How does your breed rate? OFA info-

[IliamnasQuest]

I pondered whether to post this here or in the dog breed area, but to me it's a breeding issue so I went with here.

On the OFA site, there's an area where you can search statistics by breed. Go to http://www.offa.org/stats.html and scroll down to click on your breed and then share the results with us on elbow and hip dysplasia (and any others you want to share).

Here are my breeds:

Chows rank #1 in elbow dysplasia (47.4% abnormal results), GSD's rank 8th (19.5% abnormal results). That's a shocking amount of ED in chows .. truly sad especially given that not many breeders are doing (or admitting that they do) elbow x-rays.

Chows rank 34th in hip dsyplasia (19.6% dysplastic), GSD's rank 54th (19% dysplastic).

The other results are only entered into OFA if the owner submits them, so I don't feel there's a really great representation there on my breeds.

Where do your dogs rank?

Melanie and the gang in Alaska

[PWCorgi]

Pembroke welsh Corgis are ranked 45th in hip dysplasia (17.6% dysplastic)
They're ranked 53rd in elbows (3.7%)

[RedyreRottweilers]

It would be interesting to know how many Chows who indicate ED on film are affected by it with any sort of lameness.

You also have to take into consideration that many people don't send in films if they look bad, so the results can be very skewed in regard to what the incidence of an issue is in the actual general population.

Rottweilers are 29th in HD stats, with 86551 screened, of which 7.9 were rated Excellent, and 20.5 were rated dysplastic to some degree.

Rottweilers are second behind ChowChows in the ED stats. There have been 10148 screened for elbow dysplasia. Compare this to the hip numbers
(86,551). 58.5 were found to be normal, with 40.9 percent found to have ED to some degree. Of those found to be dysplastic a whopping 30.5 were rated Grade 1, with 8.8 percent grade 2, and 1.6 grade 3.

OFA's comments on using dogs who are grade 1 in the elbows:

There are many factors to consider when evaluating the progress of countries that permit breeding Grade I elbows. There may indeed be reasons to consider using Grade I elbows in breeding programs for the purpose of maintaining a broader gene pool, especially in countries where the breed specific rate of ED is approximately 25% or higher (as appears to be the case in some European countries).

You can read more about ED and HD at the OFA's website at http://www.offa.org

[~Jessie~]

Chihuahuas are 22nd in patellas... 372 were tested, and 5.6% were abnormal.

Other than that, the evaluation sizes were small and the rank was N/A.

[Melissa_W]

Shetland Sheepdogs are ranked 58th in ED with 3.2% abnormal.
They are ranked 128th in HD with 4.8% abnormal.

[Lizmo]

Border Collies are ranked 83rd in HD with 7429 tested and were 11.1% abnormal.
Ranked 72nd in ED with 1072 tested and 1.5 were abnormal.
For Thyroid was ranked 29th with 81 tested and 4.9 were abnormal.

[planet molosser]

Sadly we dont rank yet cause we dont have enough dogs in our database.
It took me years to get them up to where they can be compared to each other within breed vs outside the CAS database.

It will take another 5 years for us to get our own Penn Hip mean.

IN the mean time since most breeders are NOT xraying at all or all stock.
The numbers will never clearly show a accurate pic of where our breed lies when compared to others.

Since the breed is rare I wont list the results cause it will be taken wrongly.

[Zoom]

Aussies are:
#117 in terms of HD with 24292 tested and 5.8% abnormal
#47 in ED with 2407 tested and 4.2% dysplastic

Pretty healthy as far as tests submitted go.

[bubbatd]

Goldens are 31 ..... I blame this on changing the looks for the ring . Shorter legs the last 20 years . Such a shame !

[Renee750il]

It would be really interesting to see how that broke down if it were divided into show and working lines.

[BostonBanker]

Well, the one and only Mountain Cur tested was normal for HD.

I'm curious, do most working dogs get the x-rays done? Obviously, they should. But I've been browsing some sites for stock dogs recently, and never saw any signs of health checks on any of them. Is it normal that the dogs out there working all day on a ranch aren't getting health checks done, or do some breeders do it? I'm looking at dogs with zero show lines. Not actually looking looking, like buying;) , just curious.

[Zoom]

Most times if the dog has anything under what would be a "Fair-Good" rating, the dog just can't work all day long and wouldn't be bred anyway.

[RD]

I think so too, Renee. I notice in my breed that the show-bred dogs tend to have looser hips. It might be from lack of conditioning, but I'm not sure. On the flip side, working Border Collies as a whole tend to have "loose" hips, which some people believe allows for greater flexibility and range of motion, as well as giving a little room for trauma and injury. It's not dysplasia, obviously, but hips that the PennHip and OFA people might look at and go "hmm". But yeah, i wish there were pedigrees on the OFA site.

BB - as Zoom said, an unsound dog just couldn't do the work that stockdogs are expected to do. But I guess the question is, why does the OFA rating matter if the dog is working a ranch on a regular basis? If the dog can work, I consider it sound. Now, for the Sporter collies like Dakota, I'd insist on OFA'd stock. The dogs really don't do "normal" stuff like stock work, nothing is really testing their body as well as their mind, so I want some proof that the dog is of optimal soundness if it is going to twist, leap, skid, turn and stop on a dime like it does in agility.

Border Collies are # 72 in hips, with 11% abnormal. #83 in hips, with 1.5 abnormal.

[Bahamutt99]

I'm disappointed to say that the APBT is number 22 for dysplastic hips. (If I remember correctly. I just visited the site yesterday.) Everybody wants to point the finger at other lines/types for encouraging the HD, and few are actually stepping up and getting the testing done. ETA: I was almost right. Number 26. The AmStaff is 22. ETA ETA: Holy crap! The Dogo is really up there, too!

[daaqa]

tibetan terriers: hips #119, hearing #4, patella #7, everything else n/a

the dandie dinmont had a weird result: N/A, 32 evals, 50/50 on the percentages.

[SizzleDog]

Dobes are...

#21 Cardiac (99.1% normal)
#75 Elbow (98.5% normal)
#113 Hips (93% normal)

[Maxy24]

Max was half shar-pei and half something else so I'll do shar-pei.

cardiac ranks N/A
Elbow ranks #4 (28.3 abnormal, 70.1 normal)
Hips rank #66 (13.5 abnormal, 85.2 normal)
Patella rank #4 (17.8 abnormal, 82.2 normal)
thyroid rank N/A (4.2 abnormal, 91.7 normal)

sorry for the double and triple post.

[Cheza]

Danes:

ELBOW #48 with 95.7% normal
HIPS #77 with 86.6% normal

To me it didn't seem like a large degree of dogs were tested either (by comparison to other breeds.)

[Gempress]

Blackmouth cur: Only 1 tested for hips, and it was 100 percent.

Catahoula: Out of 341 dogs, 25.2 percent had hip dysplasia. They rank 23rd. I'm surprised how high they rank.

[BostonBanker]

BB - as Zoom said, an unsound dog just couldn't do the work that stockdogs are expected to do. But I guess the question is, why does the OFA rating matter if the dog is working a ranch on a regular basis? If the dog can work, I consider it sound.

That's pretty much what I thought, but I admit ignorance on breeding issues;) . Thanks.

[IliamnasQuest]

Red brought up a point that I wanted to talk about. When x-rays are done, some people may opt not to send them in because of obvious abnormalities (although a "general practitioner" type of vet is not really qualified to judge hip and elbow x-rays, especially being as abnormalities vary some by breed). So the results on hips and elbows can be slightly swayed because of that.

You will generally see many more hips listed on the site because OFA has been doing hips since 1966, but elbows only since 1990.

Cardiac, patellas, thyroid, etc. are not valid as far as ratings per breed on the OFA site because those are not rated by OFA. Owners opt to send those in and the majority of people probably wouldn't send them in if they're not passing. I think most (if not all) of the testing other than hips and elbows is done elsewhere and then sent in separately for listing on the site. If you have a dog that passed everything, then you would probably want to list it!

Most people who have their dogs OFA'd are serious breeders, too. There are vast numbers of dogs out there being bred/shown who never have the dogs x-rayed. If I were going to buy another dog, I'd certainly check OFA results (or other valid forms of testing). It's so easy to go on the site and do a search for a dog's name or even part of a name.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska

[Amstaffer]

Great website, thanks

[elegy]

I'm disappointed to say that the APBT is number 22 for dysplastic hips. (If I remember correctly. I just visited the site yesterday.) Everybody wants to point the finger at other lines/types for encouraging the HD, and few are actually stepping up and getting the testing done. ETA: I was almost right. Number 26. The AmStaff is 22. ETA ETA: Holy crap! The Dogo is really up there, too!

they're way up there for other things, too. amstaffs are 12 and apbts 21 for elbow dysplasia. amstaffs are SEVENTH and apbts 23 for cardiac. amstaffs 21 and apbts 11 for thyroid.

i would be very interested to see how the so called "game bred" lines test. but of course, they don't have any health issues, so they don't test *eyeroll*

[showpug]

Goldens are 31 ..... I blame this on changing the looks for the ring . Shorter legs the last 20 years . Such a shame !

Grammy, back when you were breeding Goldens, was it common practice to OFA hips on breeding stock?

[OutlineACDs]

BB - as Zoom said, an unsound dog just couldn't do the work that stockdogs are expected to do. But I guess the question is, why does the OFA rating matter if the dog is working a ranch on a regular basis? If the dog can work, I consider it sound. Now, for the Sporter collies like Dakota, I'd insist on OFA'd stock. The dogs really don't do "normal" stuff like stock work, nothing is really testing their body as well as their mind, so I want some proof that the dog is of optimal soundness if it is going to twist, leap, skid, turn and stop on a dime like it does in agility.

Border Collies are # 72 in hips, with 11% abnormal. #83 in hips, with 1.5 abnormal.

I don't find that to be true. There are a hell of a lot of dogs out there who have a lot of heart and therefore never physically show the pain of HD or other problems. These 'working' breeders who don't test are doing just as much of an injustice to the breed as their showdog counterparts. Dogs can work through pain, especially when it is in their genes and they live for it.

[RD]

I agree that dogs can work through pain, but I've never heard of a dog that works (and by works I mean actually working a livestock establishment on a regular basis, not hobby herding with dog-broke sheep in a paddock) well and gets around well at home while having some underlying, crippling problem like hip dysplasia. Even an intense, stoic Border Collie will show the effects of the condition, whether it is while working or at night after the dog is off the stock.

If a dog can do that job and not show any signs EVER (not just on stock, becuase I can understand a dog working through a considerable amount of pain) that it has a problem, then it is a sufficiently sound working dog IMHO. I would prefer that everyone test their dogs too, but this breed did just dandy for hundreds of years before OFA existed, and I don't think that people who don't OFA their real working dogs are harming the breed at all.

[ToscasMom]

Collies: 2.3% hip dysplastic
0.0% Elbow dysplastic
4.0% idiopathic thyroid
0.0% autoimmune thyroid

No cardiac or pettular stats

[Bahamutt99]

RD, I know of two dogs who -- while they may not be stock dogs -- put in their hard weekend's work. Both have genetic health problems that you'd never know about if nobody told you. They're both good weight pull dogs, and at least one of the two runs agility as well. Both are the kind of dogs that will go all day if its something they want. Both had their problems identified through health-testing and are out of the gene pool.

I've said it before and many times. I've even blogged it. Health testing is a tool. It can only help in a breeding program, not hurt. (Unless one is afraid of what they're going to find.)

[SisMorphine]

Greyhounds: 138 for HD with 2.3% being abnormal. Truth is, I have yet to meet a retired racer with HD. It is more common in the AKC-bred Greyhounds, but obviously not even THAT common.

Alapahas: No ranking, only 6 dogs tested and hips were 50/50. The thing is, with Alapahas there is no true standard since they are still considered a breed in development, and from what I've seen there are two very different lines of Alapaha, one looking more like an AB (Athena's type) and one looking more like an EB. So which types were tested? Which breeders, which lines? I definitely wish it told you more.

Akita/pit bull: well Mike's screwed. LOL! the Akita part of him is ranked 67 and the APBT part of him (assuming that that is what makes up his "pit bull" portion) is ranked 26. Lately I've been thinking his back end looks a little stiff, but I may just be imagining things since I'm a hypochondriac. LOL!

[Renee750il]

I agree that dogs can work through pain, but I've never heard of a dog that works (and by works I mean actually working a livestock establishment on a regular basis, not hobby herding with dog-broke sheep in a paddock) well and gets around well at home while having some underlying, crippling problem like hip dysplasia. Even an intense, stoic Border Collie will show the effects of the condition, whether it is while working or at night after the dog is off the stock.

If a dog can do that job and not show any signs EVER (not just on stock, becuase I can understand a dog working through a considerable amount of pain) that it has a problem, then it is a sufficiently sound working dog IMHO. I would prefer that everyone test their dogs too, but this breed did just dandy for hundreds of years before OFA existed, and I don't think that people who don't OFA their real working dogs are harming the breed at all.

That's what I was thinking of when I mentioned working lines ;) If you're attuned to your dogs and watching them on a daily basis, you're going to see things - even intuit things - subtleties that might not even show up on tests.

[bubbatd]

Showpug ... OFA didn't start until about mid sixties . And yes , after that all good breeders had their studs or bitches checked . Elbows came in much later .

[AusCatDogs_4Ever]

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/5517/rankqr5.gif

[sjames]

Miniature schnauzers are not ranked in any of them. I'm guessing that that is a good thing.

[Lynx]

TIBETAN MASTIFF
Registry Rank Evaluations Percent Abnormal Percent Normal
CARDIAC N/A 1 0.0 100.0
ELBOW 29 211 10.4 89.1
HIPS 69 658 12.9 85.4
THYROID N/A 37 21.6 70.3

Two N/A's. :( I expected the hips.. tibet's are quite large.. elbow not too bad.

[SummerRiot]

BELGIAN TERVUREN
Registry.................... Rank .Evaluations Percent Abnormal Percent Normal
BAER HEARING TEST.... N/A ...2 .............0.0 ...................100.0
CARDIAC.................... 49 ....145 ..........0.0 ...................100.0
ELBOW....................... 51 ....2081 ........4.1 ...................95.6
HIPS .........................133 ....4695 ........3.6 ...................96.0
PATELLA..................... N/A ...29 ...........0.0 ..................100.0
THYROID...................... 53 ...383 ..........2.1 ...................82.2

[Bahamutt99]

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/5517/rankqr5.gif

That is very interesting. I wonder where the other 48% is on those PRA evaluations. I've seen some OFA numbers be a bit off, but that's quite a discrepancy.

[OutlineACDs]

That is very interesting. I wonder where the other 48% is on those PRA evaluations. I've seen some OFA numbers be a bit off, but that's quite a discrepancy.


I get my dogs' eyes CERF'd every other year. We have a genetic test for late onset PRA. You can know if your dog is not carrier, a carrier, or affected. My older bitch is a "B" meaning, shes a carrier, not affected. Her daughter from my litter has not yet been tested, but she is either an "A" or "b" because of what her parents are. If you do an "a" to "a" breeding there is almost no need to do the genetic test on the puppies because they are all obligate "A's". So I think some people have slacked off on the CERF'ing, or else these could be the results of our genetic test. As in the 48% are the "B's" carrier's but not affected.