I find it interesting that 75% of the people that responded say they require elbows and yet only 37,000 Labradors have been evaluated for ED through 2006. There are about 300,000 labs registered with AKC annually and only 37,000 have EVER been tested. Assuming that since 1974 there have been a average of 150,000 labs registered with AKC a total of 4.5 MILLION labs would have been registered in this same time period which means that a total of .008% of the registered dogs have ever been tested making the 12 or so percent of the 37000 tested dogs found to be dysplastic to be statistically insignificant. Of this number 88% were normal and only 0.6% had grade 3 dysplasia (the worst) and 11.2% had very mild grade 1. I am sure I will get the comments about how terrible it is to have a dog with ED, and I am sure it is. My point, however, is that ONLY 37.000 labs have ever been tested and you have to wonder how many of those were tested because they showed signs, thus elevating the percentage of dogs evaluated that have dysplasia. I for one just do not believe that ED is that big of an issue with those who breed responsibly. I have no problem buying a dog without ofa elbows if I know neither parent has issues. I would also speculate that other birth defects occur at a much higher percentage than ED in labs.
Oddly enough, even though we hear all the time about how prevalent HD is in labs, only 12.2 % of the 185,781 labs tested for HD actually are dysplastic (again when the entire number of dog is evaluated I do not find this statistically significant either, but do test all of my dogs)
The end result is that it is not folks like most of us here on RTF that are perpetuating the problem, rather it is those who have not clue of how to breed or what dogs are suitable for a breeding program. They do not and will not test for anything because they have “the best dog” and Bubba down the street has: the best dog other than mine” so lets get them together.
EIC and CMN are good tool when selecting dog sto breed
