%. For me, even 8% is a fairly high risk for a tumour that half the time, is malignant. . .

This risk, as stated, however is completely incorrect. You have stated them as absolute risk rates (as many mistakenly do), and they are not.

The original document that these relative risk rates came from was "SCHNEIDOR, R, DORN, CR, TAYLOR, DO 1969: Factors influencing canine mammary cancer development and post surgical survival."

The exact wording is:


Summary . . . Among the variables, neutered bitches had 12% of the mammary cancer risk as compared to intact animals. Bitches spayed before any estrous cycles had approximately 0.5% of the mammary cancer risk; those that had only 1 estrous cycle had 8%, and animals that had 2 or more estrous cycles before neutering, 26%. Within the group having 2 or more estrous cycles before being spayed, those neutered before 2 years of age exhibited a marked sparing effect on mammary cancer risk not shown for bitches neutered after 2 years of age. . .

What that means is that IF your breed has a 10% risk rate for mammary cancer, waiting for 2 or more estrous cycles puts the girl at 26% OF THAT risk (so 2.6% risk). Some breeds have a heightened risk of mammary tumours (many spaniel breeds among those) but the vet info I have read puts the overall risk of mammary neoplasia at 3.4% - http://dogtorj.com/main-course/neutering-misconceptions/the-truth-about-gonadectomy/.

A list can be found here which shows some of the higher risk breeds (page 114) - http://www.oncoveterinaria.com.ar/contenidos/archivos/file/Julio/Incidence%20of%20and%20survival...pdf - and - http://actavet.vfu.cz/pdf/200574010103.pdf (http://actavet.vfu.cz/pdf/200574010103.pdf)

I happen to agree that people most often do not have the desire, support or time to deal with a female in heat. 24% of females will also face pyometra if left intact. Most will want to get a female spayed on those factors alone.

Oreo

godblessthem
19th September 2012, 12:36 AM
Thank you for your reply, Karlin. I find this all very interesting. Would you be able to give me the link to this SM email list ? I would like to read more about this discussion.

Thank you Karlin and Rod for your reference to the research on the changes that occur during early fetal development. It certainly may be correct, but it still leaves me wondering.

MadPip
19th September 2012, 08:44 PM
A very timely thread as Rosie has just caught us out by coming in to her 2nd season only 3.5months after her first. So her planned spay will have to wait until December now, hopefully she wont mess that up by coming into season so quickly again! She's a year old and I think fully grown height wise (same height at withers as her mum, and she was the smallest pup in the litter so I don't expect her to get bigger than her mum), which implies closed growth plates - only a scan or x-ray would show that for definite though.

It is interesting to read all the differing viewpoints, but ultimately we all do what we think is right for our dogs.