register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Meg
Supervisor
Meg is offline  
Location: Dogsey and Worcestershire
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 49,483
Female  Diamond Supporter 
 
19-08-2013, 10:59 AM
Lymphoma (lymphosarcoma) 3 times more prevalent in spayed females than intact females (VMDB)
From Villamil et al. 2010.
Hormonaland sex impact on the epidemiology of canine lymphoma.
J Cancer Epidemiol 1–7. doi:10.1155/2009/591753
I lost one bitch Emma many years ago with Lymphoma, she was not spayed.

I lost Franny and Tilly to closed Pyometra, Bunny had closed Pyometra and was saved. Since then I have always spayed my bitches and will continue to do so.
For me the prospect of Pyometra in an unspayed bitch is a bigger threat than other conditions.
Reply With Quote
Westie_N
Dogsey Veteran
Westie_N is offline  
Location: West of Scotland
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,034
Female 
 
19-08-2013, 11:08 AM
Originally Posted by Minihaha View Post
I lost one bitch Emma many years ago with Lymphoma, she was not spayed.

I lost Franny and Tilly to closed Pyometra, Bunny had closed Pyometra and was saved. Since then I have always spayed my bitches and will continue to do so.
For me the prospect of Pyometra in an unspayed bitch is a bigger threat than other conditions.
Absolutely agree with this.
Reply With Quote
mjfromga
Dogsey Veteran
mjfromga is offline  
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 5,680
Female 
 
22-08-2013, 02:12 PM
Originally Posted by Apache View Post
If you know there is a risk you do what you can to minimize it.
That is exactly what I was saying. You're acting as if spaying/neutering only makes everything go up in term of health risks. Like I was saying, owners of notoriously unhealthy breeds understand that their breed is at high risk for certain diseases over other breeds, but this doesn't stop them from choosing that breed anyway.

That isn't the case at all. It eliminates the risk of pyometra in bitches and the risk of testicular cancer in males. Both dangerous and fairly common.

It also can calm dogs and make them far less territorial, which reduces the chances of roaming and initiating fights or other dangerous behavior.

Then of course there is eliminating accidental breeding, which is a huge cause of death to innocent dogs around the world. Not all dog owners are competent or careful enough to have intact dogs and prevent breeding.

Most dogs put down because of bites were NOT altered. In America, anyway. Sure it poses potential health risks, but it's like I said... that is for the individual owner to weigh.

Who are you to say it should never be done? If that is even what you're trying to say, which is what it looks like to me. I actually prefer not to alter my dogs, but in the end... I don't think it matters one way or the other.

You either have a healthy dog, or you don't. Spaying and neutering is blahhh, whichever you choose. Luck plays a huge part.

I've seen people feed their dogs nothing but excellent food, and take them to the vets twice a year and do everything right and still lose their dogs to early cancer.

Whereas all my dogs live to old ages (14,16,15) and Jade is 10 and still ticking with no serious health problems (bit stiff at times). They don't always get the BEST care. Because I can't always afford to feed them EVO and Orijen and take them to the vet for every little thing but they do alright.

In the end, spaying or neutering, or not spaying or neutering won't guarantee very much... but spaying and neutering can make at least a few guarantees (no puppies, eliminates certain cancers), whereas not doing it makes none. So, there. My opinion on the matter.
Reply With Quote
Mattie
Dogsey Senior
Mattie is offline  
Location: West Yorkshire
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 855
Female 
 
22-08-2013, 03:31 PM
I always tell people to research as much as they can both sides of the argument, if I can I help them with the research, but I never tell them what to do with their dogs, only the owner can decided.

These sites may help:

I don't like the way this man trains dogs, I have had a few good arguments with him but in this case he does speak some sense.

http://www.doglistener.co.uk/medical/neuter.shtml

I have a dog who was neutered early, can you imagine an adult Staffy with a puppy brain? It is a nightmare at times but thankfully he is improving, it has taken me 2.5 years to get him to this stage.

http://niceorg.wordpress.com/2009/02...causes-cancer/

http://www.caninesports.com/uploads/...iderations.pdf

http://www.medhelp.org/user_journals...DICAL-PRACTICE

http://www.sheltieranch.com/articles...uterInDogs.pdf

http://sciencenordic.com/should-dogs-be-neutered

http://www.associationofanimalbehavi...neutering.html

Neutering a dog does not make his behaviour better as many vets tell their clients, all it does is take the testosterone away from the dog so will only help dogs with testosterone problems, most problems with dogs is because the dog isn't trained. Cyril was neutered when I got him, I wouldn't have had him done. A bitch I will always neuter, they have pmt like we do, some suffer as much as a woman can, so as well as the other health problems, pyrometra, mammary tumours etc, we can take away the pmt. Any woman who no longer has to put up with this will tell you just how much easier it makes their lives.

What really gets to me is when I am told that dogs should be neutered to stop puppies, think they need to learn about the birds and the bees, it is bitches which have puppies not dogs.
Reply With Quote
Apache
Dogsey Senior
Apache is offline  
Location: Cheshire, UK
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 531
Male 
 
22-08-2013, 04:39 PM
Originally Posted by mjfromga View Post
That is exactly what I was saying. You're acting as if spaying/neutering only makes everything go up in term of health risks. Like I was saying, owners of notoriously unhealthy breeds understand that their breed is at high risk for certain diseases over other breeds, but this doesn't stop them from choosing that breed anyway.

That isn't the case at all. It eliminates the risk of pyometra in bitches and the risk of testicular cancer in males. Both dangerous and fairly common.

It also can calm dogs and make them far less territorial, which reduces the chances of roaming and initiating fights or other dangerous behavior.

Then of course there is eliminating accidental breeding, which is a huge cause of death to innocent dogs around the world. Not all dog owners are competent or careful enough to have intact dogs and prevent breeding.

Most dogs put down because of bites were NOT altered. In America, anyway. Sure it poses potential health risks, but it's like I said... that is for the individual owner to weigh.

Who are you to say it should never be done? If that is even what you're trying to say, which is what it looks like to me. I actually prefer not to alter my dogs, but in the end... I don't think it matters one way or the other.

You either have a healthy dog, or you don't. Spaying and neutering is blahhh, whichever you choose. Luck plays a huge part.

I've seen people feed their dogs nothing but excellent food, and take them to the vets twice a year and do everything right and still lose their dogs to early cancer.

Whereas all my dogs live to old ages (14,16,15) and Jade is 10 and still ticking with no serious health problems (bit stiff at times). They don't always get the BEST care. Because I can't always afford to feed them EVO and Orijen and take them to the vet for every little thing but they do alright.

In the end, spaying or neutering, or not spaying or neutering won't guarantee very much... but spaying and neutering can make at least a few guarantees (no puppies, eliminates certain cancers), whereas not doing it makes none. So, there. My opinion on the matter.
I am trying to sift through your post to understand it and am having great difficulty.
The OP was provided by Prof Ben Hart of Uni of California, Davis. I have not added anything to it at all. It was put up here to provide information to members who, like myself, are undecided what to do for the best.

In the past i have owned 2 bitch GSD's, one was spayed the second one wasn't. Neither got PYO.

The first got to age 13 and eventually lost the use of her back legs. She was however incontinent from the age of around 8/9 years old, which i always believed was due to the hysterectomy.

The second bitch (not spayed because of my experience with the first bitch) again reached 13 years old and died suddenly due to a heart attack.

The link that Mattie has sent from the Dog Listener person contains the following paragraphs.

"Castrating a male reduces the risk of prostate and testicular cancer. They are less likely to develop unwanted behaviour's such as marking, sexual aggression, and mounting, they are also less likely to escape, roam, or fight with other dogs."
"It is a medical fact that spaying and castration can prolong the life of our pets and may reduce the number of health problems in later life."
"Castrating a male reduces the risk of prostate and testicular cancer. They are less likely to develop unwanted behaviour's such as marking, sexual aggression, and mounting, they are also less likely to escape, roam, or fight with other dogs."

The Dog Listener then says - Nearly every claim above is flawed or incorrect. Many dogs especially females can get more aggressive after neutering. The information we are given is often for financial reasons. To line the pockets of the Breeders and the Vets.
Reply With Quote
Mattie
Dogsey Senior
Mattie is offline  
Location: West Yorkshire
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 855
Female 
 
22-08-2013, 05:50 PM
Originally Posted by Apache View Post
The link that Mattie has sent from the Dog Listener person contains the following paragraphs.

"Castrating a male reduces the risk of prostate and testicular cancer. They are less likely to develop unwanted behaviour's such as marking, sexual aggression, and mounting, they are also less likely to escape, roam, or fight with other dogs."
"It is a medical fact that spaying and castration can prolong the life of our pets and may reduce the number of health problems in later life."
"Castrating a male reduces the risk of prostate and testicular cancer. They are less likely to develop unwanted behaviour's such as marking, sexual aggression, and mounting, they are also less likely to escape, roam, or fight with other dogs."

The Dog Listener then says - Nearly every claim above is flawed or incorrect. Many dogs especially females can get more aggressive after neutering. The information we are given is often for financial reasons. To line the pockets of the Breeders and the Vets.
I have no time for Stan Rawlinson, I put that link up along with the others so people can make their own mind up by encouraging them to research more. I never believe what he says.

There is evidence of both spaying and neutering causing aggression to get worse, it is on the internet but needs to be found. I have met owners who complained about their dog's aggression getting worse and not better as their vet said it would.

As to making our minds up, we should be flexible in what we believe because things are changing daily, what is right today can be wrong tomorrow so even though we think we know something we should keep up to date with modern thinking, that doesn't mean we have to believe it or follow it, but to investigate and research it, it may not suit us or our dogs but we can only make a decision to suit us if we have as many of the facts as we can find.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Effects of neutering and spaying Ayak Dog Health 59 18-04-2013 01:23 PM
OCD? Emotional disorders? Magpyex Health & Fitness 11 23-11-2011 01:18 AM
Side effects of neutering HiHoSilver Dog Health 26 08-04-2011 10:18 AM
Eating disorders jackiew Health & Fitness 40 03-03-2008 09:10 PM
Sleep disorders CBT Off-topic Chat 15 01-02-2005 09:51 PM

© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top