Yes, thanks for this, I've just clicked through the links to the full Lab/GR surveys, really interesting and you wouldn't have thought the differences between the breeds was so striking
What's.....
- Thread starter SwampDonkey
- Start date
- Location
- Argyll & Bute, Scotland
This is my one and only reason for never buying a male puppy. Too much riding on it for me. The decision is made for you when you rescue a male. xx
Last edited:
- Location
- SW London UK
How times have changed. 7 years ago I had just about everyone and anyone telling me I must get Homer castrated. I held my ground with thanks to our vet and support and info on the old forum I had information to make my own decision to keep him as he is. It’s been many years now since anyone has commented about his bits.
there are so many dog owners that will tell you “I know dogs, I’ve had dogs for years” as their answer for sticking to out of date information.
there are so many dog owners that will tell you “I know dogs, I’ve had dogs for years” as their answer for sticking to out of date information.
You may well be correct. Neither option is ideal but at least the chemical approach offers the opportunity to stop any continuing damage after a, hopefully brief, period. As is often the case, probably best to discuss with the dog's vet if the owner is determined to go this route.
Very much sounds as if the owner is looking for an 'easy fix' though - and I think she will be disappointed.
- Location
- Argyll & Bute, Scotland
Do you think maybe her vet is advising neutering as so many still do? I know it doesn't mean anyone has to take the advice but some owners do. x
- Location
- Andorra and Spain
Oh, I can't agree with that. If too much is riding on it, why would you let someone else make that decision with a blanket policy, without taking into account the needs of the individual? In my mind, that's just negligent of the organisation, and I'm glad that more shelters these days are taking the individual into account and actually making a measured decision based on the welfare of that dog. I can't support surgical alteration of a dog by policy alone.
Maybe, I don't know. I don't even know if the studies have been done. Again, my gut tells me that, since the implant works for six months to a year, that any physical growth-based damage (bone development, joint complications) will be done in that time, and will be irreversible. Probably not so much with cancers etc.
Many owners still take their vets' advice as gospel, and that is totally understandable. I can't criticise them for doing so, when they're the ones with the qualifications. You have to be a certain type of person to want to do the research for yourself, and then to be able to stand up to your animal's healthcare provider for it. Many people don't even know there's a debate, and assume what their vet tells them is true, in the same way they'd believe their GP for their own medical advice.
It sounds to me as if this is just a case of Swampy's friend always having done it, and so carrying on with the status quo. The thing is, we don't live in a Sliding Doors world, so never know whether the choices we make led to something better or worse in the long run. More's the pity - or maybe not!
I won't mention it again. He's very physically and emotionally behind due to a poor start. He's a Collie I just didn't not think he's old enough or mature enough to be making that kind of descion. Strangely her old Collie died at a young age suddenly with what sounds like sarcoma. I used to being seen as a crank but I just don't care I've given the info, that's all I can do
- Location
- The Hague, The Netherlands
We had chemical castration on Hunter when he was 16 months. The reason was due to his constant humping. His already weak joints just couldn't handle it. Urban living means a higher concentration of dogs and it was very hard to control him or remove him from temptation. We saw a huge change in him after the implant. Less pulling and much more focused. We really didn't want to do it. We are hoping that after this last implant that we will not longer need it. He has been through so much that I cannot face another operation for him especially as it is not essential or beneficial to his health.
I hope more research is going to be carried out so future vets are more informed.
I hope more research is going to be carried out so future vets are more informed.
- Location
- The Hague, The Netherlands
You can only do your best @SwampDonkey.
Frustrating I know.
Frustrating I know.
Changing my name to Cassandra
- Location
- Argyll & Bute, Scotland
It's my personal view that I would never want a male puppy as I wouldn't want to make the wrong decision for him even though David and I would do our research. I understand your view about neutering policy but there are so many dogs already in rescue centres so maybe this is the only way to reduce more potential negligent adopters from breeding or 'accidental' matings. The bigger picture has to be taken into consideration. xx
- Location
- Andorra and Spain
It does indeed, and that's why there are more rescues who are not, in fact, blanket neutering these days, especially with puppies. Decent shelters only allow responsible people to take their dogs. If they can't trust them to avoid accidental matings (which, let's be fair, is really not difficult at all) then they shouldn't be selling the dogs to them. If they are selling the dogs to owners they don't trust, they are not a responsible shelter.
The reason that shelters are full isn't because of either accidental breeding, or ethical breeding, but because of unethical intentional breeding.
The reason that shelters are full isn't because of either accidental breeding, or ethical breeding, but because of unethical intentional breeding.
- Location
- Argyll & Bute, Scotland
Oh I agree, decent shelters, decent adopters but they can only make a decision based on the form you fill in and the home assessor's decision. Not everyone is what they seem. I think it's difficult for the rescue centres, they are on the ground dealing with this daily and do what they think is best. I wonder what a lot of people would do if they adopted an uneutered dog, most probably take it straight to the vet to be neutered which might lead to less dogs being adopted due to cost. x
- Location
- Andorra and Spain
I wouldn't have thought so - after all, there are plenty of entire dogs in the UK who come from breeders of one description or another. Sure, lots of people still neuter without giving it any thought, but there are more and more people who aren't, as information that it may not be for the benefit of the dog becomes available - or simply because they don't see the necessity. It's less "the done thing" these days.
If people stop buying dogs from shelters because they can't afford the cost of a neuter, I'd say that they're probably not in the position to be having one, anyway. And if it's a necessary neuter, then the shelter of course should still be having it done. I'm not saying that no dogs should be neutered, simply that blanket policies are not in the best interests of the dogs. After all, if the neuter of a shelter dog creates joint issues that the buyer cannot afford to have treated, or if it is a factor in the development of a cancer - without even taking into consideration potential behavioural issues which may develop - then that is not in the interest of either the dog, nor the buyer. If you're talking about something the size of a chihuahua where this is unlikely to be an issue, and any behavioural issues are manageable because of the size of the dog, then maybe it's not something that holds that much importance (although I would argue by the same token, it's also not something that it's important to do). But if you're talking about a bigger dog where it has been shown that you are risking these health issues, and messing with hormones which can affect behaviour can lead to more severe problems because of the size of the dog, then I can't see me being convinced that it is in anyone's best interests to neuter without consideration. If that dog develops issues that the buyer cannot deal with, he will end up back in shelter, or euthanised.
If people stop buying dogs from shelters because they can't afford the cost of a neuter, I'd say that they're probably not in the position to be having one, anyway. And if it's a necessary neuter, then the shelter of course should still be having it done. I'm not saying that no dogs should be neutered, simply that blanket policies are not in the best interests of the dogs. After all, if the neuter of a shelter dog creates joint issues that the buyer cannot afford to have treated, or if it is a factor in the development of a cancer - without even taking into consideration potential behavioural issues which may develop - then that is not in the interest of either the dog, nor the buyer. If you're talking about something the size of a chihuahua where this is unlikely to be an issue, and any behavioural issues are manageable because of the size of the dog, then maybe it's not something that holds that much importance (although I would argue by the same token, it's also not something that it's important to do). But if you're talking about a bigger dog where it has been shown that you are risking these health issues, and messing with hormones which can affect behaviour can lead to more severe problems because of the size of the dog, then I can't see me being convinced that it is in anyone's best interests to neuter without consideration. If that dog develops issues that the buyer cannot deal with, he will end up back in shelter, or euthanised.
- Location
- Argyll & Bute, Scotland
There as always pros and cons, again shelters can only go on what they are told by the potential adptors. We were certainly not asked if we could afford to look after Charlie. Also there are many, many dogs that have been bought at huge cost from breeders that are left entire that have behavioural and health issues. It's not something that is going to be sorted out anytime soon.
Last week I met a man I see regularly in the forest and he didn't have one of his entire fox red labs with him. He was x-rayed and the vet said in her words "his front legs are f****d" Wanted to refer him to the "Super Vet" they don't have insurance as they can't afford it as they have four dogs so the dog is going to be left as he is. One example doesn't make a case I know but it does happen with bought dogs and not just rescue ones.
Charlie was neutered before he came to us and at 9 years old is fitter than dogs half his age, runs a good 10 miles a day and swims everyday. Just one example I know but a fine example of a neutered dog!
xx
Last week I met a man I see regularly in the forest and he didn't have one of his entire fox red labs with him. He was x-rayed and the vet said in her words "his front legs are f****d" Wanted to refer him to the "Super Vet" they don't have insurance as they can't afford it as they have four dogs so the dog is going to be left as he is. One example doesn't make a case I know but it does happen with bought dogs and not just rescue ones.
Charlie was neutered before he came to us and at 9 years old is fitter than dogs half his age, runs a good 10 miles a day and swims everyday. Just one example I know but a fine example of a neutered dog!
xx
Last edited:
- Location
- SW London UK
After Homer‘s antics this morning, suddenly turning round and running after a female dog for what felt like miles. I’ve told him in no uncertain terms what will happen that if he does that again! He’s never run off quite like that before, it took all I had to catch up with him.
In some countries it's illegal to neuter without a medical reason.
- Location
- Cornwall , UK
I read the link , and have to say that it has upset me . On Vets advice back then , I had Sam castrated at around 11 months of age , I never thought to question someone who was supposed to know a lot better than I did . As you know , Sam was diagnosed with cancer when he was five years old , although my current Vet and I agree that his cancer was very likely there for some time before diagnosis and surgery . This has left me feeling terribly sad , did my actions contribute ? I guess we will never know but oh how I wish this information had been readily available back then , so that we could have made an informed choice x
I had the same with Doug he developed an auto immune diseases. It didn't kill him but was hard on him. This was nearly 20 years ago so things were very different. Now more info is available and I'm more confident.
- Location
- Andorra and Spain
I think that's awful! Surely that's once of the most basic things that a shelter should ask.give an idea of the "running costs" for an average dog, and offer some scenarios of things that can go wrong, because it can be totally shocking to realise how much they do cost.
Yes, but as you rightly say, these are two individual cases. There are many, many more on all four sides: those who are neutered and fine, those who are neutered and not fine, those who are entire and fine, those who are entire and not fine. The point is that there is research out there that says, for certain breeds, you are significantly more likely to increase their chances of life-altering, or life-shortening, conditions by neutering them. Those are not studies of one.
Ah, but it does say this, Kate: "In this study, the risk of lymphosarcoma, hemangiosarcoma, or mast cell tumor increased in neutered Golden Retrievers, but no such association was found in Labrador Retrievers or German Shepherd Dogs."
Which indicates that, on this evidence, there is no statistically significant increase in these cancers for neutered Labs.
We can't always know what decisions we make contribute to the unfortunate things that befall our dogs (or ourselves!) but as the research continues, and gives us more of an idea of how it might affect our animals - whilst understanding we're still dealing with probabilities and not certainties - we can start to make more and more informed decisions, rather than applying a "one size fits all" approach, which is definitely not right.
There has been some absolutely amazing work on genetics in recent years, and there will likely come a point where we will be able to determine for any individual dog whether they are predisposed to X condition, and so will either be able to make decisions based on that, or will even be able to replace the unwanted gene. Here's an article on some mind-blowing "search and replace" gene research that has happened really recently: This New Gene-Editing Tool Can ‘Search-and-Replace’ Genes Without Breaking DNA