Here's a concern:
It is clear that far too many breeders and people who are very involved on discussion lists and with breed clubs STILL are not aware of even the most basic steps that have been taken by national and international clubs on health issues, STILL are debating issues that in some cases no longer even exist, STILL are woefully poorly informed about the current state of research, what their own clubs are doing, what is being proposed.
That returns us to the same old issue -- if breeders are concerned about their image, what are their clubs doing to combat it? What are their representatives on their regional and national clubs doing? How many of those breeders on those committees and clubs cardiac test? MRI? How many health reps do? If not, why not? If they don't, if the clubs don't fundraise and support health research but only send a few random members off to argue on discussion lists, then what proof of any commitment to health is there? How is the average puppy buyer supposed to believe that clubs or breeders care when we cannot even find a basic list of breeders who do some basic health screening, when we do go looking for puppies? Would clubs do a survey of committee members and see where each stands? Will they explain why they feel there shouldn't be a public list of the sort that some have tried to set up that would enable breeders to list what they do and with which dogs? Will breeders not go ask their clubs why they themselves are unaware of key developments and even, basic information and research results on SM and MVD? In the age of the internet why do they not have more links to current research and more basic briefing documents on their websites?
Only this past week it was clear some breeders who are very vocal on SM, some of whom regularly have had negative things to say about researchers and scanning and concerns about breeders -- were not even aware that there is a list of dogs scanned on the UK Club site. This list now features hundreds of dogs from breeders and pet owners internationally, and has been there for over HALF A DECADE now!! :sl*p: Several breeders reacted with shock and indignation when the UK scanned dogs list was mentioned as Kathy noted -- they questioned whether it existed and implied if so, it seemed to be some evil plot (from pet owners, was the subtext...). More welcome was at least one person's interest in including their own dogs -- but what huge gaps in education and leadership from the national clubs if breeders of long standing remain unaware of this list!
Sheesh. This is why so many of us are tired of being told any concern at all abut health issues, breeders and dogs is not our business. What kind of vacuum of self-indulgent ignorance do some of these people live in (the ones unaware of the list still, years on, and implying such a list was a bad thing)? Do they NEVER read any posts except their own friends' posts on SM (god forbid they should learn something new...)? Do they never look at any of the other club's websites, particularly the UK Club's which has consistently had the most information on ongoing SM research (it sure seems pet owners take more interest in club websites than club members and are more familiar with the contents)? Do they simply wish to remain this clueless, as it serves their ability to non-debate to their hearts' content? How dare they then tell owners with affected dogs that 'there is SM and then there is SM', as one did last week upon hearing of a confirmed diagnosis (I kid you not) -- apparently suggesting that it isn't really anything for the owner to worry about? On the other hand, what better evidence than such a breathtakingly arrogant statement to indicate that it is apparently fine with these people to breed dogs with serious disease as long as the dog isn't showing pain that they can see. Would these same people say to a friend with a tumour, "Well, there is cancer and then there is cancer"?
The only conclusion that can be drawn from some a statement is that some feel it is OK to normalise ill health (just as MVD has in many circles now become so unworthy of remark that when dogs of only 6 or 7 are heart-murmur free, breeders post this news in excitement). I cannot think any parent would be happy living with the knowledge that their child had syrinxes, a grievously abnormal state of health. Regardless of whether there are any external signs of discomfort at the time of a scan, those who care about the affected patient, be it a parent with a child or an owner with a dog, must live with a potential pain time bomb every day of the remainder of that patient's life, always worried that what is latent will become debilitating. It is opinions like this, expressed on public lists, that make people wonder about how committed breeders are to addressing these health issues. I and many others don't care that sometimes SM has painful symptoms and sometimes it does not; that some cavaliers with heart murmurs at 5 live to age 10 or even 14 and some die in hideous pain at age 6. We want you to get your collective act together, and pressure your clubs and committee members and fellow breeders to show they care about more than organising dog shows.
There are many great individual breeders and brave committee members trying hard to preserve a future for the breed and push clubs in responsible directions. Those of you need to find each other and work together for change just as many pet owners and owners of health-affected dogs are doing. If you don't get the committees and clubs to work towards the goals you want then the entire profession of breeding will continue in disrepute. And you WILL end up regulated from outside.
