• If you're a past member of the board, but can't recall your password any more, you don't need to set up a new account (unless you wish to). As long as you recall your old login name, you can log in with that user name then select 'forgot password' and the board will email you at your registration email, to let you reset your password.

Charlie is bring neutered tomorrow

xoxHannaHxox

Well-known member
He is almost 7 months and I feel like this is the right time for him although I wish we didn't have to do it at all.

I've been lying awake worrying when I need sleep! I'm afraid he will hate me for leaving him there and I know he will be crying loads when I leave :(

Just needed to share, I worry about everything and anything all the time!
 
Seven months is much too young to castrate. He needs those hormones to grow properly. especially his bones. I'd wait a year.
 
If you research......most Veterinarians ( even those well-known & respected) will say between 6 - 12 months of age.
Even Animal Behavorist ~ Victoria Stilwell suggests earlier rather than later.

No research is perfect, and no experience is absolute. In reality, there are very few definite "right" answers. The best answer to most questions is to find a Vet who you trust to tell you the whole story and make your decision based on the pro's & cons of that information.

Early neutering is a controversial topic. A very few uncontrolled studies have shown a link with early neuters (before 14 months of age) and some forms of cancer and joint problems. Both the joint problems and the cancers that they have linked are relatively common in large-boned dogs, so the challenge is to prove whether the early neuter actually caused an increase in the incidence. There have been no studies that prove this. Waiting to neuter seems to offer fewer advantages for smaller dogs than larger ones.

Spaying females before 6 months is less controversial than neutering; preventing the first heat nearly eliminates the risk of breast cancer which is much more common than bone cancer.

....also.... we have always brought our dogs home the same day after their surgery. IF you discuss this with your Vet..most of the time they will be agreeable. The office itself usually closes at 6 p.m...& the dogs are left till morning w/ no supervision. So therefore bringing them home w/ YOU being able to monitor it throughout the night is far better IMO. Should there be a problem ( which most likely there will NOT be)..there is always an emergency number to call.
We also opted for the lazer surgery which is far less invasive..and they heal much quicker. They didn't really even need the cones. ( Honestly..dogs are not so stupid as to lick open their stitches. We have NEVER had ANY of our dogs over the last 30 yrs. even try!)
 
Last edited:
If you research......most Veterinarians ( even those well-known & respected) will say between 6 - 12 months of age.
Even Animal Behavorist ~ Victoria Stilwell suggests earlier rather than later.

No research is perfect, and no experience is absolute. In reality, there are very few definite "right" answers. The best answer to most questions is to find a Vet who you trust to tell you the whole story and make your decision based on the pro's & cons of that information.

Early neutering is a controversial topic. A very few uncontrolled studies have shown a link with early neuters (before 14 months of age) and some forms of cancer and joint problems. Both the joint problems and the cancers that they have linked are relatively common in large-boned dogs, so the challenge is to prove whether the early neuter actually caused an increase in the incidence. There have been no studies that prove this. Waiting to neuter seems to offer fewer advantages for smaller dogs than larger ones.

Spaying females before 6 months is less controversial than neutering; preventing the first heat nearly eliminates the risk of breast cancer which is much more common than bone cancer. ...


I totally disagree with you on this. I don't think you've done your homework, and you are making very risky assumptlons without sufficient research. But, go ahead. Take that big risk. Risk hindering the dog's development to maturity. I would never take that risk with a cavalier. The breed has too many genetic strikes against it as it is. Ignore these experts:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18052800

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

http://healthypets.mercola.com/site...f-early-pet-spaying-or-neutering.aspx?np=true

This one is on the falsehood that early spaying eliminates the risk of mammary cancer:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1748-5827.2011.01220.x/full

Here is an AKC podcast released just this month: Early Spay and Neuter. In this podcast we hear from Dr. Benjamin Hart, a distinguished professor emeritus and active researcher at the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine. Dr. Hart is a diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Behaviorists and discusses his CHF-funded research into the health implications of spay and neuter in Golden Retrievers, the results of which he and his research team have just submitted for publication.

http://www.akcchf.org/news-events/multimedia/podcasts/early-spay-and-neuter.html
 
Last edited:
It's a bit offensive to assume if we choose to have our dog neutered or spayed prior to maturity we obviously don't care if our beloved pet/s are at risk.
There is still a lot yet totally understood on this subject..as it is still controversial.
I guess it's a little like politics...depends on who you are listening to.
It's sad that we cannot have an exchange of thoughts without being made to feel we are complete idiots.
I too have done research & my statements were made on everything I have ever read.
Perhaps all the reasons given for many years as to WHY to neuter & spay are just complete myths???
.. I don't honestly know.
All I shared in my previous posts came from well known Vet (experts) as well.
I pretty much copied what they had wrote.
Obviously there has been some new discoveries regarding this.

Yes..Dr. Hart speaks of the advantages of waiting regarding LARGER breeds ( his research was w/ golden retrievers).
There is still not significant evidence that it benefits a smaller breed to wait till sexual maturity.

Here is where I got what you obviously consider (mis) information....

http://www.cesarsway.com/askthevet/basicadvice/best-age-to-neuter-or-spay

http://www.akcchf.org/canine-health/your-dogs-health/determining-the-best-age-at.html

http://www.petmd.com/blogs/dailyvet/2009/July/30#.UFgNw7KPWeE
 
Last edited:
I agree DZee, just had my lovely Sasha spayed at 8 mths after having two bitches not spayed who went on to suffer with Mammory Tumours, its the best decision for Sasha's future health as far as i am concerned x
 
Rod, I think you can make your personal point about believing the growth plate/maturity argument without offending people by arguing they (have) put their dogs at risk (certainly no more so than by not neutering!). Even these studies indicate 'risks' are pretty darn tiny. And they are challenged by other studies. And in some the study group of dogs was TINY -- sometimes just 10 dogs. Not very statistically significant.

Overall, I feel those studies cited are misleading in how they are used as an argument against neutering. There are significant differences in actual likelihoods of any dog having any serious issues over a lifetime from neutering (that comparative study, if you delve into it, reveals tiny fractional increases on the con side of neutering for various problems, while the preventative protection of neutering is for diseases that have huge potential impact -- such as mammary tumours).

I strongly feel that in many ways the larger arguments for neutering are the behaviour/management issues (which can directly lead to increased deaths, greater than what is accounted for by health issues, I would wager) and welfare reasons. Ask any vet or anyone in rescue: there's a far greater death risk or abandonment risk to any dog left intact simply from the innate behaviours of intact dogs. Neutering generally prevents/resolves the potential behavioural problems that cause owners to abandon, put down, sell on or send to the pound, an intact dog. It also eliminates the primary cause of dogs roaming and/or escaping -- males roaming after females in heat, or females escaping while in heat to get to males -- the end story of which is often a dog lost forever or killed by a car or other accident. Typically these dogs are young, going through puberty/first heat. and owners cannot manage them, are ignorant of risks, or choose not to.

Having talked to many pound personnel over the years, they say they get dogs handed in for behaviours owners could have limited or ended simply by neutering. Most surrendered dogs in pounds worldwide can be pts immediately or within 24-48 hours. The reclaim rate for dogs is also very low at pounds worldwide. They also say they often bring in whole posses of dogs, consisting of one female in heat being assaulted by a crowd of fighting males. Around 90% of the male dogs in pounds here are unneutered males. Most of the females are not spayed. Very often they are in heat. Many of the behaviours are harder to manage if the dog is neutered (males ion particular) after they start eg at later than about 9-10 months.

If people are persuaded by the argument about growth plates they can simply wait to neuter til their dog is one-ish but by waiting two-three heats to spay a female, the lifetime risk of mammary tumours, half of which are malignant, rises to 25%.

As for NAIA. I cannot take seriously any argument from that lobby organisation that has led the drive to prevent any productive work being accomplished on puppy mills because they feel breeders never should be subject to any kind of inspection (not in any workable way). In the past I've seen them send out warnings to breeders in specific areas to indicate there may be a raid on those wonderful responsible breeders with over 100 dogs in breeding cages. :( These often were passed around the old CKCS L-list. NAIA to me, are a breeder led lobby at the bottom of the barrel in having any right to moralise about dogs on any issue whatsoever. :x Oh, and that Mercola vet. The same one who recently chirped away about the things you need to adjust for with your flat-faced breeds, who have just a few little issues due to those flat faces people bought them for -- rather than taking the chance to discuss what you yourself have so well argued about the snub faces being a serious health risk and the flat face, which leads to eyeballs falling out of shallow skulls and serious breathing difficulties, maybe being a feature we should take a stance on for the dogs' sake. :( In despair at a vet industry that just rubberstamps the status quo health issues most easily prevented by not breeding for such features, I sent that Mercola article on to a few researchers, who were pretty disappointed that vets like this cater to their clients and audience and do not take the initiative to highlight a far more serious issue than might ever be encountered in an early spay. And unsubscribed from their nerwsletter.
 
When I woke up this morning to read the first reply I was pretty shocked and Charlie had his appointment at 9am. I stuck to my decision as I had done all the research beforehand and decided based on his growth and behaviour (especially roaming issues!!) that this was around the right time to do it along with a trusted vet's advice. We also took Harry in at around this time in his life and never had any problems re: that department. I also considered his ability at 7 months to be able to bounce back pretty quickly from his op with hopefully no negative physical or emotional repercussions.

I was upset leaving him but he seemed ok and I pick him up at 6:20.

Sorry for sparking a heated debate :(
 
Don't apologise; it is always a good debate to have because people are often confused and worried and the issue comes up regularly. (y)

If people wish to wait til their dog is a year or so that is entirely a personal choice. There are to me, significant health reasons not to wait longer than after a single heat for a female for those who choose to wait. But I think evidence AGAINST neutering before one is inconclusive.

The AKC Canine Health Foundation article I think gives a good conclusion -- there are good reasons to spay a female and to spay after 6 months and before first heat. With males you can balance out the pros and cons on the health arguments -- but the writer fails to return to one of the strongest initial arguments in the article, the behavioural issues.

In my experience it is unwanted male behaviours coupled with the drive of an intact male to roam that argue for neutering, as well as preventing unwanted litters and more pound deaths, not the health issues that are primary.

I do not think it responsible to look at neutering only as a health discussion -- if anything, the behaviour issues leading to higher risk of death, and the welfare issues, are even more persuasive.

BTW of all the cavaliers I took out of the pounds here in Ireland over the years, most of them males, I can only recall one that was neutered.
 
I agree don't apologize the when to neuter is still up for debate. Personally I think people being passionate about their opinions is good for the breed. After all we all want what is best for our dogs, the breed and ourselves. There is obviously both positive and negatives on both sides of this issue. The bottom line is it comes down to what's right for you and your dog. It reminds me of the breastfeeding issue in humans......do what works for you and your baby even if its a furbaby :)

I'm sure Charlie will be fine. I know it makes for a hard day. Sending happy thoughts!!!!
 
I have always spayed and neutered our dogs at that 6 - 8 months age, per our veterinarian's recommendation. He was graduated from a well-respected vet school and I trust him on that. The dogs all lived to a ripe old age, too.

Every one of the dogs we had spayed/neutered came home that afternoon, groggy of course, and were back to normal by the next morning. The vets now have a better anesthesia, so the dogs come 'round much faster than they did twenty years ago.

I never fawn over any dog that goes for day surgery or procedure. My attitude (around the dog) is "business as usual" so that the dog doesn't pick up on any emotional trauma. We humans sometimes, without realizing it, teach the dog to be afraid of the vet. The decision is yours to take. Your dog won't hate you and he won't be crying when you leave, if you take the same approach. This way, in the long run, you are doing your dog a huge favor. He won't be afraid of the vet, who is really his friend. Our dogs never looked back when dropped off at the vet for the day; tails are wagging because mom is not upset and the staff will love on them.

All my dogs have loved going to the vet because I treat it like a trip to the park. Our Shih Tzu would almost fall asleep in my lap at the vet's!
 
Hi
I can't really comment as my four are all girls and the only intact males in our group are Luke and myself and Luke is far too young
and I am far too old to do any damage though Luke is now a faster runner than me .But back to a serious comment, with the girls I
always believed the appropriate time for them was midway between their first and second season would that still be considered the
best time. I do agree that sometimes a heated debate can be good as it gives an opportunity for others to read and educate from
the researched comments from both sides .
 
Brian, no, most vets would recommend before the first heat as does that AKC Canine Health article by a vet. If you wish to do otherwise it falls outside the general recommendation but you may feel persuaded by other arguments. But the majority vet and welfare opinion, whether people have differing views or not, is very definitely not to wait for a dog to have a heat and thus have an 8% risk of the most common, and commonly malignant, canine tumour in bitches.
 
I consider premature neutering to be a very big mistake, healthwise for cavaliers. I consider this subject as important as the need for cavalier breeders to follow the MVD and SM breeding protocols.

There may be other reasons for it, like controlling assumed future bad behavior (for the convenience of owners with a lack of patience), but when you cut off one of a puppy's most important hormone producers prior to maturity, you risk interfering with the full development of the dog's immune system and its structural growth. By forcing the immune system to compensate for missing ingredients, you are getting that cavalier off to a very bad start in life. And the argument that early neutering only interferes with the growth of bones in larger breeds is bogus. It is like arguing that only cavaliers with small skulls will have Chiari-like malformation.

You may criticize the sources of some information, such as NAIA, but the content remains valid. And it is interesting that the most recent study, issued this year, finds that there is no valid evidence that early spaying reduces a bitch's risk for mammary cancer. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1748-5827.2011.01220.x/full

The problem with neutering is that if you find later on that you have made a mistake, it is too late to reverse it.
 
I asked about neutering recently on the forum and had some very helpful advice.
Leo is an intact lad who will be 6 years old next month. I was asking over a behavioural issue which thankfully hasnt been repeated.

My question is is it ever too late to neuter?
 
... My question is is it ever too late to neuter?

I don't think so, except if the dog's health -- like advanced MVD -- would be affected by the procedure.

We had a 10 year old male castrated a couple of years ago. He had a low grade MVD murmur, and his bloodwork allowed it. He had no bad consequences from the operation.
 
To Rod..to Karlin..to everyone.
I sincerely apologize for any drama here on the forum.
I came to this forum awhile back because of my love for dogs. And also because I had a new Cavalier puppy and was anxious to talk w/ others who owned them as well. I was searching for a fun and casual atmosphere. I truly would love to stay...but I do not want to feel I cannot state an opinion if it is contrary to perhaps someone elses for fear of being slammed. I obviously do not know all there is to know about dogs. I am still learning things. So please bear with me.
But if I can say this..I am not stupid concerning them either. We have owned and trained animals for many years.
Thank you Karlin for being a "peacemaker".
.and again...Rod.. I am sorry my post offended you.
 
I don't think so, except if the dog's health -- like advanced MVD -- would be affected by the procedure.

We had a 10 year old male castrated a couple of years ago. He had a low grade MVD murmur, and his bloodwork allowed it. He had no bad consequences from the operation.

Thanks Rod, thats good to know....although Leo may not agree icon_whistling
 
To Rod..to Karlin..to everyone.
I sincerely apologize for any drama here on the forum.
I came to this forum awhile back because of my love for dogs. And also because I had a new Cavalier puppy and was anxious to talk w/ others who owned them as well. I was searching for a fun and casual atmosphere. I truly would love to stay...but I do not want to feel I cannot state an opinion if it is contrary to perhaps someone elses for fear of being slammed. I obviously do not know all there is to know about dogs. I am still learning things. So please bear with me.
But if I can say this..I am not stupid concerning them either. We have owned and trained animals for many years.
Thank you Karlin for being a "peacemaker".
.and again...Rod.. I am sorry my post offended you.

Dzee, you did not offend me. I just didn't agree with what you wrote, and because there was a very short time constraint -- the dog's appointment set for the next day -- I wanted the owner to understand that there are valid downsides to many veterinarians' love affair with premature neutering.

Just because a lot of vets are in favor of early neutering does not impress me by itself. Consider that 90% of vets who are delegates to the American Veterinary Medicine Association voted last month to condemn feeding raw food to dogs and cats. That fact just proves either their ignorance or their bias, or both. My hat is off to the other 10%.
 
Back
Top