The point is, the male was not showing any symptoms! And I think the Neurologist was amazed he wasn't due to so many syrinxes. The breeder owned the bitch and used the dog who she also bred but it lived with someone else. The dog was scanned because he had been party to a mating to a bitch who produced 2 puppies, and she subsequently was pts as she was screaming in pain. I think the mating took place before scanning was considered desireable. Not sure how old she was when she developed signs and was pts.
I'm not a breeder either Honeymonster so it's hard for two "laypersons" to say what she should or shouldn't do,but I'm sure it's ok to offer a hypothetical response
so to recap...
This breeder has bred two unaffected cavalier pups from affected parents due to the scan missing out on a late onset severe syrinx in the dam who had been mated to an unscanned affected male.
She questions the usefulness of scanning as a tool because two clinically diagnosed dogs have produced unaffected offspring coupled with the fact it failed to screen her bitch as being affected.
So she has choices.
(1) Knowing the family history,she can disregard scanning as a tool for her breeding programme and breed without considering the MRi status of potential mates.
(2) She may decide not to breed at all.
(3) She might decide that mri scanning while not offering a definitive answer, can be used to find the best possible mate for her cavaliers and hope to breed away from the condition over successive generations.
she might choose
(a) a cavalier with herniation but no syrinx
(b)a cavalier with no herniation and no syrinx
(c) a cavalier with no malformation,herniation or syrinx.(Good luck with that one)
(4) She could submit scans to the AHT for use in the EBV programme
(5) she might want to hold tough for the EBV scheme to become available.
(6) She might want to talk with breeders who have been scanning over several generations and see how their programme is doing.
Best of luck to her with whatever she chooses.
My dogs were given a exam by a neurologist looking for signs of weakness and pain before all the MRI's.
I don't know of one breeder that would breed a dog 'showing' symptoms.
Yes, agree, lots here just doesn't sound right...
Scanning clear -- what does that mean? Absolutely no syrinxes? A malformation? No malformation, no syrinxes (this would be so rare as to make these two unusual offspring highly desireable for researchers on the genome scan)? A lot of people use the term 'clear' to mean any of a range of things. And who rated the dogs 'clear'? Any of the neurologists involved with the actual grading scheme? There's an awful lot of self-grading going on. This is the equivalent of breeders listening to their cavaliers, doing their own auscultations and announcing murmur grades then assuming them to be correct enough to submit to OFA, which no intelligent breeder would do. Though many are fairly clear to understand in general terms, reading MRIs remains a specialist skill, and there also are only a handful of neurologists participating on the grading scheme. A grade is only a grade if verified by one of those who are.
But really -- this 'case' is a red herring and pretty meaningless, both statistically and because the offspring are still too young for them to be proclaimed two 'clear' dogs from two affected parents. Consider a similar, progressive condition: MVD. No one would think it at all unusual for two dogs that acquire early or late onset severe MVD to have offspring heart testing clear at only 2.5 years old. SM like MVD is a progressive condition. I'd not breed the offspring with this background. Those offspring should be neutered.
Possible cases like this are why researchers are currently so eager to get the results of scanned cavaliers that are older than 5. It is only the older dogs who will help fill in the picture and provide answers on progression and also: give a better picture of the rate of affectedness in the whole population as to date, the percentages are calculated off mostly dogs under 5 (for a progressive condition, that is obviously going to give results skewed to look more positive than they actually are). The UK Club has a request for such scans to be done on its webpages at the moment. The reason I scanned my 10 year old dog was for this research.
If people want answers to questions about likelihood of inheritance they need to be 1) doing MRIs on their own dogs; 2) taking those MRI scans, & submitting them to Sarah Blott for analysis of inheritance; 3) pushing for more funded research; 4) supporting the genome scan.
Cavaliers: Jaspar Tansy : Mindy Connie Roxy Neasa
In memory: Lucy Leo Lily Libby
And yes, this certainly seems very odd for a 'health conscious breeder'. As I said: this post just seems a little bit odd from beginning to end. Maybe tell the 'health conscious breeder' to talk to Sarah Blott and Clare Rusbridge. I hope she has submitted all these important and useful scans too with the full story as it would be so helpful for research and for the breed .why did she not ask to see the Sire's MRI Scan ,since her Bitch had been MRI Scanned.
Cavaliers: Jaspar Tansy : Mindy Connie Roxy Neasa
In memory: Lucy Leo Lily Libby
Karlin wrote: It is only the older dogs who will help fill in the picture and provide answers on progression.
Talking to Nick Jefferey of Cambridge at the Cavalier Club Ch show last March, he said how little they know about what is happening with older dogs - once they are scanned and found to have SM, they don't get scanned again, just treated for the symptoms if and when they occur. This encouraged me to have Oliver scanned again under the Midland Club scheme (which is why I had asked Nick's opinion). He was scanned two years ago at 6 and had a very small syrinx but no symptoms. Scanned again this May at 8, the syrinx had doubled in size (still small, though) but still no symptoms. Two months later the first symptom appeared - mild paralysis of his right front leg, but so far he seems to have no real pain (but everything complicated by spondylosis in three spinal vertebrae close to his syrinx, which makes it difficult to know which is causing what).
As Karlin said, it is important to scan older dogs - especially if they have produced puppies (Oliver hadn't - I was just nosey!). Sarah Blott said at her Midland Club talk that if money is tight, scan your older dogs rather than your younger ones (unless the younger ones have symptoms, of course), as the older ones contribute more to research - and also give you information about whether their descendants may be at risk and themselves need to be scanned before breeding.
Kate, Oliver (cheerful as ever) and Aled (scanned clear at 2)
I also think that any breeder that truely cares about CKCS would be doing EVERYTHING they can to prevent incidences of SM in their lines and if that means volunteering information to help develop the EBVs then thats what they should do. Im not a breeder nor would I want to be - I would hate to have that responsiblity on my shoulders but I cetainly make sure I contribute in other ways through money donations- rubys DNA and scan information has been forwarded to the AHT and i cant say for definate but I am seriously considering donating Ruby when the time comes to Clare for research also. Clare is our neurologist and knows Ruby well- I wouldnt trust her with anyone else but like I said I wont really know how I feel about that until it happens- but I do like to think that I can make Ruby proud and be as brave as she is being through coping with this horiffic ordeal!!
Karen and Ruby
Without people willing to walk the fine line of dog breeding -- there would be no more cavaliers. I don't know about you, but I never want to be without one.
There have been a few cavaliers that have a "normal" skull and brain formation.
The fact that you think you know better than:
Breeders who have been doing this for DECADES
What are your qualifications??
In nature, nothing is clear, nothing is easy. IF it was, we would have cured a lot of human ills that cause human suffering.
Opinions are like bums, everyone has one.