[B]White dobermans[/B]
- Thread starter poeluvr
- Start date
W
no joce it isnt the parts with pigment where they ahve to worry about cancer. it is the no pigment parts 
i also did that my first year or so of undergrad. dont worry... i have to go pull books out adn read them sometimes because i cant remember everything . lol but if you take all pigment out you are albino or without pigment... you can NOT have pigment and have black pupils and still be any albino.
i also did that my first year or so of undergrad. dont worry... i have to go pull books out adn read them sometimes because i cant remember everything . lol but if you take all pigment out you are albino or without pigment... you can NOT have pigment and have black pupils and still be any albino.
Wow...this is facinating. I don't "get" some of it but it is really an interesting read. I fancy psychology and other sciences of the mind as debatable topics, but genetics?! WOW. I'm amazed at the information out there related SPACIFICALLY to colors in animals. It is enthralling. Too bad I don't have a genetics degree or anything remotely like it so I can debate right along with ya'll Back on to the point I was going to make: It seems like there is plenty of information on the internet about, well...everything. A good deal of it though is bull. I could write "the sky is undeniably maroon tonight" and there is potentially someone out there that since they read it on the internet would believe it. The same -could- be said for books, that anyone with enough letters after their name could publish complete bull and people would flock to read about it and stand in awe of his insight on the molecular structure of the sap in sugarmaple trees. HOWEVER I tend to believe more strongly the person with the bunch of letters after their name then Bill on the Net's web page. That said, I don't know so much about this topic besides what is presented to me in the most intelligent way. I'm taking the girl who is studying ...what was it, need to look back a page or two...testing the effects of azole antifungals on mycobacteria models in vitro. I hardly understand what I just wrote. She seems to be saying though, in short, breeding ...shall we say "off white" dobies is bad for the breed and can cause problems. Heck, I know enough about dogs to know that a dalmation with too much white and not enough black is a bad, and undesirable, shouldn't be bred for trait. It too can cause blindness and deafness. As someone else brought up, aussies bred merle to merle often (always?) result in a "lethal white" which upon reading in other places seems to be a misnomer (the term lethal white in dogs...I digress sorry) , but nontheless serious. The pups can be blind, deaf, both. I almost adopted a pup that was a result of poor breeding practice. I decided though I have time to train I don't have THAT much time These dogs just don't get adopted , and when they do it is hard for everyone involved. Often they just end up being put down. I guess my bottom line is, if you REALLY love your dog and the breed, why take the risk when there is SO MUCH evidence stating it is a bad, byb type practice?! SURE some of the pups could be fine and dandy, but what of the ones that AREN'T?! Normal color dobes are beautiful, why mess with that? Why risk having a dog that you can't take outside, and why contribute to the millions of other "defective" dogs in the system? I have been looking around and most of the sites I found state white or fawn as "undesirable" and "disqualifying" same as my Sunny and his color, for good reason. With his coat you can't tell if he is a merle or not and breeding him to a merle could result in lethal white puppies or piebald merles or...oh I've already drowned myself in a buch of stuff I don't completely understand. I trust the scientists. Not on everything mind you but on this one, I'm going with solid research and Elle has that in her court. I'd say any "fawn" or white or whatever dobies or "faulty" dogs are out there should not be bred. It's selfish. You're taking even more a gamble there then you are normally breeding a dog. The dog is the one that will lose out.
Back on to the point I was going to make: It seems like there is plenty of information on the internet about, well...everything. A good deal of it though is bull. I could write "the sky is undeniably maroon tonight" and there is potentially someone out there that since they read it on the internet would believe it. The same -could- be said for books, that anyone with enough letters after their name could publish complete bull and people would flock to read about it and stand in awe of his insight on the molecular structure of the sap in sugarmaple trees. HOWEVER I tend to believe more strongly the person with the bunch of letters after their name then Bill on the Net's web page. That said, I don't know so much about this topic besides what is presented to me in the most intelligent way. I'm taking the girl who is studying ...what was it, need to look back a page or two...testing the effects of azole antifungals on mycobacteria models in vitro. I hardly understand what I just wrote. She seems to be saying though, in short, breeding ...shall we say "off white" dobies is bad for the breed and can cause problems. Heck, I know enough about dogs to know that a dalmation with too much white and not enough black is a bad, and undesirable, shouldn't be bred for trait. It too can cause blindness and deafness. As someone else brought up, aussies bred merle to merle often (always?) result in a "lethal white" which upon reading in other places seems to be a misnomer (the term lethal white in dogs...I digress sorry) , but nontheless serious. The pups can be blind, deaf, both. I almost adopted a pup that was a result of poor breeding practice. I decided though I have time to train I don't have THAT much time These dogs just don't get adopted , and when they do it is hard for everyone involved. Often they just end up being put down. I guess my bottom line is, if you REALLY love your dog and the breed, why take the risk when there is SO MUCH evidence stating it is a bad, byb type practice?! SURE some of the pups could be fine and dandy, but what of the ones that AREN'T?! Normal color dobes are beautiful, why mess with that? Why risk having a dog that you can't take outside, and why contribute to the millions of other "defective" dogs in the system? I have been looking around and most of the sites I found state white or fawn as "undesirable" and "disqualifying" same as my Sunny and his color, for good reason. With his coat you can't tell if he is a merle or not and breeding him to a merle could result in lethal white puppies or piebald merles or...oh I've already drowned myself in a buch of stuff I don't completely understand. I trust the scientists. Not on everything mind you but on this one, I'm going with solid research and Elle has that in her court. I'd say any "fawn" or white or whatever dobies or "faulty" dogs are out there should not be bred. It's selfish. You're taking even more a gamble there then you are normally breeding a dog. The dog is the one that will lose out.