[nimloth]

I was looking up some info for another person in OFA and decided to run a report for PRA results. We have a somewhat similar problem with PRA in Labradors as with EIC in that test results are not automatically posted by the testing company. I was really stunned at the results of the report. Only 242 dogs have had results submitted to OFA and the test has been out for years. Of those, only 24 dogs are displayed as carriers and there are NO reports for affected dogs at all!

It seems that the DNA testing is like a lot of other areas of dogs - people only want to brag about their good stuff and hide the less glamourous. If we are going to deal with these genetic disorders, we certainly have to be more open with our information than it looks like we have been. I hope the trend will change with EIC reporting.

 

[Lady Duck Hunter]

Results are already coming back. I just got a call from my vet. Jive is a carrier....didn't even realize that it was a possibility....just goes to show what ticking time bombs we have.

He was CNM clear.

 

[ErinsEdge]

Results are already coming back. I just got a call from my vet. Jive is a carrier....didn't even realize that it was a possibility....just goes to show what ticking time bombs we have.

He was CNM clear.

Guess the turn around time is good!

 

[Lady Duck Hunter]

We shipped last Monday.

 

[AmiableLabs]

We might be surprised.

My experience so far is that people are more upfront about EIC than other ailments.

Except in the case of top stud dogs. They remain mum.

 

[JusticeDog]

We might be surprised.

My experience so far is that people are more upfront about EIC than other ailments.

Except in the case of top stud dogs. They remain mum.

Have you asked any Kevin? I know one that will state that his is a carrier if asked...

 

[badbullgator]

Have you asked any Kevin? I know one that will state that his is a carrier if asked...

I know one that won't.....

 

[JusticeDog]

I know one that won't.....

I think that now that there is an actual test out there, and not just level 1 results, that things will change. EIC has been such an issue, that the market will demand the test...

 

[badbullgator]

I think that now that there is an actual test out there, and not just level 1 results, that things will change. EIC has been such an issue, that the market will demand the test...

Maybe…… I think we are at the point we are at because people take chances on breedings and some will continue and some will continue to take a chance on the dogs they produce. Sad, but I am afraid it will be true because too many people believe this will affect the quality of the breeding stock

 

[nimloth]

I think that a LOT of people will test..... but will they make their results public?? That was my concern.

I was surprised at how few people used OFA to post results for PRA. Sure, it costs $15, but I thought a lot would submit to make it public. Heck, there are 90 PRA records in LabraData, from which 22 are carriers (almost as many as reported in OFA) and even one affected dog listed with his pedigree. Perhaps it is the cost of reporting that is an issue. People hate getting unpleasant results and then feel insulted they have to pay to make it public

 

[jeff t.]

Except in the case of top stud dogs. They remain mum.

My understanding is that at least one prominent stud was was tested at the Minnesota trials last year and the owner now claims the dog was never tested.

If you owned an FC/AFC stud dog that was identified as a carrier in the research phase, would you re-test now that the same test is officially available?

I think most in that situation will not.

Since OFA only accepts "official" results, persons with dogs identified as carriers in the research phase are not able to post that info, even if they wanted to do so.

IMO, at some point in the near future, if a dog isn't listed on the OFA site as EIC "clear", most will assume the dog is a carrier.

 

[Miriam Wade]

I think that a LOT of people will test..... but will they make their results public?? That was my concern.

I was surprised at how few people used OFA to post results for PRA. Sure, it costs $15, but I thought a lot would submit to make it public. Heck, there are 90 PRA records in LabraData, from which 22 are carriers (almost as many as reported in OFA) and even one affected dog listed with his pedigree. Perhaps it is the cost of reporting that is an issue. People hate getting unpleasant results and then feel insulted they have to pay to make it public

Ironically, my dog is at the vet right now for hip, elbow, thyroid and prcd-PRA (Heart was already done, but I've misplaced paperwork, so have to wait for another clinic and submit to OFA). Every clearance is going to be submitted to OFA-good news or heartbreak. It has nothing to do with his being bred (he may never be), but allowing the owner of his sire & dam to see what they are producing.

M

 

[Guest]

People hate getting unpleasant results and then feel insulted they have to pay to make it public

Absolutely. I think most folks view OFA as a site to list "clearances" and to be honest, with the way I have seen people react to carrier status, I can't say I blame them.

 

[Franco]

IMO, at some point in the near future, if a dog isn't listed on the OFA site as EIC "clear", most will assume the dog is a carrier.

That is what I would assume too.

Owner of the dam I'm getting my next FT bred pup from just got word that his bitch is EIC CLEAR. That's one down and one to go. Waiting on results on the stud.

Will the results be posted on the same page as hips, elbows, CERF ?

 

[Montview]

I have submitted everything I can to OFA...I will do the same with the "official" EIC results when they come back. I really like doing "background checks" on various dogs, just for research purposes...right now, OFA has a lot of "holes" where people haven't submitted results (or done tests?) for whatever reason, but it still has a lot of good information on it and is a great way to trace pedigrees.

I think that OFA should definitely consider posting "affected" or "carrier" results at no charge.

 

[Ken Archer]

IMO, at some point in the near future, if a dog isn't listed on the OFA site as EIC "clear", most will assume the dog is a carrier.

I think that is an accurate statement. I wouldn't have any problem approving the publishing of negative results, but I doubt I would pay to have them published. I took five dogs to the vet yesterday for drawing blood for the EIC test. I think you can safely assume that, if you don't see one of them listed as clear on OFA, it will be a carrier. Since we are looking at a 40% carrier rate I expect to have a carrier or two this time around but that won't be the case in the next generation, at least not in my kennel.

One thing I have been wondering about is if they will accept swabs for testing on puppies under the age of 6 weeks. I can't see drawing "1-3 ml of blood" out of puppies that young, but I do expect to test some puppies out of carriers before they go to their new homes or remain in my kennel.

 

[nimloth]

Hey, Mr. Booty. I got you on my puppy list for next year when I breed one of my girls :lol:

 

[Franco]

Hey, Mr. Booty. I got you on my puppy list for next year when I breed one of my girls :lol:

Looking forward to it!

 

[wingbeat]

I think that a LOT of people will test..... but will they make their results public?? That was my concern.

From the looks of it, no. I asked the breeder of a litter the other day if they were going to test for EIC and their response was

"Why ? If we test for everything we will never have any great dogs!"

This is a big name breeder and trainer that all would be familiar with, and it made me lose all respect for them.

 

[nimloth]

Originally Posted by jeff t.

IMO, at some point in the near future, if a dog isn't listed on the OFA site as EIC "clear", most will assume the dog is a carrier.

OK... I got jumped by Marilyn last week because I commented that this is what I have heard from some people about the CNM white list. Do many of you feel the same way about the White List as you do about OFA - if dogs aren't listed you assume they are carriers?