Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 210111213 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 130

Thread: Pedigree Dogs Exposed: part three

  1. #111
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    N.W.Iowa
    Posts
    1,324
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Dog World Breed Notes now has Sept 5 again but with 0 comments. A new article,again by Norma Ingliis, for today with errors in my opinion.
    frecklesmom
    Learning new things everyday

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Essex UK
    Posts
    8,136
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I have written a letter of complaint to Dogworld and have pointed out the issues of defamation.

    The web site has a glitch and logs me out and in and out again as I browse and each time I come to the breed notes 5th September, I am logged out and unable to post.
    ....
    Dylan, Poppy & Kipling's
    *''' ' "*Mummy`` "*'
    ,'*" "*'

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    N.W.Iowa
    Posts
    1,324
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    In contrast to Dogs World, Dogs Today has a good article up titled
    Unhealthy Attitudes at Cavalier Club this is second article down

    Also, first article is a petition to Kennel Club

    http://www.coldwetnose.blogspot.com/
    frecklesmom
    Learning new things everyday

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    N.W.Iowa
    Posts
    1,324
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    This is from Margaret re: letters

    I would really appreciate members writing a polite & reasoned letter to the Chairman:-

    Mrs L Jupp,
    60 Roundway,
    Camberley,
    Surrey, GU15 1NU

    I think that the Cavalier Club committee need to hear what ordinary cavalier owners think, not just the vocal group of show breeders who do not want to let anything stop them planning matings with only success in the show ring in their minds.

    Thank you for all your support, I really appreciate it.

    Margaret
    frecklesmom
    Learning new things everyday

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Hi Jan

    The minutes of the Cavalier Club Committee Meetings are not available to ordinary members, so you never know if your letter has been brought to their attention or not.

    I've done the same thing (on other issues in the past) and I don't know if the letter was ever read out to the committee.

    Doesn't mean that we shouldn't keep writing though.

    Carol

  6. #116
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Essex UK
    Posts
    8,136
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I finally managed to get a reply on Dogworld. I changed my original post slightly at the beginning as Norma Inglis criticised me in one of the posts that was deleted for not giving my surname and not saying who I was (of course I don't want to put my surname out on the internet) and at the end I added something too.

    http://www.dogworld.co.uk/Breeds/BreedNotes/36-CAV-(1)
    Last edited by *Pauline*; 12th September 2008 at 10:35 PM.
    ....
    Dylan, Poppy & Kipling's
    *''' ' "*Mummy`` "*'
    ,'*" "*'

  7. #117
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    23,879
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    15

    Default

    One of the surprising quotes in Dr Ingpen's letter, so eagerly seized upon by Norma Inglis, Veronica Hull and others, is this:

    “1 The clinical research published is seriously flawed and the figures are simply unacceptable. The basis of any study such as this has to be developed from a sound population sample rather than a selected group, which will provide a massive bias rendering it from an epidemiological point of view useless. Unfortunately, this is not uncommon in scientific studies when the opinion of the researcher is clear almost before the study starts.
    Let's dissect it. ALL the research published is clinically flawed? Really?! There are now studies from several continents, all of which have had approximately the same incidence of malformation and SM: UK, Holland, France, South Africa, several in the US and one currently underway in Canada. All of these were conducted by completely different groups of researchers with different academic or other professional associations. One significant study -- FUNDED BY THE US CLUB, THE ACKCSC -- had over 30% with SM, and this sample was all relatively young dogs (eg under 5). In a progressive disease, one assumes the younger the sample, the lower the level of incidence, as with MVD in cavaliers:

    MRI images were obtained in 11 clinically affected and 48 unaffected CKCS, and in 5 control dogs of different breeds using a Siemens AG 1.5 T MRI. Ages ranged from 1 to 5 years
    The results? And remember, this is a study that was undertaken on behalf of, and funded by, the breed club itself! NB: SHM is SM,

    Fifty-one of the CKCS were classified as morphologically abnormal; 22 of these had SHM. Thirteen dogs with SHM did not have clinical signs; 2 dogs with clinical signs did not have SHM. Observed morphologic abnormalities included mild to marked cerebellar herniation and occipital dysplasia (50/59), medullary kinking (39/59), cerebellar crowding and indentation (55/59) and a dorsal compressive lesion at the level of the first and second cervical vertebral junction (12/59). The dorsal compressive lesion lay immediately cranial to the syrinx in several cases. Clinically affected dogs were more likely to have SHM than unaffected dogs, and the ratio of the caudal fossa volume to the total brain volume was significantly smaller in affected dogs...

    In conclusion, the incidence of caudal fossa and cervical spinal abnormalities is high in CKCS showing clinical signs of Chiari malformation and in unaffected CKCS.
    Read the full results here: http://ackcsccharitabletrust.org/ncsureport.htm

    So Dr Ingpen is saying a dozen different international researchers all started with opinions they planned to have confirmed in their studies? Even the team hand chosen by the largest US club? Goodness, it is a virtual conspiracy of respected scientists! Given that the vast majority of dogs in every single study were brought by breeders -- not pet owners --who presumably believed the dogs were unaffected as they were showing no clinical signs (this has been confirmed by researchers themselves in several presentations), it seems extraordinary that all these samples could keep aligning at the same general levels of incidence.

    Would it not be more likely then that perhaps a doctor in a different field of medicine for an entirely different species of animal, humans, and married to a cavalier breeder and friendly enough with the Malvern dog breeder to personally visit her home on a visit to the UK from Australia, to read her dog's scan (as she insists he did), might instead be the one with an opinion that was clear even before the reading started?

    In summary, we have:

    * a dozen researchers all with the same general results on SM incidence, across several continents, at independent institutions, some professional rivals with each other and no predisposition to confirm each others' studies

    versus

    * one human doctor married to a cavalier breeder friendly with the breeder in question
    Karlin
    Cavaliers: Jaspar Leo Lily Tansy
    In memory: Lucy
    Cavalier SM Infosite:www.smcavaliers.com

  8. #118
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Essex UK
    Posts
    8,136
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    ....
    Dylan, Poppy & Kipling's
    *''' ' "*Mummy`` "*'
    ,'*" "*'

  9. #119
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Surrey UK
    Posts
    469
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Well done Pauline. And thanks Karlin for all the information you post - being very concise, I tend to crib bits and pieces for the letters I have been writing.

    Very good comments from Beverly Cuddy on the Cold Wet Nose Blog about "Saint Margaret" this morning. Hope that the CKCS club are snowed under with post. Whatever happens at this meeting (if it takes place) they have totally destroyed any credibility as an association that cares about their Cavaliers.
    Jan
    Owned by Rufus (B&T) and Piper (Border Terrier) and in loving memory of 12 years of Toby joy (Tri cavalier) - waiting at the rainbow bridge.

  10. #120
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Thank you Karlin and all you responsible cavalier owners for this site which I found by accident a few days ago. It is so wonderful to find a forum of sensible people, who know that the most important thing is the health of their dogs, and who don't try and find some ridiculous reason for SM other than that shown by the research. I am horrified by the way that Margaret C has been treated, and I also received a letter from the club about the meeting but cannot go. I shall write a letter however. I could understand if it was a person who had deliberately bred a dog they knew had SM that was being castigated, but to treat the person who has only the health of puppies as her focus in this way is truly ridiculous. Unless the club comes up with some answers to all this, I shall not be renewing my membership next year.

    I breed cavaliers in a very small way, having only two breeding bitches who live with us in the house, and have had 28 puppies, none of which have had MVD or any heart problem, either as puppies or as grown dogs. People find out very quickly that it is health and not showing that is a person's main focus in breeding and I get at least one call a week for people wanting a puppy.

    However, I have heard from a good friend who had one of my puppies that the dog has been diagnosed with SM and I am devastated. My first reaction was that I would give up breeding, and I spoke to my vet who is very supportive of my 'I don't breed for show, just for health and companionship' policy.

    He was also very worried and we talked through the whole thing. He would really like to see a new society for dog breeding in this country, where pedigree dogs are bred according to the outline on the petition which has been mentioned before on this site. No dog should be able to be bred or shown who is in any way suffering due to the disease or deformity inherent in the breed. There needs to be a completely radical rethink around dog breeding and showing.

    (I used to show cats, and have won shows that I would never have won with a dog, as championship cat shows are set up so the cats are completely anonymous and judged just for themselves. This applies to the blankets in the cage - must be plain white with no distinguishing marks - and the identification of the cats - white ribbon round the necks with a number attached. Disqualification applies when any flouting of the anonymity rule is tried. It would be interesting to see what would happen if some method of anonymity was applied to dog shows!)

    I have two puppies that I am bringing on to breed from in the future, having now retired my two elderly girls, and I have decided that I will follow the protocols as strictly for SM as I did for MVD, and also carry on the protocols for MVD. I will not breed until they are 2.5 years old, and with A scans, and will only breed to an A dog, with no murmur and with cardiologist reports of clear hearts.

    What I would like to know is this. Is there any point in having the puppies (5 months old at present) scanned before they are two and a half? Will SM show as clearly now as it would as adult dogs? Can the disease show itself as clear as a puppy and then be seen as an adult?

    Thank you again for this marvellous site.

    Sue

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •