Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 74 of 74

Thread: Is there something wrong with the Cavalier Chat forum?

  1. #71
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Cork,Ireland.
    Posts
    2,563
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    No Trisha, it's no surprise at all.
    Sins

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    24,063
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    15

    Default

    When I say *power*~ I mean any breeder who is scanning has the power to help with positive change in the breed~ and I DO feel it is a responsibility to the future of the Cavalier.
    Absolutely.

    The complex inheritance is only going to be untangled by having the results of as wide a range of scans as possible. Also, for many breeders they will find the more scans are submitted, the more options they will have with their own dogs/lines -- because minimal information is a lot more likely to weigh against them than for them! It will be likely that all breeders will have a range of good options for matings but this will only emerge from having a wide range of scans. Not contributing to a project that many breeders ARE going to use -- and where many breeders will be talking amongst each other about the results they get back on some dogs of their own and others' breeding -- means ending up with weak data that is far more likely to obscure the potential strengths within their lines.

    Whatever about accusing researchers of 'breaching confidentiality' (which is a serious professional accusation and potentially defamatory) there are definitely breeders who will talk about others' dogs, and information on lines, good or bad, is unlikely to stay hidden. Contributing to Sarah Blott's research is therefore one of the best ways of making sure the gossip isn't only negative and that results are more nuanced. A lot of scans going to Sarah Blott are coming from affected dogs don't forget -- if breeders are (hopefully!) getting all the good scans they are stating on their private and public discussion lists then they need to be putting this information towards research. If they are getting poor scans it may be the choice of matings and that information is also critical. If anyone cares about the breed rather than just their egos then all scans need to be going to research. The EBVs combined with the genome work is going to be the best and very likely, the ONLY shot at saving this breed from oblivion in the longer term but more important -- relieving and reducing the pain suffered by so many dogs in this breed in the shorter term.
    Karlin
    Cavaliers: Jaspar Lily Tansy Libby Mindy
    In memory: Lucy Leo
    Cavalier SM Information site:www.smcavaliers.com

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Hatfield, Herts, UK
    Posts
    2,750
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chloe92us View Post
    I don't think it's any secret that some breeders were upset at what Clare Rusbridge and Simon Swift said on PDE. I don't see how what I've said is any surprise? It's already been mentioned in this thread about some breeders not contributing to the EBV research. Although many more breeders are now scanning, I don't think all of those scans are being contributed to research and that's a shame. When I say *power*~ I mean any breeder who is scanning has the power to help with positive change in the breed~ and I DO feel it is a responsibility to the future of the Cavalier.
    I know that one breeder has written that these specialists "stabbed us in the back" because when interviewed on the documentary they confirmed that cavaliers have health problems. Should researchers study the health of cavaliers but keep their conclusions a closely guarded secret?

    Health Representatives demanding that researchers should conceal their findings, so they do not upset breeders, seems to suggest some very warped thinking and a sorry outlook for cavalier health research.

    The other scenario, where confidentiality is cited as an issue, is in connection with my appearance on the film. I confirmed that someone's popular and successful stud dog had a MRI scanned diagnosis of SM, and that all the top breeders knew it.

    However my action is viewed, I cannot see how it can be used as a justification for boycotting important research studies.
    Margaret C

    Cavaliers......Faith, The Ginger Tank and Woody.
    Japanese Chins.... Dandy, Benny, Bridgette and Hana.
    Remembered with love......... Tommy Tuppence and Fonzi

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    24,063
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    15

    Default

    However my action is viewed, I cannot see how it can be used as a justification for boycotting important research studies.
    Some also said that a researcher revealed the results of the scan (for the programme). Then how to explain that I had heard the full story of this dog via other breeders well before Pedigree Dogs Exposed and when I barely knew who Margaret Carter was. But the people who told me -- and I heard this from more than one breeder -- were aware the breeder in question had been showing the scans around at a show and telling people of the results and thus his status was widely known and had since been gossiped about relentlessly. For breeders then to refuse to get involved with or even give any support to research on the basis that 'researchers' (or Margaret) revealed confidential scans is -- as I know many in the UK club know well, and at the very highest levels of the regional and national clubs -- using a known falsehood to suppress further research, or deliberately confuse and sow uncertainty, or undermine some researchers.

    Many people working for the breed were shockingly treated to back up the agenda of some people. Some breeders put a key and very dedicated and helpful, club-supportive researcher into a horrible position by advocating the views of Dr Ingpen -- their much-trumpeted 'neutral authority' who was, as I found through a few moments of basic googling -- the husband of a key person in the Australian cavalier club, and friends of the breeder who owned the dog in the film. And as a couple of human medics have confirmed, not of a background that would be terribly informed on reading and analyzing dog MRIs either as reading dog MRIs has differences to reading human MRIs. Not that his opinion was necessarily to be dismissed out of hand but his views were put forward when some doing so would have known the true story about the scans and his views were based on small images of a scan, not the digital originals. And those views also questioned the ability of a dedicated researcher in a public forum -- as if that researcher couldn't know a syrinx when he sees a syrinx, having read over a thousand cavalier MRIs and authored the main text on canine MRI.

    Nonetheless the researcher, due to his own dedication to the breed and helping some of the breeders who have used him most shamefully, continues to support them and their scanning programmes generously with his time and effort.

    These are the people these breeders claim violate confidentiality.

    Those who actually care about the breed -- rather than their show social lives and shelf of ribbons and trophies and puppy income -- can be very thankful the researchers generally ignore these sad people and continue to work on behalf of the breed.
    Karlin
    Cavaliers: Jaspar Lily Tansy Libby Mindy
    In memory: Lucy Leo
    Cavalier SM Information site:www.smcavaliers.com

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
  •