Scanning

[sins]

Opinions are like bums, everyone has one.

And as such is fully entitled to one without being confronted by demands to know about their qualifications by you or anyone else.
There is no minimum academic requirement for admission to this board that I am aware of, just like there is no formal qualifications required to breed dogs.
Any owner who is dealing with a dog who is being treated for SM and who pays their veterinary bills is more than adequately qualified to offer their opinion.
And as for neurologists and geneticists, I'm sick to the back teeth of reading about their competence being questioned and seeing their reputations being undermined.
At this stage many breeders have gone a long way to demonstrate their committment to the health of their dogs,but that too is being undermined by a determined core group of hotheads(some aren't even breeders) who seem to enjoy harrassing vulnerable pet owners who dare to express an opinion.
If breeders cannot show some solidarity and display even a little empathy with the pet owners who keep the faith and continue to buy from a compromised breed,then perhaps they should tackle the elements within their own peer group who continue to give two fingers to the Clubs and researchers and their fellow breeders who actually do give a damn.
Sins

[WoodHaven]

And as such is fully entitled to one without being confronted by demands to know about their qualifications by you or anyone else.
There is no minimum academic requirement for admission to this board that I am aware of, just like there is no formal qualifications required to breed dogs.
Any owner who is dealing with a dog who is being treated for SM and who pays their veterinary bills is more than adequately qualified to offer their opinion.
And as for neurologists and geneticists, I'm sick to the back teeth of reading about their competence being questioned and seeing their reputations being undermined.
At this stage many breeders have gone a long way to demonstrate their committment to the health of their dogs,but that too is being undermined by a determined core group of hotheads(some aren't even breeders) who seem to enjoy harrassing vulnerable pet owners who dare to express an opinion.
If breeders cannot show some solidarity and display even a little empathy with the pet owners who keep the faith and continue to buy from a compromised breed,then perhaps they should tackle the elements within their own peer group who continue to give two fingers to the Clubs and researchers and their fellow breeders who actually do give a damn.
Sins

So VERY true, but I didn't demand didley-- I asked (I did use the word qualification tho) from where she got this very stringent opinion-- what does she have that gives her INSIGHT that neither experience or expertise grant. Ya never know-- maybe she will change MY mind.

I never question the competency of any neuro, geneticists or cardio experts-- DID We read the same post?? Tho getting any of the to agree on much very difficult.

If vets/ and specialists don't agree, why would you expect breeders to?

AND I have NO idea what you are talking about/referring to about hotheads who aren't even breeders etc.. etc... But truly it seem to set you OFF.

[sins]

what does she have that gives her INSIGHT that neither experience or expertise grant

Surely the experience of having a dog with SM would give plenty of insight?
What do you expect the"pet crowd" to do? Just shut up about SM because they aren't qualified?? Can you perhaps specify what you condider an appropriate qualification to discuss SM and cavalier breeding?
Let's face facts, there will always be dogs produced who have SM and will invariably end up in the homes of people who will be responsible for their care.What does their qualifications have to do with it?
Although I suppose we could all be taken for fools seeing as we extended the courtesy of a response to an individual who started this thread with some contrived cock and bull story about a fictitious breeder.
You mean you haven't figured out who it is Sandy?
Sins

[WoodHaven]

Surely the experience of having a dog with SM would give plenty of insight? Well, I have two with SM.. Following the blessed protocol and all.
What do you expect the"pet crowd" to do? Just shut up about SM because they aren't qualified?? Can you perhaps specify what you condider an appropriate qualification to discuss SM and cavalier breeding?Having a background in genetics, or at least biology would help. Notice that most of the experts aren't telling breeders how to fix the problem(or that it can be fixed), just how we 'might' make it better. Isn't that worth noting?? IF the experts aren't sure, it seems odd (to me at least) that some pet owners KNOW how.
Let's face facts, there will always be dogs produced who have SM and will invariably end up in the homes of people who will be responsible for their care.What does their qualifications have to do with it? NOT really following this at all-- my questioning her qualifications of changing the protocol (which was devised by neuros) has what to do with this?
Although I suppose we could all be taken for fools seeing as we extended the courtesy of a response to an individual who started this thread with some contrived cock and bull story about a fictitious breeder.
You mean you haven't figured out who it is Sandy? No, but everyone who knows me, KNOWS I am very straightforward, blunt if you will, and I really don't delve into subterfuge.
Sins

[Karen and Ruby]

There are other ramifications of taking out too much in a breeding pool. Ask any geneticist. This is a major problem for dog breeders. An MRI is not non invasive-- It is a picture in time of how the brain and spine look. A clear MRI could give a false sense of security and you could have a majorly overused sire that could crop up other nasty issues like epilepsy etc..


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
Geneticists
Reproduction experts
and Neurologists

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.

Well well well... who would have thought that a tiny opinion could open such a can of worms. You may well have been breeding cavs for YEARS as you put it. but Ive been looking back over posts on this board and it seems that most of the times someone poses anything questionable about breeding on this forum you are the 1st one to pop out and start ranting.
No I dont think I know more than genetists and neurologists and experts I simply dont understtand why when SM was discovered over 10 years ago that its been left in the cuboard this long. Well its certain people in certain clubs that have let it get to this stage through not being willing to a) admit there was a problem and b) not making an effort to change

Yes nature is very complex but if left alone we wouldnt be in this situation in the 1st place would we and i wouldnt have to watch my poor girl suffer EVERY GOD DAMN DAY so YES i am entitled to an opinion and YES im entitled to voice it on this forum the same way as you can and i should be able to with out having 20 questions from a breeder living 1000s of miles away.

[WoodHaven]

Well well well... who would have thought that a tiny opinion could open such a can of worms. You may well have been breeding cavs for YEARS as you put it. but Ive been looking back over posts on this board and it seems that most of the times someone poses anything questionable about breeding on this forum you are the 1st one to pop out and start ranting.
No I dont think I know more than genetists and neurologists and experts I simply dont understtand why when SM was discovered over 10 years ago that its been left in the cuboard this long. Well its certain people in certain clubs that have let it get to this stage through not being willing to a) admit there was a problem and b) not making an effort to change

Yes nature is very complex but if left alone we wouldnt be in this situation in the 1st place would we and i wouldnt have to watch my poor girl suffer EVERY GOD DAMN DAY so YES i am entitled to an opinion and YES im entitled to voice it on this forum the same way as you can and i should be able to with out having 20 questions from a breeder living 1000s of miles away.

This is turning into a bad Springer episode-- do I hear "you don't know me"!!
I never said I'd been breeding anything for any time.

I don't rant, I do defend, and I don't attack unless attacked.
I doubted your credentials to change the protocol? That was all I did to "you".
You've been on cavalier talk since WHEN?? the middle of June 2009-- I've been here since Nov. 2005. I've put in a lot more 'dues' than you have. IMNSHO

[Karlin]

I can vouch that Sandy has put a lot of time and thought into her breeding programme and she expresses many of the difficult choices breeders face. I value that input.

I think some folks are misreading posts though and thinking they are being targetted when they are not, and when comments are actually being directed at third parties. This curious and theoretical case doesn't need to be made personal.

Back to whether this 'case' actually exists? I have my doubts and have good evidence for doubting it. If, however, it does, then it would be a sad and shocking example of how breeders who could make major contributions to finding solutions to this horrific breed health problem by working with researchers with these dogs' MRIs and pedigrees, instead are willing to block progression and find reasons why they and others won't do anything at all. That, if it were to be the case, is disgusting.

Sarah Blott's work addresses quite thoroughly the issue of diversity and retaining as broad a working gene pool as possible -- and she believes it IS quite broad. If there's a lack of understanding of this point, maybe the US Clubs need to get her over to speak to groups and post detailed information about her research and EBVs and what is needed from breeders for these to work -- because she has discussed all these issues, she has explained that breeding with EBVs helps breeders avoid other bottlenecks, and so on. Maybe the international clubs really should start working *together* on this issue?

An MRI is indeed a snapshot in time but a heck of a lot can be seen and predicted in such a snapshot. An auscultation is also only 'a snapshot in time' yet I have never heard breeders who are working to minimise MVD say there's no point in auscultations as things could change in future.

Statistically there's always a possibility that two badly affected parents could produce perfectly clear offspring. But statistically the odds are far more likely that these two dogs will develop syrinxes over time and perhaps, like the parents, have a form of SM that progresses slowly at first then becomes devastatingly bad.

More MRIs of older dogs would help researchers to better understand progression and answer some of these questions.

At the same time, if breeding cavaliers to minimise SM only brings out other problems, then truly the viability of the breed must then be questioned. There is no justification to continue breeding just in the hopes that some dogs won't have such problems and allow serious heath problems to be 'just a cavalier thing' that means dogs suffer and die.

but going back to Sarah Blott -- these are ALL issues she addresses and she is optimistic about maintaining diversity and addressing these health problems. But breeders will have to be a key part of getting that information in to the researchers that enables these projects to succeed. Hoping everyone else will do the work and submit the information -- or worse, hiding bad scan results in the hopes that one can prop one's own lines while as a consequence allowing SM to expand even further -- is morally and ethically bankrupt.

[Karlin]

This article by Sarah Blott, Tom Lewis and Carol Fowler is invaluable for better understanding why breeding away from SM does not mean having to dangerously foreclose the gene pool and could address all heritable diseases. Maybe this link should be circulated more widely via the clubs so breeders would better understand this complicated area.

http://www.cavaliercampaign.com/ebv.htm

[Bet]

I just can't understand why this excellant Article is not on the UK CKCS CLUB WEB SITE.

It is much easier to follow than what is on the CKCS CLUB Web SITE at the moment.

Infact I believe it should be being Mailed to all Club Members,.

This is such important information.

Maybe I am being a bit snide here, but on the Club Web Site ,great mention is being made of a Cavalier Rally at Blenheim next year, but surely this easy to follow Article ,and could get more Cavalier Owners to be giving Dr S Blott the information she needs for her Research,should also be on the Club Web Site .

Bet(Hargreaves)

[Kate H]

I know the webmaster for the Cavalier Club site, so I'll ask him if he could put the article on - presumably he'll need copyright permission from Dog World (as I suppose Carol had to get for her website).

Kate, Oliver and Aled

Oops - have just checked the article itself and realised we could (with her permission, of course) lift it straight from Carol's website - the version in Dog World was a shortened one, minus the diagrams.