Unhealthy breeds

Romy

Taxiderpy
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
10,233
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Olympia, WA
#61
I guess for me, it's going to hurt just as bad at 8 years as it will at 12 or 16 so I am not going to base anything on how long they may live. I am going to go with breeds (or mixes) I have a strong connection with and enjoy them for as long as I am blessed with them in my life.
This is my husband's reasoning. One of the reasons we got Charlie (wirehaired pointing griffon) is because of their super robust healthiness. We expected to have him around for 15-18 years or so. The some douchecanoe ran over him just before his second birthday. :(

The thing that gets me about giant breeds living less than 10 years is they are so slow maturing. It takes a deerhound about 4 years to mature. Then what, you have them maybe 3 or 4 more as an adult? Sad. When I invest the time and energy in loving and training a puppy, I'd prefer if they stuck around for a while longer than that.

Borzois are awesome because 12-14 years is pretty typical, which is a long time for a giant breed. I've met a couple who hit 15, and they weren't particularly geriatric acting or anything.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
3,199
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
St. Louis, MO
#62
I dont know, I have had some long lived breeds that yes, did in fact make it to an older age....but they were also seniors and not their normal happy selves for multiple years too.

And the four years to mature...its not as if those 4 years they are total puppy or "dont count". I know you dont mean it that way of course, but just meaning IMO you still have a lot of good years even in breeds with short life spans.
 

Aleron

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
2,269
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
NE Ohio
#63
So what you are saying is that with your great involvement in the breed, you haven't seen progress therefore those in the breed are clearly complacent and accepting of the problems?
There has been an acceptance of the problem though, at least to some degree. If there weren't, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The one that goes that the only reason there is still a problem is because the people in the breed don't care enough. Nevermind the decades-long studies being conducted, the vast collection of samples from people who despite their grief make arrangements before and as their dogs pass to ensure their tragedy can at least provide information to help others in the breed understand the nature of the cancers in play and how they can be better treated and are being passed genetically.
Again, I don't doubt that FCR owners and breeders love their dogs. And I'm sure breeders think what are doing what is right thing at this point in time. It's great that the parent club has funded all of this research on cancer in FCRs. But if it's already acknowledged that the real issue is the limited gene pool, what is the research hoping to find that will improve the health of the breed in the future?
 

Shai

& the Muttly Crew
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
6,215
Likes
0
Points
36
#64
There has been an acceptance of the problem though, at least to some degree. If there weren't, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Well if you mean that they have not stopped breeding FCRs altogether then yes. As in, we haven't been able to fix this yet but we're not going to let the breed go extinct while we figure out where to go from here. In the meantime we try to figure out what lines tend to have problems/earlier problems and breed accordingly. Not a solution, but a buy-me-time strategy while a real solution is pursued.



Again, I don't doubt that FCR owners and breeders love their dogs. And I'm sure breeders think what are doing what is right thing at this point in time. It's great that the parent club has funded all of this research on cancer in FCRs. But if it's already acknowledged that the real issue is the limited gene pool, what is the research hoping to find that will improve the health of the breed in the future?
Never suggested you thought FCR owners/breeders didn't love their dogs, so don't know where that came from.

The goal of the research is to figure out the method of inheritance of some of the cancers. *I* agree that the only way to really fix the problem is to bring in outside blood. I am a first-time owner of the breed and not really one that needs convinced. My opinion, regardless of data, doesn't mean everyone is convinced and that there aren't many who believe if we can find new cures for the cancer or ID why they are getting it and what triggers the onset in some dogs instead of others that we can fix the problem within the breed. As anyone who has ever spoken to breed fanciers of any breed knows, there are a LOT of people who believe that an outcross will just bring in new problems without necessarily fixing the old. And as other outcross projects have shown, there needs to be full support for an outcross to be accepted and be beneficial to the breed. It's not a question of caring or of action, it's a question of formulating a data-backed plan and implementing it. The point of the research is to acquire that data.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#65
I would not buy a dog of a notoriously unhealthy breed, though I might rescue one if I really wanted one of that breed and could find one that appeared reasonably healthy (for example, I might adopt a Frenchie if I found one that seemed to be in good health).

That said, though, as many have noted, every breed has its issues. Standard poodles are not notoriously messed up (though many have hip problems), but my mom's Tarnish died of a tumor on her heart,and the vet said those were not uncommon in standards . . . Mutts may generally be healthier, but then if they do have problems, who knows what it will be? So there's a downside there. For example, with Docket, who is a poorly bred (rescue) Cardigan, I know to look out for his back, his hips and elbows, and his eyes. Sarama . . . well, if she has inborn problems, what they might be is anyone's guess.
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2010
Messages
892
Likes
0
Points
16
Location
WA State
#66
Well I would NEVER own a Bulldog. Just sayin'. But common health issues would not keep me from dog breeds I love. Health testing is not common in APBTs, so it makes the search for a breeder with my high standards much harder, but it's worth it in the end.
 

Aleron

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
2,269
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
NE Ohio
#69
I am a first-time owner of the breed and not really one that needs convinced. My opinion, regardless of data, doesn't mean everyone is convinced and that there aren't many who believe if we can find new cures for the cancer or ID why they are getting it and what triggers the onset in some dogs instead of others that we can fix the problem within the breed. As anyone who has ever spoken to breed fanciers of any breed knows, there are a LOT of people who believe that an outcross will just bring in new problems without necessarily fixing the old. And as other outcross projects have shown, there needs to be full support for an outcross to be accepted and be beneficial to the breed. It's not a question of caring or of action, it's a question of formulating a data-backed plan and implementing it. The point of the research is to acquire that data.
Yeah, like I said change is hard, very slow and the idea of outcrossing is still taboo to many breeders, especially old timers of the breed. It's just odd because historically, there were not closed stud books. These breeds did not come about by people being concerned about purity and good breed type in every generation. That is a much, much more modern idea.

That said, though, as many have noted, every breed has its issues. Standard poodles are not notoriously messed up (though many have hip problems), but my mom's Tarnish died of a tumor on her heart,and the vet said those were not uncommon in standards . . .
Standards are not considered all that healthy, due to lack of genetic diversity caused by popular sire syndrome. This breeder has been actively trying to breed dogs with low COIs because of the fairly widespread health issues and lack of longevity (10 year average) in the breed:

"An Interview With The Breeders' Guild" -- TIARA Standard Poodles

About TIARA Standard Poodles
 

Shai

& the Muttly Crew
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
6,215
Likes
0
Points
36
#70
Yeah, like I said change is hard, very slow and the idea of outcrossing is still taboo to many breeders, especially old timers of the breed. It's just odd because historically, there were not closed stud books. These breeds did not come about by people being concerned about purity and good breed type in every generation. That is a much, much more modern idea.
Again, no argument with that aspect of the discussion.
 

Laurelin

I'm All Ears
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
30,963
Likes
3
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Oklahoma
#71
I dunno, I see the whole idea of 'it's going to hurt the same no matter how long they live' to be... weak to say the least.

In my experience it DOES hurt worse losing a young dog. At least for me, it's much easier to accept in a dog that has lived out a full life versus one that was taken much too young.
 

Aleron

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
2,269
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
NE Ohio
#72
I dunno, I see the whole idea of 'it's going to hurt the same no matter how long they live' to be... weak to say the least.

In my experience it DOES hurt worse losing a young dog. At least for me, it's much easier to accept in a dog that has lived out a full life versus one that was taken much too young.
I agree with this. I've lost dogs too young and those dogs are the ones who sort of haunt me. It's very sad to say goodbye to the old dogs too but there's a comfort in knowing they had a good, long life and it was their time.
 

Michiyo-Fir

Active Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2010
Messages
2,494
Likes
0
Points
36
#73
I dunno, I see the whole idea of 'it's going to hurt the same no matter how long they live' to be... weak to say the least.

In my experience it DOES hurt worse losing a young dog. At least for me, it's much easier to accept in a dog that has lived out a full life versus one that was taken much too young.
Exactly this. It's much easier for me to see a dog that's lived its life than to see one that could potentially live to 15 but drop dead from a heart problem or something like that at the prime of it's life.
 

SoCrafty

New Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
505
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
US
#74
I really have to say that I would probably never own another American Cocker. I had a bad experience (poorly bred dog) and I just don't know that I would feel comfortable enough to own another. Amazing breed though personality-wise. (and as long as someone gets theirs from a good breeder, just an amazing breed).

Otherwise, I'm willing to take on one of those breeds that might pass away early or get struck by cancer late in life. As long as its relatively healthy through its life (i.e. I could *not* handle another dog that had major skin issues, ear infections, eye problems, seizures, thyroid problems). I want to enjoy my dog while I can, not worry that they will always be sick lol
 

Romy

Taxiderpy
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
10,233
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Olympia, WA
#75
I dunno, I see the whole idea of 'it's going to hurt the same no matter how long they live' to be... weak to say the least.

In my experience it DOES hurt worse losing a young dog. At least for me, it's much easier to accept in a dog that has lived out a full life versus one that was taken much too young.
Though he didn't die of a health issue, that's how I felt about Charlie. We 'endured' ;) a really destructive wild puppyhood with him. He was a total freak, like how people here describe their mals minus the biting. I worked so hard to train him, and it seemed like nothing stuck until about a month before he was killed. He was finally starting to mature, and it was like he magically remembered all the training out of nowhere. We were just starting to do some serious tracking stuff and things with him, because he was finally a reliable grown up.

Then he was gone. I don't know if I could get a dog with the expectation that its life was going to play out that way. It was utterly devastating. I felt like his mind had finally matured and we were going to get to enjoy him for all of his raw talent and the training we put into him. That never happened and I'll always regret it.
 

noodlerubyallie

Sprayin' the spiders
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
1,181
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Iowa
#76
I would get another Dobe in a heartbeat.

There's a reason I named Rocket, well, Rocket - he lives life full speed, and even though that life may only be 8-12 years, I know in that span that the joy he brings me will last indefinitely. (Even as much as I complain about his obnoxiousness ;) ).

Next dog will be a Griff or a rescue mutt. Or a Parson.

I'm not sure I'd ever step into another breed that has known issues similar to Dobes.
 

Bigpoodleperson

Megan and Draco
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
892
Likes
0
Points
16
Location
WI
#77
Yes. Standard poodles have a crap ton of health issues. Riley has a crap ton of health issues. I am getting another standard in the summer. I love the breed too much, and they fit me too well to turn my back on them because my dog May get a health problem. I am prepared to deal with health issues for a breed I love. I will go to a breeder that does testing, and has looked at the lines to hopefully give me the best chances. They are MY breed. It means too much for me to have a breed that fits me so well to Not have one.
 

~Jessie~

Chihuahua Power!
Joined
Oct 3, 2006
Messages
19,665
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Central Florida
#78
I dunno, I see the whole idea of 'it's going to hurt the same no matter how long they live' to be... weak to say the least.

In my experience it DOES hurt worse losing a young dog. At least for me, it's much easier to accept in a dog that has lived out a full life versus one that was taken much too young.
This is exactly how I feel as well.

My Dalmatian died at the age of 10 from renal failure... as much as I'd love to have another dal, I wouldn't want to have to accept 10 being considered a "long" life.

Although I've never had to deal with grieving from the death of any of "my" dogs, it will be easier to accept death from a full life rather than the death of a 6, 8, or 10 year old dog. Even 10 is much too young for me.
 

Lilavati

Arbitrary and Capricious
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
7,644
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
47
Location
Alexandria, VA
#79
Interesting. Other than Tarnish, and Gavotte (who died in an accident) all of the standards I've know have died in their teens.

Of course, none of them were from confirmation lines, which might have had something to do with it . . .
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
3,199
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
St. Louis, MO
#80
I dunno, I see the whole idea of 'it's going to hurt the same no matter how long they live' to be... weak to say the least.

In my experience it DOES hurt worse losing a young dog. At least for me, it's much easier to accept in a dog that has lived out a full life versus one that was taken much too young.
w

First off, its my opinion and is how I feel, so no, not weak...just not something you agree with.

Second...I actually wasnt talking about dogs dropping dead in the prime of their life, which I agree is tragic. I was talking about dogs with shorter life spans in general, like in danes, a 10 year old dane has lived a full life and is a senior.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top