RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Who is going to avoid Myopathy carriers 100%?

  • I wouldn't hesitate to breed my clear bitch to a known CNM carrier.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I will avoid a CNM carrier completely even though my bitch is clear.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
1 - 20 of 62 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,098 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I will try to do this as a poll.....

Please respond to this. Those with bitches looking to have bred and those of you looking for a pup, will you avoid a stud (or litter with one parent) who is a known Myopathy carrier??? Or if your bitch is clear will you go ahead and still breed her to a carrier if it is a good fit for your girl????

Just curious what everyones thoughts are.... Thanks, Travis

PS. Please give opinions and reasons for your answer.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is going to avoid Myopathy carriers 100%?
I wouldn't hesitate to breed my clear bitch to a known CNM carrier.
I will avoid a CNM carrier completely even though my bitch is clear.
I would prefer to avoid it but, for the right stud I may breed my clear bitch to a carrier.







.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
I would consider CNM status along with all of the other health info available.

For example if I am choosing between

Dog A - a CNM "carrier" male with OFA excellent hips and a good temperament

or

Dog B - a CNM "clear" male with OFA good hips who is dog aggressive

I'm going with Dog A


Some folks are responding to the news that their dog is a carrier as though it was a death sentence, something to be kept a secret.

The fact is that it can't be kept secret. As more and more dogs get tested, I believe we will find that we can ascertain the status of their sire and dam by the results of their offspring.

It is much better to be open and honest about it.

I can say that I would avoid a stud whose owner keeps his CNM status private. It needs to be publically available along with all info re hips and eyes.

If a breeder hides the CNM status of their dog, I'd wonder what else they are hiding.

JMO

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Myopathy testing will be 'required' criteria, just as OFA and CERF, and as such there are too many good, clean dogs out there to consider breeding to that won't produce more carriers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,442 Posts
It has been stated to me that if a dog is a known carrier some judges would hold it against the dog in a FT by not placing the dog and making sure the points went to a cleared dog. Granted a judge would have to keep some serious notes about various dogs and have an absolutely mean spirit but is this really true?

This makes me wonder why being a carrier is frowned upon? Why is it considered so negative. I can understand why some owners would NOT want to release information about their dogs if they were carriers because of the negative stigmatism.

Is being a CNM carrier the kiss of death for a dog?

Lainee, Flash and Bullet
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,611 Posts
One thing missing from the poll is if the bitch is a CNM would you breed her and would you buy a puppy from a CNM positive litter
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
220 Posts
I agree completely with chessieguy. A dog being a carrier is not THE kiss of death, but it IS a negative, just like being untitled, or unproven, or out of a litter with some dysplastic siblings, or chocolate :wink: can all be a negative when chosing a breeding or a stud.

Now, given a choice between a great dog who is a carrier and one who isn't - all things being equal, I'd go with the clear dog, just because if we all breed to carriers, eventually the majority of dogs would be carriers.... and the carrier dog would have to be pretty special for me not to be able to find a dog who is equally good in terms of other health issues, performance ablility, pedigree, production record, etc.

Obviously if it's my dog who is the carrier, then all other carriers are off the list of potential breedings, so if I want to keep a pup from the litter and have the maximum options if and when it's time to breed that pup, then it would behoove me to breed my clear to another clear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,939 Posts
Wow, if those words were really spoken by an individual that truly believes a dog would be placed lower by two judges based on his CNM status, hip status, or eye status..those folks really need to get involved in another sport..that mentality is truly not in the spirit of field trials and borders on absurd.. imagine if that conversation was overheard by a family attending their first field trial..what a sad commentary..

Will the stud fees and interest in breeding to a CNM carrier be reduced? Maybe.. Will that dog not be given the "blue" because of his CNM status? Unlikely.. Scare tactics to prevent CNM tests being done or full disclosure of results is probably the goal...then that's just my opinion..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,826 Posts
FOM said:
It has been stated to me that if a dog is a known carrier some judges would hold it against the dog in a FT by not placing the dog and making sure the points went to a cleared dog.
please supply us all with a list of these judges who are judging genes rather than performance, why even have a field trial just submit DNA profiles and award the places to the dogs based on their DNA

that is perhaps the single most ludicrous thing I have ever heard
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
chessieguy said:
I would consider CNM status along with all of the other health info available.

For example if I am choosing between

Dog A - a CNM "carrier" male with OFA excellent hips and a good temperament

or

Dog B - a CNM "clear" male with OFA good hips who is dog aggressive

I'm going with Dog A


Some folks are responding to the news that their dog is a carrier as though it was a death sentence, something to be kept a secret.

The fact is that it can't be kept secret. As more and more dogs get tested, I believe we will find that we can ascertain the status of their sire and dam by the results of their offspring.

It is much better to be open and honest about it.

I can say that I would avoid a stud whose owner keeps his CNM status private. It needs to be publically available along with all info re hips and eyes.

If a breeder hides the CNM status of their dog, I'd wonder what else they are hiding.

JMO

Bob
How about bredding to stud C or stud D which are also clear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
there are too many good, clean dogs out there to consider breeding to that won't produce more carriers.
People keep saying this but I don't know how we can really know this until everyone's dogs are tested. I certainly hope there are a ton of clean dogs and only a few carriers but don't see how we can know that's the case at this time.

And, Ed said it best...the idea that judges would judge based on DNA profiles rather than abilities is ridiculous.

Is being a CNM carrier the kiss of death for a dog?
I guess it depends on the owner, but it won't be the kiss of death for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
Among dogs of proven performance abilities, I believe there are no "clean" dogs. Research the pedigrees and, if you're privy to enough information, you'll find the skeletons. Does this mean that you don't breed to dog X because he exhibits disease Y? Absolutely not. You just need to get informed and be really smart about your breeding. What PO's me is that the info is shared among a very small group within each breed.

Just sayin',

Ted
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
With all the great "CNM clear" dogs out there why even consider a carrier? I know some will argue that Stud B, a "carrier" is so great that we just can't stop using him and the same argument could go for the bitch. Does this class of dog currently truly exist?

Among dogs of proven performance abilities, I believe there are no "clean" dogs. Research the pedigrees and, if you're privy to enough information, you'll find the skeletons. Does this mean that you don't breed to dog X because he exhibits disease Y? Absolutely not. You just need to get informed and be really smart about your breeding. What PO's me is that the info is shared among a very small group within each breed
Amen, EIC is just one example!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
Dogguy said:
With all the great "CNM clear" dogs out there why even consider a carrier?
Breeding only CNM clear dogs will make the gene pool smaller. Why not breed carrier to clear and test the puppies before they go to their new homes? Use the test wisely, don't use it to cut every carrier out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
Among dogs of proven performance abilities, I believe there are no "clean" dogs.
This is a good point and probably worth repeating. The CNM test is wonderful but it's not the be all that ends all when it comes to breeding dogs. Lots of other things to think about that there are not tests for currently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
652 Posts
FOM said:
It has been stated to me that if a dog is a known carrier some judges would hold it against the dog in a FT by not placing the dog and making sure the points went to a cleared dog. Granted a judge would have to keep some serious notes about various dogs and have an absolutely mean spirit but is this really true?


Lainee, Flash and Bullet
If someone actually voiced that opinion, Lainee, that is an abomination.

Performance should be judged on performance. Period.

Not CERF, OFA, CNM, EIC, etc.

What business does a judge have in deciding the outcome of a performance based endeavor based on some medical genetic information that is relevant only to breeding potential?

I agree with Dr. Ed, and I would love to know who would take such a truly ignorant and uninformed stand.

CNM is something that needs to be wiped out of the breed and the testing will aid in that profoundly. CNM is not, however, the canine equivalent of the Black Plague sweeping across the continent. The stigma that some people assign is very unfair and needless.

I think that the CNM literature and the website make it very clear that a dog tested positive as a carrier should in no way be eliminated unilaterally from a thoroughly informed and well considered breeding program.

I've heard Marilyn Fender give a lecture about CNM - she is a subject matter expert and has made a huge commitment of her time and energy to get the correct (and not inflammatory) information disseminated.

She is quite clear on this particular point: you don't just perfunctorily remove the breeding stock that are carriers, you would do greater harm in limiting the available gene pool. You simply have to make more informed choices as a breeder if your bitch or stud is a carrier.

No need to make those dogs pariahs. That would be terribly unfair and unnecessary.

(The corporation that I work for just issued a public policy statement that genetic information will not be used in hiring/employment decisions for this company. My first reaction was that this was a little over the top, but perhaps I shouldn't be so cynical.)

Does DNA = Destiny?

I hope not, both in the canine and human world.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,248 Posts
Years ago I won several trials with a bitch that everyone knew was displastic. She was also neutered because of her bad hips. She ran for the sheer joy of it, and the happiness it gave to her owner. It was the game, not breeding interest.

Judges should score performance with total indifference about breed, color, sex, or any prior knowledge of the animal.

Evan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
419 Posts
First I read here that carriers aren't any good as breeding stock, and now that their carrier status will affect how they're judged in the field.

If the hope is that owners of carriers will be honest and forthright about their dog's status, the rest of the retriever world has got to stop with the judgments and scare tactics.

If we're truly interested in what's best for the breed, this isn't it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
IMO, these are two different subjects..breeding and judging. The judging has to do with what you see in performance, period. It is wrong as wrong can be to award ribbons based on any other criteria. On the breeding issue, if it is important to test, to have a registry, and to be a significant consideration, then I think one would have to proceed very cautiously in breeding to a carrier. I think someone mentioned that maybe testing the litter for carriers, and then giving a limited registration may be an acceptable solution. However, I still maintain that going with 'clean breedings' is the surest, quickest way to put this issue behind the breed, and isn't that the purpose of responsible breeding?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Many advocate the breeding of carriers, basing their rational on the gene pool being to small or not breeding will cause it to become dangerously smaller. Is this a valid point or is their position based on reasons of personal interest? The reason I ask is that you don?t read about any current FT dog that towers above all the others too the point that we have just got to have it in the gene pool.

Michael
 
1 - 20 of 62 Posts
Top