|
A Mini-Course In Applied Genetics
This applies to all breeds as do the fallacies of
many health tests. By request, I have thus spent a day digging in old
files to find something that most Mini-Bull breeders ignored and the realization
of which drove us and other breeders out of the breed or at the least, out of
breeding MBT. Don't let it happen in your breed!
MBT Breeders are no closer to getting a handle on
health problems than they were twelve years ago. When I went to England and
selected four dogs that we hoped would nick with the best lines here, I didn’t
know that along with an exciting acceleration of breed type, health problems had
also proliferated.
How can that be? Ok Ok, there are
breeders that do seem to ignore a problem as
long as its in someone else’s lap. Even
so, we cannot blame all of the health problems on uncaring puppy
producers.
If good breeders
are conscientiously trying to solve genetic health problems, how can the health
defects have reached such seemingly gigantic proportions? The equation is out
of balance and that, in and of itself, may be a tip-off that
we’re either not taking the right approach or the stats are misleading.
If statistics have been incorrectly interpreted or
inflated, then those numbers need to be corrected before any more
people drop out of the breed rather than risk having their hearts broken.
If the statistics are accurate, then our approach to solving the problem
is faulty. Why is the MBT so disproportionately
affected by three serious health problems? It isn’t like we have thousands
of pups whelped yearly by hundreds of big producers as is the case in healthier
breeds. Most Mini-Bull fanciers are
dedicated, conscientious people trying to do the right thing.
I have rejected some of the more
plausible explanations such as a dog that was dominant for heart defects
permeated the breed with multiple heart problems.
OK, then there must have also been a widely used dog dominant for kidney
problems? Hmmm.
Perhaps there was one dog capable of inundating the gene pool with both
defects? Not likely – he would
have quickly bred himself into extinction.
So unless we also postulate that those one or two dogs were also dominant
for lens luxation, you can throw such logical explanations out the window.
The examples
are exaggerated but scientifically, I’m on solid ground. I
don’t have letters after my name so it’s hard to state qualifications
without sounding like a braggart. Bill
and I have bred way over two hundred AKC champions from a lengthy but very
limited breeding program. Over one
hundred are Multi-Group, Specialty winners, and/or Register Of Merits.
In fact, over half of all Akita Top Winners and Register Of Merit Sires and Dams are
O’BJ bred. More important to us, Akitas O’BJ are known as the typiest,
soundest, and healthiest in the world.
There
are those who say “so what?” and who will try to belittle an
accomplishment which they secretly envy. It
doesn’t bother me because my ego is non-existent compared to the joy of having
a living work of art that loves me back - and the satisfaction of having created
it. The point here is that even if we were a jillion-dog puppy mill, we could
not have achieved those records without a basic understanding of applied genetics.
That doesn’t mean throw the books
away. It does mean having to
backtrack, admit mistakes, study, earn the confidence of other top breeders and
have sense enough to listen to them, and to be absolutely uncompromising about
quality. It means a determination
to breed complete dogs, not
caricatures with numbers and letters but no brains or beauty. It also signifies a stubborn resolution not to be misled by
popular but genetically unproven rhetoric, even when it comes from the hallowed
pages of veterinary journals. Applying
genetic theory so that you can reach certain pinnacles without falling on your
face means you accept reality. It means you weigh new ideas on the scale of proven
practicality.
First, Primary Lens
Luxation. According to Professor
Keith Barnard, Animal Health Trust (England), prominent and highly respected
researcher, there have been no recorded
cases of PLL (in England) in dogs under three years.
On that basis, there is a sensible belief that there’s no need to check
for PLL prior to three years of age. The
Brits are a bit more in-the-know due to the small size of the country and fewer
shows. It is harder to conceal
problems and published critiques also help to promote a more open attitude about
faults, something which has thankfully, filtered to the U.S. So unless there is conflicting documentation, I accept the
British approach to lens luxation. There
are other problems that can be identified earlier so this does not imply “don’t
check,” it means simply that PLL has late onset.
Put in perspective it could also mean that a dog may be lost to other
age-related disease long before he luxates. Sort of like the new truth in
prostate cancer. If you’re over
seventy, forget surgery. You’ll
die of old age or surgical complications before the cancer gets you.
Heart defects.
It would be utopia if we knew for sure what is genetic and what isn’t.
But since researchers don’t know yet if certain conditions are acquired
or inherited, we’re going to have to wait. We just had a youngster diagnosed
as “most likely a form of tricuspid valve dysplasia.... possibly congenital.” Italics
are mine because I find such reports insulting. Bill could easily hear the whooshing, could see the gaping on
doppler, and quickly spotted the enlargement on thoracic radiographs.
So why mince words? She has
serious heart defects, has already fainted once. The breeder said “put her to
sleep” but we will keep her and love her for as long as she lives. What
troubles us is that even the most obvious problems are couched in the same
deliberately obtuse, incomprehensible, CYA terms as are tests that reveal nothing!
We don’t know if increased flow rates are “normal” in Minis.
We don’t know if it indicates a serious potential or future problem. Sadly, neither do cardiologists!
I will happily
provide copies of reports on our dogs. They
all say “nothing showed up but...”
or “appeared normal at this time” etc etc.
There will always be instances when a definitive report is impossible but
only the tester can benefit from a speculative essay riddled with self
protecting loopholes based on personal interpretation.
We are learning that many (most?) echocardiograms present a gray area
filled in only by the experience of the cardiologist.
Even more frustrating for all concerned, the doppler is often
contradicted by no auditory evidence of abnormality or vice versa!
We know of
instances wherein dogs were found normal on doppler and very
soon thereafter they died from “massive heart problems” per autopsy
reports. We can cite other dogs who
didn’t do well on a doppler but who lived long active lives with no symptoms
of any problem whatsoever. So the
bottom line as we see it at this time: Definitive diagnosis by doppler is
possible only when glaring abnormalities are present.
Incidence Statistics in all three areas could be flawed.
There exists confusion as to which defects are proven hereditary and
which are the result of trauma, virus, illness, test compromises, or external
influence. Readings are
subjective. It is not like x-raying
your tooth and being able to point out a cavity that is certain to enlarge.
OFA was forced to raise the minimum certification age from twelve to
twenty four months because the readings were so often wrong.
They still are and now PennHip has joined the fray of critical comments.
In fact, there is growing evidence that what some outspoken breeders have
said for decades may be the only truth in dysplasia – hip x-ray is a great
diagnostic tool but is not necessarily predictive!
We are
expecting too much of cardiologists at this time.
We are so demanding of “answers” that we have frightened some vets
into a new way of writing reports. Perhaps
the unexpected (and therefore infinitely more traumatic) deaths of dogs believed
to be heart-sound accounts for increasingly ambiguous written reports.
In one recent episode involving four dogs, we received oral summaries at
the time of exam, followed by written reports, followed by totally rewritten
and contradictory reports after the cardiologist conferred with another vet
“more familiar” with Mini-Bulls.
I suggest that we
continue to use every means at our disposal to foresee and avoid genetic
problems but that we not run about like the Mad Hatter when a vet refuses to
give an unconditional “all clear” on your dog.
The sky probably isn’t falling. It
is our expectations that should be lowered until such time as definitive lab
testing and/or DNA analysis is available for eye, heart, and kidney problems.
Do not ever refer
to this article as a reason to “not bother” with health tests and periodic
evaluations. Just put things in
perspective. Remember that eggs
were bad for us. Now they aren’t.
Butter was sure to clog our arteries, now we’re told its
better than margarine due to trans-fatty acids.
Remember how many ulcer patients suffered horrible emotional, physical,
and financial hardship because doctors refused to listen to one small voice in
Australia kept saying “uh excuse me guys, but its really only an easily
treatable bug called pylori bacteria.....”
Please test.
Please disclose. Please help. Please
keep your priorities and perspective in balance.
And please urge your parent club to provide meaningful and accurate
information. (Our offer to fund
another simpler, re-worded survey is still on the table.) Most of all, PLEASE put aside personalities in order to work
together for that little guy who follows every step you make.
He will do anything for you. We
just need to be worthy of that kind of unconditional love and trust.
BJ Andrews
A Little Bull, Summer 1999
Copyright © 1999 Barbara J.
Andrews. All rights reserved. Reprint rights granted for Educational Purpose
as follows: Except for brief quotations with source provided, no portions
thereof may be stored or reprinted in any form, electronic or otherwise, without
credit to TheDogPlace and if used online or in lists, a link to
www.TheDogPlace.org must be provided.
Barbara J. Andrews contact@thedogplace.org
|