Yes, indeed. A more eloquent way of putting it! Thanks.

In my experience there is little difference. I board probably more crossbreeds on permanent meds than pedigrees.

Isn`t this an Old Wives Tale? Do you have any studies for it? Maybe insurance companies keep these sort of figures?

Crossbreeds are healthier than pedigrees.

Obviously a generalised statement and of course there are always exceptions to the rule but fact is; as an overall population crossbreeds are healthier than pedigrees.

a wider gene pool can sometimes = a wider range of possible medical problems.

True, a wider range of possible problems but also less chance of doubling up on any 'problem' genes, hence less actual problems.

But how do you know?

I always thought it was down to the genetic diversity, but now don't think, in general, one is healthier than the other.

I think this is based on anecdotal evidence. I`ve been trawling the net looking for studies but can`t find hard evidence. I`ve got 4 dogs, 3 pedigree, 1 cross. The crossbreed is in poor health, the pedigrees are healthy. That doesn`t mean pdigrees are all healthy - it just means mine are. The x-breed had a hard life in a country with many endemic parasites / diseases and was badly treated.
I wouldn`t generalise from this, however.

Can be as as bad as it can be good!!


Exactly, I dont think you can generalise one over the over... a poorly bred dog is just that.