Dear editor,
I would like to add some further commentary regarding the film Pedigree Dogs Exposed, shown on BBC1 on August 19. In contrast to Nick Blayney [Ed note: BVA president at time documentary aired and featured in the documentary being very supportive of the KC] (September 1 issue), I thought the programme was a reasonable presentation to the general public of the facts associated with pedigree dog breeding. No doubt, many will have been surprised – or even shocked – at the evidence of ill health in pedigree dogs, although the existence of widespread breed-associated disease is common knowledge among veterinary professionals.
I was also interviewed at length for the programme. The producers told me an important obstacle they encountered was a reluctance of vets, and especially those in academia, to speak freely about The Kennel Club (KC), because of the potential risk of losing future research funding from the organisation. This certainly is a quandary, because of the extreme paucity of funds available in this country for clinical research in dogs. Indeed, I have been a recipient of KC funding, so publicly questioning the KC could appear disloyal.
However, as vets our foremost professional loyalty must be to the animals we have pledged to serve. I believe the time has now come to abandon the pusillanimous approach to the more questionable aspects of dog breeding in this country. I would liken the need for the veterinary profession to unite and present an alternative point of view to the KC to that of a person who is alarmed by the errant behaviour of a close friend or relative and who must eventually speak out.
The whole issue of dog breeding practice merits an article in itself, but of the points raised by Mr Blayney in the article, science – and its role in providing solutions – is, of course, of key importance. There are, however, two aspects to the control of breed-associated disease.
Firstly, there are dogs that are obviously conformationally unsound: there is little need for scientific research to understand that animals that are unable to breathe without distress, to walk for any reasonable distance or to breed unaided – all prevalent in specific breeds – are not humane end points of in-breeding. As a veterinary educator, I find it difficult to explain to students the claim that the KC is safeguarding the health and welfare of pedigree dogs while this is permitted. It also often begs questions from students about why it is so important that the KC remains “in control” of dog breeding?
Secondly, there are breeds that are conformationally basically sound, but carry a high risk for specific breed-associated genetic disease. For these, the present approach – rightly developed by the KC – of attempting to identify and eliminate disease-associated genes may be appropriate: there are many extremely conscientious breeders who wish to do all they can to preserve the health of their breeds. However, these individuals often feel their efforts are poorly recognised and supported. Therefore, in addition to establishing appropriate genetic testing methodology, very vigorous support of these breeders from both the KC and the veterinary organisations is imperative if these programmes are to successfully achieve their aims.
Even so, some breed-associated diseases will likely prove refractory to this type of approach – most notably those that are caused by multiple genetic abnormalities. Furthermore, elimination of individuals carrying one specific genetic abnormality may also limit the remaining available gene pool to an unrealistic degree.
Finally, it has been noted that current breeding practice will inevitably shrink gene pools, meaning it will be unsustainable in the long term for all breeds. It was disappointing that this was pointed out in the television programme by a geneticist rather than a veterinarian. Clearly, there are many issues regarding dog breeding that the veterinary profession as a whole could, and should, provide analysis and advice on. It may be necessary for more obvious and radical approaches to be adopted. For instance, it could be argued that the greatest contribution the veterinary profession could make to improving the welfare of domestic dogs would be to campaign for an end to]selective breeding in the form it is currently practised.
Yours faithfully
NICK JEFFERY, BVSc, PhD, CertSAO, DSAS(soft tissue), DECVN, DECVS, FRCVS,
Professor of veterinary clinical studies, Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge CB3 0ES.
First, there was a rather nasty allegation about Jemima's filming of the Cavaliers on the programme on the Dog World site. 
